Author Topic: WP: Nats MASN deal renegotations will have a huge impact  (Read 91278 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mathguy

  • Posts: 7227
  • Whoa That Was A Good One ! Poke His Brain Here !
    • Outer Banks Beach House
What a difference between the 2 newspapers on this

Interesting to compare the Post story with the Baltimore Sun's.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bs-bz-masn-appeal-20170713-story.html

Offline whytev

  • Posts: 8768
And WTF happens if MASN goes off the air or bankrupt? I just want to see Nats baseball for 6 months.

Watch the road feed.

Offline OldChelsea

  • Posts: 7231
  • From the best seat in the house at Nationals Park
Short term, probably a bunch. Long term, it'd be a rather progressive move, I think.
How many customers get alienated if the Nats go internet only? I know many, including myself, have ditched cable altogether.

As long as I've got Charlie and Dave and my season ticket, I've got baseball.

Offline Kevrock

  • Posts: 12459
  • Troll So Hard University
I canceled cable and just listen to C&D.

Offline DPMOmaha

  • Posts: 21568
  • Take two of these 30 minutes before first pitch.
Ratings up 12%. #1 in the market on days their games play. This makes them pretty much like every other team in MLB, finally.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2017/08/24/nats-tv-ratings-juggernaut/

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 11430
    • Twitter
If the Nats win the case this year I assume they will pay 21% in Federal taxes instead of 35% for the back payment, a nice bonus for waiting.

Offline Smithian

  • Posts: 8657
  • Team America 2017
If the Nats win the case this year I assume they will pay 21% in Federal taxes instead of 35% for the back payment, a nice bonus for waiting.
There is no winning.

This case is the Nats Vietnam. Their very own quagmire. Our leaders are caught in a long slog against Ho Chi Angelos where there is no victory, only a continuation of a fight because you've already lost so much.

Hopefully we can eventually reach some peace with honor. But I won't buy that victory is an option.

Offline JCA-CrystalCity

  • Global Moderator
  • ****
  • Posts: 24062
  • Platoon - not just a movie, a baseball obsession
I would say that any win is Pyrrhic if it comes too late to keep Harper, Murphy, and Rendon.

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 11430
    • Twitter
The amount in dispute for 2012-2016 is $100 million total, the Nats were awarded about $55M/year and MASN is paying them $35M/year. If the Nats won the dispute today MLB would take 34% of that $100M as part of the revenue sharing tax on local TV rights, so just $66M to the Nats. But the Nats have been receiving an additional $6M a year from their equity stake in MASN, a number that would evaporate with the higher rights fees, leaving $35-40M. MLB loaned the Nats $25M during the time when Selig was trying to keep the dispute of of court, resulting in about a $10-15M gross payment before taxes and legal fees. Hardly a major windfall.

The bigger factor now will be the determination of the fees for 2017-2021.

Offline Mattionals

  • Posts: 4058
The amount in dispute for 2012-2016 is $100 million total, the Nats were awarded about $55M/year and MASN is paying them $35M/year. If the Nats won the dispute today MLB would take 34% of that $100M as part of the revenue sharing tax on local TV rights, so just $66M to the Nats. But the Nats have been receiving an additional $6M a year from their equity stake in MASN, a number that would evaporate with the higher rights fees, leaving $35-40M. MLB loaned the Nats $25M during the time when Selig was trying to keep the dispute of of court, resulting in about a $10-15M gross payment before taxes and legal fees. Hardly a major windfall.

The bigger factor now will be the determination of the fees for 2017-2021.

I think it shows enough that most of the "player burns" in Free Agency in the past few years were more due to players wanting to play in a certain place, and money wasn't the issue. From what I can think of, the only contract I see the Nats being burned on about money was Heyward, and that was a great deal the Nats didn't make. Zobrist wanted to play for Maddon again. O'Day, Cespedes, and Jansen all wanted to go back to their respective teams. The Nats still got Scherzer, Strasburg extended, and even Wieters without the MASN money. Certain players won't like the deferrals, but when the numbers are that high, it doesn't seem to matter much to some. For guys who take the deferred money, they essentially have a really nice insurance policy if they never own up to their contract.

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 11430
    • Twitter
I think it shows enough that most of the "player burns" in Free Agency in the past few years were more due to players wanting to play in a certain place, and money wasn't the issue. From what I can think of, the only contract I see the Nats being burned on about money was Heyward, and that was a great deal the Nats didn't make. Zobrist wanted to play for Maddon again. O'Day, Cespedes, and Jansen all wanted to go back to their respective teams. The Nats still got Scherzer, Strasburg extended, and even Wieters without the MASN money. Certain players won't like the deferrals, but when the numbers are that high, it doesn't seem to matter much to some. For guys who take the deferred money, they essentially have a really nice insurance policy if they never own up to their contract.

I've never seen the deferred money as being directly related to the MASN dispute, my thought is that it's an accounting trick that saves the team money and gives the player a bigger total number. I doubt if the deferred contracts will end after the MASN case has been decided.

Offline LoveAngelos

  • Posts: 258
i wonder how long before Angelos starts floating the idea of moving the Orioles out of Baltimore.  I'm guessing the team isn't very profitable anymore.


You would think that considering the way they troll for DC baseball fans ( I thought there were none?) with billboards on every tree they can find.

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 11430
    • Twitter
i wonder how long before Angelos starts floating the idea of moving the Orioles out of Baltimore.  I'm guessing the team isn't very profitable anymore.

That's not a bad option for Angelos. If he leaves he still owns the Nats TV rights, so he keeps the DC and Baltimore markets. Plus he adds a new market in Portland or Vegas or Mexico.

Offline LoveAngelos

  • Posts: 258
Angelos is going on 89 and Big Ted is 92.
Iz true only the good die young. Just ask Billy Joel.

In Angelos's case when he does go to that big bank vault in the sky, I do hope he does take it all with him



Hey hon, where dem Orioles go dere????????????????????????????

Offline PowerBoater69

  • Posts: 11430
    • Twitter
Angelos is going on 89 and Big Ted is 92.
Iz true only the good die young. Just ask Billy Joel.

In Angelos's case when he does go to that big bank vault in the sky, I do hope he does take it all with him



Hey hon, where dem Orioles go dere????????????????????????????

WNFF needs a Like feature just for LoveAngelos, I don't know how to respond, but I like it.