668 replies to this topic

[You Play to Win the Game]

Can you disband MASN and then just each have their own network? Is that a viable option?


This is going to get really really ugly.

I think it's a likely outcome at some point. It's a worst case scenario as far as Angelos is concerned. It's not necessarily a bad thing as far as the O's themselves are concerned given that the team would retain TV rights through a sell off the team eventually.

[Domenic]

Can you disband MASN and then just each have their own network? Is that a viable option?
This is going to get really really ugly.

That's kind of what MASN's saying would end up happening if this decision stands. Quite frankly it also appears to be what the Nationals want. While in reality that might sound fair, it would also eliminate what was supposed to have been the Orioles' compensation for having to share their turf.

[Domenic]

I think it's a likely outcome at some point. It's a worst case scenario as far as Angelos is concerned. It's not necessarily a bad thing as far as the O's themselves are concerned given that the team would retain TV rights through a sell off the team eventually.

I still say be careful what you wish for (not you specifically per se, but the "collective you") First off, the TV rights thing is far from an easy fix if MASN ceases to exist. The Nationals would go to CSN without a doubt. Given the fact that they would have been devious enough to have sent MASN out of business (potentially with that intent, mind you) are we to believe that they might not require some sort of non-compete clause from CSN? Basically a gaurantee that they won't carry any other MLB team or baseball programming...something like that. It would ensure that the O's in effect don't have a TV partner, which is a huge problem. (Again, this is assuming that MASN goes belly-up and doesn't exist any longer.)

Either way, let's say the franchise is eventually sold. It could happen sooner or later, be it Peter Angelos selling it or his sons after he passes away. If the team is sold to a local person that might be one thing. But if it's sold to an out-of-town investor, we'd be assuming that the person would have some sort of loyalty to Baltimore. If that person happened to be from a city such as Charlotte, Vegas, Portland, etc (a place without a big league team that's always been mentioned in the conversation), we're really in trouble. Owners don't move teams out of their hometowns, but they do often buy teams and move them to their hometowns.

[Oriole85]

I still say be careful what you wish for (not you specifically per se, but the "collective you") First off, the TV rights thing is far from an easy fix if MASN ceases to exist. The Nationals would go to CSN without a doubt. Given the fact that they would have been devious enough to have sent MASN out of business (potentially with that intent, mind you) are we to believe that they might not require some sort of non-compete clause from CSN? Basically a gaurantee that they won't carry any other MLB team or baseball programming...something like that. It would ensure that the O's in effect don't have a TV partner, which is a huge problem. (Again, this is assuming that MASN goes belly-up and doesn't exist any longer.)

Either way, let's say the franchise is eventually sold. It could happen sooner or later, be it Peter Angelos selling it or his sons after he passes away. If the team is sold to a local person that might be one thing. But if it's sold to an out-of-town investor, we'd be assuming that the person would have some sort of loyalty to Baltimore. If that person happened to be from a city such as Charlotte, Vegas, Portland, etc (a place without a big league team that's always been mentioned in the conversation), we're really in trouble. Owners don't move teams out of their hometowns, but they do often buy teams and move them to their hometowns.

Let's see if Stan Kroenke moves the Rams out of St. Louis since a hometown owner would NEVER leave hometown. Or in the past, Bob Short (Lakers), Walter O'Malley (Dodgers), or Horace Stoneham (Giants). These are businesses at the end of the day and even though a hometown owner is more likely to keep the team in their original city, it's not a guarantee. There's a reason Steve Ballmer isn't even trying to move the Clippers to Seattle -- they are more valuable as LA's second team. Not every owner cares about civic pride as much as looking at as an investment.

 

You've mentioned the doomsday scenario before in your defense of Angelos/MASN. O's are locked into their lease until 2021. Not saying they will never move, but I'm not too concerned. Besides if there were better situations for the A's/Rays, I think those teams would've been out of their respective cities. Moving a team in baseball is harder than other sports -- most cities without a team don't have a capable temporary facility to play in. Plus there's the supporting a team 162 times a year including 81 home dates; not every city can do that. Baseball has worked very well in Baltimore; in another city, not necessarily. Also, the owners would have to approve any such move. There's a reason teams haven't moved to Vegas in ANY sport.

[Domenic]

That's all true, but also keep in mind that team moves don't happen overnight. By the time all of the dust settles, a new perspective owner might find himself right up on that 2021 deadline. I know it's not a simple thing to move a team, but the fact is that you never know. In this day and age if you suddenly find yourself without a viable TV deal, a new owner with little rapport with the fan base might start looking around.

