Orioles Halt National's Exhibition Games At Naval Academy

[Tx Oriole]

On 11/1/2017 at 8:08 AM, webbrick2010 said:

Makes me care less as the O's head to another decade plus of irrelevance.

Dream that some day the O's are sold by the Angelos clan, and any other ownership group would be an improvement, until that day comes the Orioles will be an embarrassment.

Not the coaches and players. But Angelos is the embarrassment. 

[Redskins Rick]

I understand the Angelos hate in this town.

But, make no mistake about it.

Angelos passes on from this life, there will be another Angelos at the helm of the team.

MLB isnt going to do anything to anybody, they are a joke of an organization with no backbone.

BTW, you can not care Angelos cheap, when it comes to the team, the Sarasota facility is state of the art and not cheap. Angelos does not make the players provide their own shampoo like Bidwell of the Cardinals did.

Last I heard, the team travel well and stayed well, again, not the mark of a cheepster.

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

I understand the Angelos hate in this town.

But, make no mistake about it.

Angelos passes on from this life, there will be another Angelos at the helm of the team.

MLB isnt going to do anything to anybody, they are a joke of an organization with no backbone.

BTW, you can not care Angelos cheap, when it comes to the team, the Sarasota facility is state of the art and not cheap. Angelos does not make the players provide their own shampoo like Bidwell of the Cardinals did.

Last I heard, the team travel well and stayed well, again, not the mark of a cheepster.

True, but they did roam Florida like a bunch of itinerants for a good decade before he squeezed the best deal possible out of Sarasota.

Remember the weight room tent in the parking lot?

[Redskins Rick]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

True, but they did roam Florida like a bunch of itinerants for a good decade before he squeezed the best deal possible out of Sarasota.

Remember the weight room tent in the parking lot?

I get it, trust me, but, what he used to be and what is currently being done, is not the same.

Thankfully, they have left those ways behind, and I pray they dont return to them.

[spiritof66]

3 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

 .  .  .

Angelos passes on from this life, there will be another Angelos at the helm of the team.

MLB isnt going to do anything to anybody, they are a joke of an organization with no backbone.

.  .  .

I assume Peter Angelos intends to pass the ownership of the team on to his sons.

A few facts (or what I think are facts). MLB  (the Commissioner and the other owners) would like the Orioles to be owned by someone else. The ability of Angelos's sons to have enough resources after  estate taxes are paid on  Angelos's death (or the death of his wife, if he leaves the team to her) will depend on what the estate tax is at the time of his  or her death; that in turn may depend on when that death occurs. It's uncertain whether MLB's owners would approve the transfer of the team to Angelos's sons, especially if estate taxes drain the financial resources available to them.

The original decision in the MASN arbitration, if upheld, would significantly depress the value of the Orioles , relative to that value under the rights fees  in the original MASN agreement. The rights fees determined in that arbitration were unfair to MASN and the Orioles, and the Commissioner almost certainly knows that. It's uncertain how and when the rights fees will be decided, and what that decision ultimately will be. 

It ought to be possible -- and I'm not saying that it is possible, only that it ought to be -- for there to be a settlement among MASN, the Orioles, the Nats and MLB  in which (a) Peter Angelos agrees that the team will be sold at the later of X years and a year after his death, and (b) the rights fees are compromised at an amount above what the Orioles asserted but far below what the arbitrators decided. MLB might have to throw some dollars to the Nats. I think it would be worth it to them, especially if X is a small number like two or three. 

[Redskins Rick]

4 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

I assume Peter Angelos intends to pass the ownership of the team on to his sons.

A few facts (or what I think are facts). MLB  (the Commissioner and the other owners) would like the Orioles to be owned by someone else. The ability of Angelos's sons to have enough resources after  estate taxes are paid on  Angelos's death (or the death of his wife, if he leaves the team to her) will depend on what the estate tax is at the time of his  or her death; that in turn may depend on when that death occurs. It's uncertain whether MLB's owners would approve the transfer of the team to Angelos's sons, especially if estate taxes drain the financial resources available to them.

