Jump to content
JohnD

MASN dispute update

Recommended Posts

On 9/4/2019 at 8:57 PM, Satyr3206 said:

And some said the deal was stupid and not negotiated well.

It was both. The fact that Angelos didn’t require “fair market value” to be spelled out in the settlement was stupid.  The fact that he demanded that both teams get the same FMV revenue was not stupid, but moronic.  Now that FMV is being calculated correctly, that is to maximize revenue for the teams, he and MASN are screwed.  The fact that he thought MLB would allow him to calculate FMV for MASN’s benefit is smh worthy.

This situation isn’t going away anytime soon.  MASN won’t be able to afford the identical FMV payments to both teams unless they find a way to make MASN profitable.  It’s a crap network, that no one watches outside of baseball.  

Greedy Peetey’s legal options are shrinking.  Is he going to keep suing to satisfy his cantankerous nature?  Probably, but he’s throwing good money after bad.  I don’t know what happens if MASN becomes insolvent, but I suspect the Nats will sue to put MASN into receivership or to dissolve the settlement agreement because MASN has defaulted.  I think the likely outcome is that Angelos dies and his sons try and work out a new agreement, but MLB will refuse.  They only want to see the backs of the Angelos clan.  MASN will try and sell the rights to Comcast or some other entity.  The Lerners will try and kill the perpetual rights, which will lower the price.  The Angelos boys will sue, and this thread will live on for another decade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judge says MASN should pay Nats based on MLB panel decision

 

Quote

Cohen heard renewed arguments Tuesday and denied a motion by the Nationals to reargue the case that led to his Aug. 22 decision to confirm the arbitration award. He said the sides should jointly submit a proposed judgment by Nov. 21 and also said the Orioles are not precluded from seeking recalculations of MASN profit distributions.

Why on earth would the Nationals want to reargue the case?  Maybe this is a typo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, VaBird1 said:

So both teams get an additional 99 million for 2012-16?

If I recall correctly, the ownership of the Orioles will be receiving money that is subject to revenue sharing instead of money that isn't.  As well as paying money to the Nationals that they were previously pocketing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

If I recall correctly, the ownership of the Orioles will be receiving money that is subject to revenue sharing instead of money that isn't.  As well as paying money to the Nationals that they were previously pocketing.

Correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

If I recall correctly, the ownership of the Orioles will be receiving money that is subject to revenue sharing instead of money that isn't.  As well as paying money to the Nationals that they were previously pocketing.

No saying it was pocketed by the Orioles.    It was probably parked within MASN all this time.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

No saying it was pocketed by the Orioles.    It was probably parked within MASN all this time.   

I was speaking of the time before the first arbitration (previously to 2012).  Obviously for legal reasons the disputed money was set aside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, VaBird1 said:

So both teams get an additional 99 million for 2012-16?


99M minus already disbursed TV fees to the clubs plus interest as determined by the court. Could be $100-$120M depending upon the interest rate and the compounding periods chosen.  MASN might have to take out a loan.  I expect more lawsuits to occur, just because  of past performance 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Beetlejuice said:


99M minus already disbursed TV fees to the clubs plus interest as determined by the court. Could be $100-$120M depending upon the interest rate and the compounding periods chosen.  MASN might have to take out a loan.  I expect more lawsuits to occur, just because  of past performance 

The money has been put aside pending the appeals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

The money has been put aside pending the appeals.

True, but MASN’s maintenance of the money and the clerk’s interest determination are two different things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • I don’t disagree with anything you said, and I’m grateful you said it. Everyone needs a designated driver. But lemme play devil’s advocate for a moment. This is 60 games. ~12 starts instead of 30. 60 starters instead of 162, and several guys who can start a time or two and not ruin our lives. One trait of greatness is consistency. Over 60, that is less important than over 162. Our starters and our pen appear much superior to the last couple years. Not enough to matter in 162 because the long season takes a toll, And quality-or lack thereof- finds its level, but in 60 games? Sure. And remember the short season doesn’t help the best, because the best doesn’t need the benefits a short season offers. The defense is much better too, unless Nunez is playing third, anyway. so yes I agree with you, but it’s not out of the question.  
    • This was a nice read.  And that's not sarcasm.
    • No qualifying offers this season.
    • If Stroman gets a qualifying offer he would cost the O's their third pick (either the comp pick after round 2 or, if that pick is traded, their third round pick). Jake Odorizzi got a QO this off-season at the same age as Stroman with a less successful career to date. I think it is quite likely that Stroman gets one too.
    • I appreciate Wildcards's enthusiasm and optimism. This season is such a wildcard because of all the variables that really anything could happen and I wouldn't be overly surprised. Saying that, there is no reality where this is the beginning of a sustainable winning core.  There is just as much of a chance of this team losing ten straight games as they do of keep playing .500 ball the rest of this season.  As Drungo has point out, there are some guys who have started out this season way above their carer norms. Even if you believe Severino, Ruiz, Alberto and Nunez are breaking out as they enter their primes, does anyone think Cobb, Milone and Wojo are going to keep pitching to their current ERAs? Cobb maybe since it seems his splitter has come back, but I'm not buying long term sustainability on Milone and Hyde has used Wojo right but not letting him go more than twice through an order. 
    • What does that mean? What's the cost of Wildcard's optimism? Also, I don't think what I said constituted being negative.  That's an honest appraisal of the team.    Not much of what we are seeing looks sustainable.
    • Yea I don’t know that I buy they will spend what it takes but they have very little money committed long term and that is when you can take advantage of it.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...