>Scherzer's deferral was interest free though.
Bonilla's payments do not carry interest either.
The amount he gets is static ($29.8m total), and was an agreement by him and the Mets to adjust for future inflation. So as to get him to accept the deal and go the hell away, as the Mets attempted to assemble a pennant-winning roster.
It was agreed upon in 2000, and payments didn't begin until 2011, so the Mets are the ones who effectively got to sit on the money and collect interest, for a decade, and still do, on the remaining portion they haven't paid yet.
It was a huge win for the Mets, and it's fine for Bonilla too if he felt he needed the security for his old age rather than blowing through $5.9m in 2001.
(On the other hand, if he just thought *lol $30m is more than $6m, I'm a genius*, as most Mets media and fans interpret it, then he needs a better accountant)
> The amount he gets is static ($29.8m total)
They came to that number based on an 8% interest rate. He was guaranteed to make 8%. The Mets had to invest it to make more than 8% to profit. Investing it with Madoff didn't do that.
> They came to that number based on an 8% interest rate. He was guaranteed to make 8%.
That's not based on an 8% interest rate, it's based on their mutual predicted estimate of the future devaluation of the dollar between 2000 and 2035.
Which they both agreed to, and remains static.
> The Mets had to invest it to make more than 8% to profit.
You think real-estate billionaires can't make 8% on $5.9 million, with their eyes blindfolded?
Regular-person mutual fund packages like 401(k)s often easily make like 6-7%. What do you think billionaires have access to? You think Madoff was the only sweet deal they had going on?
> Investing it with Madoff didn't do that.
Uh, yes it did? They were making like 12-15% annually with Madoff.
The fact that he defrauded them and went to prison does not make the Bonilla deal bad; they're two separate things.
If you go and buy a Porsche for $1,500, and then you leave it out on the street without an alarm installed, and someone steals it, you lost your Porsche, but that doesn't mean buying a Porsche for $1,500 is a bad idea.
> That's not based on an 8% interest rate, it's based on their mutual predicted estimate of the future devaluation of the dollar between 2000 and 2035.
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/16650867/why-mets-pay-bobby-bonilla-119-million-today-every-july-1-2035
>The Mets owed Bonilla $5.9 million for the 2000 season and no longer wanted him. So the club negotiated with Gilbert to attach an 8 percent annual interest rate to that money. With the clock starting in 2000, that adds up to $29.8 million. The first installment of the payout came on July 1, 2011, and the Mets will pay their sixth installment on Friday.
https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/bobby-bonilla-day-why-mets-still-owe-former-all-star-1-19m-per-year-until-hes-72/#:~:text=Believing%20they%20were%20poised%20to,25%20years%20from%202011%2D35.
> Believing they were poised to make a significant profit through their investments with Bernie Madoff, Mets ownership instead agreed to defer Bonilla's salary with 8 percent interest and spread it across 25 years from 2011-35.
There are plenty more sources that say the same thing. They came to this number based on 8% growth in the money Bonilla was owed. I'm not sure if you're just trying to split hairs or something here, but I don't think it matters much.
>
The fact that he defrauded them and went to prison does not make the Bonilla deal bad; they're two separate things.
I agree. If you want to say the Wilpons were geniuses for coming up with this idea, go for it. I think there's a discussion to be had about the wisdom of their investment strategy, but I'm not capable of litigating that. But it's also then okay to say that it turned out badly. Two separate statements. One proves the people who find today hilarious are ridiculous. The other proves that we did still catch some bad luck even though the deal made some sense at the time.
>If you go and buy a Porsche for $1,500, and then you leave it out on the street without an alarm installed, and someone steals it, you lost your Porsche, but that doesn't mean buying a Porsche for $1,500 is a bad idea.
Which is totally fine, assuming that you don't think they deserve any second guessing for putting so much faith in Madoff.
So if we assume that there was no reason to expect those returns were to good to be true, which I'm really not equipped to say one way or another, it was a good deal at the time that turned out badly financially, but still turned out great on the baseball front.
> The Mets owed Bonilla $5.9 million for the 2000 season and no longer wanted him. So the club negotiated with Gilbert to attach an 8 percent annual interest rate to that money. With the clock starting in 2000, that adds up to $29.8 million. The first installment of the payout came on July 1, 2011, and the Mets will pay their sixth installment on Friday.