The original decision in the MASN arbitration, if upheld, would significantly depress the value of the Orioles , relative to that value under the rights fees  in the original MASN agreement. The rights fees determined in that arbitration were unfair to MASN and the Orioles, and the Commissioner almost certainly knows that. It's uncertain how and when the rights fees will be decided, and what that decision ultimately will be. 

It ought to be possible -- and I'm not saying that it is possible, only that it ought to be -- for there to be a settlement among MASN, the Orioles, the Nats and MLB  in which (a) Peter Angelos agrees that the team will be sold at the later of X years and a year after his death, and (b) the rights fees are compromised at an amount above what the Orioles asserted but far below what the arbitrators decided. MLB might have to throw some dollars to the Nats. I think it would be worth it to them, especially if X is a small number like two or three. 

Angelos is not going to agree to sell the team, it has long been his goal to pass the team to his boys.

I am sure, the lawyer side of him as seen things through and has set it up to make it happen.

MLB doesn't have the authority to keep the team out of the family's hand, did MLB approve the Yankees to be pass down to the boys?

[spiritof66]

1 hour ago, Redskins Rick said:

Angelos is not going to agree to sell the team, it has long been his goal to pass the team to his boys.

I am sure, the lawyer side of him as seen things through and has set it up to make it happen.

MLB doesn't have the authority to keep the team out of the family's hand, did MLB approve the Yankees to be pass down to the boys?

MLB does have that authority. Under section V(2)(b)(2) of the MLB Constitution, the transfer of ownership on the death of an owner to a spouse or lineal descendant requires a majority vote of MLB owners. 

The Steinbrenner transfer was approved, but the situation was different. The Steinbrenners had few if any enemies among the owners or MLB's executives, and the kids were flush with cash since there was no federal estate tax when George died (and no state tax since he was a resident of Florida, which has no inheritance tax). 

If Angelos has most of his marbles, he understands that he can';t be sure that his sons' ownership of the team would be approved -- or that they would have the resources to  operate the team without bringing in additional investors who would dilute their ownership. 

We've been through this before at some length, but if Peter Angelos owns a majority interest in the Orioles (and I think the best information I could find was that he owns about 80 percent), upon his death there is no way for his estate to bequeath that interest to his wife and/or sons and avoid paying the federal estate tax and Maryland inheritance tax on the value of that interest (net of debt). Angelos's estate can fight about the value of his interest in the Orioles, but can't avoid paying taxes on that value, whatever they may be when he dies --  except by making transfers of his interest before death (which he apparently hasn't done). 

[Ridgway22]

What the.......

Maybe there is more to the story, but wow does this stink from far away.....

[Redskins Rick]

13 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

MLB does have that authority. Under section V(2)(b)(2) of the MLB Constitution, the transfer of ownership on the death of an owner to a spouse or lineal descendant requires a majority vote of MLB owners. 

The Steinbrenner transfer was approved, but the situation was different. The Steinbrenners had few if any enemies among the owners or MLB's executives, and the kids were flush with cash since there was no federal estate tax when George died (and no state tax since he was a resident of Florida, which has no inheritance tax). 

If Angelos has most of his marbles, he understands that he can';t be sure that his sons' ownership of the team would be approved -- or that they would have the resources to  operate the team without bringing in additional investors who would dilute their ownership. 

We've been through this before at some length, but if Peter Angelos owns a majority interest in the Orioles (and I think the best information I could find was that he owns about 80 percent), upon his death there is no way for his estate to bequeath that interest to his wife and/or sons and avoid paying the federal estate tax and Maryland inheritance tax on the value of that interest (net of debt). Angelos's estate can fight about the value of his interest in the Orioles, but can't avoid paying taxes on that value, whatever they may be when he dies --  except by making transfers of his interest before death (which he apparently hasn't done). 

Very rarely over the recent years has MLB ever taken an initiative to do anything for the good of the game, outside of Pete Rose. This is the NFL.

Authority or not, mark my words, they will rubber stamp the transfer to the sons.

I believe the number I have seen reported was 60% interest in the team as majority owner.

[Beetlejuice]

1 hour ago, Redskins Rick said:

Very rarely over the recent years has MLB ever taken an initiative to do anything for the good of the game, outside of Pete Rose. This is the NFL.

