Teams negotiate to get back homerun balls

[Splinte1941]

Originally Posted by travrosty

He thinks he was gonna be jeters friend after that, like you can call him up in the offseason and ask to go hold hands and walk in central park.

Fantastic as usual Travis.

[howard38]

.

[Trl3789]

Originally Posted by howard38

It's sad to see this guy getting ridiculed here for giving the ball to Jeter. I would have sold it to the highest bidder but some people are not driven by money. Maybe he just felt good doing it.

I don't know if it is money driven. I look at it as being more fiscally responsible.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by howard38

It's sad to see this guy getting ridiculed here for giving the ball to Jeter. I would have sold it to the highest bidder but some people are not driven by money. Maybe he just felt good doing it.

Nobody prevented Jeter from taking the high road, and expressing his gratitude in a way that might really help the poor bastard.

[howard38]

/

[Exhibitman]

"Maybe Jeter didn't do the right thing. That is no reason to hold up "the poor bastard" to ridicule."

Yeah, there is: Stupidity. I never applaud stupidity, regardless of what pieties it is cloaked in. This was not an act of charity. Giving a valuable artifact to an orphanage to auction off to pay for food and clothing for the kiddies is charity. Giving an artifact of baseball history to the HOF to display and share is commendable. Giving the artifact to a rich entertainer to put in his trophy case for a tiny fraction of its worth because you are starstruck is stupid.

Let's be very clear: there is no "right" or "wrong" thing to do with a baseball you catch at a ballgame. It is not a moral question. The team grants you the right to keep the ball or dispose of it as you wish as part of the ticket [license] to enter its property. What you do with it is a business decision. Jeter did not do the right thing or the wrong thing; he and the Yankees did the shrewd thing. Lopez, however, did the stupid thing. In this world, in this economy, you have to protect your own interests first and foremost. The kid had bills to pay and debts to cover and a future family to provide for, and he threw away a winning lottery ticket. That is not commendable, it is dumb.

And yes, I am a callous, unsentimental bastard; comes with the J.D.

[Gary Dunaier]

I don't know if I'm hijacking the thread by asking this, but with Santana's no-hitter having taken place Friday night, this seems like a good place to ask.

One of the things we hear in the coverage of milestone home run balls is that the fan who finally comes up with the ball is immediately liable for taxes on the presumed market value, regardless of what the fan does with it.

The ball Santana threw for the final strike never left the field and is presumably in the custody of Santana or the Mets. I think it's safe to say that if this ball were put up for auction, it would sell for six figures due to its historical significance. I'm wondering if Santana or the Mets is just as liable for taxes on the value of the ball, whether or not they actually sell it - or does that just apply to fans?

[drc]

Good question.

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by Gary Dunaier

I don't know if I'm hijacking the thread by asking this, but with Santana's no-hitter having taken place Friday night, this seems like a good place to ask.

One of the things we hear in the coverage of milestone home run balls is that the fan who finally comes up with the ball is immediately liable for taxes on the presumed market value, regardless of what the fan does with it.

The ball Santana threw for the final strike never left the field and is presumably in the custody of Santana or the Mets. I think it's safe to say that if this ball were put up for auction, it would sell for six figures due to its historical significance. I'm wondering if Santana or the Mets is just as liable for taxes on the value of the ball, whether or not they actually sell it - or does that just apply to fans?

Gary,
No disrespect, but IMHO I can't imagine that the final strike ball from Santana's no-hit game would bring anywhere near six figures. Outside of the game ball from Don Larsen's perfect game in the 1956 World Series, I can't imagine any no-hit ball from the modern era selling for north of $10,000.

Nolan Ryan threw 7 no-hitters and the most that any of his no-hit balls ever sold for was about $7,300 back in 1994 (a game used no-hit ball from his 7th no-hitter).

I'm quite sure that a player would never pay taxes on a ball from a game like this unless they sold it. Souvenir vs. capital gains...

Just my 2 cents....

[Gary Dunaier]

Originally Posted by Gary Dunaier

The ball Santana threw for the final strike never left the field and is presumably in the custody of Santana or the Mets. I think it's safe to say that if this ball were put up for auction, it would sell for six figures due to its historical significance. I'm wondering if Santana or the Mets is just as liable for taxes on the value of the ball, whether or not they actually sell it - or does that just apply to fans?

This may be a dead issue as far as Net 54 is concerned, so more for the historical record than anything else, I came across a video of the Mets celebrating Santana's no-hitter (link here, then click on "Must C Classic: Santana finishes off Mets first no-no"), and at 1:03 we see Mets catcher Josh Thole handing Santana a baseball, which I presume is the one that was used to make the final out. Whether or not he still has it is unknown (it could be in his posession, the Mets might have asked for it for the Mets Museum, maybe even Cooperstown wants it, who knows?), but it was given to him.

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

"Maybe Jeter didn't do the right thing. That is no reason to hold up "the poor bastard" to ridicule."

Yeah, there is: Stupidity. I never applaud stupidity, regardless of what pieties it is cloaked in. This was not an act of charity. Giving a valuable artifact to an orphanage to auction off to pay for food and clothing for the kiddies is charity. Giving an artifact of baseball history to the HOF to display and share is commendable. Giving the artifact to a rich entertainer to put in his trophy case for a tiny fraction of its worth because you are starstruck is stupid.

Let's be very clear: there is no "right" or "wrong" thing to do with a baseball you catch at a ballgame. It is not a moral question. The team grants you the right to keep the ball or dispose of it as you wish as part of the ticket [license] to enter its property. What you do with it is a business decision. Jeter did not do the right thing or the wrong thing; he and the Yankees did the shrewd thing. Lopez, however, did the stupid thing. In this world, in this economy, you have to protect your own interests first and foremost. The kid had bills to pay and debts to cover and a future family to provide for, and he threw away a winning lottery ticket. That is not commendable, it is dumb.

And yes, I am a callous, unsentimental bastard; comes with the J.D.

Like