Author Topic: WP: Nats MASN deal renegotations will have a huge impact  (Read 103280 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19488
I'm worried/paranoid that this ends with the Nats off tv for most of the 2013 season while this is in litigation.

wouldn't that mean MASN was risking NOVA, MoCo, PG, and DC cable providers dropping them since they would no longer be carrying the local team?

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 33088
  • Hell yes!
Wouldn't it be great that the caluse that Angelos (no doubt) threw in to guarantee revenue parity is the clause that caused the demise of MASN? If the Nats prevail, and get, say $100M, and MASN must then pay the O's their $100M, I hope it bankrupts MASN.

Well, then they would be unable to pay either team the full $100m.  Not sure what that achieves.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19488
Well, then they would be unable to pay either team the full $100m.  Not sure what that achieves.

who knows, maybe a default costs them their rights to he Nats broadcast, maybe it costs angelos some money if MASN goes bankrupt - I'm not sure why a deal with a third party should effect fair market value for the nats

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 33088
  • Hell yes!
who knows, maybe a default costs them their rights to he Nats broadcast, maybe it costs angelos some money if MASN goes bankrupt - I'm not sure why a deal with a third party should effect fair market value for the nats

Because the ability of MASN to generate revenue is limited.  Who's going to approve a settlement that pays out $200m directly to the teams if MASN's revenue (net of production costs) is $150m?  Makes no sense. 

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
The deal says the Nats have to be paid fair market value.  The ability of MASN to pay it has nothing to do with it.  If the arbitration panel rules the fair market value is $100 million, then that's what has to be paid.  The decision can not be based on other factors.  If it is, the Lerners will sue and win big.

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
One thing that hasn't been discussed is MLB likely fearing the loss of their Anti-Trust exemption.  If this gets to court, the Lerners could really put that in jeopardy.  If I were MLB, I would fear them doing that a lot more than Angelos, as the MASN situation is almost certainly a violation of the law anyway.  This, plus other MLB owners wanting as many huge TV deals as possible, make me think this will work out well for the Nats.  They may not get out of MASN, but they should get huge dollars.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19488
Because the ability of MASN to generate revenue is limited.  Who's going to approve a settlement that pays out $200m directly to the teams if MASN's revenue (net of production costs) is $150m?  Makes no sense. 

It's not the Nats fault that MASN chooses to treat a lesser property as equal. If MASN can't pay the nationals fair market value than maybe it's existence should be questioned. When I go to buy a car, I can't get a better deal because I also owe money on my mortgage, but somehow, the nats should get a worse deal because MASN made a bad deal with the Os

Offline comish4lif

  • Posts: 2859
  • Too Stressed to care.
Well, then they would be unable to pay either team the full $100m.  Not sure what that achieves.

What I would hope to achieve is this:
- MASN goes bankrupt, and
- thus, MASN no longer owns the Nats TV rights, and
- - Perhaps the Nats can buy their own TV rights in the Chapter 11 liquidation, and
- - - Nats own their TV rights and make their own fair market deal without any other encumbrances.

Offline comish4lif

  • Posts: 2859
  • Too Stressed to care.
Because the ability of MASN to generate revenue is limited.  Who's going to approve a settlement that pays out $200m directly to the teams if MASN's revenue (net of production costs) is $150m?  Makes no sense. 

t would depend on the exact legal working of the agreement where the Nats are able to "reset" their TV revenues. Does it specify that it has to be a figure that MASN can afford to pay, or would it be based on a fair market value independent of other encumbrances?

Offline OldChelsea

  • Posts: 7540
  • From the best seat in the house at Nationals Park
MASN survives, MASN doesn't survive...$200m, $100m, EUR100m, GBP100m, JPY100m, CND100m, VND100m, whatever...in the words of Cato the Elder as usually misquoted nowadays, suitably adapted:

DELENDUS EST ANGELOS.

...(along with of course getting a telly outlet to ourselves, no longer 'sharing' with the Orioles)...we must never lose sight of the prime objective...everything else is just details.

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
What I would hope to achieve is this:
- MASN goes bankrupt, and
- thus, MASN no longer owns the Nats TV rights, and
- - Perhaps the Nats can buy their own TV rights in the Chapter 11 liquidation, and
- - - Nats own their TV rights and make their own fair market deal without any other encumbrances.

My bet is that it wouldn't get to that, I expect Angelos and the Lerners would cut some sort of deal where the Nats acquire their rights and then sell them to a RSN.  The profit would be way more that way IMO.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Boz has alluded a couple of times to a solution where Angelos give the Lerners more of an ownership stake in MASN.  That seems more likely a solution than one that would bankrupt MASN.

