This man ran his team like every owner should, rebuilding it from mediocrity and making it an absolute juggernaut.  Thank you George.

as a fan you have to thank him for finding a synthesis for earnin’ and spendin’. we’re lucky to have had him.

i hear they got all the Paisano’s you can eat up there.

RIP

If you are talking owners, “The Boss” can only refer to one man.

RIP Big Stein.

Win it for Mr. Steinbrenner.

Earning and spending indeed. I was always amazed at how much money he poured into the team. RIP.

I’ll miss the George of the late 90’s and very recently, but its pretty hard to deny that almost every year that he directly had his hands on the team were bad years. Steinbrenner was, for much of his ownership, a very bad owner and a very bad man, and the last twelve or so years can do little to change my perception of him.

I’m sorry for his family and I will, indeed, miss him. But I simply can’t bring myself to think of him fondly, let alone in the hallowed reverence I see across the blogs…

He had his faults, but he always wanted the Yankees to win.  It took him a while to figure out the best way to do it, but in the end, the Yanks are a much better organization thanks to his leadership.

And it seems from most accounts he was a generous and charitable man, which speaks much greater to him as an individual than any amount of championship rings would.

From the looks of it, Steinbrenner left his part of the world a better place than when he got there - and to me, that’s a true measure of a man.  Rest in peace and all the best to the Steinbrenner family.

It seems unfathomable that I would have said this 20 years ago, but he will be missed, and he may be the best thing that happened to the Yankees since Ruth.

Whatever his sins, he’s dead now.

RIP

Thank you, Mr. Steinbrenner, for picking up the Yankees out of the gutter, and for showing an Ahab-like monomania for winning.  The Yankees seem like the one team that isn’t trying to con its fan base, and that all flowed from you.

Steinbrenner may not have endeared himself to the public at large outside of NY, but he was truly a towering figure in baseball. In fact, over the last 40 years, he was without question the most significant person in the sport who didn’t actually play the game.  He not only personally rescued baseball’s flagship franchise from institutional decay, his tenacious pursuit of championships elevated the level of competition among teams in a way that really helped make MLB what it is today.  He set a standard for success that other teams had to strive to match:  It was only in response to what the Yankees had achieved under Steinbrenner that the Red Sox finally determined to turn themselves into an elite franchise in the 2000s.

If the Yankees’ brand stands for anything, it stands for “baseball excellence.”  The reason that’s as true today as it was a half century ago is George Steinbrenner.  RIP, Boss.

I’m going to run around my office and close all the windows, that’s what I’m going to do.

RIP.

RIP.

This might very well be more of an “end of an era” that we even realize now, if ownership changes.

My two cents. Just want to say that BD captures it very well.  Many contributors here due to their youth don’t remember the pre-Steinbrenner years and have fashioned their understanding upon what they have read.  Steinbrenner took over in 1973 from a guy named Mike Burke who in about four or five years was unsuccessful in bringing the team any higher than a distant 2nd place in 1970.  Burke’s tenure marked the years of transition from Mantle’s last couple of hobbled seasons along with declining years from Tom Tresh and company to the prime years of Bobby Murcer, Fritz Peterson, Roy White and a young Thurman Munson. In George’s first year the team acquired Graig Nettles and the team shot off to a fast start only to fail in the 2nd half.  I remember they were in first as late as July 1.  1974 was a year of resurgence and the team stayed in the race into late September. 1975 was a bit of disappointment since Catfish came on board that year during the infancy of Free Agency. Right or wrong George recoginized early that his team could beat the draft system by signing premier FA players.  By 1976 some of those homegrown guys, traded for guys and Hunter formed enough talent to win the AL.  With Reggie’s signing and Goose, they won it all the next two years.  This was a great feeling for me as I barely remembered the 1962 WS win having been only 9 years old.  I was just coming into the time of following box scores when they lost to Cards in 64, so 77-78 was so very sweet for me. It is true that the Winfield, Mattingly years were frustrating and George did make many, many hands on errors leading up to the suspension years. His life was marked by some personal failures but on the whole more wins than losses.  What occured in the late 90’s and the past decade has been glorious and his commitment to winning never waned. Perhaps the best is yet to come. I really like the way his son Hal has run the team over the past year or so. I am grateful for being a Yankee fan.  It’s nice to know that the team will continue the legacy of excellence that George always was committed to.