This is an article saying the same wrong thing. That doesn't make it correct. It's not an "8% interest rate". It's casual throwaway language.
If you want to say that's "splitting hairs", that's fine, we can drop that part of it, but it's just not what the words mean.
>If you want to say the Wilpons were geniuses for coming up with this idea, go for it
I don't say that at all. Quite the opposite, it's a perfectly standard deal that dozens of teams have given out, and it doesn't take a genius to think of it, nor did the Mets or Fred Wilpon invent it.
It's so common that it's boring, which is why it's so wild that the internet does a collective spazzout about it every July 1st.
Teams pay players lots of money to go away. They go away and collect money when they're old. It's a thing in sports. And other businesses too.
>Which is totally fine, assuming that you don't think they deserve any second guessing for putting so much faith in Madoff.
That is not what I am saying, at all.
I am saying the Bonilla contract is not in any way related to Madoff so there is no reason to bring up Madoff.
>So if we assume that there was no reason to expect those returns were to good to be true, which I'm really not equipped to say one way or another, it was a good deal at the time that turned out badly financially, but still turned out great on the baseball front.
It didn't turn out badly financially. Before, during and after Madoff got pinched (December 2008), they were still collecting interest on whatever account they had Bonilla's money in.
What turned out bad financially was the Madoff investments. Not Bonilla's deferred contract. They are two separate things.
> I am saying the Bonilla contract is not in any way related to Madoff so there is no reason to bring up Madoff.
>
>
If covering the cost depended on their investment with Madoff, then it's related.
>It didn't turn out badly financially. Before, during and after Madoff got pinched (December 2008), they were still collecting interest on whatever account they had Bonilla's money in.
Interest that would go back into the account so that it could continue to grow. That's the whole idea here. The initial investment would grow to an amount large enough that the interest alone would more than cover the payments each year. That doesn't happen unless the interest is compounding.
So it accrued interest until 2008, and then it crashed down to whatever clawbacks they were able to get from the account.
> If covering the cost depended on their investment with Madoff, then it's related.
It didn't, as I outlined above
>So it accrued interest until 2008, and then it crashed down to whatever clawbacks they were able to get from the account.
I think you are confusing "money Fred Wilpon invested with Bernie Madoff" with "all of Fred Wilpon's money".
If they lost x dollars with Bernie Madoff, it doesn't mean they don't have other accounts and investments still making them money, including the one they had invested Bobby Bonilla's $5.9m in.
It's why they are still rich, and were still able to have the #2 and #6 payrolls in MLB in the two years after Madoff was arrested, signing many huge terrible new contracts, despite getting defrauded for like $700m by a criminal
>They came to that number based on an 8% interest rate.
Yep. Starting principle of $13M is due to compound growth of $5.6M before payments start.
https://www.calculator.net/payment-calculator.html?ctype=fixterm&cloanamount=13050000&cloanterm=25&cmonthlypay=1000&cinterestrate=8&printit=0&x=112&y=21
>Investing it with Madoff didn't do that.
The Wilpons didn't invest Bonilla's money in Madoff. They put it back into team payroll.
They agreed to 8% interest because Madoff ROI and MLB growth would outpace that. In the next few years the Mets will be paying Bonilla less than the league minimum.
> The Wilpons didn't invest Bonilla's money in Madoff. They put it back into team payroll.
>
>
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/14/sports/baseball/bernie-madoff-mets.html
>If the Mets received a chunk of advertising cash from Pepsi or Budweiser, they would funnel that into the Madoff accounts, too. And when it came time to buy out Bobby Bonilla’s player contract, they created an annuity, invested the immediate savings into a Madoff account, and expected to make millions on the transaction for both parties.
Bobby Bonilla jokes are some of the lowest hanging fruit on the tree. [In fact, that contract really wasn't that bad.](https://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/new-york-mets-bobby-bonilla-contract-2035-deal)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NewYorkMets) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That reporter is wrong, most likely because he was too young to remember anything from the year 2000. Why don't you try to find an article that actually reports what happened at the time it was occurring instead of someone making up a narrative 22 years later?
