How can general managers increase the value of their franchise?
Phew. It has been long time coming, but you can now heave a big sigh of
relief as I publish the final of my four-part series on valuing baseball
clubs. If you are coming to this series fresh (where have you been?) I urge
you to read part 1, part 2 and part 3 first.
哇!又过了好长一段时间，但是当我现在发表这篇如何评估棒球队的价值四大系列的最后
一部分时，你应该开始有些印象了，如果你对这个系列感到陌生的话(你跑哪里去了?)，
我强烈建议你先看看第一部分，第二部分与第三部分。
Last time we looked at how to use a technique called DCF to justify the price
paid for a baseball franchise; specifically we looked at the Milwaukee
Brewers. The beauty of using the Brewers as a case study was that they were
sold in 2004/5 so we were able to compare our model to the actual sale price.
And, guess what? To the surprise of no one we managed to arrive at a
valuation very close to the purchase price by using a few informed (some
would say wild) assumptions.
上次我们着眼于如何利用叫做DCF的方法来断定棒球队经营权的价值，我们特别注意到酿
酒人队，利用酿酒人队作为研究的优点是他们在2004年5月被出售， 所以我们可以比较我
们的模型和实际的价格。你知道吗?我们利用精明(有人称作疯狂)假设下所获得的价格如
预期地非常接近购得价格。
Today I want to spend some time thinking about the levers that baseball
executives and owners can pull to maximize the value of their franchises and
try to bridge the difference in value between two teams in similar markets,
one of which is well run and the other of which is badly run.
今天我想要花时间探讨的是球队管理阶层或老板将球队价值提升至最高，或是缩短两支处
于相似市场，经营妥善与经营不佳的球队差距时所使用的方法手段。
Last time we said that every $1 increase in profit results in an increase in
valuation of $14. That gives a lot of scope for executives to boost the worth
of poorly run franchises. Simply put, there are two things an executive can
do: boost revenue or cut cost.
上次我们曾讨论过当球队收入增加一美金时，球队的价值就会提高十四美金。这给了球队
经营者很大的机会提高经营权的价值。简单的分类，经营者有两个选择，增加收入或是减
少支出。
Let's start with the revenue side of the equation.
我们先从这个公式中的收益部分开始。
Revenue
We know from part 2 that there is a reasonable degree of certainty around MLB
revenue numbers, more so than for cost numbers. So how does a typical major
league club's revenue split across its constituent components?
我们从第二部分得知，大联盟的收益数字和支出数字相比更有个合理程度的确定性，一支
典型大联盟球队的收益是如何分布的呢?
Tickets 39.0%
Concessions 16.4%
TV 16.1%
Post season 1.3%
Other local 7.0%
National 20.3%
The first thing to notice is that local revenue accounts for close to 80
percent of all revenue. That is important for a couple of reasons. First, it
places a limit on a franchise's revenue potential. By virtue of operating in
New York, which is a large market, the Yankees have a much higher
revenue-generating opportunity than, say, the Brewers do. Short of
relocating, the Brewers are constrained in earning power by the number of
people who can attend games, buy hot dogs, park at the ballpark or watch the
team on FSN.
首先要提到的是，本地的收益几乎占了整体收益的八成，这点对于两个推论而言很重要，
第一点，球队的可能收入是有限度的。在纽约经营球队，由于纽约是个大市场，所以洋基
队制造收入的机会要比酿酒人来的大。如果没有迁移主场，酿酒人队从球迷购票进场，购
买热狗，停车与从FSN频道观看比赛所获得的收益将被抑制。
Second, it means that individual teams actually have a lot of influence on
the amount of revenue they make. If they can attract more people to the park,
make their team more exciting or move to a new stadium with better
facilities, then the franchise will trouser most of the extra revenue itself.
This is doubly important when you consider that the national TV deal doesn't
discriminate among different franchises; the Yankees get just the same as the
Brewers.
第二点，每支球队的收入确实会受到许多因素所影响。如果球队能吸引更多的球迷进场，
让比赛更刺激，或是迁移至设施较完善的新球场，那么球队本身将能获得最 多的额外收
入。当你考虑到全国性的电视转拨权利金不因不同球队而有所不同时，这点更是重要。洋
基队获得的权利金和酿酒人是一样的。
There are three factors that general managers and owners should consider when
thinking about boosting franchise valuation.
