MASN dispute update

[weams]

 

[eddie83]

 

[weams]

 

[TINSTAAPP]

Between this ruling and the inheritance and estate taxes that will be owed when PA dies, the Angelos family will have to sell the team, right?

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

11 minutes ago, TINSTAAPP said:

Between this ruling and the inheritance and estate taxes that will be owed when PA dies, the Angelos family will have to sell the team, right?

If this ruling is final that might come as soon as this offseason. 

[Frobby]

I’m not at all surprised by this result, and would have been surprised if it came out otherwise. I’ll have to read the ruling tomorrow because I don’t understand the part about a judicial hearing officer determining “additional local rights fees.”    They must mean interest on the award or something like that.    

Don’t forget there are two levels of appeal after this.    So it’s not over. The Appellate Division was divided the last time on the question of whether the arbitration had to be taken away from the RSDC due to appearance of bias, and the Court of Appeal (the highest court in NY) did not hear the further appeal on that issue because it didn’t consider the case ripe for appeal to that court until the second arbitration and further appeals played out.    I do not think (and have never thought) that MASN and the O’s will prevail in overturning the arbitration.    But always remember, the O’s didn’t “lose” the arbitration.    The panel gave a Solomonic award that was about $45-50 mm/year less than what the Nats argued they were due.  

[Obando]

20 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I’m not at all surprised by this result, and would have been surprised if it came out otherwise. I’ll have to read the ruling tomorrow because I don’t understand the part about a judicial hearing officer determining “additional local rights fees.”    They must mean interest on the award or something like that.    

Don’t forget there are two levels of appeal after this.    So it’s not over. The Appellate Division was divided the last time on the question of whether the arbitration had to be taken away from the RSDC due to appearance of bias, and the Court of Appeal (the highest court in NY) did not hear the further appeal on that issue because it didn’t consider the case ripe for appeal to that court until the second arbitration and further appeals played out.    I do not think (and have never thought) that MASN and the O’s will prevail in overturning the arbitration.    But always remember, the O’s didn’t “lose” the arbitration.    The panel gave a Solomonic award that was about $45-50 mm/year less than what the Nats argued they were due.  

Thanks for the detailed analysis!  This is very helpful.  Is it a forgone conclusion that the O’s & MASN will continue to appeal until they either get the ruling overturned or run out of appeal opportunities?  Let’s say, hypothetically, that the decision is final and the O’s accept the ruling.  How does this impact their future moving forward, in terms of a potential sale of the team?  Haven’t the O’s been holding this money in escrow for themselves and the Nationals for 2012-2016 rights fees while the dispute plays out, and thus, the club would get an even larger fee than the Nats for that time period?

[Il BuonO]

48 minutes ago, Frobby said:

But always remember, the O’s didn’t “lose” the arbitration.    The panel gave a Solomonic award that was about $45-50 mm/year less than what the Nats argued they were due.  

Is the NBC piece wrong? Because the article states the Nats were asking for $475 mil. I don’t know, I’m just asking.

[hoosiers]

It all feels to unfair - MLB bullies its way to a win with the Nats over the Os, are show to be fundamentally unfair, though the entire unfair process provided a roadmap to victory for subsequent re-dos. 

Still, the Os have themselves to blame - not specifically calling out the Bortz formula in the contract, not calling out a minimum profit margin for MASN in the contract, not presenting a reasonable argument for the value of the rights fees in the original hearing - presenting instead a bs low number that the Nats deserved (just like the Nats asked for a bs number.  If the Os had offered something credible, but low in that hearing, they might have won.  And that the original MASN contract called for equal rights fees for the Os and Nats is a big part of the issues faced today.  Remember, in all of this "fairness" for the Os that PA/MASN sought, MASN owners were guaranteed in the ballpark of $150M-$200M in profits in the early years of MASN - and still the Os/MASN pressed hard for equal footing - despite the massive difference in market capacity between the two franchises.  It all seems so strange the mistakes in the MASN contract given PA's acumen as an attorney.

