Money-less ball

I read this headline and really couldn’t believe it.   ComputerWorld of all places has this story today: Pirates tap BI tools to forecast, boost attendance.  Notice there is no mention of improving on field performance as a means to improve attendance.  They just want to narrow in on what poor folks are still willing to sit and watch another losing season.
Hey, I’m all for applying wonkery in all the weird corners of the world, but there is something perverse about that story and the Pirates endless losing streak.  Moneyball is about how Billy Beane used some fundamentally econometric techniques to actually improve Oakland’s performance on the field.  The Pirates’ version of that skips the box score and focuses entirely on squeezing more efficiency from the box office.  I think that article says it all.

Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts

The NFL Lockout Doesn’t Just Affect Players, Owners And Fans

There are a lot of different sides to the NFL lockout, which is on again after an appeal from the NFL was granted to reinstate the lockout that was lifted by a judge, and most of the attention is going towards the owners, the players and the fans. But what about the cities in which these teams are being held? There are a lot of people that have nothing to do with football, or sports, who are going to feel the effect of a lockout for as long as it goes, and the longer it goes, the bigger the hit.

The players and owners are trying to figure out how to split up a staggering $9 billion in revenue between the two sides, and fans are stuck in the middle as they want to see their favorite teams and players, NFL betting players want to lay some wagers, and fantasy football owners would love to be able to schedule their annual draft. But no one is thinking about the local economies that are going to suffer greatly from this work stoppage; the people who work at the stadiums who may not care about the score of the game, but they care if they can put food on their tables. There have been estimations that the lockout is going to take $5.1 billion out of local economies across the country, and in cities like Detroit or Cleveland, that is a massive chunk that they can’t afford to lose.

That is what has happened in today’s age: it’s no longer about the sports. Sport is now a business and it affects many off the field, as much as it does off the field. There are a lot of parties invested in something that could be crippling to the game of football.

Citi Field Chicanery

First let me state a few qualifiers when it comes to the Mets’ now infamous Citi Field. Citi Field is gorgeous. The team that will inhabit it is not as gorgeous. It is outrageous that the taxpayers are backstopping the bank which made the naming deal with the team. It is embarrassing to an organization that has already suffered epic collapses the last two seasons to be going into a new stadium dealing with this kind of headache. With this in mind, let me proceed to the broader controversy regarding the naming deal.

Today in the New York Times, representative Dennis Kucinich argues regarding naming deals that “Treasury has the power under TARP to make broad changes, They have to. It’s not whether they can or should; they have to. The legal issues are very easy to maneuver.” According to Kucinich, Citi Field represents “an egregious example. But we have a list of other banks we’re working our way through. We’ll hold hearings.” I do agree with Kucinich that naming deals such as Citi’s with the Mets represent extravagent, and probably poor expenditures. I don’t know how Citi projected that it would recoup their $400 million investment in the naming rights to the stadium, but investment banks made all sorts of investments far more ridiculous over the last decade to be sure.


Further, given that taxpayers are the ones who are responsible for propping up the company responsible for this deal, it should anger all of us. But what Congress (Mr. Kucinich excluded given his populist rhetoric against the bank bailouts) fails to realize is that were it not for the government’s decision to bail out these institutions, these types of issues would not exist. As Citi unwound its assets during its bankruptcy, the naming rights deal could be nixed and purchased by another company. Where were Kucinich’s angry colleagues when it came to bailing out Citi in the first place?

The outrage amongst politicians when it comes to naming deals not only masks their lack of appreciation that this would not be an issue were it not for propping up failing ventures, but also masks the greater implications of their intervention. Since we all are now shareholders in these institutions, the government will tinker with their management. This begins with caps on executive pay, but who is to say that it will end there?

As poorly as some of these institutions were managed, and granting that a lot of their poor management was due to incentives created by government intervention, I would guarantee that government control of the banks will be even worse. Do you think that Nancy Pelosi knows how to create a DCF model in Excel? Does Barney Frank know how the market for CDO^2’s works, let alone what a CDO^2 is?

Much as I think that President Obama could give a hell of a pitch to investors on the virtues of a closed-end real estate fund, there is no way that the government can ever run these businesses properly. Command economies have always failed. The government lacks the profit motive and the knowledge to successfully manage these companies. Putting the firms under the purview of government represents the greatest moral hazard of them all.

Remember, these are only the direct effects of strict government regulation of the banking sector. There would also be a great effect on the markets. If the government is to have say over the operating activities of the major banks, what kind of implications will this have for retail and institutional investors? Will money flood out to less-regulated private equity and hedge funds? Will those shops then become as regulated as the (remaining) big banks? What kind of confidence will exist in the markets when the biggest broker-dealers are being managed by politicians? Will people not recall what happened to all of the other GSE’s?

There are a plethora of problems with these institutions being managed by the government. The Citi Field naming rights deal is very small relative to the big picture, but it exemplifies the direction the government is going. I am just as angry as everyone else that we are responsible for keeping the Citi naming deal alive, but we must remember that it was because of government intervention that we got ourselves into this mess in the first place. As if it wasn’t bad enough that the Mets aren’t going to pursue Manny Ramirez, now us tortured fans have to deal with this pathetic situation.