Tom Hicks

[New York Red]

Generally considered to be a buffoon. Signed A-Rod for the Texas Rangers for $250 million for ten years.

 

Was a Democrat and then flip-flopped and now is a Bush supporter.

 

The coupling of him and Gillett does not instill confidence in me. I think this will be a highly leveraged deal, and you can expect ignorant demands on Rafa. Don't count out undue inluence on him and Parry.

 

I can't say that I know this wouldn't have happened with DIC. I have no idea about them.

 

But, these guys I do. I'm pretty upset about this honestly. I hope to God that I'm completely wrong about this.

 

MODS -- PLEASE DON'T MOVE THIS. THIS ISN'T ABOUT THE NEW DEAL HAPPENING. THIS IS ABOUT THE NEW OWNERS, WHO, WILL LEVERAGE OUR CLUB TO THE HILT AND HAVE A REPUTATION FOR INCOMPETENCE.

Edited February 4, 2007 by New York Red

[Guest Banjo]

Anyone who backs Bush to the hilt is a buffoon - that's a given, but why do you suspect he would make unreasonable demands on the manager? Has he done this with the other sports clubs he's owned? What sort of things has he done?

Edited February 4, 2007 by Banjo

[fyds]

Wish I was an incompetent billionaire!

[Clay Davis]

i know yer

[Guest Scot]

He completely overpaid for A-Rod. So much so there's a Harvard Business School case about it.

[meepins]

Wish I was an incompetent billionaire!

Doesn't take intelligence to become rich, just a willingness to exploit people.

[Zoob]

He completely overpaid for A-Rod. So much so there's a Harvard Business School case about it.

 

Is A-Rod the baseball player who was a failure and then went to the Yankees (and continued to fail)?

 

On the one hand, it shows that Hicks wasn't scared of his club splashing the cash for someone thought of as the next great thing, but what's this abouta Harvard Business school case about it?

Edited February 4, 2007 by Zoob

[fyds]

Doesn't take intelligence to become rich, just a willingness to exploit people.

It may take a certain ruthlessness yes, but to become a billionaire you have to be better than 'incompetent'.

[McBain]

Doesn't take intelligence to become rich, just a willingness to exploit people.

 

I'm more than willing to do that

[New York Red]

Is A-Rod the baseball player who was a failure and then went to the Yankees (and continued to fail)?

 

On the one hand, it shows that Hicks wasn't scared of his club splashing the cash for someone thought of as the next great thing, but what's this abouta Harvard Business school case about it?

 

He really wasn't a failure Zoob. He was the best player in basebell, and is still fantastic.

 

The issue is that he grossly overpaid for him -- like 50% more than the next biggest contract EVER. It was to lure him to Texas where he didn't want to go at all.

[Guest Scot]

Is A-Rod the baseball player who was a failure and then went to the Yankees (and continued to fail)?

 

On the one hand, it shows that Hicks wasn't scared of his club splashing the cash for someone thought of as the next great thing, but what's this abouta Harvard Business school case about it?

 

A-Rod's not a failure, he's arguably the best player in the game. He's not won titles, but it's not a one-man game. He has something of a reputation for not hitting home runs when they matter. Scoring in a 4-0 win, not when it's 1-1.

 

HBS did a case on the valuation of assets for purchase using the A-Rod deal as an example of an owner spending entirely too much. The upside though of the case, from our perspective, was that Hicks was absolutely bound and determined to have A-Rod because he though he'd make the Rangers better. He never saw it as a business decision, he wasn't interested in the profit/loss.

[fyds]

He really wasn't a failure Zoob. He was the best player in basebell, and is still fantastic.

 

The issue is that he grossly overpaid for him -- like 50% more than the next biggest contract EVER. It was to lure him to Texas where he didn't want to go at all.

Not like any football club outside of the capital has ever tried that is it?

[Guest Scot]

Not like any football club outside of the capital has ever tried that is it?

 

There was a shade more to it that that, too. His agent played the game very well and gave the impression that there were more offers, and higher offers, than actually there were. I'll need to check on this but I think there was something about closed bids like an auction...

[fyds]

A-Rod's not a failure, he's arguably the best player in the game. He's not won titles, but it's not a one-man game. He has something of a reputation for not hitting home runs when they matter. Scoring in a 4-0 win, not when it's 1-1.

 

HBS did a case on the valuation of assets for purchase using the A-Rod deal as an example of an owner spending entirely too much. The upside though of the case, from our perspective, was that Hicks was absolutely bound and determined to have A-Rod because he though he'd make the Rangers better. He never saw it as a business decision, he wasn't interested in the profit/loss.

