431 replies to this topic

[weird-O]

You start your own RSN so you can collect carrying fees from the cable companies (based on the number of subscribers with MASN in their cable package) and then pay a lower rights fees to the team (i.e. yourself) to show the games.  The difference between the two numbers isn't subject to revenue sharing.

 

Without the Nats, it seems like the O's TV territory would have been the exact same, so I don't see where the extra revenues from adding the Nats would have come from.  And with the Nats, you not only have to pay rights fees to two teams, you also have to pay higher rights fees because of the Nats' lawsuit.  So not only do the fees paid to the Nats come out of your profits, the increased rights fees that you pay to yourself are now subject to revenue sharing.  Both things are bad.

One way the revenue increased was like this. When HTS/Comcast paid the O's, those channels were additional fees that consumers paid, because they wanted to watch baseball. With MASN, Anglos dictated that every subscriber would pay a MASN premium, whether they wanted to or not. Direct TV agreed, Comcast didn't. So Angelos told they they had two choices, charge every subscriber, or you can't air my new RSN. They had no choice but to concede. 

 

Also, two MASN channels = twice the commercial time they can sell. 

[weird-O]

But there were a LOT of these people.

I won't argue that, but I don't think it was as many as today. Because you now have young adults that grew up watching the Nats, and didn't bother with the O's, because they were a terrible product. 

[Nigel Tufnel]

One way the revenue increased was like this. When HTS/Comcast paid the O's, those channels were additional fees that consumers paid, because they wanted to watch baseball. With MASN, Anglos dictated that every subscriber would pay a MASN premium, whether they wanted to or not. Direct TV agreed, Comcast didn't. So Angelos told they they had two choices, charge every subscriber, or you can't air my new RSN. They had no choice but to concede. 

 

You're describing the difference between owning your own RSN and not owning one.  I tend to think the O's would have started MASN with or without the Nats.

[weird-O]

You're describing the difference between owning your own RSN and not owning one.  I tend to think the O's would have started MASN with or without the Nats.

Exactly, and that's a big part of my argument that they're better off now than they were prior to the Expos. If the O's were going to start up their own RSN, why did they wait until the Expos pending relocation? RSNs weren't a brand new thing in 2005. But the subject was never publicly discussed prior to the Expos move. If it was being hashed out prior to the threat of the Expos arrival, I'm sure there would have been some kind of public info about it. But that's just me speculating. I think it was MLB's generous donation that paid for at least some of the start up expenses, in not most of them. 

[CantonJester]

Right, but Angelos installed that HD video screen three years ago, right? This has always been a cutting edge organization with that guy at the helm. (o;

[JTrea81]

Weighing in on this, Correa makes a ton of sense for the Orioles.

 

1. They have tons of payroll room as they won't be paying any of their younger prospects a multi-million dollar salary for several years.

 

2.  He has ties to Mike Elias, who pushed for him in the 2012 draft when he wasn't the consensus #1 pick and allowed the Astros to spend money elsewhere in the draft and still wound up being the best pick of the first round.

 

3. We don't talk enough about his defense which not only was the best for the SS positions but all positions for DRS and OOZ plays in 2021 with 20 DRS and 156 OOZ plays, a perfect fit for a team that has young pitching.

 

4. They need somebody to take the spotlight off Rutschman. Adley is going to be the face of the franchise, but if Correa is there as a marquee signing, that makes it easier for him to not have to have all the attention.

 

5. Correa could use a fresh start in a less visible environment. His ties to the Astros' cheating saga will be more blown up with the Yankees or any other high visibility team. Nobody really cares about the Orioles, so he can fly under the radar more while still playing at an All-Star level.

 

6. They don't have another true MLB-ready SS prospect that they have to worry about blocking. Henderson and Westburg are likely ticketed for other positions and if not, quality depth is never a bad thing to have in the middle infield for trades.

 

Matt Holliday made a ton of sense for the Orioles to sign after 2009 when he became available, given his ties to Brian Roberts and desire to play with him, but they passed and spent what they would have spent on him on players that had literally no value. Correa is a similar opportunity with his ties to Elias, only younger and better as he's in his prime now and has plenty of years left to anchor an up and coming Orioles team.

 

I'm not saying it is going to happen, but it really makes a ton of sense for it to happen.  If there's any free agent that Elias would go after, I think it would be Correa given his knowledge of the player and the needs of the Orioles in general. Dan Duquette acquired Pedro Martinez twice because he knew the player and the impact that he'd have on the teams he controlled.

