Kansas City Table Template

...

With regards to roster salary some the owners include deferred salary in the current roster salary expenses. Players believe that deferred roster salary should not be expensed right away since it is not paid in that given year rather 10 years later. They believe it should only be expensed when it is paid. I think players are correct in this case especially when Zephyrs and many other teams do not set the money aside now to pay for it in the future.

Singing bonuses also presents a conflict. Owners pay signing bonus in that given year and expense it in that same year. Players believe that the signing bonuses should be amortized throughout the years of the contract because the signing bonuses in their opinion are for the years of the contact. I agree with the owners because they pay out the bonus in that same year and incur it out as an expense even if the players are not able to complete their contracts.

Non-roster guaranteed expenses are expenses which the team must pay due to the team’s decision to release a player early from their contract. The owner’s expense the current year and future years they must pay for the player. The players believe only the current year should be expensed since that is the year that they are paying for the expense they are not yet paying for the future years. In my opinion, I believe the players are correct because they are only paying for the current year, the owners won’t pay the other years until those years come.

Lastly, the last point of difference is with regards to stadium operations. Players believe that they should be 80% of what they are currently in the owner’s expenses. In large part because 2 owners of the Zephyrs are sole owners of the stadium company, and that many owners also have dealing with other corporations that benefit them. I don’t agree with this because not all teams have this problem. If this was to be standard for every team then all the calculations would be wrong because not every team is misrepresenting these costs. Therefore, I will agree with the owners in this case.

In the following I will adjust roster salary, and non-roster guaranteed contracts to side with players and will leave the other owner costs the same. So if I adjust the income statements for current roster salary pertaining to deferred salary the current roster will change from $95,922 to $81,472 since deferred salary amounted to $14,450. If I also adjust for non-roster guaranteed contract expense just for 2005 I get $4,750 instead of $11,875 which includes years 2006 and 2007. Thus the total change in these amounts is as follows ($95,922-$81,472) + ($11,875-$4,750) = $21,575. Owners said there loss was $23,766 I will add $21,575 which still equals a loss of $2,191. Therefore, even after I adjusted for those two principles I still turned out a loss. So I believe the owner’s in general are still losing money.