 

Which is exactly what so many of our fans moan about a lack of at the moment. You can't have it both ways. Good point Scot.

 

There was a shade more to it that that, too. His agent played the game very well and gave the impression that there were more offers, and higher offers, than actually there were. I'll need to check on this but I think there was something about closed bids like an auction...

Ah, OK - not exactly a true comparison with footy then I suppose.

[Guest Scot]

Which is exactly what so many of our fans moan about a lack of at the moment. You can't have it both ways. Good point Scot.

Ah, OK - not exactly a true comparison with footy then I suppose.

 

A-Rod was handled uniquely because he was thought to be a unique 'asset'. Normally you'd have the offer/counter offer like in football. A-Rod's agent seemed to think this would get a better deal. He wasn't wrong.

[Guest Cardie]

A-Rod was handled uniquely because he was thought to be a unique 'asset'. Normally you'd have the offer/counter offer like in football. A-Rod's agent seemed to think this would get a better deal. He wasn't wrong.

 

Same thing happened recently with the Japanese lad, although it was a closed bid for rights to negotiate with 50 mill the winner.

Edited February 4, 2007 by Cardie

[fyds]

A-Rod was handled uniquely because he was thought to be a unique 'asset'. Normally you'd have the offer/counter offer like in football. A-Rod's agent seemed to think this would get a better deal. He wasn't wrong.

A bit of sharp practice then...

[Guest Scot]

Same thing happened recently with the Japanese lad.

 

Yeah, the Sox paid $50m for the rights to negotiate a deal with him....

[fyds]

That really IS nuts.

[Zoob]

He really wasn't a failure Zoob. He was the best player in basebell, and is still fantastic.

 

The issue is that he grossly overpaid for him -- like 50% more than the next biggest contract EVER. It was to lure him to Texas where he didn't want to go at all.

 

 

50% more than the previous biggest contract is a bit crazy - but as has been pointed out, I guess his agent played the game well... no surprise he didn't want to go to / stay in Texas.

[boohog]

Doesn't take intelligence to become rich, just a willingness to exploit people.

 

So true. its a piece of piss

[Herbie von Smalls]

easy to argue that beckham will be overpaid when he goes stateside should l.a. galaxy fail to gain any short-term success. in terms of putting bums on seats and attracting interest in the game in l.a., thereby establishing some kind of grassroots foundations his move may be invaluable.

 

was a-rod's signing a declaration of intention to make the texas rangers a long-term 'project'?

[JonShar]

The A-Rod thing is irrelevant - the guy decided he wanted to spend that kind of money, and the team isn't worse off financially for it. It was an investment - just like the Galaxy spending the kind of money they are for Beckscum, they feel sure that in marketing alone it'll be a worthwhile investment.

 

was a-rod's signing a declaration of intention to make the texas rangers a long-term 'project'?

 

Bingo - it was them saying "Look we've got A-Rod, we're serious about being a contender, who else wants to come now?"

 

Granted it didn't work, but you can't argue the idea to begin with.

[ShaunOfTheRed]

One more thing to add about the A-Rod contract is that while the amount is shocking when looked at as a whole if you see how it's broken down there is a lot of deferred money that won't be paid out until years after his contract is over. That's not to say that I am defending Hicks for making the deal but A-Rod is and will continue to be seen as someone who will put fans in the seats. He's a phenomenal player in the field and an even better hitter. He does lack the moxy when it comes to big games and has been under the cosh a bit since moving to New York. Long may that continue as it certainly benefits ny beloved Red Sox.

[Guest Scot]

One more thing to add about the A-Rod contract is that while the amount is shocking when looked at as a whole if you see how it's broken down there is a lot of deferred money that won't be paid out until years after his contract is over. That's not to say that I am defending Hicks for making the deal but A-Rod is and will continue to be seen as someone who will put fans in the seats. He's a phenomenal player in the field and an even better hitter. He does lack the moxy when it comes to big games and has been under the cosh a bit since moving to New York. Long may that continue as it certainly benefits ny beloved Red Sox.

 

That's correct.

 

Exhibit 5 Rodriguez proposed contract

 

Year Base Salary Signing Bonus Amount Deferred

2001 $21 million $2 million $5 million in 2011

2002 $21 million $2 million $4 million in 2012

2003 $21 million $2 million $3 million in 2013

2004 $21 million $2 million $3 million in 2014

2005 $25 million $2 million $4 million in 2015

2006 $25 million $4 million in 2016

2007 $27 million $4 million in 2017

2008 $27 million $3 million in 2018

2009 $27 million $3 million in 2019

2010 $27 million $3 million in 2020