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

[Frobby]

The purpose of the NATIONALS argument is to destroy the RSN and I think that is VERY clear.

Don't know if that was the purpose, as their legal argument wasn't crazy and they certainly wanted rights fees as high as possible. But the effect of them winning the argument would have been to destroy the RSN, whether that was the purpose ir not.

[weams]

Don't know if that was the purpose, as their legal argument wasn't crazy and they certainly wanted rights fees as high as possible. But the effect of them winning the argument would have been to destroy the RSN, whether that was the purpose ir not.

They bought the franchise with a cloud on the title. And are now looking to clear that cloud.

[Frobby]

They bought the franchise with a cloud on the title. And are now looking to clear that cloud.

They've already lost the argument. Even if MASN loses the court case, it will survive and make a profit (and so will the Orioles) and the Nats' rights fees will be about half what they asked for. Angelos is playing the game on his terms now.

[weams]

They've already lost the argument. Even if MASN loses the court case, it will survive and make a profit (and so will the Orioles) and the Nats' rights fees will be about half what they asked for. Angelos is playing the game on his terms now.

Which is very good to know.

[Redskins Rick]

They've already lost the argument. Even if MASN loses the court case, it will survive and make a profit (and so will the Orioles) and the Nats' rights fees will be about half what they asked for. Angelos is playing the game on his terms now.

Sounds like negotiation 101.

You ask for higher amount, and they ask for a lower amount, and you hope for something in the middle.

[TonySoprano]

Despite the fact that MLB ranks the Orioles market as the 11th smallest and considers their revenue to be in the bottom ten, the Orioles have had a payroll in the top half of baseball for the past few years. How will a decision in this case impact the Orioles payroll?

http://camdendepot.blogspot.com/2015/05/20-questions-about-masn-dispute.html

I was going to post the article, but I'm glad you did; it's a good summary. I do want to comment on the one part you referenced.

Orioles payroll ranking

2010 -17th

2011 - 18th

2012 - 19th

2013 - 16th

2014 - 13th

2015 - 13th

The implication of the quote above is that we're seeing a notable influx of MASN money into the team and that point is debatable despite Angelos' assurance several years ago. Duquette has made the point that the team would have the ability to invest more only as attendance goes up with the team's success.

Orioles attendance per game ranking

2010 - 24

2011 - 26

2012 - 20

2013 - 18

2014 - 13

Moreover, if you go by Forbes, the team is consistently in the top 10 in terms of operating income, which is the revenue left over after expenses are paid. A leap from the "bottom ten" in revenue to the "top half" in payroll sounds significant until you consider it's only a difference of 5-6 slots on the list. Going back to payroll, if you use 2015 as an example, because the teams are relatively close together in the middle of the pack, if the Orioles payroll number is a mere $2.5M less, the rank slips 3 slots from 13th to 16th. A $6M reduction drops the Orioles 4 slots and so on. In short, you don't need a tremendous jump in payroll to get from 19th-20th to 15th. Finally, and I could be wrong, my working assumption is regardless of how the MASN dispute is decided on the 18th, the team is still likely to bid farewell to Boras's clients, Chen, Davis, and Wieters after the season.

[spiritof66]

This morning I attended the hearing in New York State Supreme Court in the lawsuit arising from the decision on rights fees by MLB's Revenue Sharing Definitions Committee. Five lawyers presented arguments at the hearing, which lasted almost four hours.

Justice Lawrence Marks will now decide the motions by MASN to vacate the RSDC's decision (that is, declare it void and unenforceable) and by the Nationals to confirm that decision (that is, declare it valid and enforceable). Justice Marks was very well versed on the issues in the case, and he seemed to have a good sense (that is, he generally agreed with me) as to which ones are important and which ones are fluff.

MASN and the Orioles face an uphill battle persuading Justice Marks to invalidate the RSDC's decision. Their main argument is that the wide-ranging representation of MLB, which represented the Nats in the RSDC proceeding, and that firm's more limited representation of the RSDC members and their teams, together with the incomplete disclosures of those representations at the time of the RSDC proceeding, so tainted the process with partiality in favor of the Nats that it should be vacated. Justice Marks seemed concerned about these facts and peppered both parties with questions about them.

There was less discussion at the hearing of the contention by MASN/the Orioles that the RSDC's decision should be vacated because it improperly failed to follow its established methodology in establishing the rights fees to be paid by MASN to the Nats. I think MASN and the Orioles have a strong case that the RSDC got it wrong, but it will be very hard to convince the courts to second-guess that ruling.

One interesting fact emerged today that I either didn't known or had forgotten. The principal reason for the lengthy delay in issuing the RSDC's decision, from around June 2012 until June 2014, was not to permit settlement discussions among MASN, the Orioles and the Nats, but to try to put together a purchase of MASN by Comcast.

I am hoping to follow up with a lengthier write-up of my views on the case and today's hearing.

[mdbdotcom]

Thank you. Looking forward to future write-ups.

[Frobby]

I've always thought that MASN had a very uphill battle in this case. However, Justice Marks certainly has given them due process and every opportunity to make their case. Did he say anything about how long he expected it would be before he ruled?

[AZRon]

Thanks a bunch -- looking forward to more from you

[scOtt]

I haven't been following these threads, this case that close. You're one of the involved lawyers?

[Frobby]

I haven't been following these threads, this case that close. You're one of the involved lawyers?

No, he's not. He attended just out of his own interest in the matter. But he is a lawyer.

[weams]

No, he's not. He attended just out of his own interest in the matter. But he is a lawyer.

I think it was great that he chose to share that with us.

[Frobby]

Here is the Sun's article about the proceedings. http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/bs-bz-masn-final-hearing-20150518-story.html

[WEAVERMAN]

Thanks for reporting. Let's hope the judge sides with MASN/Orioles and MLB and Washington are forced to live within the contract they previously agreed to in good faith.