Author Topic: WP: Nats MASN deal renegotations will have a huge impact  (Read 102961 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sportsfan882

  • Posts: 93630
Quote
Eric Fisher ‏@EricFisherSBJ
Decision on MASN-#Nationals TV dispute remains on hold as sides remain more than $70M/yr apart.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19455
so if we're asking for $100 million, that means angelos wants to keep it flat? I hope bundy throws out his shoulder bouncing a ball off weiter's knee this year

Online PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 12291
    • Twitter


Wow, that's quite a difference in numbers. The lawyers on each side are loving this deal.

Online houston-nat

  • Posts: 19028
Good, demand as much as possible and you'll get as much as possible.

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
http://tinyurl.com/72l2v3c

Interesting.  MASN would have to pay the O's the same amount that the Nats get.  I wonder if this could lead to Angelos trying to get out of this.  I suppose one could argue that from the O's end, it is just one pocket to another, but I can tell you from my accounting training that almost all owners look at each individual business on it's own.  Angelos and company may decide MASN is a bad investment if the Nats win big.

Offline Kevrock

  • Posts: 12501
  • Troll So Hard University
Yeah, wow. I didn't realize that.

Quote
Complicating matters is a parity clause in MASN’s contract requiring that the Orioles receive exactly as much in rights fees as the Nationals. That means if the Nationals wind up with a new deal worth $100 million a year, the Orioles also would get $100 million a year.

Dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Angelos and company may decide MASN is a bad investment if the Nats win big.

Let's hope.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19455
Quote
Complicating matters is a parity clause in MASN’s contract requiring that the Orioles receive exactly as much in rights fees as the Nationals. That means if the Nationals wind up with a new deal worth $100 million a year, the Orioles also would get $100 million a year.

Cable industry sources have questioned whether MASN could afford both contracts, given the long-term carriage deals they already have signed with cable and satellite operators. MASN gets about $2.14 a subscriber per month, according to figures from SNL Kagan. That’s higher than only a handful of RSNs.

hopefully the arbitrators aren't allowed to consider that, and hopefully the Lerners get their $100 million and it bankrupts MASN and the nats escape the Os

Offline PebbleBall

  • Posts: 3440
  • Now that right there is baseball.
hopefully the arbitrators aren't allowed to consider that, and hopefully the Lerners get their $100 million and it bankrupts MASN and the nats escape the Os

This is probably the reason for the delay.  The arbitrators are faced between a fair decision that would cripple MASN, or an unfair decision that would hinder the Nats just as they are gaining a fan base. 

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 14955
  • I am Djour Djilios.
Dumbest thing I've ever heard.

If you're the Orioles it isn't.  Without that they lose everything they ever had pre-2005.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19455
If you're the Orioles it isn't.  Without that they lose everything they ever had pre-2005.

I don't like the idea of arbitration being expanded because one party made a bad deal with a third party- if the point of the reset is to give the nats something approaching fair market value, it shouldn't matter if MASN promised to match the deal for the Os. It would be like a star player going into salary arbitration and having the team say, we'd love to pay you that, but we promised the bullpen catcher a salary equal to yours

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 14955
  • I am Djour Djilios.
Who cares either way.  And with that my last post here.

Offline Kevrock

  • Posts: 12501
  • Troll So Hard University
Who cares either way. And with that my last post here.


Offline comish4lif

  • Posts: 2858
  • Too Stressed to care.
If you're the Orioles it isn't.  Without that they lose everything they ever had pre-2005.

Who cares what the Orioles had prior to 2005? I don't. TV markets are "controlled" by MLB and divvied up as necessary. You don't see the Braves still hanging on to Florida - which they had for themselves through the arrival of the Marlins and then the Rays. TV markets change. Baltimore's exclusive rights extend only to the city/county where the team plays and any city county that it touches. So, the O's had rights over Howard County, but the Nats had the new rights to PG county. The o's threatened to sue, and got a tv network, bad move by Bud, But if MASN thought that they were smart in getting some clause that gave them as much for the O's as it does for the Nats, well, then, the faster that MASN goes bankrupt and the Nats get out of that deal, the happier I'll be.

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
I agree.  The best possible thing for the Nats would be for Angelos to say "no way" and let the Nats go.  I hope there is some sort of deal they can negotiate with him to get out of MASN.  It may mean less money short term, but having their own TV rights would be worth it IMO.  Especially with a potential dynasty in the coming years.

If not, I hope they get at least $70 million.

Offline tomterp

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 33088
  • Hell yes!
Obviously the object for the Nats here is to drive the residual profit to zero or below.

Better to have 50% of the big portion and 15% of the small residual than 50% of a smaller pie and 15% of a big residual.

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
Obviously the object for the Nats here is to drive the residual profit to zero or below.

Better to have 50% of the big portion and 15% of the small residual than 50% of a smaller pie and 15% of a big residual.

Except that Angelos and his advisers may see beyond the immediate residual return.  Long term, the Nats are an absolute goldmine IMO.  I am hoping they are more focused on the immediate profits, if so, the Nats could get out.

Online houston-nat

  • Posts: 19028
Especially with a potential dynasty in the coming years.

Right. With the team they're fielding now, the Nats could most certainly approach a rival network and beat the $1.2 billion the San Diego Padres got. I mean, they're the freaking Padres.

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
Right. With the team they're fielding now, the Nats could most certainly approach a rival network and beat the $1.2 billion the San Diego Padres got. I mean, they're the freaking Padres.

Look at what has happened with the Redskins and the Caps.  If the Nats win a World series with two of the biggest stars in baseball, their popularity will blow up.  There will be opportunities for programming beyond the games.  if Angelos is smart, he'll shut up and pay whatever is awarded.  Even if it's $100 million, he'll eventually make a profit IMO.  I just hope he's not that smart.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19455
Except that Angelos and his advisers may see beyond the immediate residual return.  Long term, the Nats are an absolute goldmine IMO.  I am hoping they are more focused on the immediate profits, if so, the Nats could get out.

Gold mine or not, if their carriage feed don't justify two teams, and according to the article above, they don't, paying fair market value to the Nats then having to match that for the Os could end up bankrupting MASN before that gold mine gets tapped

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19455
Look at what has happened with the Redskins and the Caps.  If the Nats win a World series with two of the biggest stars in baseball, their popularity will blow up.  There will be opportunities for programming beyond the games.  if Angelos is smart, he'll shut up and pay whatever is awarded.  Even if it's $100 million, he'll eventually make a profit IMO.  I just hope he's not that smart.

I dont think being a dynasty matters nearly as much as how many cable subscribers you can force to pay for the network, and the FCC has more to do with that than team performance

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
There is also advertising revenue, and the revenue that could come from places willing to pay for it as an extra channel.  NC doesn't seem to want it right now, but how about 3 years from now?  The reason the Braves are so popular is because they won so often.  Winning breeds revenue.  This is true in DC more than most places. 

I hope that Angelos is thinking the same way you are.  Getting out of MASN would be so huge.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 19455
The reason the braves are so popular is that they were owned by turner and already on most cable subscriptions, do you really think that Charlotte residents are going to be hounding Comcast to increase their bills and add another RSN?

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35047
  • Champs!
The reason the braves are so popular is that they were owned by turner and already on most cable subscriptions, do you really think that Charlotte residents are going to be hounding Comcast to increase their bills and add another RSN?

MASN already lost the TWC battle in NC. I don't see the Nats on a new carrier winning it, either.

Offline Nats113437

  • Posts: 249
Well they are still watching the Braves years after they left TBS.  That was Time-Warner's biggest reason for not wanting MASN is that people would rather watch the Braves.  They are on a Fox Sports station now.

Do you really think it is only because they were on TBS?  If they hadn't won, and built a fan base, they'd be nowhere near as popular.  The Cubs used to be on everybody's cable as well, and WGN is still on many, but you don't hear NC residents begging for their games.

Comcast DC is shown in NC and they don't even have actual Redskin regular season games.

If the Nats keep winning, don't be surprised if MASN ends up on those NC cable outlets.  I watched it happen with the Braves.  It has happened with the Redskins.  Winning breeds revenue.  You build up a fan base that sticks with you. 

Let's hope Angelos isn't reading this lol.  I hope he sees it as you do and gets out.

Offline Lintyfresh85

  • Posts: 35047
  • Champs!

Comcast DC is shown in NC and they don't even have actual Redskin regular season games.


That's because the NFL has a contract to show games with Fox, CBS, ESPN and NFL Network only.