Comments on: The Nationals, Orioles are having a dispute about local TV revenue

By: simon94022

simon94022 — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 00:55:26 +0000

The Orioles never “owned” the TV rights to the Washington market. It was assigned to them by the MLB Executive Committee and under MLB rules could be taken away at any time without their consent or even an owners vote.

The Nats owed the Orioles absolutely nothing when they baseball came back to DC, but the Orioles received the MASN rights because of Bud Selig’s determination to never leave an owner disgruntled.

The Baltimore claims on the Washington market were beyond ridiculous. There are more Yankee fans in DC than Oriole fans, and nobody in Virginia thinks of Baltimore as “local.”. MASN should be junked, and the Orioles should figure out some way to generate revenue in their own market.

By: randomdigits

randomdigits — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 21:43:23 +0000

MLB won’t let them out from the MASN agreement. It was a conditional of ownership.

By: randomdigits

randomdigits — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 21:41:29 +0000

Difference between ownership rights and broadcasting fees. Nats are trying to increase the later which is allowable every five years under the agreement between the two teams.

By: dugly2ugly

dugly2ugly — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 21:08:01 +0000

This is not true. MASN has been very careful over the years to give the teams the same number of games on MASN1 when they play at the same time so they can avoid being accused of playing favorites. Usually, it’s based on who the opponents are (e.g. if the O’s are playing the Yankees and the Nats are playing the Padres the O’s series will get MASN1 and Nats on MASN2). If anything, the argument is usually that the O’s get preferential treatment, mainly based on the Baltimore focused ads and programming when games are not on.

I think there is a lot of confusion about what’s being discussed. This is not about % of ownership in the station – Angelos/the Orioles will always have the bigger chunk and that is not subject to change. My understanding is that it’s more or less what the station which is owned by both teams is required to pay to the Nats for broadcast rights.

I’m an O’s fan and am not sure how I feel about this. Part of me wants the Nats to get more because logic would dictate it would then force the O’s rights fees to go up rather than allow Angelos to hide money under the MASN umbrella. However, Angelos is not known for being logical when it comes to doing what’s right for the team.

Also, logic would lead you to think that the O’s should deserve a higher fee because, when you take into consideration the entire broadcast area, the O’s have far more viewers than the Nats. I haven’t seen any ratings for this year yet, but in years past, almost nobody in the Baltimore area watches Nats games, but it hasn’t been uncommon for the O’s to have just as good, if not better, ratings than the Nats in homes in the DC metro area.

By: Old Gator

Old Gator — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 20:35:27 +0000

Awww, why not just let Anton Chigurh decide it with a coin toss?

By: Kevin S.

Kevin S. — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 20:24:21 +0000

Well the Redskins are always on national TV, but Ted Leonsis owns both the Wizards and Capitals, making it that much easier to bring three teams together for a RSN.

By: boomerdt

boomerdt — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 20:17:39 +0000

Why? it’s not supposed to be an even split…… The DC TV market belonged to the O’s before the Expos became the Nationals. Thus the O’s had to sign off on the team being moved to DC. To sweeten the deal the TV rights were given to the O’s with partial payback to the Nats….. been this way since day 1. If you’re the minority you will always argue you’re worth more. I don’t blame the Nats for trying… but I doubt they get much (if anything) more than they do now. MASN is one of the lowest viewed Baseball networks out there (I think it’s 27th).

By: boomerdt

boomerdt — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 20:12:07 +0000

The only thing the Orioles have to do is remind MLB that the only reason the Nationals exist is because the O’s allowed it (for the majority of the Nationals TV rights). Nats can argue all they want. Everyone knew what this meant from day 1.

By: chill1184

chill1184 — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 18:25:01 +0000

Granted such an idea is unlikely perhaps its time for the Nationals to get their own station a Washington sports channel. Maybe Lerner can convince the owners of the Capitals, Wizards and Redskins that it’s time for a network that brings Washington sports to the spot light instead of sharing with Baltimore. Again very unlikely but it couldn’t hurt to throw an idea around.

By: Loose Changeup

Loose Changeup — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:58:23 +0000

Angelos will lawyer his way through this meeting with ease. Hopefully, after he increases the value of the team, he sees fit to sell the team.

By: dowhatifeellike

dowhatifeellike — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:18:33 +0000

MASN only have themselves to blame. If both teams were playing at the same time, the Nats would get MASN1(HD) and the O’s would get MASN2(SD until last year). You can’t give one team the spotlight and then say they deserve less of the pie than the team on the back burner.

By: natstowngreg

natstowngreg — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:16:28 +0000

Rosenthal has it right — it probably was inevitable. Craig has it right — this is an unusual situation, with two MLB teams on one cable network.

When they bought the Washington franchise, the Lerners were stuck with a lousy TV deal. The deal will never be really fair, as long as they have not more than a one-third stake. This is their opportunity to make the deal a bit fairer, at a time when their team’s improved play should lead to more TV revenue.

By: atworkident

atworkident — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:49:28 +0000

Surprise, surprise Rosenthal and the Orioles again.

He shouldn’t be so bitter.

By: randomdigits

randomdigits — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:45:28 +0000

Shame it is going to arbitration and not court. I would love to see the MASN books cracked open for the world to see.