当球队经理或是老板思考提高球队价值时，有三个因素需要考虑。
1. How close is the team to its revenue ceiling?
2. Is the team maximizing money from its park?
3. What is the most cost-effective way to build success, and with that an
attractive product for fans to consume?
1. 球队有多接近收入的最高限度?
2. 球队是否已经从球场压榨出最多的收入了?
3. 如何以最具成本效益的方法创造出最能吸引球迷消费的产品?
Where is the revenue ceiling?
How can we identify franchises that are falling short of their revenue
potential? The first thing to do is to size each local market. There are a
number of ways to do this, but the most intuitive is to either look at
metropolitan population or size of TV market. After tinkering with each I
discovered that we get the best representation by combining the two factors
in to a composite ranking. Here are the adjusted revenue and TV data:
我们要如何判定球队是否未达本身的营收潜力?首先要做的就是估算出地区市场的大小。
有很多方法可以办到，但是最直观的方法就是观察都市的人口或电视市场规模。在我初步
的检视之后得到了结合两种因素的混合排名。以下是调整过的收入与电视资料:
Team TV Population
Yankees 4,323,401 12,441,446
Mets 3,043,549 8,758,419
Dodgers 2,978,932 8,692,750
Phillies 2,941,450 6,188,463
Red Sox 2,372,030 5,819,100
Angels 2,632,178 7,680,895
Nationals (Expos)2,272,120 7,608,070
Astros 1,982,120 4,669,571
Braves 2,205,510 4,112,198
Cubs 1,840,621 4,878,570
Tigers 1,938,320 5,456,428
Diamondbacks 1,725,000 3,251,876
Rangers 2,378,660 5,221,801
Devil Rays 1,755,750 2,395,997
White Sox 1,614,399 4,278,970
Marlins 1,538,620 3,876,380
Twins 1,678,430 2,968,806
Mariners 1,724,450 3,554,760
Rockies 1,431,910 2,581,506
Athletics 1,047,208 3,092,703
Giants 1,336,362 3,946,659
Indians 1,537,500 2,945,831
Orioles 1,097,290 7,608,070
Pirates 1,163,150 2,358,695
Cardinals 1,228,980 2,603,607
Padres 1,030,020 2,813,833
Royals 913,280 1,776,062
Reds 886,910 1,979,202
Brewers 882,990 1,689,572
We can use simple regression to work out the relationship between size of
population and revenue. Running a multivariate regression with both TV market
and population as variables will suffer from extreme correlinearity so won't
work. What will work, however, is to build two separate models and add the
results together. Here is actual revenue vs predicted revenue for population,
TV market and a composite:
我们可以使用简单的回归分析找出人口大小与收入间的关联。使用多变量回归分析，以电
视市场与人口作为变量将会得到一个无用的极端交互线性结果。比较有用的方法是建立两
个分别的模组，然后将结果兜在一起。以下是实际的收益与根据人口，电视市场所估计的
收益与比较。
Predictions
Team Rev TV Pop Composite Diff
Yankees 277 238 236 237 40
Mets 195 197 199 198 -3
Dodgers 189 195 199 197 -8
Phillies 176 194 174 184 -8
Red Sox 206 175 170 173 33
Angels 167 184 189 186 -19
Nationals 145 172 188 180 -35
Astros 173 163 159 161 12
Braves 172 170 153 162 10
Cubs 179 158 161 160 19
Tigers 146 162 166 164 -18
Diamondbacks 145 155 144 150 -5
Rangers 153 176 164 170 -17
Rays 116 156 136 146 -30
White Sox 157 151 155 153 4
Marlins 119 149 151 150 -31
Twins 114 153 142 147 -33
Mariners 179 155 147 151 28
Rockies 145 145 138 142 3
Athletics 134 133 143 138 -4
Giants 171 142 151 147 24
Indians 150 149 141 145 5
Orioles 156 134 188 161 -5
Pirates 125 137 136 136 -11
Cardinals 165 139 138 138 27
Padres 158 132 140 136 22
Royals 117 129 130 129 -12
Reds 137 128 132 130 7
Brewers 131 128 129 128 3
A negative number implies that a team under performs its median revenue
potential, while a positive number indicates it over performs. This list
makes intuitive sense. The Nationals only recently moved to the capital, so
we'd expect that they would have some way to go to build and exploit a fan
base—the team needs to become established and start winning. The Red Sox and
Yankees are marketing behemoths, so it is no surprise to see that they
outperform their revenue target. The Angels are interesting—looking at this
it is obvious why they want to tap in to the LA market more!