It would be more accurate to say that he rebuilt the team from mediocrity, then ran it into the ground, and rebuilt it again.

I don’t know why an ownership change would be in the offing.  George has been declining for some time now and transferred control to the kids years ago.  If they didn’t want to keep the team in the family, they probably would have sold already.  The team seems to have dodged the Hank bullet already, and Hal seems reasonably bright and more importantly, gives the impression that he knows what he doesn’t know.

Anyway, as one who remembers well the days of George the monster, bully, pariah, etc, but also likes to believe that people really can change for the better… RIP, George, and thanks for the good things you did in the time you were given.

Seems like the Boss was waiting for an appropriate Voice to introduce him as he comes through the Pearly Gates.

RIP George

I was always upset at George for the Yankees of my childhood (especially those late 80s early 90s teams) but grateful for the mid 90s teams all the way through today. Now that I think about, I wouldn’t have been able to get tickets to see Mattingly in those games had the team been good. Sad day, RIP.

George’s tenure as the owner of the Yankees can be summed up in one Dickensian sentence:

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…”

But the good outweighed the bad.

RIP

[17]  How appropriate.

George was a human being. Not all good, not all bad. But his life was remarkable, and he helped deliver happiness to many Yankee fans.

I see this as not a sad thing. He had been in poor health, may have been dealing with some level of dementia for several years. Hopefully his spirit is more comfortable than his body could have been.

George was a human being. Not all good, not all bad. But his life was remarkable, and he helped deliver happiness to many Yankee fans.

Yes, for every illegal compaign contribution there was an equally generous contribution tot he Olympics.  For every Howie Spira there was donating tickets to youth groups.  And for every manager he ran out of town or player he traded/didn’t resign, there was always making sure that man (or occasionally woman) would have a place working for the Yankees, and/or be invited to Old Timer’s day.  It is indeed a sad day.

If they didn’t want to keep the team in the family, they probably would have sold already.

I think as recently as last year there were (unsubstatiated) rumors that the team was up for sale.  Since nothing has moved on that, I can see (some) who insist that when there’s smoke, there’s fire, saying the kids wouldn’t sell the team as long as The Boss was around.

But no, this team isn’t going to be sold.  At most, Hank/Hal will transition power (if not shares) to one of the minority owners.  But I don’t see that happening, either.

IMHO, George Steinbrenner may not have known the best way to put together a winning team, but he clearly is responsible for making the Yankees a championship team on and off the field, and the most recognized sports brand.  As I fan, I thank you and send my condolences to the Steinbrenner family.

I like the photo I saw on Lohud today from 70’s with George at his desk and a autographed photo in the background from Cary Grant.  Class was a big thing with George. I know that he was made fun of for having standards on how his players looked on the field, but I always appreciated that small part of his makeup.

BTW,If you were to sell the team, where do you invest the billion or so -in this economy?

Poll @ BBRef: George Steinbrenner in HOF?

It would be more accurate to say that he rebuilt the team from mediocrity, then ran it into the ground, and rebuilt it again.

I’m not just talking about the product on the field.  When he took over the team was bad.  They were mid to bottom 1/3 in attendance, and they didn’t have a TV contract. CBS ran the team into the ground.  He got the team for $8.8 million and was one of the poorest owners in terms of personal net worth at the time. It took about 25 years for the Yankees to go from that point to the juggernaut they became in the mid 90’s. In 35 years of reinvestment he building the team through free agency to create a team people wanted to see.  He then used that to get a great TV contract, and using the money from that TV contract to start their own TV network, then using the money from the network to building their own stadium…

While other owners pocket he has constantly reinvested into a team and made them a money making machine. A machine that allows them to continue to reinvest now at a rate far beyond other teams. Because of that the team is now the single most valuable team in sports worth well over $1 billion.

If you can take anything from $8.8 million to well over $1B in 35 years then it’s hard to nitpick over missteps along the way.

But some of the personal conflicts along the way I can see people taking issue with.  Like others have said, you have to take the good with the bad.

