Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Forbes)   Thirty years ago today Bobby Bonilla Day was created, all you Mets fan   (forbes.com) divider line
    More: Fail, New York Mets, Scherzer's three-year, good sign, five-year deal, Wilpon-era Mets, Max Scherzer, Bobby Bonilla, good case  
•       •       •

400 clicks; posted to Sports » on 02 Dec 2021 at 6:10 PM (8 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



11 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-12-02 6:14:22 PM  
Nope. Bobby Bonilla Day is July 1
 
2021-12-02 6:45:43 PM  
What is it with Queens/Long Island teams doing stupid long-term contracts?  The Islanders are paying a similar contract to Rick DePietro, $1.5 million (as opposed to $1.2) until 2029.
 
2021-12-02 6:48:06 PM  
And the deal was reached in 21 years ago.  As a deferred compensation package, it's kind of a wash.  If Bonilla had gotten paid upfront and put that money in a S&P 500 index fund, that 5.9 million after the taxes at the time would be worth about 15 million today and likely substantially more by 2035.  Bonilla got a safe tax deferred investment and the Mets got the operating cash they needed at the time.  Win-win.
 
2021-12-02 7:31:31 PM  
Bobby Bonilla day came out of his contract in the late 90s that the Mets inherited from some other team, not the early 90s contract they gave him.

Bonilla wasn't even bad in the early 90s. But the Mets were.
 
2021-12-02 8:36:57 PM  

NewWorldDan: And the deal was reached in 21 years ago.  As a deferred compensation package, it's kind of a wash.  If Bonilla had gotten paid upfront and put that money in a S&P 500 index fund, that 5.9 million after the taxes at the time would be worth about 15 million today and likely substantially more by 2035.  Bonilla got a safe tax deferred investment and the Mets got the operating cash they needed at the time.  Win-win.


No, the deal was objectively awful for the Mets.

Note that am ignoring taxes because that is messy depending on various factors and should be somewhat in favour of the deal, if anything. I also used 1999 for the initial payment as I am not sure when it would have been due so I wanted to err in favour of the deal.

But my quick math using a calculator on Google, $5.9 million invested in the S&P500 in 1999 it would be about $27 million at the end of 2020.

The annual payments Bonilla recieved from 2011 through 2020, each invested the same way, would total about $27 million nat the end of 2020, with almost $18 million still payable through 2035. Using just a five percent rate of return the remaining PV is over $12 million. So using a fairly low future return, Bonilla is currently up $12 million on the deal.

Yes, lower returns since 1999 have made the deal a lot worse than it would have been expected at that time. But the only way this deal is reasonable for the Mets is if they were getting the kind of returns only reliably available through a Ponzi scheme. Like the one of Mr Madoff's that Fred Wilpon was investing in.

So, the deal, paying him until 2035 wasn't an issue, but the rate of return it provided him was way to high.
 
2021-12-02 8:44:23 PM  

Dafatone: Bobby Bonilla day came out of his contract in the late 90s that the Mets inherited from some other team, not the early 90s contract they gave him.

Bonilla wasn't even bad in the early 90s. But the Mets were.


Were bad? Let me check their history from 1991 to 2019 (Lifetime Royals fan. With two recent exceptions, they have been terrible since the late 80s. I know crap teams).

Years with winning records: 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2015, 2016, 2019.

12 out of 29 winning seasons and 5 post season appearances. Made the World Series twice and lost both times. Won the World Series in 1969 and 1986. Holy shiat that's way too similar to my team. I'll look further into it.
 
2021-12-02 9:14:08 PM  

Dafatone: Bobby Bonilla day came out of his contract in the late 90s that the Mets inherited from some other team, not the early 90s contract they gave him.

Bonilla wasn't even bad in the early 90s. But the Mets were.


I got to see him and Barry Bonds on the same field as Pirates.  I believe they went a combined 1-7 but they were still the new sensation.
 
