ImageImageImageImageImage

Jays bid not close to 50 Million (Update pg 7)

Moderator: JaysRule15

User avatar
baulderdash77
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,579
And1: 235
Joined: Jun 12, 2003
     

Jays bid not close to 50 Million (Update pg 7) 

Post#1 » by baulderdash77 » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:42 am

Yet, the Jays bid more than $51.1 million for the negotiating rights, according to reports from Japan ... and didn’t know if they were high man in the poker game.


http://www.torontosun.com/2011/12/19/wi ... e-too-high

Talk about nickel and diming. We really did C@@p the bed it seems.
Image
User avatar
Schad
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 58,454
And1: 17,975
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#2 » by Schad » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:45 am

baulderdash77 wrote:
Yet, the Jays bid more than $51.1 million for the negotiating rights, according to reports from Japan ... and didn’t know if they were high man in the poker game.


http://www.torontosun.com/2011/12/19/wi ... e-too-high

Talk about nickel and diming. We really did C@@p the bed it seems.


Do you seriously not understand how a **** blind auction works? There's no "nickel and diming" when putting in a bid where you have no **** idea what anyone else has bid. And no, $51m+ is not, in any universe, nickel-and-diming **** to begin with.
Image
**** your asterisk.
Avenger
Banned User
Posts: 11,501
And1: 624
Joined: Dec 19, 2008
   

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#3 » by Avenger » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:46 am

baulderdash77 wrote:
Yet, the Jays bid more than $51.1 million for the negotiating rights, according to reports from Japan ... and didn’t know if they were high man in the poker game.


http://www.torontosun.com/2011/12/19/wi ... e-too-high

Talk about nickel and diming. We really did C@@p the bed it seems.

how the **** is this nickel and diming? They put in 51 **** million in a blind auction?
User avatar
MikeM
General Manager
Posts: 9,046
And1: 9,897
Joined: Aug 10, 2006

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#4 » by MikeM » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:46 am

So we know we have money. Now give it to Fielder instead. He's more worth it anyway.
User avatar
Kurtz
RealGM
Posts: 15,568
And1: 16,489
Joined: Aug 07, 2002
Location: Toronto

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#5 » by Kurtz » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:48 am

This report is as bull as the previous tweets.

Selig only gives Japan one bid, the top one.

Japanese sources wouldn't know jack **** about a 2nd highest bid. The only ones who know what the Jays bid are North Americans.
Image
User avatar
darth_federer
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 29,060
And1: 922
Joined: Apr 12, 2009
Contact:

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#6 » by darth_federer » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:48 am

BLIND Auction.
Image

Profanity wrote:This is why I question a Canadian team in our league. it's a govt conspiracy trina to sell all our milk to Russia. They let the raptors participate to not let canadians demand crossing taxes. it will backfire one day.
User avatar
torontoaces04
Analyst
Posts: 3,365
And1: 518
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
Contact:
       

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#7 » by torontoaces04 » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:48 am

Schadenfreude wrote:
baulderdash77 wrote:
Yet, the Jays bid more than $51.1 million for the negotiating rights, according to reports from Japan ... and didn’t know if they were high man in the poker game.


http://www.torontosun.com/2011/12/19/wi ... e-too-high

Talk about nickel and diming. We really did C@@p the bed it seems.


Do you seriously not understand how a **** blind auction works? There's no "nickel and diming" when putting in a bid where you have no **** idea what anyone else has bid. And no, $51m+ is not, in any universe, nickel-and-diming **** to begin with.


This is called damage control.

Rogers knew what was coming. There is no way that they bid 51.1+ for Darvish. Sorry, NO WAY.

Sure it was a blind auction, but I have 0 faith in Rogers, the Blue Jays, or AA. We all got had. And whats worse, now Rogers is sending out the minions to defend the evil empire. It's pretty easy to say after losing "Oh yeah, we bid 51.6999999999999 million dollars, CAN'T BELIEVE WE DIDN'T WIN." This has Rogers spin and stink all over it. I really hope that the majority of Jays Fans don't buy this crap that's being spewed.
gei
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,670
And1: 394
Joined: Jan 04, 2006
Location: Toronto
Contact:
   

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#8 » by gei » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:48 am

That's nothing but speculation. All we know is that Texas had the high bid.

Based on what we know about Rogers, we'd be foolish to assume they did anything other than cheap out.
User avatar
Schad
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 58,454
And1: 17,975
Joined: Feb 08, 2006
Location: The Goat Rodeo
     

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#9 » by Schad » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:49 am

torontoaces04 wrote:This is called damage control.

Rogers knew what was coming. There is no way that they bid 51.1+ for Darvish. Sorry, NO WAY.

Sure it was a blind auction, but I have 0 faith in Rogers, the Blue Jays, or AA. We all got had. And whats worse, now Rogers is sending out the minions to defend the evil empire. It's pretty easy to say after losing "Oh yeah, we bid 51.6999999999999 million dollars, CAN'T BELIEVE WE DIDN'T WIN." This has Rogers spin and stink all over it. I really hope that the majority of Jays Fans don't buy this crap that's being spewed.


Ah, yes. It's all a conspiracy.
Image
**** your asterisk.
User avatar
torontoaces04
Analyst
Posts: 3,365
And1: 518
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
Contact:
       

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#10 » by torontoaces04 » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:50 am

darth_federer wrote:BLIND Auction.


BLIND faith.
lilneige
Sophomore
Posts: 228
And1: 0
Joined: May 23, 2006

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#11 » by lilneige » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:51 am

losing a game by 1 is still losing.