I don’t know why an ownership change would be in the offing.  George has been declining for some time now and transferred control to the kids years ago.  If they didn’t want to keep the team in the family, they probably would have sold already.  The team seems to have dodged the Hank bullet already, and Hal seems reasonably bright and more importantly, gives the impression that he knows what he doesn’t know.

I haven’t done a lot of research on this, but I believe there is/was a question about inheritance taxes and the like when George passed away.  Basically, the tax hit would be too high for the kids to pay.  I think George’s estate was trying to establish a way for his kids to own the team via a corporation of some sort.  Simply passing the Yanks to the kids wouldn’t work financially for the kids.

I’ll have to find a link or something, but I’m sure those details will be in the news soon.

I’m not just talking about the product on the field.

Neither am I.

It took about 25 years for the Yankees to go from that point to the juggernaut they became in the mid 90’s.

And it would not have taken quite so long had it not been for the degradation of the product on the field from the mid-80s through the early-90s.  George was responsible for that too, and I wouldn’t call it nit-picking to say so.

When Steinbrenner bought the team, New York was the Mets’ town and the Yankees were on the verge of permanent second fiddle status (thanks to CBS’ inept ownership as you noted).  In the late ‘80s, that was once again the case, with the Mets drawing >3M fans and the Yankees posting middle of the pack attendance figures.  George was complaining that he couldn’t compete without a new stadium and threatening to move the team to New Jersey (or even Tampa).  I don’t know where you’d find franchise valuations going back that far, but I suspect that the Yankees’ took a bit of dip during those years.

[29] I know I’ve read a lot of speculation along those lines over the years, but most of it was from sportswriters talking out their posteriors rather than financial types who might actually know what they’re talking about.  I find it hard to believe that George couldn’t afford good enough lawyers to structure his estate so as to minimize, if not totally avoid, inheritance tax issues.  Also, he certainly picked the right year to die from a tax POV.

I don’t know where you’d find franchise valuations going back that far, but I suspect that the Yankees’ took a bit of dip during those years.

Not directly answering that, but I seem to remember while in high-school - probably like 1990-1992 timeframe - that a big story was when of the minority owners put an add in the WSJ (or somesuch) that his stake in the Yankees was for sale.

Could have been that owner was hard-up for cash, or just didn’t want to be associated with Steinbrenner any more.

Man, my third or fourth trip down to The Stadium was just a nonstop wave of “George Must Go” chants. (As opposed to my first trip—a Yanks-Royals tilt in the mid-‘80s that saw my section chant “ASS-hole, ASS-hole” for about three innings because a guy wouldn’t throw back a foul ball. He stood up and turned all the way around to shoot a 360-degree bird. Welcome to New York, kid.)

But I digress. After all that, when he finally got banned it was like someone got rid of the Wicked Witch. Then we realized that the flying monkeys were on our side all along.

I’ve never known another owner of the best team in sports, and it’s going to be weird without him. Had his faults, but you can’t ask anything more than your owner having a massive desire to win.

RIP

RIP George.

There is no tax to worry about in 2010. Zero estate tax, so it is not a consideration. The pressure to sell therefore is likely to be very high, with no taxes to pay.

Zero estate tax in 2010 just means that the heirs don’t pay tax on the team if the estate settles before the calendar year ends, right?  But wouldn’t they (or the estate) still have to pay taxes on previously unrealized capital gains if the team is sold?  15% of a couple billion is a pretty good chunk of change.

EDIT: IOW, I’m not a tax lawyer and I didn’t even stay at a Holliday Inn Express last night, but aren’t the baby Steins better off inheriting the team with no estate tax rather than selling?  Or do they get to re-set the basis and sell without paying any capital gains?  If the latter is the case, then it’s hard to think of a better justification for having an estate tax in the first place.  Death shouldn’t be an occasion for taxation, but it shouldn’t be a means of escaping taxation either.

What role in ownership does the widow have? How do we know that the ownership will be transferred prior to her death?

Baseball pundits and there’s no shortage of them are always writing things that suggest baseball would be better off if ... for example Yanks don’t get Cliff Lee.  There’s a lot of talk about what’s wrong with baseball such as the steroid problem, the lack of competitive balance, the Yankees finances etc.  What runs through my mind is that we tend to glorify the past and I’m guilty to some extent, but I keep thinking about how hard it is to get a good seat these days to see the Yankees in Minnesota and even in KC.  My mind goes back in contrast to the many empty seats that were evident on October 1, 1961 when Maris hit his 61st homer or the many games that Mattingly’s home runs rattled around to empty seats in the 80’s.  I think Steinbrenner had a lot to do with elevating MLB and why the Yankees averaged 50K per game a year or so ago and baseball in general outside of a few markets sells so many tickets these days.

