Jump to content

MASN loses in NY Court of Appeals


Frobby

Recommended Posts

I’m not at all surprised by this result.   The rights fees for 2012-16 are now settled per the decision of the RSDC, affirmed by the court.  There are collateral issues about set-offs for distribution of MASN profits, and any interest due, that now have to be resolved through a AAA arbitration if the parties don’t agree.   These are simple issues that normal parties would resolve quickly without the need for further arbitration, but I won’t be shocked if MASN and the Orioles drag this out.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MCO'sFan said:

Thanks for staying on top of this Frobby. I have a strange question. Do you know under the terms of the MASN deal who actually owns the TV rights to the Nats. For instance, could MASN sell or outsource the broadcast rights to another RSN? 

I have a copy of the MASN contract and can check that.  Don’t have time right now, but I will get back to you on that.  

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so does this now mean the rights fees are a settled issue? If so, what reason would the Orioles have to further delay payment, unless seeking appeal in a higher court? Also, I'm slightly confused about the NY court system, the NY court of appeals is the highest court in the state so no further appeals in NY?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Frobby said:

I’m not at all surprised by this result.   The rights fees for 2012-16 are now settled per the decision of the RSDC, affirmed by the court.  There are collateral issues about set-offs for distribution of MASN profits, and any interest due, that now have to be resolved through a AAA arbitration if the parties don’t agree.   These are simple issues that normal parties would resolve quickly without the need for further arbitration, but I won’t be shocked if MASN and the Orioles drag this out.  

So the Washington Post who said a ruling was coming around this week was sort of right. So now the Orioles can move since Baltimore City filed a brief to the court saying if you rule against the Orioles, they would not be sustainable in Baltimore. 😀

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Going Underground said:

So the Washington Post who said a ruling was coming around this week was sort of right.

I believe they said last week that a ruling could come as early as the end of last week.   Close enough!  I wonder how they knew that.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Going Underground said:

From the Sun:

The Orioles could, in theory, appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, but it’s unlikely the court would accept the case. The decision Tuesday could pave the way for the Nationals to receive roughly $100 million that the Mid-Atlantic Sports Network placed in escrow in 2019.

I really hope this is the beginning of the end of this saga. I can't help but feel that there was bad faith acting on all sides of this thing and it just needs to end. And I really don't care at what expense to the Orioles and MASN at this point. Thanks for the reply

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Going Underground said:

The Orioles could, in theory, appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, but it’s unlikely the court would accept the case. The decision Tuesday could pave the way for the Nationals to receive roughly $100 million that the Mid-Atlantic Sports Network placed in escrow in 2019.

Start sending box seats to the justices, baby!  Give 'em Rutschman jerseys!  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Banner:

 

MASN and the Orioles have argued in court documents that the award could threaten the sustainability of the network as well as the competitiveness, economic viability and ability of the team to remain in Baltimore.

 

Nashville, Nashville here we come.Right back where my wife's music career started from.

Seriously, I won der if the Orioles would give more consideration to the Ted Leonsis offer to buy MASN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Posts

    • I’d go even farther. I’m not trading any of top 4 prospects including Kjerstad. I would not trade Cowser as well. We still have a large amount of depth in the system. A trade example would be Stowers, Norby, Liranzo, Forret, Elvin Garcia. That is plenty to get a number 2/3 starter. 
    • Ugh I hope not. Please move on from players that were brought in originally to tank     unless you do this to replace Mcdermott at AAA
    • Here’s another list from “the other guys”. It doesn’t appear Holliday is eligible here, just an FYI: Os have 4 on this list including Estrada and Etzel.
    • I don’t.  He passed rookie eligibility two years ago.   
    • I think Fangraphs decides who’s eligible as of the start of the season.  Unlike other publications that release all their team lists at the same time, Fangraphs slow rolls theirs over a 6 month period or so.   Therefore, to put all the teams on the same footing, they base eligibility as of the start of the season.   
    • Clearly he has a roster spot for a playoff series with the Yankees….
    • My stance would be pretty simple. Im not trading any of the top 3 prospects and im not trading any of the young talent that is controlled long term that is currently on the ML roster. That means besides the very obvious guys that players like Cowser and Kjerstad are also off the board. Now, if a player like Skubal becomes available, that could cause me to change my mind but as I look around at the reported available players, I don’t see anyone worth a top 20 prospect or young contributing ML talent. Guys like Norby and Stowers fall into that latter category but they aren’t here right now and they are just redundant on our roster. So I’m telling teams if you want to deal with us, guys like Norby, Stowers and Beavers are who will lead deals and that several vets, led by Mountcastle, are also on the board in any potential contender/contender(fringe contender) type deal. I think whether it’s Fedde or relievers like Estevez or Nardi or Garcia or even Scott, I think we have enough to get deals done without trading any of the guys we would rather not lose. This is all to say that I just don’t see that proven elite high end talent available this deadline to justify trading any of those top guys.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...