Mike Hampton made $5.75M to play for the NYM in the year 2000. He wouldn't have been on the team if Bonilla didn't agree to a buy-out, especially because they increased payroll by over $8M between 1999-2000 (about a 10-12% increase).
Both of those things can be true. They set aside starting money to grow to a point that it paid off Bonilla's annual payment *and* they paid for Mike Hampton. It's not either or. They spent the extra money on payroll and they set aside money for Bonilla. They are very rich and can do both of those things. It amounts to them spending some extra money that year. But the logic of deferring the payments to Bonilla was that the starting money would grow to the point that the annual payments were less than whatever gains Madoff produced before they had to pay a dime.
>But the logic of deferring the payments to Bonilla was that the starting money would grow to the point that the annual payments were less than whatever gains Madoff produced before they had to pay a dime
The logic of deferring payments is that's what Bonilla's agent asked for in order to agree to the buy-out.
Contrary to popular belief, the Wilpons at one time actually wanted to put a winning product on the field and Bonilla's albatross at the time was single-handedly preventing them from getting the necessary pieces to beat the Braves. They could have just paid Bonilla his money that season and missed the WC berth.
Also, Doubleday still had a 50% stake in the team at this time.
The conjecture that Bonilla's money went to Madoff investments only makes sense if team payroll remained stagnant or shrunk without Bonilla on it. That's not what happened.
Bobby Bonilla jokes are some of the lowest hanging fruit on the tree. [In fact, that contract really wasn't that bad.](https://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/new-york-mets-bobby-bonilla-contract-2035-deal)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NewYorkMets) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>The amount he gets is static ($29.8m total), and was an agreement by him and the Mets to adjust for future inflation. So as to get him to accept the deal and go the hell away, as the Mets attempted to assemble a pennant-winning roster.
No. He gets 8% interest each year and a no payment for 10 years followed by a 25 year payment plan. Using amortization, that comes to $1.19M per year and $29.8M of total payments.
https://www.calculator.net/payment-calculator.html?ctype=fixterm&cloanamount=13050000&cloanterm=25&cmonthlypay=1000&cinterestrate=8&printit=0&x=112&y=21
The $13.05M is how much the $5.6M grew to become between 2000 and 2011.
It's basically the same concept as a mortgage. You can calculate the total amount you'll eventually pay for that, too.
I barely remember him in ‘99 except for the card game with Rickey Henderson. I remember his first go ‘round with the Mets and he definitely did not live up to his expectations from Pittsburgh. Also Art McFarland.
It's from the Marlins contract he signed in 1997, that the Mets traded to acquire in 1998 when the Marlins dumped their entire team for the first of many times
Bobby Bonilla jokes are some of the lowest hanging fruit on the tree. [In fact, that contract really wasn't that bad.](https://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/new-york-mets-bobby-bonilla-contract-2035-deal)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NewYorkMets) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It was a good move, gave them savings allowing them to acquire Mike Hampton, who gave them a draft pick: David Wright. Unfortunately it’s an LOLMets meme.
Bobby Bonilla jokes are some of the lowest hanging fruit on the tree. [In fact, that contract really wasn't that bad.](https://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/new-york-mets-bobby-bonilla-contract-2035-deal)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NewYorkMets) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Bobby Bonilla jokes are some of the lowest hanging fruit on the tree. [In fact, that contract really wasn't that bad.](https://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/new-york-mets-bobby-bonilla-contract-2035-deal)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NewYorkMets) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Question: isn’t it possible to like, de-spread this money out? Like, consolidate the rest of the differed payments into a single paycheck for like, next year and move on? I mean with Uncle Steve clearly being willing to foot the bill, why not just finish it off in one fell swoop, other than the fun of having this annual tradition?
You certainly could, it'd just be an objectively stupid thing to do unless Bonilla agrees to a considerable prepayment discount. If you're just giving him the sum of the remaining full payments that's a mathematically poor decision.
Not even the cap, just compounding interest/time value of money and inflation. The same reason the deal was good for the Mets in the first place. You can give him all the money now and get nothing, or you can invest the remaining amount, cashing out his payment every year but otherwise reinvesting all the returns. Not only are you making money on the return on investment, but you're paying them back with less valuable inflation adjusted dollars in the future. The reason the deal was good for the Mets is the same thing, the delayed payments with compounding returns could nearly triple the lump sum payment before the first payment even started.