The estate tax is based solely on the year in which the decedent dies. Passing away in 2010 means zero estate tax, regardless of what year the estate is settled. Thus the heirs can sell in 2011 or afterwards and have zero estate tax to pay.

Capital gains reset from the date you inherit, that is date of death, so the basis is whatever the team is worth today, not when George bought it, unless any share of the team was transferred to an heir earlier, then that is the date to determine any capital gains.

Likely the thing has been set up to take advantage of the one year, 2010, in which there is an unlimited exemption from estate tax. Next year the exemption is a mere one million dollars, which as pointed out, has no bearing now.

Isn’t the threshold question how much of the estate is left to his wife given the marital deduction, especially since that the federal estate tax may be retroactively adjusted before the year is out?

And it would not have taken quite so long had it not been for the degradation of the product on the field from the mid-80s through the early-90s.  George was responsible for that too, and I wouldn’t call it nit-picking to say so.

I understand the point you are trying to make and you’re not wrong.  Could he have done it better?  Yes there was room for improvement, but no other owner has been able to do what he did so in a sense it’s like saying Babe Ruth didn’t get a hit over 60% of the time.

[39] There is no chance that the estate tax will be touched in 2010. It is doubtful that any attempt in future years to change what has been done would pass Constitutional muster.

There is zero estate tax for the Steinbrenner heirs.

[41] That is false, but this isn’t the place to discuss it.

[42] why do you hate the business side of things?

I think Nick Swisher should sport a stache and some eyeblack and he could play the lead role in the Don Mattingly story.

43. I think Rich recognizes that some of the rest of us aren’t tax accountants and lawyers and I applaud him

[42] I have no idea what part is false.

Don, if everything you’re saying is true, then there is no pressure to sell.  At least not for tax advantage.  No tax either way.  If they hold and sell later, then they just pay cap gains on profit over new basis.

Capital gains reset from the date you inherit, that is date of death, so the basis is whatever the team is worth today, not when George bought it

The internet tells me that the capital gains basis resets because of the estate tax, and that with no estate tax, the basis doesn’t reset.

[46] Retroactive Taxes are almost always constitutional and have been used before.

Leave it to George to die of a MASSIVE heart attack, everything he did was MASSIVE and without George there probably would have been a lot more unhappy posters here through the years and maybe a few more Boston championships.  He was an SOB with a heart of gold and I for one am glad that he was the Yankees owner.

“If the latter is the case, then it’s hard to think of a better justification for having an estate tax in the first place.”

That was my (uneducated) understanding of the economic reasoning.  I’ve read comments by people from families who even under the prevailing system have stocks which have been as it were born again twice or more, providing an increase in wealth that will in effect never be taxed.  IIRC I’ve seen (presumably revenue-neutral) proposals from estate tax proponents to trade the estate tax straight across for a capital gains tax that would be more like the income tax and send a lot of estate attorneys and accountants over to the corporate side.

[47] MC - I’m speaking from the angle of human nature. It is likely that most heirs would rather have the money than the team. This happens all the time, so several heirs are likely to push for a sale.

Now it may be arranged to make the decision a simple majority, or a two-thirds majority, whatever, but some heirs will want to sell, the sooner the better. Rare is a case where this demand to sell is avoided.

Also, the economy is going to get much worse, so sell while the selling is good.

[48] Yes, but this is only for 2010. The estate tax returns in 2011. I was merely answering a poster about how capital gains are normally adjusted in any year in which there is an estate tax.

[49] There is a huge difference for the estate tax versus other taxes, and it would likely be thrown out.

[51] The people most hurt with estate tax are small business owners, including family farmers,  and their families. They work thirty, forty,  fifty years to build a business, paying taxes all along the way, then they die and the feds want 55% of it after the exemption. In 2011 that exemption will be a mere one million dollars, this is outrageous.

