Chatanooga Lookouts SOLD!

[Paul Pleiss]

http://www.chattanoogan.com/2015/3/3/295255/Lookouts-Sold-By-Frank-Burke-To.aspx

 

Lookouts were sold. Surprising headline to see earlier this week.

 

I wonder why more MLB teams dont buy up MiLB clubs to get more control over facilities and player development contracts. Seems like that's going to happen eventually, right?

[Thrylos]

http://www.chattanoogan.com/2015/3/3/295255/Lookouts-Sold-By-Frank-Burke-To.aspx

 

Lookouts were sold. Surprising headline to see earlier this week.

 

I wonder why more MLB teams dont buy up MiLB clubs to get more control over facilities and player development contracts. Seems like that's going to happen eventually, right?

 

There are some teams that own all or most their minor league affiliates (Braves & Yankees come to mind).   The Twins own Elizabethton.  The teams have control over player development.  Dealing with facilities etc figuring out mascots for the mascot runs and all kinds of kitschy "entertainment" is a pain, and that is the major function of those owners & their front offices.  The parent clubs pay them fees for things that deal with their players like food and facilities, but in many cases do not want to deal with the circus acts.

[Paul Pleiss]

Thrylos,

Still, it seems that negotiating for better facilities and better player accomodations could be beneficial to the player development plan. I understand that planning mascott antics and chicken races isn't something that MLB front offices are interested in taking care of, but to me it seems that bringing the entire player development pipeline into the organization make sense. They can hire people to handle mascot races and fan promotions.

 

Thinking on the topic, I'm sure that geographic location plays at least some part in the non-ownership of teams. I know the Twins have hopes of someday having another affiliate in MN, but even the Midwest league would be a stretch for a Twin Cities based team.

 

In the control freak, super analysis world of MLB, I'm just surprised more teams aren't intersted in owning the entire supply chain.

[Steven Buhr]

At the risk of hijacking the thread, I'll add that I think things could get really interesting as we near 2020, when the current agreement between MLB and MiLB expires.It's been a couple decades since anything remotely major changed in the working agreement between MLB and the affiliated minors. That agreement establishes pretty much exactly which costs each party will be responsible for (right down to how the minor league team and the MLB affiliate split the cost of baseballs).

 

What has typically happened is that MLB and MiLB announce that the agreement has been renewed several years (or more) before the agreement expires. That's necessary because player development contracts are either 2 or 4 years long and can be extended just about at any time between existing affiliates. That's how the Twins and Kernels, for example now have an agreement through 2020.

 

I don't think you'll find any agreements currently extended beyond 2020. I'm not sure the parties really could, given that the overarching MLB/MiLB agreement expires then.

 

One problem is that many minor league facilities still haven't even been brought up to minimum standards set out in the agreement established back in the early to mid 90s. They keep getting "grandfathered" in and thus have been able to keep their teams, and that forces some MLB organizations to use those outdated facilities. I don't think that situation can go on indefinitely.

 

If we don't see a renewal of the MLB/MiLB agreement in 2015, I think it signals some very significant changes likely to come by 2020 in how minor leagues are owned and operated.

 

Ownership groups that are well-funded, like (apparently) the new Lookouts group, should have no trouble surviving whatever comes. But ownership groups with less deep pockets (such as many in the MWL that are community owned) could be more at risk.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

I'm going to claim the economist's point of view. MiLB is a crapshoot as far as talent acquisition goes. Of minor league players, 90% or more never get get a whiff of the bigs. If a major league team can get the talent and only shell out a few bucks, why shell out a lot more to get no better results?

 

If all of these organizations and people are willing to do the work for next to free, why pay them more to not see exponentially better results.

 

A case could be made that the Braves and Yankees are in the playoffs at a higher rate than other teams, but at what price? Is the ownership and control of the minors the cause?

 

 

 

 

On a side note, I do agree that the Mior League contract is a travesty and all of the players deserve better pay than they get, but I'm not a MLB owner, am I?

[John Bonnes]

I didn't know this was happening, but apparently the the Chattanooga Lookouts, the Twins newest AA franchise, has been sold? MLB just approved it this month:

 

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/sports/professional/story/2015/mar/03/major-league-baseball-approves-sale-chattanooga-lookouts/291318/

 

There are a lot more details in this story:

 

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2014/dec/11/chattanooga-lookouts-sold-to-atlanta-partners/277604/

 

Price is believed to be $12-$13M. It's being sold to a group that also operates a couple of other franchises:

 

 

Hardball Capital owns the Fort Wayne (Ind.) TinCaps of the Midwest League and the Savannah (Ga.) Sand Gnats of the South Atlantic League, and it is overseeing the building of a $35 million ballpark in Columbia, S.C., that will house a team in 2016.

 

Anyone know much about the other franchises they operate? Seems like we might have some insight into how the TinCaps are doing out here.

[Thrylos]

That really does not affect the Twins or the Twins' players.  There has been somewhat of consolidation of ownership of franchises to gain advantage in operating costs leveraging their size.  Hot dogs and buns, beer, t-shirts etc etc, cost much less to those guys if they give a quadruple order to the same vendor.  All about operations and economies of scale that reduce supply and operational costs.  Might even increase secondary revenue, but getting the same musical gigs to all ballparks, etc etc.

 

Makes sense.