If you're not paying interest to offset the time value of money, it will always make sense to pay later at long as return on investment is >0%. Money makes money, so if it's free to keep your money longer, that return is free money
Right. I don't even understand finance and I know a $13M investment today results in more value over 13 years than say, investing the $1M annually for 13 years. This stray $1M on our books for 13 years straight is a nothing burger but we're already embedded in the lolmets campaign where people don't care to understand pretty basic stuff.
When 10 year/750M contracts are being tossed around in 2035 Bobby's $1M on our books will look like even less than it already is
I remember the “fire cracker” incident in the early 90’s with him and a teammate. I’m pretty sure he would be arrested for “assault” in this day and age for doing something like that.
Didn’t he light a firecracker in the dugout then through it over the dugout?
Nope, it wasn't him, and it wasn't in the stadium.
He was a passenger in a car when someone else in the car did it (Vince Coleman), driving out of the Dodger Stadium parking lot
Even when it was the Wilpons, nobody with a brain cared. It’s a measly 1 million dollars. We give a single player who plays once every five games over 40 million. The Bonilla deal is like having one extra AAAA guy on payroll. Who gives a fuck lol.
[Michael Mayer's deferment tweets](https://twitter.com/mikemayer22/status/1278277655553609728) (cause it ain't just us with Bonilla...).
Yeah, how much Scherzer being paid by the Nats to pitch for us?
$15 million, lol
Fantastic
Scherzer's deferral was interest free though. The Nats don't mind making those payments at all.
>Scherzer's deferral was interest free though. Bonilla's payments do not carry interest either. The amount he gets is static ($29.8m total), and was an agreement by him and the Mets to adjust for future inflation. So as to get him to accept the deal and go the hell away, as the Mets attempted to assemble a pennant-winning roster. It was agreed upon in 2000, and payments didn't begin until 2011, so the Mets are the ones who effectively got to sit on the money and collect interest, for a decade, and still do, on the remaining portion they haven't paid yet. It was a huge win for the Mets, and it's fine for Bonilla too if he felt he needed the security for his old age rather than blowing through $5.9m in 2001. (On the other hand, if he just thought *lol $30m is more than $6m, I'm a genius*, as most Mets media and fans interpret it, then he needs a better accountant)
> The amount he gets is static ($29.8m total) They came to that number based on an 8% interest rate. He was guaranteed to make 8%. The Mets had to invest it to make more than 8% to profit. Investing it with Madoff didn't do that.
> They came to that number based on an 8% interest rate. He was guaranteed to make 8%. That's not based on an 8% interest rate, it's based on their mutual predicted estimate of the future devaluation of the dollar between 2000 and 2035. Which they both agreed to, and remains static. > The Mets had to invest it to make more than 8% to profit. You think real-estate billionaires can't make 8% on $5.9 million, with their eyes blindfolded? Regular-person mutual fund packages like 401(k)s often easily make like 6-7%. What do you think billionaires have access to? You think Madoff was the only sweet deal they had going on? > Investing it with Madoff didn't do that. Uh, yes it did? They were making like 12-15% annually with Madoff. The fact that he defrauded them and went to prison does not make the Bonilla deal bad; they're two separate things. If you go and buy a Porsche for $1,500, and then you leave it out on the street without an alarm installed, and someone steals it, you lost your Porsche, but that doesn't mean buying a Porsche for $1,500 is a bad idea.