Authority or not, mark my words, they will rubber stamp the transfer to the sons.

I believe the number I have seen reported was 60% interest in the team as majority owner.

I seriously doubt they will rubber stamp anything. Angelos has proven himself to be a poor business partner.  The rest of the owners aren’t ever going to forget who laid open the books for all to see.  That decision is going to cause irreparable harm for owners seeking a stadium paid for by Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Taxpayer.  This is even assuming that they can afford to pay the estate taxes, which seems unlikely.

[spiritof66]

1 hour ago, Redskins Rick said:

Very rarely over the recent years has MLB ever taken an initiative to do anything for the good of the game, outside of Pete Rose. This is the NFL.

Authority or not, mark my words, they will rubber stamp the transfer to the sons.

I believe the number I have seen reported was 60% interest in the team as majority owner.

I'm pretty sure Angelos owns much more than 60 percent, maybe from acquiring shares previously owned by Clancy or others. 

[Beetlejuice]

3 hours ago, spiritof66 said:

The original decision in the MASN arbitration, if upheld, would significantly depress the value of the Orioles , relative to that value under the rights fees  in the original MASN agreement. The rights fees determined in that arbitration were unfair to MASN and the Orioles, and the Commissioner almost certainly knows that. It's uncertain how and when the rights fees will be decided, and what that decision ultimately will be. 

How is paying fair market value unfair to MASN?  It was Angelos who insisted that the FMV fees be the same for both teams.  Picking an award fee number so that MASN can remain profitable probably doesn’t (nor shouldn’t) concern MLB in the slightest.  They want each team to get as much as possible.  They also want their cut coming back to MLB coffers.  The primary function of the RSDC is to make sure teams aren’t cutting the league out of what is rightfully theirs.  In the case of MASN, the RSDC is also there to protect the interests of the teams, not Angelos.  Whether it’s the RSDC or another arbitral body setting the fees isn’t probably going to make a whit of difference. 

[Beetlejuice]

I also can’t see Ripken willing to shell out his own money just to become a team mouthpiece. All of the blame with none of the control.  Why dump all of that cash out when he couldn simply take a perfunctory title instead?  At least he has the advantage of watching how this Jeter farce plays out.

[Can_of_corn]

25 minutes ago, Beetlejuice said:

I also can’t see Ripken willing to shell out his own money just to become a team mouthpiece. All of the blame with none of the control.  Why dump all of that cash out when he couldn simply take a perfunctory title instead?  At least he has the advantage of watching how this Jeter farce plays out.

This Jeter farce is going to end up with him being repaid his investment and him keeping his ownership stake.

[spiritof66]

12 minutes ago, Beetlejuice said:

How is paying fair market value unfair to MASN?  It was Angelos who insisted that the FMV fees be the same for both teams.  Picking an award fee number so that MASN can remain profitable probably doesn’t (nor shouldn’t) concern MLB in the slightest.  They want each team to get as much as possible.  They also want their cut coming back to MLB coffers.  The primary function of the RSDC is to make sure teams aren’t cutting the league out of what is rightfully theirs.  In the case of MASN, the RSDC is also there to protect the interests of the teams, not Angelos.  Whether it’s the RSDC or another arbitral body setting the fees isn’t probably going to make a whit of difference. 

The RSDC is supposed to resolve the inherent conflict between a team with an affiliated cable provider and the rest of MLB by deciding how much of the value of its cable rights a team can divert to an affiliated cable provider, thereby protecting them from revenue sharing. While the MASN agreement is not clearly written, I have no doubt that the only reasonable reading of it is that the parties intended to have the rights fees paid by  MASN treated like the rights fees paid by other team-affiliated cable providers. There are some problems with that interpretation, but no other interpretation makes any sense. 

At the time of the rights fees renewal (and at the time of the arbitration decision) treating MASN like other affiliated cable providers meant allowing MASN to pay rights fees under the Bortz formula -- it did not mean determining the rights fees that would be paid to a non-affiliated  cable provider. The RSDC just have set the rights fees in a way that permitted MASN (to the benefit of the Orioles, based on their majority ownership of MASN) to keep substantial profits,  just as it has, apparently, allowed every other affiliated cable provider to do.