Ask MASN: John Angleos

[houston-nat]

Hahahahaha, I'm such a clean mouth that until my 1656th post I had no idea what "nages" was for that always in other people's posts. I thought it was inside lingo!

Congrats!! Bang zoom nages!

[mitlen]

Hahahahaha, I'm such a clean mouth that until my 1656th post I had no idea what "nages" was for that always in other people's posts. I thought it was inside lingo!

 

[blue911]

Huh? He owns both entities. If he wanted to spend that equity profit money, he could spend it on whatever he wanted including payroll for the Orioles.

No one nages about the Yankees getting the lion's share of their YES money through equity profits...

Not at all. The IRS takes a dim view of separate companies commingling monies. Yankee ownership made money from YES but the team always ran right around $0 profit. George would drag that out whenever asked. A majority of YES stock is now owned by FoxSports. The plain fact is you can't simply give money to a company or individual above a certain amount without the recipient declaring it as income. And if it was a gift, the donor couldn't write it off their taxes. There is no mechanism for Peter Angelos to convert MASN profits into Orioles operating funds.

[dracnal]

I've learned my lesson on this one - the topic is way more complex and nuanced than I understand and I'll just read and try to learn from people who get it. Finance stuff makes my head hurt.

[skippy1999]

I've learned my lesson on this one - the topic is way more complex and nuanced than I understand and I'll just read and try to learn from people who get it. Finance stuff makes my head hurt.

Mine too

[Ray D]

Hahahahaha, I'm such a clean mouth that until my 1656th post I had no idea what "nages" was for that always in other people's posts. I thought it was inside lingo!

Yes, I spent about the first five years or so here wondering what "nages" meant.  I finally asked, and someone pointed out that I must have the "censored" feature turned on in my profile (which must be the default, because I never turned it on).  Funny thing is if the pluralization algorithm were working properly, "nages" would be "nags" and it would make a bit more sense in context.

[NJ Ave]

Not at all. The IRS takes a dim view of separate companies commingling monies. Yankee ownership made money from YES but the team always ran right around $0 profit. George would drag that out whenever asked. A majority of YES stock is now owned by FoxSports. The plain fact is you can't simply give money to a company or individual above a certain amount without the recipient declaring it as income. And if it was a gift, the donor couldn't write it off their taxes. There is no mechanism for Peter Angelos to convert MASN profits into Orioles operating funds.

What are you talking about? Old man Lerner can pull an extra million out of his pocket whenever he wants to pay additional payroll, whether it comes from Lerner Enterprises or the Washington Nationals.

No one's talking about the IRS or saying it's being done as a tax dodge. It's done for the exact two reasons I described, because Angelos gets more from the equity pot and because baseball only counts one type of revenue for revenue sharing.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=18502

"As mentioned previously, the distributions of equity in these RSNs are not subject to revenue sharing, so a club can decide to make a deal with itself in a fully- or partially-owned RSN at a discounted rate. "

and...

"Focus on this out of the Bloomberg piece: the Dodgers are going to pay revenue-sharing on every penny that comes into their coffers through media rights. They wouldn’t, however, have to pay revenue-sharing on any equity should they start an RSN with a partner such as FOX or TWC. "

[blue911]

What are you talking about? Old man Lerner can pull an extra million out of his pocket whenever he wants to pay additional payroll, whether it comes from Lerner Enterprises or the Washington Nationals.

No one's talking about the IRS or saying it's being done as a tax dodge. It's done for the exact two reasons I described, because Angelos gets more from the equity pot and because baseball only counts one type of revenue for revenue sharing.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=18502

"As mentioned previously, the distributions of equity in these RSNs are not subject to revenue sharing, so a club can decide to make a deal with itself in a fully- or partially-owned RSN at a discounted rate. "

and...

"Focus on this out of the Bloomberg piece: the Dodgers are going to pay revenue-sharing on every penny that comes into their coffers through media rights. They wouldn’t, however, have to pay revenue-sharing on any equity should they start an RSN with a partner such as FOX or TWC. "

No he can't simply move money from Lerner Enterprises to the Washington Nationals. This has nothing to do with revenue sharing.

[blue911]

The fact that the MASN contract stipulates that the Nationals and Orioles receive the same compensation makes any other payments to the Orioles impossible .

[NJ Ave]

The fact that the MASN contract stipulates that the Nationals and Orioles receive the same compensation makes any other payments to the Orioles impossible .

