papasmurfbell Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 http://espn.go.com/blog/playbook/dollars/post/_/id/2294/the-dodgers-are-hit-at-least-for-tv Will MASN be a joke when every MLB team has their own network? Ultimately it will go again to media market size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 http://espn.go.com/b...at-least-for-tv Will MASN be a joke when every MLB team has their own network? Ultimately it will go again to media market size. Way too many variables involved to comment. Revenue sharing could be completely different by the time every team has a TV deal like you mention. The league could have a new salary structure (unlikely, but maybe a larger luxery tax?). The more realistic thing to look at is who is going to own the O's after Angelos passes. We could either have a filthy rich owner who spends regardless of the playing field, or we could have an owner much cheaper than Angelos where none of this would matter. Since Angelos owns MASN, the Angelos family might keep MASN and just sell the team (if they decide to do so at all). So there is a good chance that the next owner might not have MASN revenues to work with (I think the O's as a team are guaranteed a certain amount, not sure how much). The ownership situation is a much better tell of the future state of this team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted November 15, 2012 Author Share Posted November 15, 2012 I don't think anyone would buy the team if they couldn't get MASN. That is the revenue genorator. Without that teh owner would just be burning money in a pile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 I don't think anyone would buy the team if they couldn't get MASN. That is the revenue genorator. Without that teh owner would just be burning money in a pile. Two ways of looking at it: If MASN was not included the sale could include buyers with a lower budget, say a group headlined by Cal Ripken. If MASN is included, the team is going to fetch a lot of money for the Angelos family. MASN is going to be a big money maker for whoever owns it for the forseeable future. It would definitely be an asset for the Angelos family. What it is going to come down to is what type of offers the family gets for the team with MASN and without MASN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted November 15, 2012 Author Share Posted November 15, 2012 I just don't think an owner could come close to competing without MASN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 I just don't think an owner could come close to competing without MASN. Well the Orioles as a team are guaranteed a certain amount of money from MASN each year. There was actually an article in the Washington Post where the Nationals were going to sue Angelos and MASN because they did not believe their revenue share was increasing in relative to the market value of a television contract for the average MLB team. The under-stated fact in that article is the Nationals guaranteed share is tied to the Orioles guaranteed share. So if the Nats take-home amount increases, so does the Orioles. Yes, the Orioles, not Angelos. So in other words, Angelos is pocketing a good amount of money that does not have to go to the team. This is why the consensus say Angelos negotiated a one-sided deal with the MLB when the Nats game to town. Whoever owns the profitable MASN stands to gain a lot of money that is not tied to the Orioles or the Nats. You would have to think if somoene bought the O's they would want to negotiate a fair market share from MASN profits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cravnravn Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 A buck and some change from Comcast goes directly into Angelos pocket, each and every month from your bill..Thats fine with me as long as the product on the field is competitive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted November 16, 2012 Author Share Posted November 16, 2012 Well the Orioles as a team are guaranteed a certain amount of money from MASN each year. There was actually an article in the Washington Post where the Nationals were going to sue Angelos and MASN because they did not believe their revenue share was increasing in relative to the market value of a television contract for the average MLB team. The under-stated fact in that article is the Nationals guaranteed share is tied to the Orioles guaranteed share. So if the Nats take-home amount increases, so does the Orioles. Yes, the Orioles, not Angelos. So in other words, Angelos is pocketing a good amount of money that does not have to go to the team. This is why the consensus say Angelos negotiated a one-sided deal with the MLB when the Nats game to town. Whoever owns the profitable MASN stands to gain a lot of money that is not tied to the Orioles or the Nats. You would have to think if somoene bought the O's they would want to negotiate a fair market share from MASN profits. I don't think so. The MASN money is gauranteed to the owners of it. Peter owns about 2/3 of it now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I don't think so. The MASN money is gauranteed to the owners of it. Peter owns about 2/3 of it now. Right, Angelos owns MASN just like he owns the Orioles. I don't think his equity in ownership can go below 80% unless he physically sells it. If his family wants to keep MASN and sell the O's, they should be able to. Obviously the TV deal would have to be negotiated in this type of deal. But you have to think what the Nats end up getting out of MASN any new owner of the O's would at least want that. Bottom line, Angelos makes a lot of money from MASN, not the O's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted November 16, 2012 Author Share Posted November 16, 2012 So nobody is going to buy the team and not want MASN also. The team will have low revenues without the network. http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-04-19/sports/bal-nationals-in-line-for-much-bigger-chunk-of-masns-money-20120419_1_nationals-market-orioles The Orioles, of course, own a majority of the network that televises both team's games. Orioles owner Peter Angelos brokered that deal by arguing that the arrival of the Nationals in D.C. would cut into the Orioles' profits. In the beginning, he owned 90 percent of the network, and his percentage is dropping slowly and will bottom out at 67 percent. it bottoms out at 2/3 in the end. So he is probably around 70 something %. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 So nobody is going to buy the team and not want MASN also. The teamwill have low revenues without the network. http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-04-19/sports/bal-nationals-in-line-for-much-bigger-chunk-of-masns-money-20120419_1_nationals-market-orioles it bottoms out at 2/3 in the end. So he is probably around 70 something %. Right my point is that the Angelos family holds all the cards here because of MASN. They could get a really high price for O's with MASN or broker a brand new TV deal keeping MASN and selling off the O's to a new owner.There are only 30 MLB teams: someone will buy them no matter what. Turner sold the Braves but kept the television rigs. There is a lot of unknown about the MASN deal. There is supposedly no termination date, but when the Nats first came to DC there were rumblings their commitment to the company was tied to how long Angelos had the team. Does that extend to his family if he dies? No one knows... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted November 17, 2012 Author Share Posted November 17, 2012 TBS doesn't pay the Braves? If someone made that business move they are to stupid to own anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 TBS doesn't pay the Braves? If someone made that business move they are to stupid to own anything. TBS does pay the Braves, but the point is the Braves don't own their own network like the O's, Yanks, Rangers, and Sox do. So any excess profits that are made go straight to the owners, not the team. I am sure Turner could have sold the TV rights to the Braves as well, so the new owner could have created their own network but the property is way too valuable. I am sure there are escalators but the when the team owns the network there is a lot more potential for profit. When you're in a contract with a network you're locked into a deal and your upside is limited (which is what the Nats are complaining about). As far as an owner buying the team without MASN, I point to Cal Ripken. With MASN he would probably not be able to afford the O's. But without MASN he might be able to be a part of a group that could afford the O's. I am not saying it is smart, I am just saying owning an MLB team is a luxury and there will always be a buyer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted November 17, 2012 Author Share Posted November 17, 2012 Oh. When the contract is up then they can negotiate their own deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 Oh. When the contract is up then they can negotiate their own deal. Right and that is where the MASN deal is weird, the details are sparse. No one knows for sure what the league promised Angelos and there is no termination date. So who really knows what happens when Angelos passes. Like you said, the Nats ownership stake will get as high as 33% or so. Maybe they will be able to sell out of their equity later. Ideally the Nats would probably like to either negotiate their own deal or create their own network. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted November 18, 2012 Author Share Posted November 18, 2012 I don't think Peter or his replacement will let the Nats out of the deal. Either they leave the area or they are in MASN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted November 18, 2012 Share Posted November 18, 2012 I don't think Peter or his replacement will let the Nats out of the deal. Either they leave the area or they are in MASN. We know Angelos will not, but my point is no one knows the terms of the MLB deal. For example if Angelos passes away are the Nats allowed to get out of the deal? Do the Nats have to stay with MASN if the Angelos family keeps the team? Does that apply if someone else buys the team? That's all I was saying. No one knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted November 18, 2012 Author Share Posted November 18, 2012 No they are partners in MASN. The life and death of Peter have nothing to do with it. CEO's die all the time but the parts of the company don't split off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted November 18, 2012 Share Posted November 18, 2012 That's not what I meant. I meant no one knows how long the Nats are financially obligated to MASN. Sure they own 15% or whatever but they contest if they were negotiating on the open market they could get more money than they are required to receive with MASN. If Angelo's dies, could the Nats buy out of their equity stake in MASN to either negotiate a new deal with someone else or create their own network? This is not known. The Nats would not be able to do this now, which is for sure what they would want to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted November 19, 2012 Author Share Posted November 19, 2012 They are finacially obliged forever. Just like the O's are. It is not like a contract between TBS and teh Braves or The Angels and Comcast. It is their TV network. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 They are finacially obliged forever. Just like the O's are. It is not like a contract between TBS and teh Braves or The Angels and Comcast. It is their TV network. I don't think they are. It is 20% their TV network or whatnot. But if the Nats had the option of buying or selling out of their stake (whatever you would want to call it), I am sure they would do it in a heart beat to negotiate a new deal on the open market or create a network that is 100% theirs so they can control their own profits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted November 19, 2012 Author Share Posted November 19, 2012 I am sure they would but MLB locked them in. Now maybe if they out spend their revenues and declare bancrupcy to kill the contract that might work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted November 19, 2012 Share Posted November 19, 2012 I am sure they would but MLB locked them in. Now maybe if they out spend their revenues and declare bancrupcy to kill the contract that might work. Ok I got you. Wow, that is a hell of a deal Angelos brokered that the Nats cannot get out of MASN. Being stuck at 33% maximum is tough. The Angelos family is going to get a heck of a price for the O's if they decide to sell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papasmurfbell Posted November 19, 2012 Author Share Posted November 19, 2012 Yeah Peter bent MLB over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercleetz Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 To give us an idea of how valuable networks owned by baseball teams are: News Corporation’s Bid for a Stake in YES Would Value Channel at $3 Billion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.