The Corollary of Art Modell's move and American Job Outsourcing Overseas

• Footwedge

  I would expect all the unbridled free marketers to rave (pun intended) Modell's "business decision" in moving the team in 95.
  
  There will be the usual cast of characters that will claim the scenarios are like night and day. Watch and see. But in reality, they are both one and the same...and if one sees the so called logic and strength of the one.....they MUST see the logic and strength in the other. If not, they are total and complete hypocrites, that probably would never pass a personality assessment for hireability with a large company.
• fish82

  

  Footwedge;1263018 wrote:I would expect all the unbridled free marketers to rave (pun intended) Modell's "business decision" in moving the team in 95.
  
  There will be the usual cast of characters that will claim the scenarios are like night and day. Watch and see. But in reality, they are both one and the same...and if one sees the so called logic and strength of the one.....they MUST see the logic and strength in the other. If not, they are total and complete hypocrites, that probably would never pass a personality assessment for hireability with a large company.

  Hopefully they'll all die like Art...then you can achieve total happiness.
• O-Trap

  

  Honestly, Foot, I agree with you on this. I see the parallel.
  
  I don't think "raving" is what a free-market supporter would do, but I DO think they would say it was his right to move the team. I also think they'd say Ohio doesn't have the right to try to penalize him for the move or prevent him from moving.
  
  Pretty much sums up my view on the topic. It was his right to move the team, and Ohio should have no grounds for preventing it. But then, I'm pretty indifferent about the Browns, so I suppose I'm probably a little more objective.
  
  EDIT: Obviously, relocating doesn't automatically make a decision a better one in either example, but the litmus test applied is whether or not moving the company is better for the company ... not if it's better for either location.
• pmoney25

  

  Footwedge;1263018 wrote:I would expect all the unbridled free marketers to rave (pun intended) Modell's "business decision" in moving the team in 95.
  
  There will be the usual cast of characters that will claim the scenarios are like night and day. Watch and see. But in reality, they are both one and the same...and if one sees the so called logic and strength of the one.....they MUST see the logic and strength in the other. If not, they are total and complete hypocrites, that probably would never pass a personality assessment for hireability with a large company.

  Mind Blown
• Con_Alma

  I had no problem with Mr. Model's business decision. I also have no problem with outsourcing of jobs.
  
  If the franchise owner believes he has better opportunity elsewhere he is an idiot not to go.
• O-Trap

  

  Con_Alma;1263036 wrote:If the franchise owner believes he has better opportunity elsewhere he is an idiot not to go.

  And he can apply his own subjective criteria for what is "better." If his model involves a commitment to his community, then leaving would not be a better opportunity in that regard. If it would in other ways, then he has to weigh the benefits to himself and his company of relocating versus staying.
  
  If he chooses the option that he, himself, believes to be the less optimal choice, then yes, he's an idiot.
• Con_Alma

  O-Trap;1263041 wrote:And he can apply his own subjective criteria for what is "better." If his model involves a commitment to his community, then leaving would not be a better opportunity in that regard. If it would in other ways, then he has to weigh the benefits to himself and his company of relocating versus staying.
  
  If he chooses the option that he, himself, believes to be the less optimal choice, then yes, he's an idiot.

  Yep.
  
  
  ...and the people can hate him for doing it.
  
  I guess I don't understand the point of the thread.
• queencitybuckeye

  Let's see, the public sector:
  
  - gave millions to the Cavaliers to build a new place to play.
  - gave millions to the Indians to build a new place to play.
  - gave the Browns the digit.
  
  Yeah, definitely a greedy free-maketer at fault there. :rolleyes:
• gut

  Well, we'd be reaching, but I suppose the corollary is if the Browns played better football there would never have been a reason to move the team.
  
  No company or its jobs get 100% outsourced. But in some people's worlds, failing and losing 100% of jobs is better than a company succeeding and saving some of those jobs. And the ability of these people to find equal or better work probably speaks to why the jobs were outsourced in the first place. Lamenting the outsourcing of jobs is simply the wrong debate to be having.
  
  Tell me Foot, how many jobs have been "outsourced" since 1980? Please provide a credible link because mfring jobs lost due to productivity and automation don't count. Will this number be greater than the 5M+ workers employed by foreign companies here in the US? Because when you preach protectionism you also put those 5M+ workers at risk.
• O-Trap

  

  Con_Alma;1263042 wrote:Yep.
  
  
  ...and the people can hate him for doing it.

  Definitely true. If one was to try to construct an argument that it was wrong, though, that would undercut their ability to support outsourcing a la free-market.
• Footwedge

  queencitybuckeye;1263043 wrote:Let's see, the public sector:
  
  - gave millions to the Cavaliers to build a new place to play.
  - gave millions to the Indians to build a new place to play.
  - gave the Browns the digit.
  