I just don't think you know what you're talking about, to be honest.

http://halfstreetheartattack.com/2013/08/23/debate-the-nationals-the-orioles-peter-angelos-and-masn-all-you-need-to-know-about-the-masn-contract-situation-2/

"4. The fourth way some teams make money is the equity ownership of regional sports networks. This is where the Red Sox and Yankees make their money. About 1/3 of the teams are at least part owners of their own sports network and take profits from them. This is the crux of the argument between the Nats and O’s. The O’s take 86% of the profits and would prefer to maximize those while the Nats see no reason to take a lower than market rate so the O’s can take the profits like they have been doing for the last 6 years."

[NJ Ave]

The MASN contract stipulates that they receive the same RIGHTS FEES, not the same equity payments. The O's, in their deal to "allow" the Nats to come to Washington, gave themselves like 90% of the equity payments, while giving only 10% to the Nats. This rises by 1% per year until the Nats cap out at 33%. The money given to both clubs every year is a combination of the rights fees and the equity payments.

Thus, as I said, the Nats would prefer more of the money get loaded into the RIGHTS FEES that they share equally, and the O's would prefer more of the money get loaded into the EQUITY PAYMENTS they get far more of.

But in no way has the money that's been going to both clubs been equal, It's been something like $30-40 million higher going to the O's every year.

[Natsinpwc]

I hope you all put as much effort into analyses at your job as you have on this situation.

[JCA-CrystalCity]

Yes, I spent about the first five years or so here wondering what "nages" meant.  I finally asked, and someone pointed out that I must have the "censored" feature turned on in my profile (which must be the default, because I never turned it on).  Funny thing is if the pluralization algorithm were working properly, "nages" would be "nags" and it would make a bit more sense in context.

Brad Pealollipop was always the toughest to figure out until you realized what it said.

[NJ Ave]

In fact, MASN's offer to the Nats was $37 million plus their 14% (at this point) equity payments which MASN estimated at $8 million. That estimate - 14% of total equity payments = $8 million - indicates total equity is more like $57 million, of which the remaining $49 million would go to the Os, plus the same $37 million in "rights fees".

Thus, the Os would have receives $86 million, while the Nats would have received $45 million.

[NJ Ave]

I hope you all put as much effort into analyses at your job as you have on this situation.

I do

[mitlen]

I do

Me too.   

[varoadking]

Me too.   

Me three... 

...and it garners the same result...not much...

[blue911]

In fact, MASN's offer to the Nats was $37 million plus their 14% (at this point) equity payments which MASN estimated at $8 million. That estimate - 14% of total equity payments = $8 million - indicates total equity is more like $57 million, of which the remaining $49 million would go to the Os, plus the same $37 million in "rights fees".

Thus, the Os would have receives $86 million, while the Nats would have received $45 million.

Nothing you have posted shows that MASN can funnel money to the Orioles. Because they can't. The equity payments are to the shareholders of MASN not the Nationals or the Orioles. I don't know why you find that the IRS doesn't allow for commingling so difficult. 

[blue911]

I hope you all put as much effort into analyses at your job as you have on this situation.

I'm retired. I can drink with the best of them 

[mitlen]

Me three... 

...and it garners the same result...not much...

Now, if I could just figure out the five wood.

[Natsinpwc]

I'm impressed.  These one sentence posts are easy for me to understand!

[JCA-CrystalCity]

Nothing you have posted shows that MASN can funnel money to the Orioles. Because they can't. The equity payments are to the shareholders of MASN not the Nationals or the Orioles. I don't know why you find that the IRS doesn't allow for commingling so difficult. 

are the equity holders for MASN the teams or the owners of the team?  If it is Angelos, Inc., and Lernerco, then I can see the comingling issue.  If it is the Washington Baseball Club, LLP and the Baltimore Orioles Baseball, Inc., then wouldn't the dividends paid by MASN go to the teams, skipping the IRS implications?  I thought the teams were the owners of MASN.

[blue911]

are the equity holders for MASN the teams or the owners of the team?  If it is Angelos, Inc., and Lernerco, then I can see the comingling issue.  If it is the Washington Baseball Club, LLP and the Baltimore Orioles Baseball, Inc., then wouldn't the dividends paid by MASN go to the teams, skipping the IRS implications?  I thought the teams were the owners of MASN.

It's the individuals. If it were the teams then the equity payments would be subject to revenue sharing.

[NJ Ave]

It's the individuals. If it were the teams then the equity payments would be subject to revenue sharing.

This is untrue, as you can read in any number of the things I've cited.

[NJ Ave]

I mean jeez, just wiki it: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-Atlantic_Sports_Network

First sentence.

Mid-Atlantic Sports Network (MASN) is a regional sports network owned by two Major League Baseball (MLB) franchises — the Baltimore Orioles and Washington Nationals