Orioles wins the TV rights court case battle against the Nats and MLB

[TonySoprano]

Not Over.

Not.

More arbitration.

Justice Lawrence K. Marks vacated the decision and strongly suggested that the parties settle the matter through a "neutral dispute resolution process."

The judge had several options.

He could have affirmed the June 2014 decision of the three arbitrators — the owners of the New York Mets, Pittsburgh Pirates and Tampa Bay Rays. He could have dismissed the panel's decision and sent it back to Major League Baseball with instructions on starting over with a new decision. Or he could have sent the case to a third party, which is what he suggested. He did not specify which arbitration group might hear the case.

source = Baltimore Sun

[lovetoaster]

The only reason the O's won this is because MLB and the Nats had a conflict of interest in both using the same firm (Proskauer). The Nats used them as counsel in this RSDC decision, and MLB has used them for lots of other things.

It felt like MLB had a lot of conflicts of interest in this case.

[Redskins Rick]

Not over, but, it delays the decision and the fans will win, at least, by getting another year of baseball on MASN-1 and MASN-2 with their cable providers.

[mdbdotcom]

Looks like the O's will have 2 more years of not knowing how much they can safely spend on payroll. That being the case, I see no reason for payroll to decline this season.

[DrungoHazewood]

Even if this was the final decision, wouldn't it just mean that both the Nats and O's each get $40M a year in fees instead of $60M? I'm sure I'm missing something, but how does that help us?

[mdbdotcom]

Even if this was the final decision, wouldn't it just mean that both the Nats and O's each get $40M a year in fees instead of $60M? I'm sure I'm missing something, but how does that help us?

At $60 million a year for both teams, MASN might not survive. That would be great for the Gnats, but not so good for the O's.

[spiritof66]

Even if this was the final decision, wouldn't it just mean that both the Nats and O's each get $40M a year in fees instead of $60M? I'm sure I'm missing something, but how does that help us?

That would help the Orioles a lot. Each dollar that MASN retains, rather than distributing it 50-50 in rights fees to the teams, benefits the Orioles more than it does the Nats because of their unequal ownership of MASN. Way back when, I estimated that the difference between the rights fees determined at the arbitration and the rights fees argued by the Orioles amounted to a swing of about $16 million each year -- that is, the Orioles would receive about $16 more and the Nats about $16 million less.

[weams]

https://twitter.com/JamesWagnerWP/status/661969540587327490

Congratulations to all. I am hoping the escrow is now released.

[weams]

That would help the Orioles a lot. Each dollar that MASN retains, rather than distributing it 50-50 in rights fees to the teams, benefits the Orioles more than it does the Nats because of their unequal ownership of MASN. Way back when, I estimated that the difference between the rights fees determined at the arbitration and the rights fees argued by the Orioles amounted to a swing of about $16 million each year -- that is, the Orioles would receive about $16 more and the Nats about $16 million less.

It is also a five year rulng if it stands. So x2x5

[Larry18]

The case didn't resolve the dispute, it merely backed the Orioles/MASN claim that the award was biased. They are right back to square one which why the judge suggested an independent arbitrator.

[Number5]

The only reason the O's won this is because MLB and the Nats had a conflict of interest in both using the same firm (Proskauer). The Nats used them as counsel in this RSDC decision, and MLB has used them for lots of other things.

The Orioles objected, repeatedly, from the beginning. If MLB had done anything reasonable at all with regards to this, the O's lose the appeal.

The rest of it, the advance loan, the methods used to determine the Nats share, none of that stuff was enough to vacate the arbitrations hearing.

I don't know that you can conclude this. I believe the ruling is saying that, in view of the clear conflict of interest, there is no basis on which to rule on these other issues. The previous decision was made under unfair circumstances, so the merits of the case are irrelevant.

[weams]

Not Over.

Not.

More arbitration.

source = Baltimore Sun

The loss is over. The situation continues.

[SteveA]

The O's are now 82-81 in 2015.

[weams]

The O's are now 82-81 in 2015.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/baltimore-orioles-triumph-mlb-civil-837077

The Kansas City Royals aren't the only professional baseball team that emerged victorious this week. Thanks to a big legally and financially consequential ruling on Wednesday, the Baltimore Orioles and its Mid-Atlantic Sports Network (MASN) have done the rare feat of overturning an arbitration award.

As The Hollywood Reporter first revealed, Major League Baseball and two of its most prominent owners — Peter Angelos of the Baltimore Orioles and Ted Lerner of the Washington Nationals — have been engaged in a vicious legal fight that spilled into open court.

The dispute dates back to when the Nationals were relocated from Montreal in 2005 and Angelos sought to protect his home TV market. Back then, the parties worked out a deal whereby the Orioles would hold a majority partnership profit interest in MASN and get to telecast Nationals games at a substantial discount from 2005 to 2011. After that, MASN would be obligated to pay the Nationals "fair market value."

Thereafter, the parties went to arbitration to figure out that "fair market value." The Nationals thought they should be paid about $109 million starting in 2012 while the Orioles believed the better amount to be $34 million. On June 30, 2014, an MLB committee comprising the chief operating officer of the New York Mets, the president of the Pittsburgh Pirates and the owner of the Tampa Bay Rays decided that $53 million was the right sum for 2012, with bumps that would take fees to $66 million in 2016.

With the MLB commissioner threatening the teams for going public, and with the Baltimore Orioles estimating the lost asset value of its network to be $800 million, an attempt was made to vacate the arbitration award. Angelos' team complained of the league's secret $25 million payment to the Nationals and accused MLB of "corruption" and "fraud" in the arbitration process.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/major-league-baseball-embroiled-explosive-721927?utm_source=twitter

[mcgraw238]

The case didn't resolve the dispute, it merely backed the Orioles/MASN claim that the award was biased. They are right back to square one which why the judge suggested an independent arbitrator.

Bingo. The Judge vacated the RSDC Award on the narrow grounds that there was "evident impartiality" due to the concurrent representation of the Nationals, MLB, and the individual arbitrators by the law firm Proskaueh Rose LLP. The Court rejected the other arguments (e.g., the loan to Nats, etc.) put forth by MASN/O's. My guess is things go back to the RSDC with the Nats having new counsel...I suspect the O's get the short end of the stick yet again.