Already in January, Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic reported on the future of athletics and suggested that a big payroll increase was coming. However, Rosenthal himself expressed serious doubts that any of this would actually come to fruition.
“According to a source briefed on their plans,” Rosenthal wrote at the time, “revenues for the A's project will be $130 million to $150 million during the ramp-up period before moving into the new park, and more than $170 million thereafter .” are established in their fixed-roof stadium.”
Rosenthal remained skeptical of what he heard, even titling the piece “Why I Remain Skeptical of the A's Grandiose Vegas Plans.” The skepticism on the part of Rosenthal or anyone reading it was and is completely understandable. Owner John Fisher has done little to give himself the benefit of the doubt. In fact, he had caused many people to do the opposite.
Since Fisher became managing partner of the club November 2016The A's arguably received more attention for their trip to Las Vegas than their performance on the field. They had a good run from 2018 to 2020, reaching the playoffs three years in a row. But when their winning total fell slightly to 86 in 2021, it was time to sell off. Matt Chapman, Chris Bassitt, Sean Manaea And Matt Olson were traded before the 2022 season Sean Murphy, Cole Irvin, Frankie Montas and others follow.
The A's have been one of the worst teams in baseball for the last three years, while much of the headlines have been about the club abandoning its fans in Oakland and the surrounding area and fleeing to the East. A new stadium is scheduled to open in Las Vegas for the 2028 season, with a three-year stop at a Triple-A stadium in West Sacramento. The club didn't seem to have much interest in staying in Oakland, as negotiations for a new stadium there didn't gain much traction. There were also no discussions about staying beyond the end of the lease, even temporarily, which is why the temporary move to West Sacramento occurred.
Given the way the franchise has behaved, it's natural to doubt that there will be a massive turnaround. Accordingly Cot's Baseball ContractsTheir payroll has been in the bottom third of the league for over a decade, including last the last two years and 29th in 2022.
Reaching the range described by Rosenthal above would be a huge leap. The club had a payroll of just $61 million in 2024, so we're talking more than a doubling. The franchise's record payroll was $92 million in 2019, so the proposed numbers are also close to doubling.
While such a jump may be extreme, it's not impossible to imagine a scenario where Fisher is more motivated to support the Las Vegas Athletics than he was for the Oakland Athletics. Even if he doesn't care about the team or its fans in a direct sense, there is still the cold-hearted business perspective. If you've seen the movie Major League, you get the gist here. The recent lack of investment in the club may have been a deliberate way to reduce fan loyalty and thus justify the move.
After going through the trouble of moving the club, all the paperwork and meetings that come with it, he's no doubt hoping for some sort of benefit. Per Mick Akers of the Las Vegas Review-JournalThe Fisher family is willing to pay about $1 billion of the $1.5 billion needed to build the stadium. Akers says that US Bank reviewed the Fisher family's finances and “concluded that the Fishers have more than adequate assets for the equity required to finance stadium construction.”
Given the family situation, this is not particularly surprising. John's parents Donald and Doris founded the clothing chain The Gap. Donald died in 2009, but Forbes puts the family's net worth, including John Fisher personally, at just under $9 billion listed with a net worth of just over $3 billion.
That gives them plenty of options to pay for the stadium, but it's safe to assume they're not doing it out of the goodness of their hearts and imagine getting the money back one day. There has been speculation that the Vegas location could mean the club relies more on tourists than locals to come to games compared to other franchises. If that's the case, there could be an incentive to put more effort into signing stars and attracting interest outside of Vegas. Many clubs are losing TV money as the cable model collapses and the A's allegedly have received $70 million in 2024 as part of their deal. That deal is set to end if the club leaves the Bay Area, although it already has reported that they may be able to rework it for the West Sacramento years, although probably at a lower price.
They'll probably find a new broadcast deal for Vegas down the road, but probably not at this price. This will only put more pressure on the club to make money from attendance figures. Their new stadium will only have a capacity of 33,000 spectators, which will be the lowest of any major and barely half the stadium they will be leaving. If they want to charge a lot of money for tickets, they need a lot of demand. Ideally, demand would be high for the owners right from the start, so winning some games in West Sacramento could be a big priority.
We can't know if this is actually the case, but perhaps it's worth considering. The family's generosity, which allows the Fishers to cover stadium costs, could also allow them to have larger payrolls than in the past. They could simply choose to become a mid-sized club if they wanted. Many will approach this speculative scenario as believe it when I see it, and that is probably the wisest position, but there is an argument to be made that it is in the Fishers' own interest to go down this route. Even if you're the type of fan who thinks John Fisher is a cold-blooded lizardman who has no warm feelings toward baseball or people, which would be understandable if you're from Oakland and he stole your team from you wouldn't necessarily contradict that , that he puts a good team on the field as it would be a good business decision.
These are all big ifs, but they could have significant implications if they contain even partial truths, including stirring up baseball's winter landscape. Another club willing to hand out big contracts would be good for the players, as another bidder always helps with the supply-demand equation.
RosterResource The club has projected $37 million for next year, meaning it would need to spend over $20 million to reach the bottom spot of 2024. Many free agents won't be excited about playing in a Triple-A park, so the A's may have to wait out the market and reach out to guys who don't find the contract they've been looking for. Acquiring unwanted contracts from another club via trade would be another way to increase payroll without the player having any say. But this could also benefit the players, as the other club could use their freed up spending capacity to spend money on someone else.
There are already four pretty aggressive teams in the American League West. The Astros have been one of the strongest teams in the last decade. The Rangers have played aggressively in recent years, leading to a World Series title. The Angels haven't been successful lately, but it's not for lack of trying, as they've been a top-ten salary club for most of this century. The Mariners don't have large payrolls, but are one of the most active clubs on the trade market, hitting over .500 four years in a row. If the A's go one step further, it could raise the level of competition in an already strong division.
Despite the owners' behavior, there have been some encouraging signs on the field for the A's recently. They posted a 39-37 record in the final three months of 2024, helped by strong performances from players like Mason Miller, Brent Rooker, Lawrence Butler and many others.
If the club didn't care how he performed during his three-year exodus in West Sacramento, it would make sense to trade Rooker since he's scheduled to be a free agent after 2027. But they didn't trade him at the deadline and generally manager David Forst said recently They also have no plans to trade him this winter. As mentioned, they don't need to save any money since there's almost nothing on the books, but trading Rooker could certainly attract a lot of prospects they'd rather not take advantage of. That agrees with Forst said recently The club is focused on expanding the major league roster, not trading big league players for new players.
Whether the club will have enough talent to compete in the near future is of course questionable and depends on many factors. One of them is how much the club spends on strengthening the squad during this period. Many people's general expectation seems to be that the A's will be just as cheap as they were in Oakland, but one imagines they were intentionally waiting to get out of town before opening the proverbial purse strings. This would be particularly frustrating for fans in the Bay Area who have watched the club starve for years, only to see them living on the rocks again after elimination. But would they really be that surprised after Fisher has already hurt them so much?