  Yeah, definitely a greedy free-maketer at fault there. :rolleyes:

  You do not have your facts straight on what was offered Modell....at all. Certainly no surprise I might add.
• Footwedge

  gut;1263044 wrote:Well, we'd be reaching, but I suppose the corollary is if the Browns played better football there would never have been a reason to move the team.
  
  No company or its jobs get 100% outsourced. But in some people's worlds, failing and losing 100% of jobs is better than a company succeeding and saving some of those jobs. And the ability of these people to find equal or better work probably speaks to why the jobs were outsourced in the first place. Lamenting the outsourcing of jobs is simply the wrong debate to be having.
  
  Tell me Foot, how many jobs have been "outsourced" since 1980? Please provide a credible link because mfring jobs lost due to productivity and automation don't count. Will this number be greater than the 5M+ workers employed by foreign companies here in the US? Because when you preach protectionism you also put those 5M+ workers at risk.

  Modell's football team was in fact pretty good on the field. Moreover, his attendance was in the top 5 each year, every year. Try another approach to justify what he did.
  
  He outsourced his football team...for the exact reasons ABC Widget company outsourced to China. 100%...for the exact same reasons.
  
  The cause and effect....and the resulting hardships were in fact different. In one scenario, the unemployment rate has been slaughtered at the homefront. Not to mention the downward pressure of real inflation adjusted wages being slaughtered. In the other scenario, a city was devastated in losing their beloved football team. A team that was supported...like no other in the NFL.
  
  Same floating shit....different toilet.
• queencitybuckeye

  Footwedge;1263874 wrote:You do not have your facts straight on what was offered Modell....at all. Certainly no surprise I might add.

  I know exactly what transpired, and my characterization is accurate.
• QuakerOats

  He moved the team for financial reasons, including estate planning issues that could not be resolved here. Capital always flows to where it is treated the best (as we have repeated here over and over and over again), and thus I fully understand the move........and so-called outsourcing.
• gut

  Footwedge;1263886 wrote: The cause and effect....and the resulting hardships were in fact different. In one scenario, the unemployment rate has been slaughtered at the homefront.

  Did you watch Obama's speech last night? What did he say about jobs coming back because American's are more competitive (i.e. skilled). So what's that mean for the jobs that left and haven't or won't come back?
  
  Your views reflect someone clueless about competition. It's like you think American companies have some monopoly on what they want to charge, and their costs of production are irrelevant. I notice you don't advocate sending all those jobs for foreign companies back home.
  
  But feel free to answering my question when you get around to it. Is the number of outsourced jobs greater than the 5M+ workers employed here by foreign companies?
• Footwedge

  queencitybuckeye;1263887 wrote:I know exactly what transpired, and my characterization is accurate.

  No you don't. Don't act like you do. Modell had every opportunity in the world to negotiate a package that would have kept the team here. As usual, you stick your nose into a subject that you know very little about.
  
  Modell had "earning rights" to all Muny Stadium revenues. he wanted contracts changed...a negotiable situation, Instead of doing the right thing, he outsourced his team to Baltimore.
  
  If you want to do a google off with me on this subject, you will lose.
• O-Trap

  

  Footwedge;1263917 wrote:No you don't. Don't act like you do. Modell had every opportunity in the world to negotiate a package that would have kept the team here. As usual, you stick your nose into a subject that you know very little about.
  
  Modell had "earning rights" to all Muny Stadium revenues. he wanted contracts changed...a negotiable situation, Instead of doing the right thing, he outsourced his team to Baltimore.
  
  If you want to do a google off with me on this subject, you will lose.

  His business is his property. There is no "right" thing to do with his property.
• Footwedge

  gut;1263914 wrote:Did you watch Obama's speech last night? What did he say about jobs coming back because American's are more competitive (i.e. skilled). So what's that mean for the jobs that left and haven't or won't come back?
  
  Your views reflect someone clueless about competition. It's like you think American companies have some monopoly on what they want to charge, and their costs of production are irrelevant. I notice you don't advocate sending all those jobs for foreign companies back home.
  
  But feel free to answering my question when you get around to it. Is the number of outsourced jobs greater than the 5M+ workers employed here by foreign companies?

  1. I didn't watch Obama's speech...or anyone's speech at these conventions. I have better things to do with my time than watch political informercials that say the same thing over and over and over.
  
  2. I am hardly "clueless" on competition. That's always been your feeble retort. It is YOU that is feeble minded on what free market competition entails...as espoused by the original "free hand" marketers of Adam Smith's day.
  