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
Boz has alluded a couple of times to a solution where Angelos give the Lerners more of an ownership stake in MASN.  That seems more likely a solution than one that would bankrupt MASN.

That is possible, but they have to get fair market value out of MASN one way or another.  If it were me, I wouldn't go that route.  I'd want to force Angelos's hand and make him give up the Nats rights. 

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Making the Lerners greater stakeholders in MASN would allow money to flow directly to them rather than to the Nats.

Offline Kevrock

  • Posts: 12502
  • Troll So Hard University
They'd have some kind of balls to work out a deal like that with the entire fanbase watching.

Offline HerndonNat

  • Posts: 518
    • FSU Football
Anyone know the ratings for the Nats this year on MASN?

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
Making the Lerners greater stakeholders in MASN would allow money to flow directly to them rather than to the Nats.

Yes, but forcing Angelos to sell the rights would allow all of the money to flow directly to the Lerners.  Too much BS can happen when you're a minority owner.  Accountants can manipulate the numbers, ect.  It is better to have huge fees ($100 million or whatever it is) or have the freedom to make decisions (ownership).

Online PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 12334
    • Twitter
Anyone know the ratings for the Nats this year on MASN?

I was wondering that as well, probably SteinBog is the guy to ask but I suspect that if he knew that he'd have already published the numbers.

Offline Tyler Durden

  • Posts: 7970
  • Leprechaun
Yes, but forcing Angelos to sell the rights would allow all of the money to flow directly to the Lerners.  Too much BS can happen when you're a minority owner.  Accountants can manipulate the numbers, ect.  It is better to have huge fees ($100 million or whatever it is) or have the freedom to make decisions (ownership).

That may be true, but I think what they're trying to work out is a deal that both Angelos and the Lerners can live with.  Granted, it's probably not going to net 'fair market value' for the Nats TV rights, but it will still put a lot of food on the Angelos and Lerner dinner tables.

If the Lerners decide to sue based on not getting 'market value,' then I have no idea what will happen.  No all star game in DC, earning the enmity of Turd Selig, and crap like that will be the downside to suing.

Offline HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19488
I don't think it's possible to get a deal both sides can live with- given recent deals, $100 million for a market the size of DC is actually reasonable, but the whole point of MASN was to tie the Os to the Nats expected prosperity- giving the Nationals that kind of deal would almost ensure that the Os would have to get their parity renegotiated (since, according to the business insider source, MASN couldn't afford to pay out $200 million per in rights fees) thereby screwing instead of propping up the Os. Anything drastically less isn't fair market and likely has huge impact on the teams ability to keep and sign talent.

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
That may be true, but I think what they're trying to work out is a deal that both Angelos and the Lerners can live with.  Granted, it's probably not going to net 'fair market value' for the Nats TV rights, but it will still put a lot of food on the Angelos and Lerner dinner tables.

If the Lerners decide to sue based on not getting 'market value,' then I have no idea what will happen.  No all star game in DC, earning the enmity of Turd Selig, and crap like that will be the downside to suing.

Putting food on dinner tables is not an issue.  Power is the issue.  The Lerners don't need any money.  It's about getting the best possible deal for your business.

If that is the downside, bring it on.  Justice is worth no All-Star game, which we aren't getting anytime soon.

My impression is that everyone will want to side with the Nats on this.  It just makes too much sense for everyone other than Peter Angelos to get the Nats what they deserve.

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
Anything drastically less isn't fair market and likely has huge impact on the teams ability to keep and sign talent.

I disagree with this part.  If they get $70 million or more with the increases in ticket revenue, the'll easily be able to keep all the key players, and make a very nice profit.  I crunched the numbers and was conservative.

Offline comish4lif

  • Posts: 2859
  • Too Stressed to care.
I disagree with this part.  If they get $70 million or more with the increases in ticket revenue, the'll easily be able to keep all the key players, and make a very nice profit.  I crunched the numbers and was conservative.

Care to share your numbers?

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
http://www.pressboxonline.com/story.cfm?id=9012  Interesting. I wonder if they could get an offer from CSN or anyone else and use it in the arbitration.

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
Care to share your numbers?

It would take too long to type it all out, but essentially it's TV money, plus estimated revenue from ticket sales(I did not factor playoffs), advertising, and money saved on the draft.  IMO, by the time they have to pay big for guys like Strasburg and Harper, they will easily be able to afford a payroll up to the luxary tax, and still make a profit.