Do you think Dan Snyder is broke?

[Skinsinparadise]

16 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

Anyway, whether he has the money or not, it's ridiculously dumb to watch WR's salary go up at least 5M a year in a few months and try to be the last one to sign one of the most obvious signing of all of these. 

 

It's like trying to save money in a .5% savings account while the house you want to buy is increasing 25% a year. Dumb, dumb, dumb!!!

 

Agree, though for Dan its been how he's rolled for years as for in house contracts.  Summer seems to be when he likes to do these big in house contracts.  

 

In his defense, I doubt he antcipated the WR contracts escalating the way they ended up going up.  They often will go up post FA but nothing crazy dramatic -- this time it was crazy dramatic.  It's likely going to end up costing them another 5 million a year on the cap each year of the contract. 

Edited June 9, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Burgold]

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Agree, though for Dan its been how he's rolled for years as for in house contracts.  Summer seems to be when he likes to do these big in house contracts.  

 

In his defense, I doubt he antcipated the WR contracts escalating the way they ended up going up.  They often will go up post FA but nothing crazy dramatic -- this time it was crazy dramatic.  It's likely going to end up costing them another 5 million a year on the cap each year of the contract. 

I don't think that's fair. As soon as you see the first contract drop, you pretty much know a new NFL floor has been set. That's when you need to get mobilized even if you like to wait. After all, the rule of elites is that each deal must outdo the one previous. So, being the last receiver standing means Terry and Terry's agent expects the biggest contract of them all which is probably why the sides are reportedly "far apart."

 

The Marties are probably working off the plan they developed in January and not the reality of early summer.

[Skinsinparadise]

15 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I don't think that's fair. As soon as you see the first contract drop, you pretty much know a new NFL floor has been set. That's when you need to get mobilized even if you like to wait. After all, the rule of elites is that each deal must outdo the one previous. So, being the last receiver standing means Terry and Terry's agent expects the biggest contract of them all which is probably why the sides are reportedly "far apart."

 

The Marties are probably working off the plan they developed in January and not the reality of early summer.

 

I am not arguing that they played this right.  I am arguing the opposite.  I think waiting for the summer as Dan has been apt to do for most major in house contracts -- Trent, Kerrigan, Allen, Terry is IMO foolish.  

 

when I hear Rivera from the jump of this off season reference that Terry's contract would be dealt with later, likely in the summer ala the Jonathan Allen contract, it made little sense to me at the time.  Ditto the beat guys saying the team hasn't even broached contract talks back then.

 

But now that i understand the finances of these contracts better, it makes some sense to me why Dan likes to do it that way.  It's not that I agree with the tact.  But it doesn't sound as crazy from Dan's point of view -- but the Terry contract blew up on him in ways that some of those other contracts likely did not to the same extent.  The WR market wasn't just a run of the mill episode this off season where position doesn't go up give or take like 7 million a year for the top end of that market.    the WR went up in a much bigger way than some anticipated.  It was a national sports story for a reason as for how crazy that market went up. 

 

As stupid as Dan is -- even he i think would have done the Terry contract sooner if he anticipated the market would go up to this extent and would have sucked up the finances of it. 

 

 

Edited June 9, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[goskins10]

@skinsfan93 - Fair Enough

 

@skinsfan93 @Skinsinparadise - We will have to agree to disagree. It happens. 

 

I do agree that Dan is the worst owners in all of sports. I just wish the other owners had the guts to move him out. I think they could if they wanted to. Maybe they still will.Time will tell. 

[Hooper]

to franchise Terry, it would cost under 50 million for the next two years.

 

That's where this is probably going and it will be non-stop drama as usual.

 

 

[TheShredder]

On 6/10/2022 at 1:41 AM, Hooper said:

to franchise Terry, it would cost under 50 million for the next two years.

 

That's where this is probably going and it will be non-stop drama as usual.

 

 

True, but to extend him would cost over 70M. He needs the extension or stands to loose +20M.

[SpacePenguin]

I couldn't resist the happy meal option, although it's definitely a case of wishful thinking.

 

I don't think Dan should own an NFL team regardless of how rich he is. The product on the field is consistently bad to average from year to year, so I don't believe a lack of liquidity will make a lot of difference.

[Skinsinparadise]

The idea of Dan being "broke" as the title thread sort of wins the argument on the spot for those who believe Dan's finances are perfectly fine by setting up a ridiculous premise as the counter argument.  Obviously he's not broke.  And the idea that Dan is broke isn't the counter argument. 

 

I could have most of my equity in my house.  I can take a loan off of that equity.  But that doesn't mean I am liquid.  It also doesn't mean I am broke.  i have assets.  Liquity and being broke are entirely two different things. 

 

As far as Terry goes.  If his contract matches Kupp, then he'd need to park 75 million now.  Not spread out over years but all of that right now.  It would be almost twice the price of his new luxury home.  Can he pull that off?  I bet he could.  Does it hurt now more than it would have in years past?  I'd think yeah considering his whopping 875 million loan and all the money he needs to come up for the stadium.    Would it behoove him to wait this out until closer to the period when he gets some in season lump payment from the NFL?  Probably so.  Hence IMO the likely delay.   Or interest made on said money as i pointed out in a different thread.

 

I do think they get this deal done.  I do think though he has less liquidity than he typically does and i do think it effects some of how they roll right now. 

Edited June 13, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

I’m not sure why it’s a stretch for some to connect the dots that Dan likely has liquidity issues that are impacting football operations to some extent.

 

Billionaires don’t just have money sitting around in a savings account.  He recently had to leverage his assets to take on debt to buy out the other owners.  Most everything else he’s touched is a negative.  He’s playing checkers while lawmakers are playing chess in regards to securing funding for a stadium.  Deals for guys like Dan are less about balance sheets and more about relationships - his name is mud and he’s world renowned for sinking everything he touches. 

[Peregrine]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The idea of Dan being "broke" as the title thread sort of wins the argument on the spot for those who believe Dan's finances are perfectly fine by setting up a ridiculous premise as the counter argument.  Obviously he's not broke.  And the idea that Dan is broke isn't the counter argument. 

 

I could have most of my equity in my house.  I can take a loan off of that equity.  But that doesn't mean I am liquid.  It also doesn't mean I am broke.  i have assets.  Liquity and being broke are entirely two different things. 

 

As far as Terry goes.  If his contract matches Kupp, then he'd need to park 75 million now.  Not spread out over years but all of that right now.  It would be almost twice the price of his new luxury home.  Can he pull that off?  I bet he could.  Does it hurt now more than it would have in years past?  I'd think yeah considering his whopping 875 million loan and all the money he needs to come up for the stadium.    Would it behoove him to wait this out until closer to the period when he gets some in season lump payment from the NFL?  Probably so.  Hence IMO the likely delay.   Or interest made on said money as i pointed out in a different thread.

 

I do think they get this deal done.  I do think though he has less liquidity than he typically does and i do think it effects some of how they roll right now. 

On the flip side, you can also have 26 houses, each worth 1 million, and have 2 million in cash and be broke if you owe $30 million on the houses.  Having lots of expensive things doesnt mean someone isnt broke, its all about assets vs liabilities, and ability to pay big costs for wealthy people is often tied into their financials.  If he has good financials, lenders will line up to give money, especially temporary(6 months) loans to an NFL owner.  But if he has bad financials, lenders are going to look at his books and decline to offer him temporary operating cash, especially considered that someone could turn a cash cow into something thats not.

 

Unless someone can see his books, we probably can only guess based on how those that CAN actually see his books react.

[Corcaigh]

1 hour ago, Peregrine said:

Unless someone can see his books, we probably can only guess based on how those that CAN actually see his books react.

Which set of books are you talking about? 

[Voice_of_Reason]

On 6/13/2022 at 9:56 AM, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I’m not sure why it’s a stretch for some to connect the dots that Dan likely has liquidity issues that are impacting football operations to some extent.

Here’s the problem with that statement:  if Dan needed $200M cash tomorrow, he’d have it tomorrow.  
 

Dude is a billionaire.  He has access to every lender and a 4.5 billion dollar asset.  He can leverage it and get almost free cash any time he needs it.  
 

It’s good being a Billionaire.  
 

It’s super easy for me to say he’s more leveraged than he has been.  And it’s fine to say he might want to wait to write big checks. 
 

But if he needed cash, he can get it,  I don’t think he needs it.  I think they’ve got all the cash the need.  But even if he didn’t, he can send 1 text and somebody will make a phone call and he has access to certainty whatever he would need to cover any player salary. 
 

Stadium is different.  I don’t think he could finance $3 Billion on his own.  
 

But he’s not worried about putting $50 or $60 million in escrow for Terry.  I just can’t imagine that rises even remotely to a level of concern.

 

I would say it would irk him to have to put the entire Watson contract in escrow.  But that’s $230M.  That’s some serious real money.

[Voice_of_Reason]

On 6/13/2022 at 8:34 AM, Skinsinparadise said:

As far as Terry goes.  If his contract matches Kupp, then he'd need to park 75 million now.  Not spread out over years but all of that right now.  It would be almost twice the price of his new luxury home.  Can he pull that off?  I bet he could.  Does it hurt now more than it would have in years past?  I'd think yeah considering his whopping 875 million loan and all the money he needs to come up for the stadium.    Would it behoove him to wait this out until closer to the period when he gets some in season lump payment from the NFL?  Probably so.  Hence IMO the likely delay.   Or interest made on said money as i pointed out in a different thread.

Terry isn’t getting $70M guaranteed. Kupp and Hill got that.  All the other comps are $40-57.  He’ll get somewhere in that neighborhood.  

 

Regardless, I disagree. One thing you’re not factoring into your equation is yeah, Dan took a big loan.  He also now gets 100% of the profits from the team, and does not have to split those 60/40 with the minority owners.

 

His debt position grew, but so did his asset and income base.  
 

I doubt very seriously the NFL would have granted a debt waiver if they thought there was a chance the best load was going to effect the ability to operate the team.  
 

Dan is making more now than he ever has since he has nobody to split the profits with. 
 

With the combination of revenue sharing of the TV deals, local  non-shared revenue, and the fact Bruce was a miser for a decade, I think it’s a reach to say he had liquidity issues.  
 

Might  he want to defer paying for something? Maybe.  In one sense, that’s good business.  Never pay today for what you can pay for tomorrow. 
 

Or maybe he doesn’t care because it’s not a QB sized contract and it’s just not that big a deal.

 

I still think it’s a reach to think a billionaire owner and an NFL franchise with the revenue sharing agreements are going to have issues paying a WR.

 

I’ll hear you out in a $230M fully guaranteed QB contract.  I still think Dan could do that, but that is ~1/16th of the current value of the team and that’s not trivial.  That would seriously deplete Amy cash reserves snd you’d almost have fo be moving money around for that.   

[Skinsinparadise]

10 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Terry isn’t getting $70M guaranteed. Kupp and Hill got that.  All the other comps are $40-57.  He’ll get somewhere in that neighborhood.  

 

 

Signing bonuses from what I understand have to be paid up front, too so its not just guaranteed money that's the upfront money.  Look at the AJ Brown contract for example, a lot of dough between guaranteed money and signing bonuses.

 

10 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

Regardless, I disagree. One thing you’re not factoring into your equation is yeah, Dan took a big loan.  He also now gets 100% of the profits from the team, and does not have to split those 60/40 with the minority owners.

 

 

This isn't a $10,000 loan.  It's 875 freaking million dollars.   Even if I ran with your premise, if Dan has any financial sense, he'd want to pay that down as soon as possible versus shrug it off.   And I'd add as I've said to death Dan gets his payments from the NFL in increments as Lombardi explained and he explained that influences the timing of how some owners spend their money.

 

10 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

I doubt very seriously the NFL would have granted a debt waiver if they thought there was a chance the best load was going to effect the ability to operate the team.  

 

Strawman argument. 

 

10 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

With the combination of revenue sharing of the TV deals, local  non-shared revenue, and the fact Bruce was a miser for a decade, I think it’s a reach to say he had liquidity issues.  

 

And apparently Bruce just for kicks loved to do his big resign deals in the summer.   Dan the dude who is the common thread between both regimes -- the dude who actually signs the checks and has something to gain from doing it this way, is somehow just along passively for the ride.  People have said Dan can't help himself but butt on on just about everything -- but apparently that stops when it comes to giving out big contracts and the timing for that.  On that he tells his minions do it anyway they please and I'll just sign the checks.  

 

10 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

Might  he want to defer paying for something? Maybe.  In one sense, that’s good business.  Never pay today for what you can pay for tomorrow. 

 

That's my backup argument.  If Dan doesn't have liquidity issues than as Breer said he might like (among other owners) to hold on to their money and do these bigger contracts later so they can make money on their interest.  Is this you saying here you agree that you think this is a strong possibility?

 

My whole argument doesn't center on Dan's liquidity.  My argument is its Dan who likely punted this for the summer.  As for the reason its immaterial to my point.

 

10 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

I still think it’s a reach to think a billionaire owner and an NFL franchise with the revenue sharing agreements are going to have issues paying a WR.

 

 

Big time strawman argument.

 

Again some of the people arguing on behalf of Dan, seem to like to paint this as an extreme binary argument.  Is Dan broke?  Is Dan in financial trouble?  Can Dan afford to pay Terry?  To me those are nonsense questions, designed to win an argument versus have a real discussion.

 

I don't feel like rehashing all my points again.  I'll just use a simple financial example.  My business like Dan happens to be cyclical.  Like Dan my revenue comes almost 100% from my business.  Can i afford to spend a nice amount of money right now on a vacation?  Sure.  But I'd rather wait until closer to my cash infusion.  Not because I can't handle it now but because I'd rather do it at a different time considering my finances where it feels more comfortable. 

 

Some counter well Dan has all the money in the world.  Yeah he does compared to us but some are taking the point IMO, way too far.  60 million for a big contract isn't like our version of 60 cents.  Paying back almost a billion dollar loan isn't like us paying back a $5000 a loan.  Him having to pay 2 billion potentially for a stadium and soon isn't like us having to fork over $10,000 to make an addition to our house. 

 

I get that the dude has money but I think some are wildly off as to the scale of things.  Just because his scale is way different than ours doesn't make every big expense irrelevant for him.  And I haven't even dived into the point about how cheap he is. Losing popular assistant coaches to the Rams of all teams over $100,000 or so.  His whole kingdom started to come down ironically because he forgoed payments to his minority owners.  Bruce had to sue him for backpay.  On and on and on.   That's a whole different narrative which actually feeds big time into my point much easier than it feeds into yours.   

 

For a dude that supposedly has money coming out of his butt, he certainlty doesn't act that way running this team especially in recent years to say the least.   Not even close. 

Edited June 15, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[DiscoBob]

YES 

 

Dan is definitely broken, somewhere between his ears

 

 

[justice98]

I dont get the liquidity argument, signing bonuses dont come out of his personal bank account.  

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

16 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

Here’s the problem with that statement:  if Dan needed $200M cash tomorrow, he’d have it tomorrow.  
 

Dude is a billionaire.  He has access to every lender and a 4.5 billion dollar asset.  He can leverage it and get almost free cash any time he needs it.  
 

It’s good being a Billionaire.  
 

It’s super easy for me to say he’s more leveraged than he has been.  And it’s fine to say he might want to wait to write big checks. 
 

But if he needed cash, he can get it,  I don’t think he needs it.  I think they’ve got all the cash the need.  But even if he didn’t, he can send 1 text and somebody will make a phone call and he has access to certainty whatever he would need to cover any player salary. 
 

Stadium is different.  I don’t think he could finance $3 Billion on his own.  
 

But he’s not worried about putting $50 or $60 million in escrow for Terry.  I just can’t imagine that rises even remotely to a level of concern.

 

I would say it would irk him to have to put the entire Watson contract in escrow.  But that’s $230M.  That’s some serious real money.

I'm well aware of his net worth and the fact that billionaires leverage their assets to get cash when needed.  

 

But we literally have no idea what his financial situation looks like.  What we know about him is that this franchise is worth a lot of $ and that he recently took out a huge loan against it to buy out the minority owners.  We also know that practically every other endeavor he's been apart of outside the team has been a failure.  He's currently lobbying for public money to land a stadium and either has or will have to put out north of $100MM to secure land for a stadium.  As seen by his inability to land a stadium site, the congressional hearings, sponsors dropping out, etc. - his name is mud, and not that of someone people are lining up to do business with.

 

I do agree with you that the strength of this franchise alone affords him the ability to make a call and get access to more money, as would anyone in his situation - however, I'd certainly bet that the terms of any arrangements for additional cash would approach loan shark levels based on his reputation, the amount of debt he has on him, and on and on and on.  There are so many things in motion with this franchise due to his own ineptitude - having to change the name, losing sponsors, lawsuits, congressional hearings, trying to secure a spot for a stadium - and none of this stuff is cheap.  The cost to borrow has gone up exponentially for everyone. The liabilities keep stacking up around Dan and I'm certain the cost of obtaining cash for him is at the highest it's ever been.

[Skinsinparadise]

The idea that Dan's personal finances and company finances aren't interlinked?  Yeah they are seperate animals technically.  But they are interlinked especially when the net worth is tied to the business almost 100%. 

 

I don't pay my employees via my personal checking account but by my business account but that doesn't mean one doesn't influence the other.  If I make less money via my business it effects my personal finances.

 

Gibbs said a bunch of times that Jack Kent Cook would tell him he just had some business success outside of the team and will give that money to the team -- he'd joke so they can piss it away on players.  Gibbs shared that story several times including on the SB special. 

 

Kroencke didn't pay the billions he did for the stadium via profit on the Rams.  His money went beyond the Rams.  

 

The fact that Dan's money by most accounts doesn't go that much beyond this team's net worth -- some here find irrelevant.  But IMO and others here, its clearly relevant. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

But we literally have no idea what his financial situation looks like.  What we know about him is that this franchise is worth a lot of $ and that he recently took out a huge loan against it to buy out the minority owners.  We also know that practically every other endeavor he's been apart of outside the team has been a failure.  He's currently lobbying for public money to land a stadium and either has or will have to put out north of $100MM to secure land for a stadium.  As seen by his inability to land a stadium site, the congressional hearings, sponsors dropping out, etc. - his name is mud, and not that of someone people are lining up to do business with.

The bolded is my point.  We have literally no idea what his financial situation is.  What frustrates me is jumping to the conclusion he has liquidity issues and that is why we had a quiet off-season and why Terry's deal has not gotten done. And it feeds into the "cycle of negativity" around the team for no particular reason, based on pure speculation which started by a few reporters who I'd be willing to be dollars to doughnuts do not have any type of a finance background.  

 

And let me be clear: I'm NOT irritated with ANYBODY on this board about this, not you, not @Skinsinparadise. I'm irritated by what I think is some really, really fast and loose, and at times irresponsible reporting by the folks covering the team, particularly Standig, JP Finlay and Michael Phillips.  Ironically, all of whom I REALLY like. (Maybe JP less than the other two, at the moment.)  But I think they got this "head cannon" and they keep trotting it out there, and it's started to take on a life of it's own.  And I find that significantly irritating.  

 

Sure, there are dots to connect:

- Non-shared revenues are down because fans are not going to the games, not buying stuff at the stadium, not buying as much merch and sponsors dropping out

- He just took on significant additional debt.

- We have had a quiet off-season.

- We know that when a player signs a contract, the guaranteed money has to be put into escrow, and the owner can't use it until the player gets it.  Even for out-years.  ** One thing I'm not sure about, if an amount of money gets fully guaranteed at a later date, does that money have to go into escrow now or later?  The reporting is unclear on that.  For example, let's say you get $50M guaranteed at signing, but $20M more guaranteed if you are on the roster on the third day of the 2023 league year.  (This is VERY common).  Does the organization need to put the $50M in escrow, or the $70M.  My guess is it's the $50M, then another $20M on the third day of the league year, which is one of the reasons they do it this way.  

 

So, sure, there are dots to connect. And MAYBE those dots lead to the right answer.  

 

But we really have no idea how much cash Snyder or the team has on hand.  Snyder did sell Snyder Communications for a fairly hefty sum of money ($2 Billion in 2000.)  It was primarily a stock deal, and as far as I know there hasn't been any reporting of what Snyder has done with his shares.  

 

At the time, he said he was not going to sell the shares in order to pay down the $300M loan he took to buy the Redskins.  But who knows what he's done with the shares since.  I can't find anything (granted I didn't search that hard) to find what happened with those shares. But they were worth $2.something Billion in 2000.  

 

Pure speculation, over the course of the last 20 years, he's sold at least some of those shares, and taken the cash.  I have NO way of knowing that, but almost any financial advisor would advise him to diversify that particular windfall. So if we're playing "connect the dots" that's a dot I would connect.  

 

And this was AFTER he purchased the team. He did NOT use the sale of Snyder Communications to finance the deal to buy the Redskins in 1999. This would have been money in his pocket after he bought the team.    

 

Another assumption I have no basis on, and can't find any reporting of: Since 1999, he paid off the original $300M loan, or a significant component of it.  Again, freely admitting this is speculation, but it has been 23 years.  And he had the sale of Snyder Communications.  And the revenue of the team for 23 years.  And general interest on his money, which isn't trivial.  It stands to reason he has paid down at least some, if not all of, the original loan. The only thing we know (that I could find) is he and Fred Drasner re-finance $600M of debt in 2002 to take advantage of lower interest rates, and move some money between the stadium debt and the team debt. (Some of that debt was Fred's not Dan's)  Again, that was 20 years ago, they might have re-financed that as well a few times without it being reported.

 

Final point: I can't find anywhere where Snyder took an $875M loan to pay off the Minority Partners. The NFL granted him a $450M debt waiver, payable by 2028. My assumption from reading a whole bunch of articles is he took a $450M loan, and paid the rest in cash.  If there is reporting to the contrary, where he actually took an $875M loan, please post a link.  I'm not saying it doesn't exist, I just couldn't find it. 

 

The purchase of the 40% of the team, of course, increased his assets and his cash flow.  My guess (again, pure speculation) is that with the full ownership of the team, he thinks he can pay back the loan in full by the deadline.  Either he thinks he can do that with revenues from the team now, or he will have to sell some equity to pay off the loan.  

 

So again, to your bolded point, we have literally no idea what the cash position of Snyder or the Commander's franchise is.  Is it possible the $2B in stock he got in the sale of Snyder Communications went bust and he didn't take any as cash, and he just lost that money?  Yep.  Could have happened.  Is it also possible over the last 20 years he sold some of it for cash?   Is it possible he sold all of it for cash and invested it elsewhere?  Both are very possible.  Unless somebody knows, I certainly don't.  

 

And since we don't know, even though there are dots to connect, I still fall on the side that there is no liquidity problem, because there has been NO reporting of such.  None.  

 

(This doesn't mean there aren't OTHER problems, will get to that in a minute.)

 

 

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I do agree with you that the strength of this franchise alone affords him the ability to make a call and get access to more money, as would anyone in his situation - however, I'd certainly bet that the terms of any arrangements for additional cash would approach loan shark levels based on his reputation, the amount of debt he has on him, and on and on and on.  There are so many things in motion with this franchise due to his own ineptitude - having to change the name, losing sponsors, lawsuits, congressional hearings, trying to secure a spot for a stadium - and none of this stuff is cheap.  The cost to borrow has gone up exponentially for everyone. The liabilities keep stacking up around Dan and I'm certain the cost of obtaining cash for him is at the highest it's ever been.

I agree with everything you said here, except with one important clarification:  We don't actually know how much debt he has on the team.  We don't know if it is piling up.

 

I think the only thing we know is he was granted the ability to take a $450M loan to buy out the minority partners.  If I'm not mistaken, that's the ONLY thing we KNOW.  We don't know if he's still leveraged from the sale of the team, we don't know if he has other loans outstanding.  It's really possible he had paid off all or most of the debt he had on the team before he bought out the minority owners.  I don't think he did fully, or he might not have needed the debt waiver.  But we don't know how much debt he is carrying with any certainty.  

 

And we don't know how much cash he has.  Or how much cash he can shake free at any point.  

 

-------------------------------------------------------------

Look, this is not a defense in any way of Snyder.  It's just finance.  Unless there is reporting to show he might have cash flow or liquidity issues, I'm not going to believe it. My basic premise is an NFL team, any NFL team, generates enough cash to do whatever the hell they want whenever the hell

 

On the other hand, if you are telling me he's delaying certain payments because he's Dan and he's stupid, I have no problem believing that could be the case.  But again, we haven't heard ANY reporting to that effect, just speculation.  Standig even asked Ron directly if he was on a budget at the (I can't remember which, Draft of Owners meetings) and he said no, they're just managing the cap.  

 

But Dan is often self destructive.  So I COULD believe he wanted to delay payments.  I also COULD believe that Ron and company were distracted and didn't want to start the negotiations until after the draft.  

 

I think either of those are possible.  My gut tells me it's more Ron than Dan. Maybe I'm wrong on that. Maybe I'm being completely naive.  I'm open to that possibility.   Maybe we will find out, maybe we won't.  (Though I do think Terry will be signed regardless. And then this will kindof go away.)

[86 Snyder]

17 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The idea that Dan's personal finances and company finances aren't interlinked?  Yeah they are seperate animals technically.  But they are interlinked especially when the net worth is tied to the business almost 100%. 

 

I don't pay my employees via my personal checking account but by my business account but that doesn't mean one doesn't influence the other.  If I make less money via my business it effects my personal finances.

 

Gibbs said a bunch of times that Jack Kent Cook would tell him he just had some business success outside of the team and will give that money to the team -- he'd joke so they can piss it away on players.  Gibbs shared that story several times including on the SB special. 

 

Kroencke didn't pay the billions he did for the stadium via profit on the Rams.  His money went beyond the Rams.  

 

The fact that Dan's money by most accounts doesn't go that much beyond this team's net worth -- some here find irrelevant.  But IMO and others here, its clearly relevant. 

Agree about all of this and there’s an extra layer to consider, too.  
 

Even if he has plenty of liquidity, it also matters whether *he feels* he has enough liquidity.  
 

If he feels a big squeeze, he’s going to handle business matters accordingly.  If he’s in a scarcity based mindset, he’s going to handle business matters accordingly.  So whether he has more than enough liquidity (he doesn’t) is not even the question…it’s whether he feels he does or not.

 

Terry’s situation is one thing.  Could just be standard negotiation that is dragging it out.  To me the telltale sign is not restructuring Wentz.  It’s a no-brained move to not spread out his cap hit and create a bunch of $$ to spend on FAs (3 months ago) to bolster the team.  Old Dan would have done that in a heartbeat.  Wouldn’t even be a consideration, just done.  New, broke Dan just let it walk right by.

 

Add the Wentz contract to the backdrop of waiting until the last minute to sign guys, the stadium fiasco, a non existent fan base, expensive rebrand, tumbling gate earnings, a looming congressional hearing, dropping of sponsors, and well, there’s only one conclusion:

 

This mother****er is broke.

[Est.1974]

1 minute ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

 

Look, this is not a defense in any way of Snyder.  It's just finance.  Unless there is reporting to show he might have cash flow or liquidity issues, I'm not going to believe it. My basic premise is an NFL team, any NFL team, generates enough cash to do whatever the hell they want whenever the hell

Pretty much this.

[Voice_of_Reason]

34 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The fact that Dan's money by most accounts doesn't go that much beyond this team's net worth -- some here find irrelevant.  But IMO and others here, its clearly relevant. 

But you have ABSOLUTELY no way of knowing that.  

 

I guess, after looking into this further, my biggest question is, what the hell happened with the $2B he sold Snyder Communications for in 2000?  Has he spent it?  On what?  Did it disappear?  Is it re-invested?  In what?

 

The simple answer is, we don't know.  Nobody knows, except Dan and his finance folks.  

 

It's possible he didn't sell it, the company tanked, and he got nothing.  I find that somewhat hard to believe, but it's possible.  

 

If that didn't happen, SOMETHING happened with at least part of that money.  Did he lose all of it on 6-flags and Johnny Rockets?  Maybe.  Maybe not. I can't believe he lost all of it.  Though, maybe he is just THAT stupid.  

 

I do separate out the Stadium stuff from the player stuff.  Is he cash-rich enough right now to put a down payment on a stadium and take whatever the remainder in loans? Honestly, I don't know.  But with that's we're talking BILLIONS of dollars.

 

Spending money dictated by the salary cap? I find it hard to believe that's hurting the bank account of any team.  

[86 Snyder]

5 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

But you have ABSOLUTELY no way of knowing that.  

 

I guess, after looking into this further, my biggest question is, what the hell happened with the $2B he sold Snyder Communications for in 2000?  Has he spent it?  On what?  Did it disappear?  Is it re-invested?  In what?

 

The simple answer is, we don't know.  Nobody knows, except Dan and his finance folks.  

 

It's possible he didn't sell it, the company tanked, and he got nothing.  I find that somewhat hard to believe, but it's possible.  

 

If that didn't happen, SOMETHING happened with at least part of that money.  Did he lose all of it on 6-flags and Johnny Rockets?  Maybe.  Maybe not. I can't believe he lost all of it.  Though, maybe he is just THAT stupid.  

 

I do separate out the Stadium stuff from the player stuff.  Is he cash-rich enough right now to put a down payment on a stadium and take whatever the remainder in loans? Honestly, I don't know.  But with that's we're talking BILLIONS of dollars.

 

Spending money dictated by the salary cap? I find it hard to believe that's hurting the bank account of any team.  

What exactly do you think people are doing on here all day?  We don’t truly know much of anything.  Folks read the actions and comments of the team and have opinions based on how the puzzle pieces fit together.  
 

The team is being run like the person who is running it has money problems.  The most likely reason is the person who is running it has money problems.

 

If you take away speculation then you are left with game results, what coaches and players say, and news about acquisitions and such.  Makes for a pretty boring board of all you’re gonna do is “YOU CANT KNOW THAT” to everything else.  It’s as bad, probably worse actually, as the old “well if you know so much how come you’re not a GM” nonsense.  

 

Terrible take.

[Skinsinparadise]

4 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

But you have ABSOLUTELY no way of knowing that.  

 

 

You also have ABSOLUTELY no way of knowing how liquid or not Dan is either.  You want to give Dan the benefit of the doubt.  And you do not want to give Ron the benefit of the doubt here.  That's your choice.   My choice based on seeing the facts and the credibility I give to Ron and lack of which I give to Dan -- lead me to a different conclusion.  Simple as that. 

 

You also have no way of knowing that it was Ron as you claim you believe it is who wanted to punt the contract to the summer versus Dan.  You think the facts lead you down that road.  IMO the facts lead me down the road that its Dan.   You can play down that you don't like Dan as much as you like but that doesn't make you more credible.  And this isn't the first subject you've thought the media has been over the top going after Dan.   I've read some of your occasional rants about the media in the context of Dan.

 

As for any NFL owner has any resource to do anything they want anytime they want, while its a strong defense of Dan because it defends him without looking like you are -- still that point goes against the grain of what some cap guys have said and ex-agents have said for years where some owners have more liquidity than others and that it indeed effects the timing of what they do.  I can post to you 10 million times about the word "timing" and its not about having the money or not having the money but WHEN you want to use it -- you seem to ignore that point even though its the central plot of my point --  so its tough for me to take you too seriously since you miss my overall point again and again.

 

Speaking of the rest of the NFL.  If you get over thinking poor Dan is being attacked by the media.  You'll see that this point has been extended beyond Dan and this situation.  It's not some obscure point that me and some others have discovered on our own and are spitballing about it on the board.   This has been an NFL topic for years. 

 

You could be wrong.  I could be wrong.  My point is for various reasons, i indeed think its Dan.  Because he's the only one who benefits from it.  His track record on this extends beyond Ron.  And he has the history of interferring on matters, he also has a history of being cheap -- somehow i am supposed to believe that the dude who is picking our QB himself in the draft among other things, is some passive bystander, not just with Ron but for years with Bruce too as to caring when a chunk of his money is spent -- it requires a heck of lot of imagination in my book to buy that.   And a lot of faith in Dan's ability to be hands off.  

 

Whether its Dan's not liquid where he wants to wait until he gets his cash infusion from the NFL, or as Breer suggested he wants to make interest on the money or he's just cheap or maybe he's been liquid over the years but the stadium among other things changed things this time -- whatever narrative that is in play, they all seem to me to be very plausible arguments.  If people want to argue its this or not that as for what's influencing Dan -- I am flexible on that point.  But the idea that Dan is sitting at home in his mansion and pays no heed to how his money is spent and when it happens and Ron for bizzare reasons just likes to wait just for kicks and let the market rise -- I just don't buy it.  Is it possible?   Sure. But IMO its unlikely.  The burden to me is on Dan.  You think the burden is on Ron.   

 

As far as net worth goes and how that's computed.  Net worth is assets minuses liabilities.  Assets include -- house, yacht, businesses, investments, etc.    When you lose money in businesses it has consequeces to the bottom line.  

 

Depending on the web site, Dan's net worth is anywhere from 2.3 million to 4 million and change.  No matter what figure you take, that doesn't take you much beyond the actual worth of the Commanders.  Could he have stashes of money outside of that?  Maybe.  You are suggesting he does and wants to play that down as to his net worth.  Most rich people I know, and I work with a bunch of them in my line of business if anything like to inflate their net worth.   Bragging rights with their fellow rich men versus play down their assets. 

 

Whether Dan paid half and took out the loan for the other half either way it cost him money.   Whether he pays 1.2 billion or 2 billion for the stadium or however it ends up, its still a lot of money.  He's not Bezos, he doesn't have unlimited money.  For example if 450 million here, 75 million there, a billion there is like nothing for Dan -- and if money is just coming out of Dan's butt where 70 million or whatever is like petty change to him then why give a rats behind about 300 million from Virginia for a stadium?  That should be pocket change for the dude with his supposed unlimited pockets -- why all the angst about petty change like that. 

 

Screw the 300 million, just buy the land and go for it?  He needs to get out of that stadium sooner than later.  If Dan has 2 billiion in a money market account from the sale of his company or whatever, he should be able to end this stadium nonsense in a heartbeat.  Just go full Kroencke and buy that stadium.  

Edited June 16, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Redskins Diehard]

It seems there is enough money available to sign Terry. So that question of liquidity is answered.