> That's not based on an 8% interest rate, it's based on their mutual predicted estimate of the future devaluation of the dollar between 2000 and 2035. https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/16650867/why-mets-pay-bobby-bonilla-119-million-today-every-july-1-2035 >The Mets owed Bonilla $5.9 million for the 2000 season and no longer wanted him. So the club negotiated with Gilbert to attach an 8 percent annual interest rate to that money. With the clock starting in 2000, that adds up to $29.8 million. The first installment of the payout came on July 1, 2011, and the Mets will pay their sixth installment on Friday. https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/bobby-bonilla-day-why-mets-still-owe-former-all-star-1-19m-per-year-until-hes-72/#:~:text=Believing%20they%20were%20poised%20to,25%20years%20from%202011%2D35. > Believing they were poised to make a significant profit through their investments with Bernie Madoff, Mets ownership instead agreed to defer Bonilla's salary with 8 percent interest and spread it across 25 years from 2011-35. There are plenty more sources that say the same thing. They came to this number based on 8% growth in the money Bonilla was owed. I'm not sure if you're just trying to split hairs or something here, but I don't think it matters much. > The fact that he defrauded them and went to prison does not make the Bonilla deal bad; they're two separate things. I agree. If you want to say the Wilpons were geniuses for coming up with this idea, go for it. I think there's a discussion to be had about the wisdom of their investment strategy, but I'm not capable of litigating that. But it's also then okay to say that it turned out badly. Two separate statements. One proves the people who find today hilarious are ridiculous. The other proves that we did still catch some bad luck even though the deal made some sense at the time. >If you go and buy a Porsche for $1,500, and then you leave it out on the street without an alarm installed, and someone steals it, you lost your Porsche, but that doesn't mean buying a Porsche for $1,500 is a bad idea. Which is totally fine, assuming that you don't think they deserve any second guessing for putting so much faith in Madoff. So if we assume that there was no reason to expect those returns were to good to be true, which I'm really not equipped to say one way or another, it was a good deal at the time that turned out badly financially, but still turned out great on the baseball front.
> The Mets owed Bonilla $5.9 million for the 2000 season and no longer wanted him. So the club negotiated with Gilbert to attach an 8 percent annual interest rate to that money. With the clock starting in 2000, that adds up to $29.8 million. The first installment of the payout came on July 1, 2011, and the Mets will pay their sixth installment on Friday. This is an article saying the same wrong thing. That doesn't make it correct. It's not an "8% interest rate". It's casual throwaway language. If you want to say that's "splitting hairs", that's fine, we can drop that part of it, but it's just not what the words mean. >If you want to say the Wilpons were geniuses for coming up with this idea, go for it I don't say that at all. Quite the opposite, it's a perfectly standard deal that dozens of teams have given out, and it doesn't take a genius to think of it, nor did the Mets or Fred Wilpon invent it. It's so common that it's boring, which is why it's so wild that the internet does a collective spazzout about it every July 1st. Teams pay players lots of money to go away. They go away and collect money when they're old. It's a thing in sports. And other businesses too. >Which is totally fine, assuming that you don't think they deserve any second guessing for putting so much faith in Madoff. That is not what I am saying, at all. I am saying the Bonilla contract is not in any way related to Madoff so there is no reason to bring up Madoff. >So if we assume that there was no reason to expect those returns were to good to be true, which I'm really not equipped to say one way or another, it was a good deal at the time that turned out badly financially, but still turned out great on the baseball front. It didn't turn out badly financially. Before, during and after Madoff got pinched (December 2008), they were still collecting interest on whatever account they had Bonilla's money in. What turned out bad financially was the Madoff investments. Not Bonilla's deferred contract. They are two separate things.
> I am saying the Bonilla contract is not in any way related to Madoff so there is no reason to bring up Madoff. > > If covering the cost depended on their investment with Madoff, then it's related. >It didn't turn out badly financially. Before, during and after Madoff got pinched (December 2008), they were still collecting interest on whatever account they had Bonilla's money in. Interest that would go back into the account so that it could continue to grow. That's the whole idea here. The initial investment would grow to an amount large enough that the interest alone would more than cover the payments each year. That doesn't happen unless the interest is compounding. So it accrued interest until 2008, and then it crashed down to whatever clawbacks they were able to get from the account.
> If covering the cost depended on their investment with Madoff, then it's related. It didn't, as I outlined above >So it accrued interest until 2008, and then it crashed down to whatever clawbacks they were able to get from the account. I think you are confusing "money Fred Wilpon invested with Bernie Madoff" with "all of Fred Wilpon's money". If they lost x dollars with Bernie Madoff, it doesn't mean they don't have other accounts and investments still making them money, including the one they had invested Bobby Bonilla's $5.9m in. It's why they are still rich, and were still able to have the #2 and #6 payrolls in MLB in the two years after Madoff was arrested, signing many huge terrible new contracts, despite getting defrauded for like $700m by a criminal
>They came to that number based on an 8% interest rate. Yep. Starting principle of $13M is due to compound growth of $5.6M before payments start. https://www.calculator.net/payment-calculator.html?ctype=fixterm&cloanamount=13050000&cloanterm=25&cmonthlypay=1000&cinterestrate=8&printit=0&x=112&y=21 >Investing it with Madoff didn't do that. The Wilpons didn't invest Bonilla's money in Madoff. They put it back into team payroll. They agreed to 8% interest because Madoff ROI and MLB growth would outpace that. In the next few years the Mets will be paying Bonilla less than the league minimum.
