Skip to content

Same as the old boss: Fox may bid for the Dodgers

Nov 2, 2011, 12:34 PM EDT

dodgers logo

Michele Steele of Bloomberg Television reports that, according to some people in the company, Fox is interested in bidding on the Dodgers when they’re auctioned off in bankruptcy.

As Steele later tweeted, this would simply be about the costs of programming, not about actually, you know, wanting to buy a baseball team.  She notes that the network could spend as much as $3 billion over 17 years for the TV rights to the Dodgers, as bid against other potential competitors for those rights.  But if they bought the team they could spend somewhere between $800 million and $1 billion now for the team and guarantee themselves the TV rights. Not for free, of course — media right holders who also own the team have always paid themselves something for the privilege of broadcasting — but it’s a way lower number than the network would have to pay by itself, bidding against other networks.

For those of you who can’t remember life before Frank McCourt, Fox was the previous owner of the Dodgers. And one of the biggest reasons they sold the team in 2004 is that they are a broadcasting company, not a sports management company, so they lost money on the team. Which they only really had for the broadcast rights anyway. Sound familiar?

Yes, the world of team-owned media outlets (or media-owned team content providers) has grown far more sophisticated in the past several years and, yes, it’s possible that Fox would take a totally different tack if they were to take over the Dodgers again.  But really, should they even be given the chance?  Their bailing on the team last time gave us Frank McCourt to begin with.

  1. sportsdrenched.com - Nov 2, 2011 at 12:56 PM

    Please tell me there was at least one guy at FOX that said: “I don’t think that’s a good idea…we’ve done this before. Remember?”…and he was shouted down.

    • thinman61 - Nov 2, 2011 at 1:04 PM

      I believe his exact words were, “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this any more!” At which point the PTB at FOX had him assassinated by domestic terrorists.

      • sportsdrenched.com - Nov 2, 2011 at 3:35 PM

        Please tell me there was one guy in the PtB that said “as long as it’s not Brian Wilson, he’s terrible at Block Ops”

  2. henryd3rd - Nov 2, 2011 at 1:07 PM

    Say it ain’t so Joe!

  3. flyerscup2010 - Nov 2, 2011 at 1:14 PM

    where’s keith olbermann when ruper murdoch needs him? been there done that.

  4. goawaydog - Nov 2, 2011 at 1:27 PM

    This is good news, as a Giants fan the last thing i want to see is some competant person with pockets full of cash like mark cuban owning the Dodgers

  5. SmackSaw - Nov 2, 2011 at 1:48 PM

    Dennis Gilbert. I don’t care who buys them as long as Gilbert is part of it. He runs the team.

  6. dodger88 - Nov 2, 2011 at 3:07 PM

    Considering the $1 billion amount be discussed as the cost to buy the team, it may be more realistic for FOX to partner with someone to make a bid. At $1 billion, it almost ensure a consortium or partnership of some sort ends up owning the Dodgers. FOX could end up with a minority stake in the Dodgers and still secure the broadcast rights they want.

  7. notsofast10 - Nov 2, 2011 at 3:53 PM

    Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

  8. mondzy805 - Nov 2, 2011 at 8:29 PM

    Hell nah. These snakes started all this Mess in the first place. They don’t care about the Dodgers at all, they sold Frank the team in the first place knowing he has no Money. All they want is to renew their TV contract with the Dodgers, at their terms and then they’ll sell the team to some other Bum. Bud can’t let this happen. Please don’t. Go Blue.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

When home-field advantage isn't so
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. T. Lincecum (3199)
  2. M. Bumgarner (2977)
  3. J. Shields (2515)
  4. M. Morse (2436)
  5. Y. Cespedes (2094)
  1. T. Ishikawa (1795)
  2. U. Jimenez (1595)
  3. L. Cain (1578)
  4. B. Roberts (1535)
  5. H. Pence (1522)