There are exceptions to every rule, but in general owners don't leave their hometowns. For the most part you get owners like the guy in Ok City who swear they aren't moving the team and then...SURPRISE! That's why I say that if an out-of-town guy buys a team fans should be wary. Robert Short owning the second incarnation of the Senators is a perfect example. Having said that, I do have to believe that MLB would be leery of selling a team like the Orioles with a strong tradition in it's town to someone who they think could be another Robert Irsay.

[Oriole85]

That's all true, but also keep in mind that team moves don't happen overnight. By the time all of the dust settles, a new perspective owner might find himself right up on that 2021 deadline. I know it's not a simple thing to move a team, but the fact is that you never know. In this day and age if you suddenly find yourself without a viable TV deal, a new owner with little rapport with the fan base might start looking around.

There are exceptions to every rule, but in general owners don't leave their hometowns. For the most part you get owners like the guy in Ok City who swear they aren't moving the team and then...SURPRISE! That's why I say that if an out-of-town guy buys a team fans should be wary. Robert Short owning the second incarnation of the Senators is a perfect example. Having said that, I do have to believe that MLB would be leery of selling a team like the Orioles with a strong tradition in it's town to someone who they think could be another Robert Irsay.

And that's exactly why it's not a good idea to talk in absolutes. However, I just gave multiple examples including a possible current case, you said "Owners don't move teams out of their hometowns," that's clearly not true. 

 

The Orioles didn't exactly have hometown ownership between Jerold Hoffberger and Angelos, they didn't move during that time period.

[DJ MC]

Let's see if Stan Kroenke moves the Rams out of St. Louis since a hometown owner would NEVER leave hometown. Or in the past, Bob Short (Lakers), Walter O'Malley (Dodgers), or Horace Stoneham (Giants). These are businesses at the end of the day and even though a hometown owner is more likely to keep the team in their original city, it's not a guarantee. There's a reason Steve Ballmer isn't even trying to move the Clippers to Seattle -- they are more valuable as LA's second team. Not every owner cares about civic pride as much as looking at as an investment.

 

You've mentioned the doomsday scenario before in your defense of Angelos/MASN. O's are locked into their lease until 2021. Not saying they will never move, but I'm not too concerned. Besides if there were better situations for the A's/Rays, I think those teams would've been out of their respective cities. Moving a team in baseball is harder than other sports -- most cities without a team don't have a capable temporary facility to play in. Plus there's the supporting a team 162 times a year including 81 home dates; not every city can do that. Baseball has worked very well in Baltimore; in another city, not necessarily. Also, the owners would have to approve any such move. There's a reason teams haven't moved to Vegas in ANY sport.

 

You say 2021 like it's 2001 and two decades away. That's seven years from now.

 

If an owner wanted to move to another city, most potential sites have at least a temporary stadium option available, especially if the team knows going in that a new park is all set to be built. Montreal has Olympic Stadium, which hosted baseball for 30 years. It wouldn't be ideal, but San Antonio can play baseball in the Alamodome for a while. Portland repurposed their minor-league park, but Providence Park could still host a team. Charlotte is the one place without a great option, but even if they can't expand their new AAA park, the old one down in SC probably could add some seats.

[Domenic]

And that's exactly why it's not a good idea to talk in absolutes. However, I just gave multiple examples including a possible current case, you said "Owners don't move teams out of their hometowns," that's clearly not true. 

 

The Orioles didn't exactly have hometown ownership between Jerold Hoffberger and Angelos, they didn't move during that time period.

I always talk in absolutes; it shows confidence in what one's saying. But there are always exceptions, which is why I throw generally in there. Just because you have an out-of-town owner doesn't mean your franchise is going to move. There are in fact some owners from other places that will remain dedicated to that city. But I'm just saying that if a franchise is sold to someone from out of town that possibility always exists. 

[Pedro Cerrano]

I always talk in absolutes; it shows confidence in what one's saying. But there are always exceptions, which is why I throw generally in there. Just because you have an out-of-town owner doesn't mean your franchise is going to move. There are in fact some owners from other places that will remain dedicated to that city. But I'm just saying that if a franchise is sold to someone from out of town that possibility always exists. 

 

This approach works splendidly for some posters on here

[Domenic]

This approach works splendidly for some posters on here

Sorry, but one thing I can't stand is someone who throws in verbal crutches to give themselves a way out of something. I do use the generally, but some people go way beyond that. 

 

In this case I unfortunately know firsthand how dirty a lot of business dealings can be because I've seen them in my own life. So if you connect the dots down the line, the "doomsday scenario" (as Madison rightly called it) could be the Orioles being forced to move. This is not to say that Angelos himself hasn't benefited from a massively one-sided agreement, however that's not to say it shouldn't be enforced as it was written. And the saddest thing would be that it would have been the very clause that was designed to protect the Orioles (in that they'd have to be paid the same as the Nats) that would have ended upbeing the eventual demise of it.