负数代表了球队未达到获利潜能，反之正数代表球队超出获利潜能。这个列表符合直觉的
判断。国民队最近才迁移到首都，我们可以预期他们会用一些方法来开拓球迷群—球队必
须被认同与多赢几场球。红袜队与洋基队都是市场巨兽，所以她们超出了获利潜能目标一
点也不令人感到惊讶。天使队则令人感到有趣-瞧瞧这就是为何他们明显的想要多开发一
些洛杉矶市场!
The correlation between market size and revenue is reasonably strong with an
R of 0.78. This won't surprise anyone: the larger the market, the greater the
revenue opportunity.
市场大小与收入之间存在一个R=0.78的关联性。不使人感到讶异的是: 市场越大，收益的
机会也越大。
A lot of franchises are within $10 to 15 million of their potential, which
indicates there isn't a whole lot more they can do to generate vast
quantities of new revenue. However, because fixed costs are low, if an owner
can find just $5 million of revenue enhancement, that can translate to an
increase in value of around $70 million. That doesn't sound like much, but it
is actually a heck of a lot. That equates to boosting attendance by 2,000 per
game (or about 5 percent for most teams) for every game, or it equates to
selling an extra 350,000 baseball caps in your own stadium. With some canny
marketing, clever owners will eke out new opportunities here. Let's call it
$1-2 million worth.
很多球队与获利潜能只差了1千万到1千5百万，这代表他们将无法获得大量的额外收益。
然而由于固定成本低，如果球队老板能将收益提高5百万，那么就可以使球队的价值增加
大约7千万。这个数字看似不多，但是事实上这可不是一个小数字。这等同于每场比赛多
2000名观众进场(对大部分球队而言大约是5%)，或是球场额外多卖出35万顶球帽。聪明的
老板将从一些聪明的市场寻找新机会。我们称为1,2百万的财富。
Valuation swing = $30m
New stadia
Stadiums affect both the revenue and cost lines.
球场同时影响了收益与支出线。
One surefire way to boost revenue in the short term is to knock up a new,
publicly financed stadium. Think about it. There is a good excuse to increase
ticket prices, fans flock to the ballpark for the novelty factor, more
expensive concessions can be served and advertising space can be better
displayed meaning higher rates.
借由兴建政府出资的球场是一种不会失败的短期提高收益方法。想想看，这是一个提高票
价的好理由，球迷也会为了体验新球场而进场，还可以提高球场商店的租金，广告曝光率
也跟着提升，也代表了可收取较高的费率。
What's more is that new stadiums often come with a heavy dose of public
subsidy so the franchise doesn't even have to stump up the cash. The Mariners
are an example of a team that has won from an attractive stadium deal. The
Mariners received $372 million in public money for Safeco and despite having
to stump up for cost overruns, they get to keep all money generated by the
stadium including when it is used for non-baseball events. Another plus for
teams is that under the collective bargaining agreement they can deduct any
building costs from any revenue sharing obligations. Nice.
新球场往往还可以获得政府的援助，如此球队甚至可以不用付出现金。水手队就是从吸引
人的球场合约而获利的例子之一。由于Safeco Field，尽管水手队需要支付溢出的支出，
但是他们仍从公帑获得了3.72亿，并且可以保留所有球场的收入，算不是棒球赛事也一样
。另一个好处是根据集体劳资协议，他们还可以将任何的建筑成本从任何的收益分享义务
中扣除。真是太棒了。
Baseball Prospectus, in its book Baseball Between the Numbers, has done some
great analysis on how new stadiums generate extra revenue. There are a couple
of factors to consider. First, fans flock to a new ballpark because of the
novelty factor. They want to see the shiny new scoreboard, the 80-foot
Jumbotron and the sexy city skyscape design. BBTN reckons produces a revenue
bump of $17 million spread out over the first three years of the stadium.
Second, is the impact of stadium quality, which allows the franchise to
increase the price of anything and everything that moves. ESPN produces
stadium ranking each season. A stadium is ranked out of 100. Again BBTN
estimates that a new stadium that scores 85 on the ESPN will generate $19
million in additional revenue than a decrepit stadium that scores 60.