[You Play to Win the Game]

I see a meltdown coming in the near future.

[JTrea81]

I see a meltdown coming in the near future.

 

Nah, I'm just a bit older, and hopefully a bit wiser and understand there are more important things in life than the Orioles. They also don't desperately need Correa, but the move makes a ton of sense for them. Now that being said, huge contracts usually don't wind up working out, so it may be better if they pass anyway. But at some point they have to flick the switch to competitor.

 

And if there's ever been a marquee FA that's the perfect fit for Elias, Correa is it to do just that.

[Ravens2006]

The year before the Nationals started playing in DC, the Orioles sold 2.74 million tickets. Attendance had already been dropping for years ahead of that event, thanks largely to sustained losing seasons. 3.68 million in 1998 had dropped to 2.45 million by 2003. And those seasons were relatively good in comparison to the last 4. They dropped 1/3 of their ticket sales at that point due to their own performance, not the Nationals. The Nationals weren't even a consideration at the time.

From 2010 to 2014, their attendance (or ticket sales) increased 42%, from 1.73 to 2.46 million. Of course, they were contenders by 2014 and were starting to bring fans back in bigger numbers.

[dude]

The year before the Nationals started playing in DC, the Orioles sold 2.74 million tickets. Attendance had already been dropping for years ahead of that event, thanks largely to sustained losing seasons. 3.68 million in 1998 had dropped to 2.45 million by 2003. And those seasons were relatively good in comparison to the last 4. They dropped 1/3 of their ticket sales at that point due to their own performance, not the Nationals. The Nationals weren't even a consideration at the time.

 

ahhhh....factz

[BSLChrisStoner]

The year before the Nationals started playing in DC, the Orioles sold 2.74 million tickets. Attendance had already been dropping for years ahead of that event, thanks largely to sustained losing seasons. 3.68 million in 1998 had dropped to 2.45 million by 2003. And those seasons were relatively good in comparison to the last 4. They dropped 1/3 of their ticket sales at that point due to their own performance, not the Nationals. The Nationals weren't even a consideration at the time.

From 2010 to 2014, their attendance (or ticket sales) increased 42%, from 1.73 to 2.46 million. Of course, they were contenders by 2014 and were starting to bring fans back in bigger numbers.

Overnight the Orioles lost 1/3 of their season tickets, individual tickets, skyboxes losing audience in PG, Montgomery, DC, and NOVA.

Being able to make up the reduction of that audience with gains elsewhere (York for instance) doesn't reduce the impact of losing something they had to themselves.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Lets get back to talking about what we do after we sign Correa

[BSLChrisStoner]

Lets get back to talking about what we do after we sign Correa

Would the biggest immediate impact of signing Correa be the mindset change it would bring to most of the fanbase?

With or without Correa I feel great about the 24 Orioles being a playoff team.

Sign Correa...and the 23 Orioles can have a chance (presumably he wouldn't be the only addition before 23).

[You Play to Win the Game]

Lets get back to talking about what we do after we sign Correa

Turn him into a pitcher?

[Mackus]

Would the biggest immediate impact of signing Correa be the mindset change it would bring to most of the fanbase?

 

It'd be a big change for me.  The amount, spending it before you're on the cusp, and spending it on an external guy would all be pretty novel.  I would be a one off (albeit a big one) until something else happens, but it would take the idea of the team being competitive within the next decade from being close to fantasy to plausible for me.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

You dont think the Os are going to be competitve in the next decade. That seems crazy to me.

[Mackus]

You dont think the Os are going to be competitve in the next decade. That seems crazy to me.

 

I think a short window where everything comes together is plausible. I don't yet think them spending what is required to add to a mostly developed core will end up happening.  And I don't think they can compete with a Tampa model.

[weird-O]

Lets get back to talking about what we do after we sign Correa

A no doubt about it, stud, TOR, marquee starting pitcher

 

Dream big, if you're gonna dream, right?

[weird-O]

I think a short window where everything comes together is plausible. I don't yet think them spending what is required to add to a mostly developed core will end up happening.  And I don't think they can compete with a Tampa model.

This is the extent of my belief. 

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I think a short window where everything comes together is plausible. I don't yet think them spending what is required to add to a mostly developed core will end up happening.  And I don't think they can compete with a Tampa model.

They will spend. It might not be the payroll or the caliber of player you prefer but they will spend.