People like Buffett and Gates put their billions in trusts; that is money that perpetuates forever.

“Also, the economy is going to get much worse, so sell while the selling is good.”

I’d think the time to sell an asset like the Yankees would be during a boom.  Though apparently Wall Street is planning on a period of new hiring, so maybe from that perspective it’s a good time.

George started this foundation

http://www.goldshieldfoundation.com/index.htm

18 kids and two widows have gotten an education from this foundation.

There is a high school named after Steinbrenner, in Tampa.

There was actually an excellent article about it in the Tampa Tribune a few months ago.  His donations pay for a specialized program (Turf Management, and, seperately, Sports Management). It is called BOSS.

People like Buffett and Gates put their billions in trusts; that is money that perpetuates for ever.

Of course, there’s nothing really stopping anyone from putting the family farm in a trust.

[53] I don’t think so, at least not if they passed the retroactive increase sometime in 2011.  Once you get to 2012 the issue becomes much harder. 
If you have something more substantive supporting the estate/regular dichotomy I’d love to see it.

From a blog comment somewhere googlable, thought this was clever:
“There’s also a perfectly legal trick where you can use an estate to wipe out the basis of a security. My sister had a bunch of very valuable Intel stock with a very low basis. Three months before my mom died, mom bought an equal amount of Intel stock. Then they traded their stocks so mom got the low basis and my sister got the high basis. When mom died, my sister got her stock back, but that low basis was wiped because of mom’s death. So, no taxes had to be paid on those capital gains.”

“the feds want 55% of it after the exemption”

The numbers I’ve seen are that the effective rate on the wealthiest estates is more like 20%.  And last I saw you get to amortize that over a decade if you keep the business in the family.

Anyway, too much politically-related stuff for this blog, back to statistics and odes to Gardner.

[57] or anything, really.  Trusts are a red flag for the IRS and they will give you trouble over them as they are often used as a legit way to avoid taxes—that doesn’t mean the government won’t look closely though.  Anyway, it’s not as if a “trust” is something not available to “little millionaires”, only to billionaires.

I will give him credit for one thing, his “Yankee Exceptionalism.” Once they got at all good, it seemed like Steinbrenner’s expectations were an effective way to distinguish themselves from other teams. Not always that it won games, but obviously the Yankees have been a pretty professional outfit for the last 14 years and a lot of incoming free agents seemed impressed by this. After that, well, I don’t have many nice things to say.

Well this conversation devolved into stuff I have no way to discus.

I will, however say, that I too am very grateful for the George of the late 90s, but again, that was a George that was VERY hands off. When he started putting his hands on again after 2001, it wasn’t quite so good or fun.

I do think you need to look at the good and the bad, but doing charity work to offset the bad you are doing isn’t necessarily a great way to look at things evening out…

The familly farms paying estate taxes is a crock and few if any are subject to that tax.  The Tax Policy Center projects that roughly 440 taxable estates were primarily made up of farm and business assets in 2004, two out of five paid an average rate of only 1.6 percent. These were taxable estates valued at less than $2 million-hardly what I would think of a a “familly farm.”  As for Buffet he is giving away the bulk of his assets and plans to leave little if any to his heirs,
preferring to use his money philanthropically.

As for Buffet he is giving away the bulk of his assets and plans to leave little if any to his heirs.

“Little if any” for Buffet is still sooooooo much moola.

I’m in the middle of trying to organize my parent’s estate so this thread is of some (though very limited, as we got a micro micro estate) utility.

But can’t wait for the All Star Break to be over, and hope there is a warm tribute to the Boss.

[59] does anybody know if that is actually legal? (I’ve done enough tax code reading for today.) logic suggests that you have to pay capital gains at the time of the swap.

Dang, watching some of the tv coverage on Steinbrenner’s passing, I know there were a bunch of warts, but there certainly was a lot of great memories too. And golly, what a larger than life personality.

[65]  Its facially appealing if you treat it as two separate gifts but I’d think the IRS would take your capital gains position.  Like you I have no desire to delve into the code for confirmation.

I’ve hawked his book on this site before, but “Bat Boy: My True Life Adventures Coming of Age with the New York Yankees” by Matthew McGough is a great book and you get a glimpse of the charitable side of George Steinbrenner.

