Craig Edwards on the expected revenue bump for the Mets

In all, the Mets are figuring on a 500,000 increase in attendance. Using the same factors from above, and adding an extra 4% for ticket price increases, it would appear as though the Mets could reasonably expected to earn another $21 million in ticket sales. Adding in increased money for sponsorships and money for concessions — even after adjusting for revenue sharing — it’s easy to see how the Mets can be expected to gain $25 million next season. The Mets front office, Sandy Alderson and his staff especially, have done a very good job rebuilding and making the Mets competitive, and at least for the time-being the Mets owners do deserve some credit for putting their increased revenues back on the field.

Source: Craig Edwards, FanGraphs

*****

If you prefer longer articles, that’s our specialty here at Mets360. Just click on “Perspectives” or “Minor Leagues” or “History” on the grey menu bar above this article’s headline and you will be taken to a list of over 2,500 articles written since the beginning of 2010.

If you enjoy the quick hitters, click on “Quotes” in the same menu bar to see our archive.

*****

11 comments for “Craig Edwards on the expected revenue bump for the Mets

  1. James Preller
    February 1, 2016 at 10:41 am

    Of course, that’s just ticket sales. Not concessions or merchandise.

    One way the Wilpons cook the books is to keep SNY as a separate business. In some respects, that makes sense. But the Mets drive SNY, and the rating increases last season were noteworthy. Ad revenues, etc.

    • February 1, 2016 at 10:59 am

      The $21 million is ticket sales.

      The $25 million includes the other stuff, including subtraction for revenue sharing. That estimate seems low to me but that’s not based on any knowledge of the various contracts and the percentages the Mets take from it.

    • DED
      February 1, 2016 at 12:23 pm

      Cooked the books, huh?

      Sorry; for a moment there I thought you were reflexively using a pejorative term to describe a business practice as old as the creation of the corporation itself, and something that virtually every large business entity does for a host of reasons, simply because it involved the Wilpons this time. As it happens, SNY is heavily leveraged, with good revenue stream but until recently not much of a bottom line; and I’m guessing that borrowed money is one of the slender threads that kept the Wilpons afloat in the aftermath the Madoff matter, so not having spun off SNY might have led to a bankruptcy for the Wilpons, which might have been fun to watch, though probably not as fun as a playoff run.

      My mistake.

      • James Preller
        February 1, 2016 at 4:14 pm

        I think SNY is making good money on the Mets, and currently enjoying a big rating boost. Both are owned by the Wilpons. So when folks look at Mets revenues in isolation, it tells a grossly misleading picture.

        • James Preller
          February 1, 2016 at 4:29 pm

          And again, my point is simply that any real accounting of the Mets revenue bump, as experienced by the Wilpons, must take into account the surging profits at SNY.

  2. Rich
    February 1, 2016 at 11:39 am

    That income increase comes to $42 per person. Seems low to me

  3. EddieMetz
    February 1, 2016 at 4:58 pm

    Mets and Sandy have and have had their ducks in a row and $$$ in a row, have done so all this time, even when us fans were screaming for $$$ spend and upgrades. Yeah, Sandy is a tad smarter than us. Reason why they could pounce on Cespedes, and now possibly entertaining even more BP arms before final product is done. They got my cable $ for sure, living in FL and wanting to see all the games. I was a Sandy critic for sure 2012,13,14…now I just shut up.

  4. Eraff
    February 1, 2016 at 5:20 pm

    ok…they’re tight wad, dishonest,misanthropic Turds—that’s not news about this ownership.

    They are making more money and spending more on the team—current reality is good.

  5. Vic Sin
    February 1, 2016 at 6:52 pm

    We have a normal payroll this season which is fine, my thoughts on this is I think the team could have gotten by with out deaza, since we did sign cespedes, and I think torres and verrett were more than capable fifth starters until mid season, infact the numbers say they probably would have put up better stats for a fraction of the cost. Had to let that out somewhere, as far as revenue , winning attracts the fans

  6. TexasGusCC
    February 2, 2016 at 9:53 am

    Woke up this morning with this dream:

    Runners on first and third in Dodgers stadium. Cespedes hits a line drive down the right field line. Scott Van Slyke dives for it but misses it and it rolls behind him to the wall. Many Mets’ fans down the right field line, and they are going crazy. Runner on first is Granderson in a blue Mets uniform and he’s flying; Cespedes is wearing a green Mets uniform is right in his heels around third and cuts third base almost horizontally; both are running home right behind each other, two headfirst dives, both are safe.

    Great dream to wake up to, going to be a great day.

  7. February 2, 2016 at 1:34 pm

    It’s a different kind of world where Met fans are satisfied with — even encouraged by — the level of the payroll and Yankee fans are moaning that the Steinbrenners are going cheap…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: