Comments on: Ravens quietly slash employee pay by 25 percent

By: tjrubleysaudible

tjrubleysaudible — Tue, 24 May 2011 20:43:22 +0000

Taking a stab at saving some money, Ravens slash employee pay by 25% and will possibly cut some of their benefits. That’s better.

By: buckmelanoma

buckmelanoma — Tue, 24 May 2011 19:25:53 +0000

@anotherdumbusername …. the war alone did not pull the country out of its economic doldrums. Infrastructure projects, led by programs like the CCC, did more long-term good than the war machine

@supashug …. demand creates supply shortages which creates jobs to meet that demand. Is this so hard to understand?

By the way …. it’s the owners who are creating the supply shortage. There’s plenty of demand, they just want to keep the money in their pockets.

By: pftard

pftard — Tue, 24 May 2011 18:09:25 +0000

This is essentially the Owners locking out 25% of employee salaries.

By: supashug

supashug — Tue, 24 May 2011 15:48:03 +0000

your incorrect Buck on many fronts. I will leave my current job out of it, but you blew that one to high heaven.

Money in the hands of workers creates demand which creates jobs.???

wtf, did he lay people off. You are saying Bisciotti is hurting the economy? Do you have any idea the amount of revenue his business is bringing to the state of MD and city of Baltimore

spare me the history lesson, its his business and a sound decision.

By: rhodefan

rhodefan — Tue, 24 May 2011 15:34:10 +0000

… one more thing that makes this move look really lame, in New England and probably other markets, season ticket holders have already had to pay in full for their tickets, so the owners still have a significant revenue stream. That’s a nice no interest loan until games are canceled.

By: rhodefan

rhodefan — Tue, 24 May 2011 15:30:48 +0000

Agreed, Mike.
And for all that think the “self-made billionaires” (many of whom only won the genetic lottery) are justified, let’s see how much they cut their own pay. It’s all within their rights as owners. But you know they’ve held staff meetings or done interviews and parroted the tired line about “our employees being our greatest asset.” Loyalty’s a two-way street, and it’s tough to expect that when you look like a hypocrite. Just so I’m not lumped in one corner of the other, I think both sides are wrong and hurting the game. The players are acting like morons, but the owners think they’re showing us their brains but just seem be showing their other a$$es.

By: tombrookshire

tombrookshire — Tue, 24 May 2011 15:21:12 +0000

Businesses may need to cut salaries when revenue is lost. There is no loss of revenue in any of these teams so far. It looks callous and cold to the fans. Many of us who have struggled through joblessness and recession then on top of that rising prices of food, gas, healthcare and costs associated with raising children place an unreasonable and unnecessary burden on those who are not compensated at six or seven figures or higher – the worker bees.

By: manhorse69

manhorse69 — Tue, 24 May 2011 15:02:53 +0000

Would you rather have 25% less now and during missed games or 100% now and nothing during missed games? Sounds like he’s trying to be able to continue to pay his employees during a work stoppage

By: anotherdumbusername

anotherdumbusername — Tue, 24 May 2011 14:48:31 +0000

Actually buck, if you’d read any history books, you’d know that it was the second World War that pulled the USA out of the Great Depression.

The unemployment rate was still over 15% in 1939. The USA didn’t start to recover until the Lend Lease program was instituted in 1940. It was mobilization of industry for arms production and the sudden exodus of thousands of soldiers to war that saved the US economy. Roosevelt’s protectionist money shuffling and dumb laws like the NIRA only served to prolong the depression.

Of course, I think your post sort of blew itself up when you contended that paying employees of a locked out football league would create demand. Hey, demand doesn’t matter when you’re actively refusing to make a product.

By: matthewmoe

matthewmoe — Tue, 24 May 2011 14:41:18 +0000

While it’s true no money has been lost, it’s also true that little to no money is being brought in. There is no incentive for fans or corporations to give any money to NFL teams this off-season.

Fans are not buying tickets since they can buy them later once a season is announced. Most consumers have a tight enough budget and the NFL wants you to give them an advance on something that might not happen. Sure, you get your money back if a season doesn’t materialize but it’s a lot easier paying $4 a gallon to get to work when you aren’t trying to pay $2000 for season tickets at the same time. By the time the NFL and NFLPA* get this worked out, they may find the average fan has spent their hard earned money on a different asset.

Corporations are not spending advertising dollars for advertising they may not receive. Corporations are also not buying suites for a season that may not happen. Why give money to the Cowboys when I can get in with the Mavericks? The Lightning or Bucs? Dolphins or Heat? Patriots or Bruins?

If you own a business and 95% of your staff has nothing to do, do you continue to pay them their full salary?

Just get a deal done already. Quit paying the lawyers and get back to the negotiating table. When has the $800 million dollar difference been lost, maybe for good?

By: zoxitic

zoxitic — Tue, 24 May 2011 14:41:02 +0000

Ray Lewis: “Evil, I mean crime will now go up 25%”

By: oldbyrd

oldbyrd — Tue, 24 May 2011 14:26:19 +0000

This is what Unions bring about. Time after time after time. Look around the world. Look in your own communities. Look at the states. Where ever you see Trumka, Sterns, D Moron etc. you’ll see businesses moving out. Disaster!!

By: ravensfan20

ravensfan20 — Tue, 24 May 2011 14:23:47 +0000

The teams aren’t losing any money yet. They aren’t doing anything differently at this point revenue wise because any OTAs that are missed aren’t bringing in revenue, in fact they cost money. Teams are actually saving money right now by not paying workout bonuses, and per diem for players to be there. There is no reason to be cutting non-player personnel salaries at this point.

By: tb12eatitbitches

tb12eatitbitches — Tue, 24 May 2011 14:10:12 +0000

PATHETIC!!! Wait till September you rich POS.

By: skippynj

skippynj — Tue, 24 May 2011 14:04:29 +0000

Classy!

By: iflounder

iflounder — Tue, 24 May 2011 14:03:55 +0000

and the ray lewis prophecy starts. if you see a ravens employee draw the shades, lock your doors, and protect your valuables.

By: supashug

supashug — Tue, 24 May 2011 13:53:45 +0000

username54, Bisciotti never stole the team, he bought it from Modell, get your sh-t straight woman. The Bears were idiots for the way they handled the draft pick and you should leave that one alone too, no one would ever defend the Bears for that, other then that it was a great post

By: thesportygirlz

thesportygirlz — Tue, 24 May 2011 13:43:59 +0000

Actually @username54 Art Modell owned the team while it was in Cleveland and he moved, or in your words “stole”, the team. Bisciotti became the owner in 2000.

By: ravensfan20

ravensfan20 — Tue, 24 May 2011 13:37:54 +0000

Sadly, they have cut the cheerleading staff salaries, which is ironic because they are in full swing, practicing as if there is a season. They are working just like every other season and only getting paid a portion of their salaries.

By: Southpaw

Southpaw — Tue, 24 May 2011 13:23:22 +0000

It’s a business, not a charity – if the company is bringing in much less money, then the employees are going to make less… if they don’t miss any games, they get all of the money back anyway

Biscotti is smart, not selfish. He’s truly a self-made billionaire, and you don’t get that way by conducting bad business

By: username54

username54 — Tue, 24 May 2011 13:11:13 +0000

This must be an entire day after PFT lauded him as a model owner. I thought that was a little deluded at the time as the only thing this guy has demonstrated an abilty for is stealing a beloved football team from another city. But that is OK because he did it to make himself more money and we all know that if you make more money everything is A-OK.

This nasty, cheap schill of a man had the audacity to state that the McCaskeys had not acted honourably to him because little Stevie-wievie wanted another draft pick.

By: buckmelanoma

buckmelanoma — Tue, 24 May 2011 12:49:50 +0000

supashug, you’re obviously a corporate lapdog & have no understanding of supply & demand.

Go read a history book & see how this country WORKED it’s way out of the Great Depression. Money in the hands of workers creates demand which creates jobs.

This is just another example of the greedy wanting to make certain that they keep building their war chests.

By: larryed

larryed — Tue, 24 May 2011 12:43:44 +0000

Wow, the poor owners can’t afford to keep their organizations going so they “slash pay” for those who can least afford it?
Greedy, money hungry bastards are all they are. I am now siding with the players for once.

By: beretta96d

beretta96d — Tue, 24 May 2011 12:39:12 +0000

So can the pro owners tell me now if there’s no money being lost yet, is this an excuse for greed or are the owners more financially hurt than led to believe?

I call this GREED!

By: supashug

supashug — Tue, 24 May 2011 12:34:51 +0000

its fiscal responsibility dork. If more businesses and our Govt cut back when they needed to we wouldn’t be about to hit another major recession due to our debt limit not being increased. Currently there is no football, so if you sell football should you aimlessly pay your staff like nothing changed. If you sell cars and someone takes away all of your cars do you just pay the employees aimlessly in HOPEs that things will change.
This article is why the US is in so much freakin trouble.

By: skoobyfl

skoobyfl — Tue, 24 May 2011 12:30:37 +0000

Another way for the owners to get a settlement, bring hoards of lump sum / accrued cash to the table. I cannot see how contractually the owners don’t pay what they have agreed to & there isn’t a labor board or court that wouldn’t side with the staff.

This is indeed a sad time.

By: yzguy431

yzguy431 — Tue, 24 May 2011 12:29:52 +0000

is this relevant?

By: dspyank2k11

dspyank2k11 — Tue, 24 May 2011 12:27:22 +0000

Its not really that quiet anymore now is it?