由Baseball Prospectus网站所出版的Baseball Between the Numbers这本书中有许多关
于新球场如何创造额外收益的分析。有两个因素需要被考虑。第一点为球迷因为想体验新
球场而进场看球。球迷想要看看闪亮的新记分版，80呎宽的大萤幕与球场的新颖设计。
BBTN(Baseball Between the Numbers)估计新球场在前三年大约能多创造1700万美金的收
益。第二点是球场品质的影响力，这点可以让经营者提高球场所有销售商品的价格。
ESPN每个球季都会列出球场的排名，最高为100分，BBTN也估计评价85分的新球场能比60
分的老旧球场多获得1900万美金的收益。
Wait a minute … if $1 of additional money a club earns equals $14 of value,
doesn't that mean that new stadiums massively increase a club's value? Not
quite. Don't forget that revenue does not equal profit. There are additional
costs to be accounted for. From our analysis of when the Brewers moved to
Miller Park not only did they have to pay off loans covering construction
they also added a chunk of overhead to maintain and manage the new stadium.
In all, it probably contributes a maximum of about $5 million in profit to a
team. That equates to $70 million in value and is the reason why the Twins
are only valued at $180 million in the latest Forbes standing. That was
before the new stadium deal. Now that it is secure, look for their value to
increase commensurately when Forbes releases its latest valuations in April.
等等...假如球队所获得额外的1元收入相当于14元的球队价值，这不就代表了新球场能大
幅的提升球队的价值嘛?其实不尽然。别忘了收入不等同于利润。还 需要计算额外的支出
。在我们的分析中，当酿酒人对迁移至Millar Park时，不只需要支付建造球场的贷款，
还多出了维护与管理新球场的大笔费用。大体而言，新球场大概能提供球队五百万的利润
。等同于七千万的价值，这也是双城队在最新的富比士排名中只值1.8亿美金。当富比士
于四月公布最新的估价时，我们再来看看双城队的价值增加了多少。
Valuation swing = $70 million
Building success and payroll
Improving marketing and building new parks are all well and good, but they
feel a bit superficial. There is, of course, one other very important way to
get the fans through the turnstiles and that is by winning.
加强行销与兴建新球场都很不错，但是它们都让人感觉有点只在做表面功夫。当然另外一
点让球迷进场看球的重要因素就是赢球。
It makes sense, right? Success on the field is usually rewarded by an influx
of fans spending money at the ballpark and more interest from local media and
sponsors. Who wouldn't want to be associated with a winner?
有道理，对吧?在球场上的成功通常都能让球迷愿意在球场消费，也更能吸引地方媒体与
赞助商。毕竟谁不想要和赢家合作呢?
How do we define by success? A trip to the postseason every year? Or perhaps
every five years? Or perhaps finishing above .500? OK, perhaps not the last
one. The point is that it is subjective, but what fans crave is contention.
That is why the wild card is good for the game—it created more excitement
and meant that more teams were contending. Sure, every so often a postseason
berth is a nice fillip to the fans but as long as the team is contending
they'll be happy.
我们如何定义成功呢?是每年都能打进季后赛嘛?还是每五年呢?或是胜率过半呢?也许不会
是最后一项。这个想法是很主观的，但是球迷所真正渴望的是竞争。这就是外卡制度对比
赛是有利的原因—它创造了更多的刺激因素，也代表了更多的球队能参与竞争。偶而打进
季后赛对球迷是一种刺激，但是只要球队保有竞争力，球迷就会感到开心。
Nate Silver, of Baseball Prospectus, has done a lot of work on how the value
of a win varies depending on the talent level of the team. Nate found the
following:
棒球年鉴网站的作家Nate Silver有好几篇文章在探讨胜利的价值如何因球队的实力水平
而有所不同。Nate发现了以下几点:
* Below 80 wins, marginal value of an extra win is $0.7 million
* At 86 wins, marginal value of an extra win climbs to $2.5 million
* Marginal value of an extra win peaks at $4.5 million at 90 wins
* After 97 wins marginal value of an extra win drops to $0.7 million again
* 80胜以下，多赢得一场比赛的价值是70万美金。
* 达到86胜时，多赢一场的价值则攀升至250万美金。
* 达到90胜时，多赢一场的价值为最多的450万美金。
* 超过97胜后，多一场胜利的价值则滑落到70万美金。
The sweet spot is around 85 wins. It is at this point that teams have a
reasonable chance of making the postseason, and this will create excitement
among the fans. It is also the point where spending that extra $1 million can
add real value to the ball club. Getting to the playoffs is very lucrative;
no wonder owners are willing to spend like Elton John to get there.