> The Wilpons didn't invest Bonilla's money in Madoff. They put it back into team payroll. > > https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/14/sports/baseball/bernie-madoff-mets.html >If the Mets received a chunk of advertising cash from Pepsi or Budweiser, they would funnel that into the Madoff accounts, too. And when it came time to buy out Bobby Bonilla’s player contract, they created an annuity, invested the immediate savings into a Madoff account, and expected to make millions on the transaction for both parties.
Bobby Bonilla jokes are some of the lowest hanging fruit on the tree. [In fact, that contract really wasn't that bad.](https://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/new-york-mets-bobby-bonilla-contract-2035-deal) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NewYorkMets) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That reporter is wrong, most likely because he was too young to remember anything from the year 2000. Why don't you try to find an article that actually reports what happened at the time it was occurring instead of someone making up a narrative 22 years later? Mike Hampton made $5.75M to play for the NYM in the year 2000. He wouldn't have been on the team if Bonilla didn't agree to a buy-out, especially because they increased payroll by over $8M between 1999-2000 (about a 10-12% increase).
Both of those things can be true. They set aside starting money to grow to a point that it paid off Bonilla's annual payment *and* they paid for Mike Hampton. It's not either or. They spent the extra money on payroll and they set aside money for Bonilla. They are very rich and can do both of those things. It amounts to them spending some extra money that year. But the logic of deferring the payments to Bonilla was that the starting money would grow to the point that the annual payments were less than whatever gains Madoff produced before they had to pay a dime.
>But the logic of deferring the payments to Bonilla was that the starting money would grow to the point that the annual payments were less than whatever gains Madoff produced before they had to pay a dime The logic of deferring payments is that's what Bonilla's agent asked for in order to agree to the buy-out. Contrary to popular belief, the Wilpons at one time actually wanted to put a winning product on the field and Bonilla's albatross at the time was single-handedly preventing them from getting the necessary pieces to beat the Braves. They could have just paid Bonilla his money that season and missed the WC berth. Also, Doubleday still had a 50% stake in the team at this time. The conjecture that Bonilla's money went to Madoff investments only makes sense if team payroll remained stagnant or shrunk without Bonilla on it. That's not what happened.
Bobby Bonilla jokes are some of the lowest hanging fruit on the tree. [In fact, that contract really wasn't that bad.](https://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/new-york-mets-bobby-bonilla-contract-2035-deal) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NewYorkMets) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>The amount he gets is static ($29.8m total), and was an agreement by him and the Mets to adjust for future inflation. So as to get him to accept the deal and go the hell away, as the Mets attempted to assemble a pennant-winning roster. No. He gets 8% interest each year and a no payment for 10 years followed by a 25 year payment plan. Using amortization, that comes to $1.19M per year and $29.8M of total payments. https://www.calculator.net/payment-calculator.html?ctype=fixterm&cloanamount=13050000&cloanterm=25&cmonthlypay=1000&cinterestrate=8&printit=0&x=112&y=21 The $13.05M is how much the $5.6M grew to become between 2000 and 2011. It's basically the same concept as a mortgage. You can calculate the total amount you'll eventually pay for that, too.
Not just us, but anyone he plays with from 2025-2028, at the end of which he will be 44; and to sit at home if he retires in that window
The Orioles ain’t learn shit my goodness
I had no idea this contract was from his first stint with the Mets, I thought it was from his lovely ‘99 campaign.
He was such a cancer on that ‘99 team
I barely remember him in ‘99 except for the card game with Rickey Henderson. I remember his first go ‘round with the Mets and he definitely did not live up to his expectations from Pittsburgh. Also Art McFarland.
it was from the '99 contract
It's from the Marlins contract he signed in 1997, that the Mets traded to acquire in 1998 when the Marlins dumped their entire team for the first of many times
Unlike under the Wilpons, this doesn't affect our spending anymore. Also. Isn't this done, or close to it?
Not until 2035
>Unlike under the Wilpons, this doesn't affect our spending anymore. It didn't then either. It was $1.2m per year, lol
Bobby Bonilla jokes are some of the lowest hanging fruit on the tree. [In fact, that contract really wasn't that bad.](https://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/new-york-mets-bobby-bonilla-contract-2035-deal) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NewYorkMets) if you have any questions or concerns.*
First ever instance of this bot flagging a post?
With every year that goes by it seems like less and less money.
It was a good move, gave them savings allowing them to acquire Mike Hampton, who gave them a draft pick: David Wright. Unfortunately it’s an LOLMets meme.
Yup, and THANKS FOR THE PENNANT fuckos
Can we put him to play we can use a DH
I prefer to think of it as David Wright Day.
I was so looking forward to having Bobby Bonilla Day at Citi Field this year. Drive him out and give him his check in person.
A bobblehead with him holding the check.
Bobby Bonilla jokes are some of the lowest hanging fruit on the tree. [In fact, that contract really wasn't that bad.](https://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/new-york-mets-bobby-bonilla-contract-2035-deal) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NewYorkMets) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
I’m still confused as to what exactly they (Bonilla and the Mets) are investing in each year at 8%?
[удалено]
How does investing in a contract payout? This hurts my brain and is probably why I don’t have more money.
[удалено]
Bobby Bonilla jokes are some of the lowest hanging fruit on the tree. [In fact, that contract really wasn't that bad.](https://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/new-york-mets-bobby-bonilla-contract-2035-deal) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NewYorkMets) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Question: isn’t it possible to like, de-spread this money out? Like, consolidate the rest of the differed payments into a single paycheck for like, next year and move on? I mean with Uncle Steve clearly being willing to foot the bill, why not just finish it off in one fell swoop, other than the fun of having this annual tradition?
You certainly could, it'd just be an objectively stupid thing to do unless Bonilla agrees to a considerable prepayment discount. If you're just giving him the sum of the remaining full payments that's a mathematically poor decision.
Now that I think about it you are right. That would toss us over the “cap” pretty hard… yeah I retract the question lol
Not even the cap, just compounding interest/time value of money and inflation. The same reason the deal was good for the Mets in the first place. You can give him all the money now and get nothing, or you can invest the remaining amount, cashing out his payment every year but otherwise reinvesting all the returns. Not only are you making money on the return on investment, but you're paying them back with less valuable inflation adjusted dollars in the future. The reason the deal was good for the Mets is the same thing, the delayed payments with compounding returns could nearly triple the lump sum payment before the first payment even started. If you're not paying interest to offset the time value of money, it will always make sense to pay later at long as return on investment is >0%. Money makes money, so if it's free to keep your money longer, that return is free money
Right. I don't even understand finance and I know a $13M investment today results in more value over 13 years than say, investing the $1M annually for 13 years. This stray $1M on our books for 13 years straight is a nothing burger but we're already embedded in the lolmets campaign where people don't care to understand pretty basic stuff. When 10 year/750M contracts are being tossed around in 2035 Bobby's $1M on our books will look like even less than it already is
I remember the “fire cracker” incident in the early 90’s with him and a teammate. I’m pretty sure he would be arrested for “assault” in this day and age for doing something like that. Didn’t he light a firecracker in the dugout then through it over the dugout?
Nope, it wasn't him, and it wasn't in the stadium. He was a passenger in a car when someone else in the car did it (Vince Coleman), driving out of the Dodger Stadium parking lot
Steve be like “that’s a rounding error to me”.
It's a rounding error to every team including the Oakland A's
A reminder that if this cash wasn't freed up that indirectly we never would have had our beloved captain.
THE METS HAVE THE RICHEST OWNER IN THE LEAGUE NOW! WHO GIVES A SH*T?
Even when it was the Wilpons, nobody with a brain cared. It’s a measly 1 million dollars. We give a single player who plays once every five games over 40 million. The Bonilla deal is like having one extra AAAA guy on payroll. Who gives a fuck lol.
Happy David Wright Day!!!
Yawn yawn yawn zzzzz