The 18th ranked market in MLB just signed an RSN deal that will pay them 50m-82m a season. Tell me again how MASN doesn't make any money LOL

[weams]

6 minutes ago, Nite said:

By total numbers the Rays can be seen by basically 10 million people, in 1 state, or about 3 millionish homes without a special MLB package.

 

The Orioles/Nats can be seen by 30 million people, or about 10 millionish homes over 5 full states, and the middle part of another without special MLB packages. So either MASN really really isn't doing a great job at running its self, or there are MAJOR profits being kept by the owner...

I think MASN could be run much better and I think the litigation has definitely hurt the whole picture. But not litigating would essential kill the advantage that was sought as compensating for moving the Expos in. 

[weams]

10 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

If will lead to the RSN losing money and killing the deal.

So it is a total speculation play? Win or go bankrupt? Use the cash flow in the meantime?

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, weams said:

So it is a total speculation play? Win or go bankrupt? Use the cash flow in the meantime?

I'm sure they have some sort of an exit strategy in place.

[Going Underground]

3 minutes ago, weams said:

So it is a total speculation play? Win or go bankrupt? Use the cash flow in the meantime?

Didn't the Orioles get helped out by the league around 2000 or so because of some financial issues? i think Angelos with the MASN money is actually in better shape at this time.

[weams]

Just now, Going Underground said:

Didn't the Orioles get helped out by the league around 2000 or so because of some financial issues? i think Angelos with the MASN money is actually in better shape at this time.

I do not know. Possible. 

[weams]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm sure they have some sort of an exit strategy in place.

Merger and Aquisition?  Sub-prime loan bundling? Sell before the bubble bursts?

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Going Underground said:

Didn't the Orioles get helped out by the league around 2000 or so because of some financial issues? i think Angelos with the MASN money is actually in better shape at this time.

 

Just now, weams said:

I do not know. Possible. 

Didn't Angelos make a habit of loaning the Orioles money?  Struck me as accounting chicanery.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, weams said:

Merger and Aquisition?  Sub-prime loan bundling? Sell before the bubble bursts?

If you couldn't tell from the gif earlier, I don't think the current model is sustainable in the face of technological advances.

[Going Underground]

6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

If you couldn't tell from the gif earlier, I don't think the current model is sustainable in the face of technological advances.

Agreed. The whole cable package where you pay $5.00 in so in the Baltimore market for MASN,even if you are not a baseball fan will change. People will get packages or internet packages that suit their niche watching.

[Nite]

7 minutes ago, weams said:

I think MASN could be run much better and I think the litigation has definitely hurt the whole picture. But not litigating would essential kill the advantage that was sought as compensating for moving the Expos in. 

Well another reason the O's HAVE to fight tooth and nail to keep this deal together is if the Nats are able to get away from MASN, then they could essentially have MLB lock themselves into "their" rights area and kick the O's out. That would mean the O's would no longer be seen in NC, VA, DC, and possibly WV/Western MD. That's a 20 million person or 6.5 million homes lost instantly. Literally 2/3rds of their viewership area is in "Nationals" territory. If they lost the WV/Western MD that's another 2 million, or half million homes... So basically 3/4ths of their footprint is now gone.

Also don't think for a second that MLB wouldn't lock the O's viewership out of the Nats area either. They've already shown which side of the fence they are in the Washington/Baltimore fight. Simply put, for the O's to keep making the money off MASN they currently are, they HAVE to keep the Nats on MASN as well. Otherwise I think MASN dies and the O's are stuck trying to get a TV deal that reaches 8 million people, or 2.5 million homes which is LESS than the Rays... HUGE problem for the Orioles.

[foxfield]

45 minutes ago, weams said:

I don't know what his motivation is. I do know he knows more about these issues than me.

So, unless you are accusing me of having an imaginary friend to knock down your LOL thread, I'll just say my guess is MASN makes little money and would be better off sold. 

 

39 minutes ago, weams said:

If I remember correctly, it was supposed to have value by control of rights fees for the market to compensate for the huge loss that introducing a competitive product in the affluent portion of the area. I do imagine that owning it offsets the "loss" in team value that would have occurred under stagnant market conditions.

I believe that RSN cable rights model is dead/dying.

I believe MASN is not run well regarding programming other than game and game coverage. 

I believe that the profit stream that we suppose should be funneled back into player acquisition is not being used to vastly increase the net worth of the Angelos family, but may well be used to fund charity and support other business/leisure ventures.

 

Weams,

Every single word you write above could very well be true.  It would still be incorrect to say the Orioles are losing money.  Running MASN poorly or diverting revenue to "other" interests my well make for woe is me accounting.  It does not however, make for proper evaluation as an entity.  

We could debate this forever, but the counter to your argument will be proven when the Orioles change hands at a price well in excess of 1 Billion Dollars.

 

[weams]

4 minutes ago, foxfield said:

 

We could debate this forever, but the counter to your argument will be proven when the Orioles change hands at a price well in excess of 1 Billion Dollars.

 

 

I agree that will be the price when it occurs. Well in excess I assume 

[foxfield]

3 minutes ago, weams said:

I agree that will be the price when it occurs. Well in excess I assume 

Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

 

It is my opinion that the single best run aspect of the Orioles, is its carefully crafted woe is me, mid market escapade.  

[Ohfan67]

15 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

If you couldn't tell from the gif earlier, I don't think the current model is sustainable in the face of technological advances.

I just renewed my mlb package. I paid more than the five or whatever dollars per month MASN charges cable broadcasters. The local sports networks get some of that money. They produce the broadcasts. And of course MLB and the teams get a cut. Baseball continues to rake in record dollars. You guys are predicting doom and gloom but there’s a real possibility that “new technology “ will actually produce more money for baseball than the old model. The owners are giving players a smaller proportion of revenue than they have in years. They have money.  I’ll believe the financial future of baseball is iffy when teams sell for bargain prices. 

[Frobby]

54 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

If the RSN model is dying then how do you explain the Rays latest contract? 

Personally, I don’t find the Rays’ deal surprising, or that huge.   As outlined in my earlier post, the MASN arbitration award was going to pay the Nats and O’s $53 mm each in 2012, escalating to $66 mm by 2016.     So, why should we be surprised that the Rays are getting $50 mm in 2019, escalating to $82 mm by 2033?

Just for comparison, the DBacks signed a 15-year deal in 2015 for about $100 mm/yr.    The Phillies have a 25-year deal at about that level, plus a 25% equity stake in the RSN.

The real question isn’t whether MASN makes money.    It’s whether MASN makes the Orioles uniquely profitable, such that we should expect them to carry a payroll well above the league average year after year.    I think the evidence is that it doesn’t.    Our TV-related revenues are solid, but not at the extreme top end, even if one includes the equity stake in MASN.