蜜点大约是在85胜左右，球队有机会晋级季后赛，也会让球迷感到兴奋刺激。这个时候球
队花费的额外100万元也能实际转换成球队的真实价格。打进季后赛对球队是非常有利的;
难怪球队老板愿意为此花大把银子。
The general manager's job is to work out how to best deploy resources to
maximize revenue yet contain cost. Should a team invest in player scouting
and development at the expense of payroll in order to build a winning team?
总经理的工作就是去计算出如何分配现有的资源而使收益达到最大。为了建立一之能赢球
的队伍，球队是否应该要牺牲部分的球员薪资而投资在球员的寻找与养成上呢?
Based on Nate's work I have estimated the cost and value of maintaining a
90-win team if you are a 75-win team.
根据Nate的文章，我估计了一支75胜的球队要进步到90胜时的花费与球队价值的变化。
* 75 wins = $35 million
* 90 wins = $65 million
* 15 wins = $30 million = $2 million/win
You need to acquire talent either through trade or through free-agents that
is worth less than $2 million a win. Our own Dave Studeman shows that free
agents cost $4.5 million a marginal win. Adding a free agent would destroy
value for this team.
你必须借由交易或者自由球员市场获得好球员，这使得一场胜利的价值不到两百万美金。
Dave Studman指出球队需花费450万美金在自由球员身上以换得一胜。签下自由球员将破
坏球队的价值。
What about moving an 85-win team to a 92-win team
一支球队从85胜进步到92胜又是什么情形呢
* 85 wins = $45 million
* 92 wins = $75 million
* 7 wins = $30 million = $4.5 million/win
In this case adding a free agent does make sense, but it doesn't add any
value to the team (because cost = value). However, trading prospects for
cheaper pre-arbitration or arbitration-eligible wins would be a good
strategy. For the 75-win team the best option is to invest in scouting,
statistics and player development to try to add 10 wins to get into the
85-win sweet spot.
在这个例子中，签下自由球员是有道理的，但是并没有使球队的价值有所增加。(因为支
出=价值)。然而交易新秀以换取较便宜的拥有薪资仲裁或提前仲裁资格的 球员是个不错
的策略。对于一支尝试多赢得10场比赛以达到85胜甜蜜点的75胜的球队而言，最好的选择
是投资在球探，统计数据与球员养成上。
Remember here we are talking about talent, not luck. Luck can mean that a
team that adds a free agent flukes a playoff spot, which fills the coffers.
记住我们在这里讨论的是潜力，而不是好运气。好运意味一支球队因为签下自由球员而侥
幸进入季后赛，但是代价是花费大笔的金钱。
Adding free agents rarely makes financial sense even if it allows a team a
run at the playoffs. Wheeling and dealing other talent makes more sense.
Also, once a team has added a free agent that is it; it is impossible to
extract the team from the contract. If the player is shipped on, the selling
team normally has to pick up some portion of the contract.
签下自由球员很少能创造经济效益，就算是球队因此打进季后赛。与潜力新秀签约能获得
较多的效益。一旦签下了自由球员，球队就很难从这份合约中脱身。如果这名球员被交易
出去，原本的球队通常仍需要负担部分的合约。
Valuation swing = $0 million (it is difficult to add wins at little cost)
Final words
Smart management both on and off the field can have a dramatic impact on
value. The difference between a club run well and one run poorly on and off
the field can be as much as $70 million.
聪明的管理不论在球场内外都对球队价值有很大的影响力。经营妥善与经营不善的球队差
距会达到七千万。
FACTOR SWING
Better management $30 million
Stadia $70 million
On-field performance $0 million
TOTAL $100 million (max)
That is why the demand for baseball clubs will continue to rise. Not only is
more money flooding in to the game, thereby increasing revenues, but heady
valuations can be justified through good management. How many owners and
general managers think that they are bad managers? It isn't a hard guess.
Zero!
这就是球队的花费持续上升的原因。不只是会有更多的资金涌入球场，球队收入也会因此
增加，但是球队价值的提升需要依靠良好的管理。有多少老板与总经理会认为自己是是差
劲的管理者呢?这不难猜，没有人!
http://dwz.tw/5d45