  3. And your last point is truly irrelevant to the case I've presented...and you know it.
  
  It's time for YOU to answer MY QUESTIONS for a change.
  
  Since I've been an adult, we have transferred our trade balance from being the largest creditor nation (circa early 80's) to the largest debtor nation today. Why? Answer it. Over that same period, we have, for the first and only time I might add, seen the inflation adjusted purchasing power decrease for the vast majority of our working people over that period. Why? Answer it. During that same time frame, we have increased our national debt 16 fold in 32 short years...barely one generation....in order to keep the masses employed, fed and housed. Why? Answer it.
  
  What is the one common denominator? to all this shit?
  
  You are so indigenous in your replies to me...it makes you look ignorant...especially for one with 3 degrees in so called economics and finance. I have explained quite clearly...over and over and over again.....wages are only one part of the equation. Yet you never acknowledge a word I say on this. Why? Because you have no argument as to the whys? Is that it?
  
  David Ricardo was a brilliant economist of his day...and expounded on A. Smith's view of free trade. Ricardo was the recognized champion in explaining "comparative advantage" whereby countries would all profit through the utilization of their natural resources. Ricardo however, whould roll in his grave given the facts of how "comparative advantage" is misused today. Never...in any of Ricardo's works did he speak of unbridled labor abuses to gain "comparable advantages".
  
  You and your brand bitch, cry, moan and decry people like Obama and his horrible job numbers. Yet, it is you and yours that are complicit to the fundamental problem that is NUMBER ONE in the contribution to huge national debts, huge unemployment, a shrinking GDP, greatly reduced tax revenues, and the inevitable result of us being the largest debtor nation on the face of the planet.
  
  You want third world America? You'll get third world America. To you and yours, take a well deserved bow.
• Con_Alma

  Footwedge;1263917 wrote:No you don't. Don't act like you do. Modell had every opportunity in the world to negotiate a package that would have kept the team here. As usual, you stick your nose into a subject that you know very little about.
  
  Modell had "earning rights" to all Muny Stadium revenues. he wanted contracts changed...a negotiable situation, Instead of doing the right thing, he outsourced his team to Baltimore.
  
  If you want to do a google off with me on this subject, you will lose.

  He had earnign rights to a stadium that was going to have no tenants.
• Con_Alma

  Footwedge;1263886 wrote:...
  He outsourced his football team...for the exact reasons ABC Widget company outsourced to China. 100%...for the exact same reasons.
  
  ...

  Let's go with that.
  
  Not only is he able to but he should if there's a greater opportunity. It's the reason his business exists.
• Footwedge

  QuakerOats;1263902 wrote:He moved the team for financial reasons, including estate planning issues that could not be resolved here. Capital always flows to where it is treated the best (as we have repeated here over and over and over again), and thus I fully understand the move........and so-called outsourcing.

  Fare enough...no sugar coating from you. Your blunt answer is appreciated. I also now know why you never have, and never will post on a Browns thread.
  
  Some people view money as God. Others don't.
• Footwedge

  Con_Alma;1263949 wrote:Let's go with that.
  
  Not only is he able to but he should if there's a greater opportunity. It's the reason his business exists.

  So the Browns, who collectively outdrew every other football franchise from 1961 through 1995, was going to go belly up had he stayed in Cleveland. Um..OK.
• Con_Alma

  Footwedge;1263952 wrote:So the Browns, who collectively outdrew every other football franchise from 1961 through 1995, was going to go belly up had he stayed in Cleveland. Um..OK.

  Who said that? I didn't although his family certainl was in trouble with the personal loans they had taken out.
  
  If there's a greater opportunity he should seek it out if that increased benefit outweighs the costs of staying.ow
  
  How did you come with going "belly up' from my posts?
• QuakerOats

  Footwedge;1263950 wrote:Fare enough...no sugar coating from you. Your blunt answer is appreciated. I also now know why you never have, and never will post on a Browns thread.
  
  Some people view money as God. Others don't.

  I just happen to know that he had significant estate planning issues that helped to force his hand. I like the Browns, wished it didn't have to happen, but at least I am glad Cleveland got to the keep the name. I am sure we are only one Super Bowl away from forgetting about the move. Just like we are only one Romney revolution away from reinvigorating our economy. :rolleyes:
• jhay78

  

  Modell was a cruel, heartless, jerk of a human being, and I will never forgive him for moving the real Browns from Cleveland.
  
  But he had every right to do within the law whatever he felt was best for his business. I mean, what's the alternative? To me it seems the only alternative is empowering a government entity to centrally plan and force people and businesses to do what they want them to, which leads to greasy corrupt business people bribing and paying off greasy corrupt politicians and vice-versa.. I would rather live in a free society and let jerks be jerks (as long as they are law-abiding, of course).