[rudyrooster]

Further fuel to the fire for the Orioles (perhaps behind the public eye) being for sale?  I personally don't buy into the rumors of O's moving to Nashville or any other market.  I can see where the Angelos family might want to just get out of this mess while they can still break even or perhaps make a little money.  JMHO.

[MDtransplant757]

46 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I’m not at all surprised by this result, and would have been surprised if it came out otherwise. I’ll have to read the ruling tomorrow because I don’t understand the part about a judicial hearing officer determining “additional local rights fees.”    They must mean interest on the award or something like that.    

Don’t forget there are two levels of appeal after this.    So it’s not over. The Appellate Division was divided the last time on the question of whether the arbitration had to be taken away from the RSDC due to appearance of bias, and the Court of Appeal (the highest court in NY) did not hear the further appeal on that issue because it didn’t consider the case ripe for appeal to that court until the second arbitration and further appeals played out.    I do not think (and have never thought) that MASN and the O’s will prevail in overturning the arbitration.    But always remember, the O’s didn’t “lose” the arbitration.    The panel gave a Solomonic award that was about $45-50 mm/year less than what the Nats argued they were due.  

So does this mean it's over for good, Or does this whole legal war resume once the 2017-2021 get disputed over? Does this also set a precident that the Nats are to be paid X amount with every time both teams are competitive? Would the Nats get more money if the Orioles suck like they currently do? 

[OFFNY]

2 hours ago, weams said:

 

Orioles lose appeal.

 

o

 

Shades of September of 1977, when American League President Lee MacPhail ruled against Earl Weaver and company when they appealed the infamous tarpaulin forfeit game.

This article was written the day after the game, which was immediately ruled a forfeit. About a week later, I remember reading the The Reporter Dispatch that MacPhail had denied the Orioles' appeal of the forfeit.

 

 

Orioles Lose by a Forfeit in Bull‐Pen Mound Dispute

(United Press International)

https://www.nytimes.com/1977/09/16/archives/orioles-lose-by-a-forfeit-in-bullpen-mound-dispute-orioles-forfeit.html

 

o

[TonySoprano]

2 hours ago, weams said:

 

That's not an additional $296.8M

Quote

MASN paid the Nationals for 2012-16 what the Orioles proposed: $197.5 million. 

That leaves $99.3M still to be paid for 2012-16.   One wonders how much was paid out in legal fees on each side to get to this point.   

What is not known is how much has been paid and will be owed for 2017-21.   2021. hmmm that's also the year the OPACY lease expires.

[Satyr3206]

1 hour ago, hoosiers said:

It all feels to unfair - MLB bullies its way to a win with the Nats over the Os, are show to be fundamentally unfair, though the entire unfair process provided a roadmap to victory for subsequent re-dos. 

Still, the Os have themselves to blame - not specifically calling out the Bortz formula in the contract, not calling out a minimum profit margin for MASN in the contract, not presenting a reasonable argument for the value of the rights fees in the original hearing - presenting instead a bs low number that the Nats deserved (just like the Nats asked for a bs number.  If the Os had offered something credible, but low in that hearing, they might have won.  And that the original MASN contract called for equal rights fees for the Os and Nats is a big part of the issues faced today.  Remember, in all of this "fairness" for the Os that PA/MASN sought, MASN owners were guaranteed in the ballpark of $150M-$200M in profits in the early years of MASN - and still the Os/MASN pressed hard for equal footing - despite the massive difference in market capacity between the two franchises.  It all seems so strange the mistakes in the MASN contract given PA's acumen as an attorney.

This is a personal opinion so take it as such. PA was very good in going after people. Not as good at protecting his interests. Interesting to see how the transfer of Ownership was done, if any, and how that relates to further proceedings.

[weams]

On another note, the Orioles have retained the right to appeal this ruling.