Time to move on, there many other things in the Jays system worth to cheer for.
User avatar
torontoaces04
Analyst
Posts: 3,365
And1: 518
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
Contact:
       

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#12 » by torontoaces04 » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:52 am

Schadenfreude wrote:
torontoaces04 wrote:This is called damage control.

Rogers knew what was coming. There is no way that they bid 51.1+ for Darvish. Sorry, NO WAY.

Sure it was a blind auction, but I have 0 faith in Rogers, the Blue Jays, or AA. We all got had. And whats worse, now Rogers is sending out the minions to defend the evil empire. It's pretty easy to say after losing "Oh yeah, we bid 51.6999999999999 million dollars, CAN'T BELIEVE WE DIDN'T WIN." This has Rogers spin and stink all over it. I really hope that the majority of Jays Fans don't buy this crap that's being spewed.


Ah, yes. It's all a conspiracy.


Sorry that I'm not going to drink the Kool-Aid.

You're going to have to drink the whole pitcher of juice to yourself.....Oh, maybe DarthFed might split some of it with you.
gei
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,670
And1: 394
Joined: Jan 04, 2006
Location: Toronto
Contact:
   

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#13 » by gei » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:52 am

Schadenfreude wrote:Ah, yes. It's all a conspiracy.

No, just common sense.

We have no way to know what Rogers' bid was unless they come out and say it (and to be honest, then I might begin the conspiracy theory talk). All we know is that Rogers has a history of being a notoriously cheap owner.

Based on what we know, the sensible conclusion is that they cheaped out.

Or, as others have said, we can drink the kool-aid, have blind faith, etc etc.
User avatar
-MetA4-
Head Coach
Posts: 6,902
And1: 548
Joined: May 28, 2003
Location: London

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#14 » by -MetA4- » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:54 am

torontoaces04 wrote:There is no way that they bid 51.1+ for Darvish. Sorry, NO WAY.


Why? The reports the entire time was that our bid was huge. $50+ million is huge. The reality is that after the Red Sox outbid themselves by about $10 million for Matsuzaka it was likely that no one was going to bid way over the $51 million that was spent there; and the result you see is two teams who both barely bid over that amount.
User avatar
BigLeagueChew
RealGM
Posts: 10,041
And1: 4,088
Joined: May 26, 2011
Location: Catcher
     

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#15 » by BigLeagueChew » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:55 am

I think it's funny that the Jays matched a past record bid of Dice K's and people still find a reason to be mad about it. If the bid numbers are true I'm actually kind of impressed we bid that much, wasn't really expecting a bid close to that.
User avatar
-MetA4-
Head Coach
Posts: 6,902
And1: 548
Joined: May 28, 2003
Location: London

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#16 » by -MetA4- » Tue Dec 20, 2011 5:55 am

gei wrote:Based on what we know, the sensible conclusion is that they cheaped out.


They cheaped out? What does that make the owners of about ~26 other clubs who didn't even freaking put in a bid? :roll:
User avatar
Kurtz
RealGM
Posts: 15,568
And1: 16,489
Joined: Aug 07, 2002
Location: Toronto

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#17 » by Kurtz » Tue Dec 20, 2011 6:00 am

-MetA4- wrote:
torontoaces04 wrote:There is no way that they bid 51.1+ for Darvish. Sorry, NO WAY.


Why? The reports the entire time was that our bid was huge. $50+ million is huge. The reality is that after the Red Sox outbid themselves by about $10 million for Matsuzaka it was likely that no one was going to bid way over the $51 million that was spent there; and the result you see is two teams who both barely bid over that amount.


Actually, no. No, my friend, no. No no no. Looks like you've fallen for a red herring.

The report was that there was one huge bid that blew away the rest, and its amount thrilled the Ham Fighters.

The speculation was then that the bid came from the Jays, as they are offcourse a super rich team, and it'd make sense for them to get YU.

As it turned out, that big bidder mystery team was Texas. Jays had nothing to do with it. Innocent to the last man.
Image
User avatar
raps4life~
General Manager
Posts: 7,664
And1: 25
Joined: Mar 13, 2007
Location: California
       

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#18 » by raps4life~ » Tue Dec 20, 2011 6:03 am

I love how the second highest bid in history is nickel and diming.
User avatar
-MetA4-
Head Coach
Posts: 6,902
And1: 548
Joined: May 28, 2003
Location: London

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#19 » by -MetA4- » Tue Dec 20, 2011 6:06 am

Kurtz wrote:Actually, no. No, my friend, no. No no no. Looks like you've fallen for a red herring.

The report was that there was one huge bid that blew away the rest, and its amount thrilled the Ham Fighters.


There were numerous sources on both sides that had both the Jays AND the Rangers as being the ones with the "huge bid". Using common sense; that could easily suggest that both sides were right and BOTH teams made "huge" bids; it just so happened that one was bigger than the other.

The complete silence and NON-DENIAL by ANYONE Toronto related over these past 4-5 days strongly suggest that we absolutely though we had a bid that we thought could be the winner. Us being only a few hundred thousand dollars off would explain why no one stepped out and calmed expectations. We legitimately thought we could have been the winner.
User avatar
torontoaces04
Analyst
Posts: 3,365
And1: 518
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
Contact:
       

Re: Jays bid more than 51.1, less than 51.7 

Post#20 » by torontoaces04 » Tue Dec 20, 2011 6:06 am

BigLeagueChew wrote:I think it's funny that the Jays matched a past record bid of Dice K's and people still find a reason to be mad about it. If the bid numbers are true I'm actually kind of impressed we bid that much, wasn't really expecting a bid close to that.


I think it's funny that you believe the Jays matched the Dice-K offer. :roll:

This is why we will never win. 11 yrs of the status quo. Here to 11yrs more of meaningless games.

Return to Toronto Blue Jays