2021-12-02 9:18:12 PM  

baron von doodle: Were bad? Let me check their history from 1991 to 2019 (Lifetime Royals fan. With two recent exceptions, they have been terrible since the late 80s. I know crap teams).


i.ytimg.comView Full Size


...and then they all look at me and say "You ain't got no rings!" but they gave the part to Deandre Jordan.
 
2021-12-03 6:25:30 AM  

dywed88: NewWorldDan: And the deal was reached in 21 years ago.  As a deferred compensation package, it's kind of a wash.  If Bonilla had gotten paid upfront and put that money in a S&P 500 index fund, that 5.9 million after the taxes at the time would be worth about 15 million today and likely substantially more by 2035.  Bonilla got a safe tax deferred investment and the Mets got the operating cash they needed at the time.  Win-win.

No, the deal was objectively awful for the Mets.

Note that am ignoring taxes because that is messy depending on various factors and should be somewhat in favour of the deal, if anything. I also used 1999 for the initial payment as I am not sure when it would have been due so I wanted to err in favour of the deal.

But my quick math using a calculator on Google, $5.9 million invested in the S&P500 in 1999 it would be about $27 million at the end of 2020.

The annual payments Bonilla recieved from 2011 through 2020, each invested the same way, would total about $27 million nat the end of 2020, with almost $18 million still payable through 2035. Using just a five percent rate of return the remaining PV is over $12 million. So using a fairly low future return, Bonilla is currently up $12 million on the deal.

Yes, lower returns since 1999 have made the deal a lot worse than it would have been expected at that time. But the only way this deal is reasonable for the Mets is if they were getting the kind of returns only reliably available through a Ponzi scheme. Like the one of Mr Madoff's that Fred Wilpon was investing in.

So, the deal, paying him until 2035 wasn't an issue, but the rate of return it provided him was way to high.


Didn't they have his money mixed in with Bernie Madoff?
 
2021-12-03 11:06:03 AM  

hoodiowithtudio: dywed88: NewWorldDan: And the deal was reached in 21 years ago.  As a deferred compensation package, it's kind of a wash.  If Bonilla had gotten paid upfront and put that money in a S&P 500 index fund, that 5.9 million after the taxes at the time would be worth about 15 million today and likely substantially more by 2035.  Bonilla got a safe tax deferred investment and the Mets got the operating cash they needed at the time.  Win-win.

No, the deal was objectively awful for the Mets.

Note that am ignoring taxes because that is messy depending on various factors and should be somewhat in favour of the deal, if anything. I also used 1999 for the initial payment as I am not sure when it would have been due so I wanted to err in favour of the deal.

But my quick math using a calculator on Google, $5.9 million invested in the S&P500 in 1999 it would be about $27 million at the end of 2020.

The annual payments Bonilla recieved from 2011 through 2020, each invested the same way, would total about $27 million nat the end of 2020, with almost $18 million still payable through 2035. Using just a five percent rate of return the remaining PV is over $12 million. So using a fairly low future return, Bonilla is currently up $12 million on the deal.

Yes, lower returns since 1999 have made the deal a lot worse than it would have been expected at that time. But the only way this deal is reasonable for the Mets is if they were getting the kind of returns only reliably available through a Ponzi scheme. Like the one of Mr Madoff's that Fred Wilpon was investing in.

So, the deal, paying him until 2035 wasn't an issue, but the rate of return it provided him was way to high.

Didn't they have his money mixed in with Bernie Madoff?


Yeah.  That's why they wanted to defer his payments - so they could put more money into Madoff's Ponzi scheme.  The Wilpons were hilariously stupid owners.  They actually made money from Madoff, though, and had to pay back something like $160M to the trustee who took over after the scheme was revealed.
 
2021-12-03 11:11:42 AM  
Oh, a Mets thread?

Here you go:
Family Guy - Mets Fan Joke
Youtube okXhAC78d4Q

\oblig
 
Displayed 11 of 11 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.