HHP: MASN/Nats/Orioles case (Inside the Courtroom)

[BohKnowsBmore]

The reality is, MLB and the Nationals are locked in a terrible contract for everyone but the Orioles. You made your bed...lay in it. If there is one thing Angelo's is great at, it is that has one of the more powerful law firms in the country. Just like you don't want to settle you disagreement with Michael Jordan on the basketball court, you don't want to try and beat Peter in court.

I will say one thing...at least the Orioles are good now. This would a much harder conversation if we were in the days when they sucked, and no one cared.

True, especially in terms of public sentiment. You avoid a large part of the population saying "LOL!! O's haven't been relevant for 15 years!" had this happened 3 or 4 years ago.

[Guest]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Judge says MLB must produce records of any communications cmsnr-elect Rob Manfred had with arbitrators deciding Os-Nats TV right fee case.</p>— Jeff Barker (@sunjeffbarker) <a href="

">December 15, 2014</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>What role did baseball commissioner-elect Rob Manfred play in O's-Nats TV rights fee dispute? <a href="http://t.co/JENHYDfD6N">http://t.co/JENHYDfD6N</a></p>— Jeff Barker (@sunjeffbarker) <a href="

">December 13, 2014</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[Frobby]

MASN is really making this painful for MLB and the Nats. If I were them, I'd be extremely concerned that this Judge is going to overturn the MLB Panel's decision on grounds of bias. That doesn't mean that MASN will do better in any subsequent proceeding, however.

[BradyBunch]

MASN is really making this painful for MLB and the Nats. If I were them, I'd be extremely concerned that this Judge is going to overturn the MLB Panel's decision on grounds of bias. That doesn't mean that MASN will do better in any subsequent proceeding, however.

Anybody with common sense (not usually a judge) knows there was bias in the Panel. Every team on the panel gains by ruling in favor of Nats and MLB wins because they can recoup the money they've been sending to their pet project known as the Nats.

[Frobby]

Anybody with common sense (not usually a judge) knows there was bias in the Panel. Every team on the panel gains by ruling in favor of Nats and MLB wins because they can recoup the money they've been sending to their pet project known as the Nats.

Well, there is still the issue that this is the process MASN/Orioles agreed to in the first place. They are the ones who agreed to have disputes decided by an MLB-appointed panel. Still, if the documents the Court has ordered to be produced show MLB interfering in the Panel's process, that will be very damaging.

[weams]

MASN is really making this painful for MLB and the Nats. If I were them, I'd be extremely concerned that this Judge is going to overturn the MLB Panel's decision on grounds of bias. That doesn't mean that MASN will do better in any subsequent proceeding, however.

As long as it stays they way it was originally intended to...I am fine with the results. The intention was for the agreement to have the adjustment made each five years based on the original formula. In perpetuity. I have never read these documents. I have been told this.

[weams]

Well, there is still the issue that this is the process MASN/Orioles agreed to in the first place. They are the ones who agreed to have disputes decided by an MLB-appointed panel. Still, if the documents the Court has ordered to be produced show MLB interfering in the Panel's process, that will be very damaging.

As long as a panel is not interfered with and does not try to change the original agreement, I would think the Orioles and MASN could live with that.

[mdbdotcom]

Well, there is still the issue that this is the process MASN/Orioles agreed to in the first place. They are the ones who agreed to have disputes decided by an MLB-appointed panel. Still, if the documents the Court has ordered to be produced show MLB interfering in the Panel's process, that will be very damaging.

If the court finds that by lending money to the Nats in anticipation of them being able to repay the loan after receiving a significant increase in their TV rights fees, could the court then rule that MLB thereby poisoned the well of arbitrators? If so, what then?

[Frobby]

As long as it stays they way it was originally intended to...I am fine with the results. The intention was for the agreement to have the adjustment made each five years based on the original formula. In perpetuity. I have never read these documents. I have been told this.

And I assume you've been told this by someone on the side of MASN and the Orioles. It would have been very easy to state in the agreement that the rights fees were to be based on some specific formula, but that is not what the contract says. It says the panel will decide the issue based on the "established methodology," and the panel said their methodology has never relied exclusively on the Bortz formula. Angelos has very good lawyers and I am quite sure that they knew how to write an agreement that would have specifically required using the Bortz formula exclusively if that is what the parties had agreed to. For me, that argument is very weak. The argument that the Panel was biased in making its determination looks much better at this stage, but that doesn't mean they will have to go back to simply applying the Bortz formula with no other considerations.

[weams]

And I assume you've been told this by someone on the side of MASN and the Orioles. It would have been very easy to state in the agreement that the rights fees were to be based on some specific formula, but that is not what the contract says. It says the panel will decide the issue based on the "established methodology," and the panel said their methodology has never relied exclusively on the Bortz formula. Angelos has very good lawyers and I am quite sure that they knew how to write an agreement that would have specifically required using the Bortz formula exclusively if that is what the parties had agreed to. For me, that argument is very weak. The argument that the Panel was biased in making its determination looks much better at this stage, but that doesn't mean they will have to go back to simply applying the Bortz formula with no other considerations.

I am just glad that this panel looks like it will be overturned. I hope that Manfred does not lose his new job over this. I know Angelos voted for him and has always been appointed to Selig's panels. That is how he hired Andy.

[weams]

If the court finds that by lending money to the Nats in anticipation of them being able to repay the loan after receiving a significant increase in their TV rights fees, could the court then rule that MLB thereby poisoned the well of arbitrators? If so, what then?

That may be ultimately where the MASN case is going. That can't be undone. And if it was prejudicial, Manfred could be in a very bad place.

[waroriole]

Well, there is still the issue that this is the process MASN/Orioles agreed to in the first place. They are the ones who agreed to have disputes decided by an MLB-appointed panel. Still, if the documents the Court has ordered to be produced show MLB interfering in the Panel's process, that will be very damaging.

If the arbitration process was biased, would it go to court instead of another arbitration hearing?

[weams]

If the arbitration process was biased, would it go to court instead of another arbitration hearing?

I would think that could be insisted on.

[Frobby]

If the arbitration process was biased, would it go to court instead of another arbitration hearing?

I would think that could be insisted on.

I think MASN asked that the matter be sent back to arbitration, but with a third-party panel not connected to MLB.

[olehippi]

Originally Posted by waroriole"

"If the arbitration process was biased, would it go to court instead of another arbitration hearing?"

I would think that could be insisted on.

If it does wind up in court, can a judge demand that the Orioles / Nats / MLB void the old agreement and create a new one concerning MASN, or possibly allowing the Nats to have their own sports network?