Kansas City Zephyrs 1983-1984 Analysis & Strategic Implications

Introduction

In this analysis, we delve into the financial statements of the Kansas City Zephyrs Baseball Club for the years 1983 and 1984, scrutinizing the varying perspectives of both owners and players. The crux of the matter revolves around the pursuit of increased actual cash flow, and as we explore the financial intricacies, three key areas emerge as sources of contention: roster depreciation, overstated player salary expenses, and related party transactions.

Roster Depreciation

The owners assert that 50% of the $12 million purchase price is rightly attributed to roster depreciation, leveraging the maximum IRS-approved depreciation rate to bolster profits without actual cash outflow.

This choice raises eyebrows, as it seems to prioritize financial gain over a genuine reflection of the team's financial health.

Contrastingly, the players advocate for an appreciation model, contending that players' skills improve with experience, rendering the notion of depreciating teams—which inherently appreciate—unjustifiable. This perspective challenges the conventional accounting practice and raises questions about the accuracy of the financial portrayal of the team's assets.

Get quality help now

Bella Hamilton

Verified writer

Proficient in: Baseball

5 (234)

“ Very organized ,I enjoyed and Loved every bit of our professional interaction ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Overstated Player Salary Expense

The dispute over player salary expenses unfolds across three key points: sign-up bonuses, deferred compensation, and non-roster player salaries.

Sign-up Bonuses: The players propose amortizing sign-up bonuses over the player's contract duration, seeking consistency with cash flow. However, the inconsistency arises as this approach conflicts with their stance against depreciation. It appears counterintuitive to treat part of a salary as an asset, arguing against the principle of expensing costs in the year they are incurred. The sign-up bonus, being a one-time cost, should logically be expensed in the year of its occurrence.

Deferred Compensation: Players receive only 80% of their contracted amount upfront, with the remaining 20% deferred for 10 years. The players argue that treating these deferred salaries as current expenses, a decade before they are due, is misleading. Moreover, the 20% serves as a pension for players no longer on the roster, introducing complexity to the accounting treatment. The suggestion to move deferred salaries from current expenses to the balance sheet as a liability, or as another asset if a separate fund exists, aims for a more accurate financial representation.

Non-Roster Player Salaries: Similar to deferred salaries, the cost of contracts for released players should align with each year's liability and not be expensed in a lump sum. This approach acknowledges the possibility of released players being signed by other teams, resulting in a transfer of contract obligations. Aligning the expense with each year's liability ensures a fair reflection of the team's financial commitments.

Impact on Profitability and IRS Rules

There are potential consequences of the Kansas City Zephyrs Baseball Club's current accounting practices on future profits and losses. By expensing everything ahead of time, the club risks lacking costs to offset future profits. However, it introduces the IRS rule allowing net operating losses to be carried forward for 20 years, potentially providing a strategic avenue to manage profits and losses effectively.

Related Party Transactions

The final point of contention revolves around related party transactions, with players highlighting concerns about Zephyrs' owners being sole owners of the stadium and charging significantly higher fees than other stadiums. Similarly, activities with broadcast companies owned by team owners add complexity to the financial landscape.

Players argue that such related party transactions, especially those involving stadium fees and broadcast contracts, create an uneven playing field. However, the analysis acknowledges the difficulty in evaluating these claims, citing the wide spectrum of contracts and unique situations. The subjective nature of these claims is evident, making arbitration challenging, and suggesting that the stadium costs, at least, might remain unchanged.

Conclusion

If the recommended changes are implemented, projecting income before taxes to rise to $1,668,300, the profitability of the Kansas City Zephyrs Baseball Club will be immense. The emphasis on addressing the identified accounting disputes aims to present a more accurate and transparent financial picture, fostering a deeper understanding of the club's true financial health.