[Nigel Tufnel]

I think the hearing where a judge will decide whether or not to lift the injunction is happening right now.  If the injunction is lifted, the Nats could theoretically leave MASN right away.

 

The problem with the O's and Nats having different networks is the fees that cable companies pay to MASN in order to carry the channel.  That's where the money is.  But if the Nats had their own network, then you'd have to think that DC and Virginia companies would drop MASN, which would hugely decrease MASN's revenues.  The O's would basically become a small market team.

[dude]

..... But if the Nats had their own network, then you'd have to think that DC and Virginia companies would drop MASN, which would hugely decrease MASN's revenues.  The O's would basically become a small market team.

 

....I'd still contend that the best thing for both teams is to operate together through MASN....but if there was a split (now or in the future)....MLB would have to address throughout the region.  Teams don't get to impede on other teams rights (although there are some jointly held areas on the latest map we've seen), so the question would become who owns all of that territory.

 

Just because MASN doesn't carry the Nationals doesn't mean that cable networks wouldn't carry MASN.....they'd just be getting Oriole only programming (MASN doesn't do much else...right?) and the Orioles would have to compete to be relevant in those markets.

 

....but wasn't that true even before the Nationals?....lots of places south of DC didn't seem to carry the Orioles in their freefall before the Nationals.  Bottom line would be the Orioles would have to fight more to have a product that would generate enough interest that companies would pay for their customers to see them.

 

Just my guess, but I'd have to believe the Orioles could still generate revenues north of what MASN is providing them now.  It certainly wouldn't seem to have the explosive potential that MASN would have with 2 teams, but Oriole fees aren't significantly more today than they were pre-MASN.  Last year before MASN was in the high-20s and under MASN they've been in the 30s.

[Nigel Tufnel]

....but wasn't that true even before the Nationals?....lots of places south of DC didn't seem to carry the Orioles in their freefall before the Nationals.  Bottom line would be the Orioles would have to fight more to have a product that would generate enough interest that companies would pay for their customers to see them.

 

Are you sure about that?  Before the Nats, the O's were on the channel that carried Wizards and Caps games, so I'd expect that they were carried just about everywhere in the DC metro area.  I would not expect that to be the case if MASN were to  become a Baltimore-centric channel.

[Thyrl]

I think the most likely outcome in the event that Angelos can't win in court is that he sells the network to Fox or Comcast and cashes out a $Billion+ payday at his 85% or wherever it stands today.

 

At that point it'll be interesting to see if the new network owners will have to pay equal rights fees to both teams, or if that winds up bartered out in negotiations. (What we'd really need to see to fully understand this issue is the original MASN charter agreement)

 

As for the Orioles possibly moving, I wouldn't sweat that much. The league basically spent 4 years or so looking for any viable market other than DC for the Expos and weren't able to find one. That's how we find ourselves in this situation now. As some have pointed out, if there were other viable baseball markets out there, there's no shortage of teams that would be lining up to explore them already.

[PatrickDougherty]

I think the most likely outcome in the event that Angelos can't win in court is that he sells the network to Fox or Comcast and cashes out a $Billion+ payday at his 85% or wherever it stands today.

 

At that point it'll be interesting to see if the new network owners will have to pay equal rights fees to both teams, or if that winds up bartered out in negotiations. (What we'd really need to see to fully understand this issue is the original MASN charter agreement)

 

As for the Orioles possibly moving, I wouldn't sweat that much. The league basically spent 4 years or so looking for any viable market other than DC for the Expos and weren't able to find one. That's how we find ourselves in this situation now. As some have pointed out, if there were other viable baseball markets out there, there's no shortage of teams that would be lining up to explore them already.

Not to mention that the Baltimore MSA is 20th largest in the country, making it stupid obvious for one of thirty professional baseball teams to inhabit. MLB couldn't possibly be dumb enough to slice up NY or LA for a third team.

[DJ MC]

Not to mention that the Baltimore MSA is 20th largest in the country, making it stupid obvious for one of thirty professional baseball teams to inhabit. MLB couldn't possibly be dumb enough to slice up NY or LA for a third team.

 

Now if only there was a huge city outside of the US, but very close to the border, with a celebrated (and mourned) baseball past, an existing venue of appropriate size and seemingly serious discussions about the possibility of a new venue.

 

Where would we find a place like that?