As for how the Steinbrenner estate will be handled and the tax liabilities (or lack thereof), here’s a starting point:

http://blogs.wsj.com/metropolis/2010/07/13/how-steinbrenner-saved-his-heirs-a-600-million-tax-bill/?mod=yahoo_hs

Its facially appealing if you treat it as two separate gifts…

Well, if the stock is “very valuable” then you’re paying gift tax anyway.

Well, if the stock is “very valuable” then you’re paying gift tax anyway.

Or using up a more valuable gift exemption. I don’t see how the original scenario in [59] works exactly. But then again, I only wish I had that problem.

And for the love of god, SG, can you please switch my logo to the Sox, whatever size they may be these days? Thanks!

Don’t know about that, everything looks better with the Yankee logo!

[69, 70]  Well you currently get (pulling #s from memory but it ought to be close) 12,000 per year per person and then any greater amount counts against the estate exemption which prior to this year was 2.5ish Million.  So there is some benefit to the sister through the gift exchange theory b/c of the basis swap.

Nice to see you around, SSF. If you are the SSF that I think you are.

[74] Lost his old password - someone should wake up the PTB.

SSF, you’ll need help from the PTB to get your old password reset, but you can edit your new profile without anyone’s help.  Click on “your account” at the upper right, the select “edit profile” from the menu.  Change your favorite team and you’ll get that logo.  Mariners, perhaps?

I think it’s Pilots, no?

I’d like to see data that says the majority of the heirs would prefer the cash to owning a piece of one of the most valuable entertainment franchises on earth. One that has a shit load of cache’ and one that is easy to secure lines of credit against.

[63] Buffett is “giving” his money to a trust, see the Ford Foundation as such an example. Which is what I had originally posted. That he and Gates et al put their money in trusts to avoid taxes. Nowhere did I say he was leaving to his heirs.

[78] There’s no “data”, where would you expect to find that? But human nature being what it is, and most of the family probably could care less about the Yankees, just ‘show me the money’ is the usual mantra in these situations. Happens all the time.

As for lines of credit, maybe the new Stadium has eaten that up.

I’d like to see data that says the majority of the heirs would prefer the cash to owning a piece of one of the most valuable entertainment franchises on earth.

What, they don’t return your calls either?

I’m more interested in the ‘Barefoot Bandit’ than the ASG.

[80] My wife met Bob Nederlander, one of the Yankees minority owners, at a Yankees-Angels game last season—he’s friends with a friend of the family, it’s complicated. 

Anyway, what NEDERLANDER TOLD HER about trusts, wealth and entertainment franchises would SET YOUR HAIR ON END…if I could reveal it.

Aw, what the heck.  Here it is:

“Nice to meet you.”

By the way, having not weighed in on the man himself—

A lot of good things happened on Steinbrenner’s watch, and a lot of bad things too.  It’s hard to argue with 7 World Championships, or the fact that he turned around a franchise that had fallen on hard times.  How weird that seems now.  Even in the 80s, I’m told, you could walk up day-of, slip the guy at the ticket window a 20 and get field level seats.  Now you can’t get seats period. 

Still, although it’s not that I “hate” him or bear a grudge, the core of the late 90s were put together when he was mostly hands-off.  And perhaps the Yankees should have won the series in 2003, or 2004, or some other year, but the early 2000s did see a return of his meddling.

I know he did a lot of good; he also did harm; and it was all writ very large because of his personality.  I doubt that at bottom he was a “bad person,” but I bet I wouldn’t have liked him very much.  So kudos for the rings and the financial success, but I was happier when he wasn’t so involved in running the team.

WOOHOO! I feel so much better. Not to mention honest. And thanks Villainx, it’s time to start talking AL East again with this knowledgeable—if horribly misguided—crew.

I think SG, or whomever, should have a sock with blood on it for SSF.

AL East talk? Yankees and Rays, all else go home.

AL East talk? Yankees and Rays, all else go home.

But… it’s only 4:30.

The red sox are allowed to take third, but they better have the third best record in the AL if they do.

[88] I would answer that with more authority if we didn’t have 18 guys on the DL. Until Laser Show comes back, I’ll refrain from bold predictions.

old login restored?

OK thanks SG; everyone else, don’t mind me.

[91] We never do…