Now I'm not going to sit here and say the Wilpons must sell off the team outright 100% immediately. Simply, these guys are loyal and they love this team. In a way I feel a little sympathy as they've worked hard to build up their network SNY, to construct a fabulous state-of-the-art Ballpark which we gallantly call CitiField. 

However, it's pretty obvious that the owners need a big financial partner and they need it pronto. Maybe 50% would be the smart way to go, because it seems like the wealthiest of the prospective investors eye only a majority percentage. Keep in mind the Mets are one of the few teams in all of professional sports that are owned completely by a family.

According to the New York Times in a must-read read for any financial-savvy readers out there, the Mets saw a loss of approximately $50M this past season and expect to lose another $50M in revenue. How is this possible? Well, I suck at math but I'll do my best to understand the figures. 

According to Forbes via Biz Of Baseball the Mets saw a loss in revenue of $6.2M. However, the Mets contribute a vast amount of money to League Revenue which helps "level the playing field" and basically gives money to small-market teams to give them more financial flexibility; thus, they can afford to sign free agents and resign young rising stars and not lose them to the Yankees, Mets, Dodgers, and Red Sox. The NY Times says that the Mets contribute roughly $40 Million to MLB Revenue-sharing pool. 

The Mets according to Forbes suffered losses of $6.2M (prior to Revenue-sharing pool) in operating costs, yet the New York Times says that two people briefed on the organization's financial situation claim the figures are closer to $10M. So simply put, the Mets lost about $46M-$50M. The reason Forbes' figures may be lower is because the $-6.2M  figure is before interest, taxes, depreciation & amortization. So when the Mets did not have the money to cover their losses and pay the MLB's revenue-sharing pool, Bud Selig made the emergency $25M loan to the Mets so they could make the payment. So when the Mets had to take money out in the past to cover losses, they did so from one or more of their 16 accounts through Bernie Madoff. So this is kind of more proof as to why they were actually victims of Madoff and not winners; but that's an argument I'll discuss at a later time — or probably never. I don't got enough stimuli to handle that discussion. 

Forbes estimates the New York Mets are valued at $747M, down 13% from last year. 

Lastly, it should be noted that the Mets' financial turmoil stems back from when Nelson Doubleday sold his half of the team to Wilpon and Katz. Forbes claims the Mets were already $156M in debt at the time and to purchase Doubleday's portion of the team the Wilpons had to borrow $137M. And on top of all of that:

In addition, the team is contractually obligated to make about $50 million a year in annual payments connected to the $695 million of tax-exempt bonds issued by New York City to fund the building of Citi Field. If a potential investor thinks about the net present value of those payments as debt, there is no equity value left in the Mets. — Forbes Special Report: Inside Baseball's Debt Disaster

Chew on that nugget of information. 

– Check out the above link (Forbes Special Report: Inside Baseball's Debt Disaster) to read more about the Mets, Madoff, as well as the Financial situation of the Los Angeles Dodgers and how Bud Selig is involved in the whole mess; both positively and negatively. 

Mets Fan Forever is being told by a source that a group of people, led by Martin Luther King III, are going to make an offer as early as tomorrow to buy 100% of the New York Mets and SNY.

Now again this is only a rumor, and it's being reported by Adam Lowenthal who isn't Adam Rubin or Matt Cerrone, but it could be worth paying attention to.

Cerrone was reluctant to post this on his site at first, but eventually did, writing, "I too have picked up rumblings that the Commissioner’s office recently discussed how a transition of ownership might work, should such an offer end up being accepted. So, who knows, perhaps something is brewing, and this seams as plausible as anything else that’s been reported."

Along with MLK III, Ed Kranepool, Charles Dolan, Mark Cuban, Peter Kalikow and more are in this group to buy the Mets.

Cuban said he wouldn't be interested in buying a minority share in the Mets, but this group would have full control over the team, so he might be interested.

I'm not too sold on this rumor, and I think it's just that; a rumor. But, it is interesting and worth paying attention to, so we'll keep you updated.

I haven't really posted my thoughts about this Wilpon/Madoff financial crisis topic because I really don't know 100% what's is going on. From what I understand the Wilpon's said they lost $500M in the Madoff scandal while a trustee for Madoff is suing them because they are saying the Wilpon's made off with $300M in profit from Madoff.

Apparently this has no impact on the day-to-day operations of the Mets. But the Wilpon's might be out a significant amount of money so they are looking for someone to buy 20-25% of the ownership. Might be hard to find because they people that buy wouldn't have a controlling stake, so they wouldn't be able to make any decisions regarding the team. So they might need to included a partial sale in SNY, which is very profitable and would attract more buyers.

I've been trying to follow Adam Rubin on ESPN because he has done a great job reporting this story. I've read most of his articles but I'm still kind of confused. I'll just fill you in on what I've been reading:

• Here is the lawsuit that was brought against the Wilpon's. Here is the summarized version of the lawsuit.
• Here is the statement the Wilpon's made.
• Here was what some legal experts have to say on the subject. It's a bit long, but if you want to understand what's going on it's worth a read.
• The Wilpon's are being excused of spending $93M of the $300M they "made" from Madoff directly on the Mets.
• The Wilpon's offered Bernie Madoff a share in the Mets ownership back in 2002.

Adam Rubin reports that the Wilpon's are "exploring" options of adding minority ownership partners because they don't have a lot of money right now. And when I say a lot of money, I mean they could owe about a billion dollars. I'd like to help them out, but I don't get paid until next Friday. They're not selling the team though, only about 20%-25% of the ownership.

I seemed some fans are excited about the idea of having a new owner for the team. That's not going to happen. But even if it did should it really excite you that much? Sure, the idea of some new faces and throwing Mark Cuban's name around is fun, but would it really make that big of a difference? I'd fill in the bubble that has the answer, "Probably not." Most likely answer letter C, I usually go with that one. 

Do people think if the Mets just spend more money they'll be better? O.K. let's get this straight for the final time; SPENDING MONEY DOESN'T MAKE YOUR TEAM GOOD. The Chicago Cubs had the third highest payroll in baseball last year, and they were terrible. It's all about spending money wisely. Now with Sandy Alderson in charge, I don't think this will be a problem, but they don't need to spend more money. After this year they will have a ton of money coming off the books, when this happens Alderson will have more than enough money to put together a good team, and he might not even need the money.

Another thing, didn't the Mets have the fifth highest payroll in baseball last season? They are spending money people.

If the Wilpon's do find someone to buy 25% of the ownership it's only because they are having financial problems that could affect the future team. It has nothing to do with the team at hand right now.

People are always talking about spending money, and getting better players but there really isn't much the Mets should be doing right now. This offseason went down as expected, maybe even better. They weren't, and shouldn't have, gone out and spent millions of dollars on a new player. Giving out incentive laden deals and minor league contracts is what they should be doing.

The Mets have the big money players, they just aren't putting up big money numbers. The team's lack of success is because of the coaches and the players, has nothing to do with the ownership.