[Oriole85]

That's all true, but also keep in mind that team moves don't happen overnight. By the time all of the dust settles, a new perspective owner might find himself right up on that 2021 deadline. I know it's not a simple thing to move a team, but the fact is that you never know. In this day and age if you suddenly find yourself without a viable TV deal, a new owner with little rapport with the fan base might start looking around.

There are exceptions to every rule, but in general owners don't leave their hometowns. For the most part you get owners like the guy in Ok City who swear they aren't moving the team and then...SURPRISE! That's why I say that if an out-of-town guy buys a team fans should be wary. Robert Short owning the second incarnation of the Senators is a perfect example. Having said that, I do have to believe that MLB would be leery of selling a team like the Orioles with a strong tradition in it's town to someone who they think could be another Robert Irsay.

Of course you NEVER KNOW, a hometown owner isn't necessarily going to keep the team in Baltimore either. Yes, hometown owners are more likely going to keep the team but it's hardly a guarantee. Robert Short is a great example of an owner who didn't seem to care if it was local or not, since he moved teams in both cases. I'm just not too concerned -- ONE team has moved in the last 40 years, there's far less viable franchises then the O's. Could things change, of course.

 

 

 

You say 2021 like it's 2001 and two decades away. That's seven years from now.

 

If an owner wanted to move to another city, most potential sites have at least a temporary stadium option available, especially if the team knows going in that a new park is all set to be built. Montreal has Olympic Stadium, which hosted baseball for 30 years. It wouldn't be ideal, but San Antonio can play baseball in the Alamodome for a while. Portland repurposed their minor-league park, but Providence Park could still host a team. Charlotte is the one place without a great option, but even if they can't expand their new AAA park, the old one down in SC probably could add some seats.

No I didn't, just not too concerned about the immediate future. There were concerns whether Olympic Stadium could even host the exhibition games in the case of bad weather. I'll give you the Alamodome, not sure how viable San Antonio is for baseball as a city itself, less so if they somehow get a football team. In the other cases, it's not like flipping a switch but it's possible. Norfolk was an "option" for the Expos as well.

 

 

I always talk in absolutes; it shows confidence in what one's saying. But there are always exceptions, which is why I throw generally in there. Just because you have an out-of-town owner doesn't mean your franchise is going to move. There are in fact some owners from other places that will remain dedicated to that city. But I'm just saying that if a franchise is sold to someone from out of town that possibility always exists. 

That's fine, there's more than a few exceptions to the rule in the case. The possibility exists regardless -- for the right price, people will do stuff in many cases NOT always. These are investments for the owners. If they see some city emerging with better demographics than the city they are in and that city doesn't have a team, good chance they'll look into it. Many of these guys didn't make a ton of money by making easy decisions.

[Oriole85]

I think the hearing where a judge will decide whether or not to lift the injunction is happening right now.  If the injunction is lifted, the Nats could theoretically leave MASN right away.

 

The problem with the O's and Nats having different networks is the fees that cable companies pay to MASN in order to carry the channel.  That's where the money is.  But if the Nats had their own network, then you'd have to think that DC and Virginia companies would drop MASN, which would hugely decrease MASN's revenues.  The O's would basically become a small market team.

Down the road, you might be right. But I think for right now, MASN (or the O's channel) would be carried in the DC area. Not sure what the ratings are right now, but the O's not too long ago outdrew the Nats in the DC area ratings-wise. WJLA carries Ravens preseason games.

 

 

Just because MASN doesn't carry the Nationals doesn't mean that cable networks wouldn't carry MASN.....they'd just be getting Oriole only programming (MASN doesn't do much else...right?) and the Orioles would have to compete to be relevant in those markets.

http://www.masnsport...about-masn.html

 

MASN is the official cable network of George Mason Patriots Basketball, Big South basketball and football, and the BB&T Classic.

Some other syndicated games/shows and the glorified public access shows, Wall-to-Wall Baseball, Nats Talk, and Mid-Atlantic Sports Report.

[Oriole85]

As for the Orioles possibly moving, I wouldn't sweat that much. The league basically spent 4 years or so looking for any viable market other than DC for the Expos and weren't able to find one. That's how we find ourselves in this situation now. As some have pointed out, if there were other viable baseball markets out there, there's no shortage of teams that would be lining up to explore them already.

Agreed, not too concerned. Baseball is having a hard enough time finding better situations for the Rays/A's.

[PatrickDougherty]

I always talk in absolutes; it shows confidence in what one's saying. But there are always exceptions, which is why I throw generally in there. Just because you have an out-of-town owner doesn't mean your franchise is going to move. There are in fact some owners from other places that will remain dedicated to that city. But I'm just saying that if a franchise is sold to someone from out of town that possibility always exists. 

Only a Sith deals in absolutes