MAY 14: Court filings reveal that the recent arbitration ruling largely reflected the decision of the original panel, per a recent report from Jeff Barker of the Baltimore Sun. If the ruling is upheld, MASN will likely be required to disburse something on the order of $60MM to $70MM in back payments to the Nationals. (The panel awarded nearly $100MM in added rights fees, but the network’s profit recalculation would reduce the net dollar amount owed.)
APRIL 23: The Orioles and Nationals have long been embroiled in a dispute regarding TV rights fees from the jointly owned (but Orioles-controlled) Mid-Atlantic Sports Network. Sorting things out with finality has taken ages, but there are finally some new developments of note.
Another arbitration proceeding before MLB’s revenue sharing committee is finally in the books, though the results aren’t yet known, per Ben Strauss of the Washington Post (Twitter links). The Nats are seeking to have the results confirmed by the New York court that has overseen the related litigation between the ballclubs.
The sides originally went to court when the Orioles challenged the committee’s first award of rights fees to the Nats, successfully arguing that the D.C. organization’s counsel had a conflict of interest. Now, the revenue sharing committee has issued a new decision regarding what constitutes fair market value for the rights to televise Nationals games.
Typically, it’s quite difficult to upset an arbitration award in court, though that didn’t stop the Baltimore organization from securing a victory way back in the full of 2015. Whether and how the O’s will attack the new award isn’t known, but it seems likely that the club will keep up what has been an all-out battle until it has exhausted all its options.
Indeed, the Orioles recently opened up something of a new front, as Eriq Gardner of the Hollywood Reporter has covered (here and here). MASN began withholding “cash flow payments” to the Nats early in 2018, then balked at a MLB-run arbitration process. While that’s called for contractually, the Orioles have taken the position that the league has an interest in the dispute because it made the Nationals a $25MM advance to deal with the long-ongoing issue discussed above.
The Baltimore organization then launched a proceeding before the American Arbitration Association. Their unhappy partners to the south responded by putting the matter to the New York court. The initial decision was in favor of the O’s, but it’s of limited moment: the court determined that the AAA panel has the authority in the first instance to determine whether the matter is properly before it, since the contract contemplates a AAA proceeding in the event of a conflict of interest.
Head spinning yet? It should be, as this is all now several layers removed from the underlying issue: what’s fair market value for the Nats’ TV rights? The Orioles have successfully introduced quite a few procedural roadblocks to the D.C. organization’s ability to receive stepped-up pay-outs and even created some possibility of securing a friendlier forum to decide the matter. As things stand, there’s a competing arbitration proceeding even as an award has come down from the revenue sharing committee, with ongoing litigation overlaying things. When and how it’ll all be resolved remains anyone’s guess.
DarkSide830
“what is the purpose of this article” comments in 3…2…
SFGiantsGallore
Money
DarkSide830
i understand perfectly fine, i just knew other people wouldn’t and would make comments of the like
Yankeedynasty
The Orioles bower can work real hard to not lose money. Being good? “If I costs more than $5, I’m out
camdenyards46
He’s really not a cheap owner
He just spends in the wrong places
LGerber
My head hurts.
tharrie0820
My head didn’t hurt until I read the comments above yours
TreyMancini
Now, if the nationals would just stick to the agreement that originally allowed them to move the team into the Orioles’ market, then there wouldn’t be lawsuits. From day one that it was agreed to, the Nationals and MLB have been fighting the contract THEY AGREED TO. But money trumps all I guess…
delete
“The Orioles Territory” – Sure, it used to be, but the Nationals won the territory by being the far superior franchise. No one asked the Orioles to lose all their fans by putting crap roster after crap roster on the field. Time for a real ownership group to buy the team and move them elsewhere. There, problem solved
jbigz12
We had the most wins in baseball from 2012 to 2016. This case is going to be long and drawn out because Angelos only agreed to let a team come into DC because of the favorable share of revenue. The nationals didn’t win all that territory by being the better team either. Location wins the territory. If you’re growing up in northern Virginia or Southern Maryland why would you now drive an additional hour to see the orioles?
DD martin
Ok sticking to facts…..The O’s did not have the best record in baseball over those seasons. I can think of at least 2 teams with better records (LA and STL). They only won 1 division title during that run and did not win a league pennant or World Series. So this modest run has been offset by basically 20+ other season of mediocrity play or worse. The O’s will not amount to anything until Peter Angelos leaves.
jbigz12
In the American League. My error I see I put baseball. Anyhow, the nationals have yet to win a playoff series in their existence. I’m not arguing for the orioles being some kind of historically strong club. The nationals were every bit of a laughing stock as the orioles in their beginning days and to date they have not won a playoff game. Got it?
jbigz12
Which really wasn’t my point anyway. My point was that the location of the club was more of a factor in the losing of fans.
bruce77
How many Championship did that bring you? Or least how many World Series you play in?
jbigz12
0. Not my point again though, Brucey. That would be not only 0 league championships for the nationals but it would also be 0 NLDS series wins. Which again isn’t my point at all. So Im failing to see any relevance in what you just said.
Yankeedynasty
Jbigz the Nate had a reason to be bad, they were just started,m. The Orioles were just cheap, which is why they will never amount to anything and always be a dumpster fire team as as long as Angelos lives
mehs
They were not just started. The franchise had existed for decades.
teufelshunde4
Playoffs are hard, no matter how much talent any one team has on hand..
pjmcnu
Cleveland. And rename then the Ravens. Trucks leave at midnight.
66TheNumberOfTheBest
You don’t get to set up a hamburger stand inside a McDonald’s…even if people like your food better.
User 4245925809
Crap roster? So by that lunatic theory u propose, should the White sox go away from the chicago area since they stink nearly every year? Oakland in the Bay area?
How about the Mets in New York? Difference is those teams were in the above areas long before money became such a huge weapon and salaries as large as it is now, also teams as valuable as they are. The Nat’s were allowed to poach on the orioles market knowing it would hurt that market they already had and shouldn’t have been allowed due to some misguided attempt by Selig and his cronies that baseball had to be in the capitol.
teufelshunde4
Sorry but, Nats have grown their brand and re invested in their farm system and beyond then Angelos has done. After 14 years of milking a neighboring franchise, why should O’s get to act like parasite? Arent companies and billionaires always touting that competition is healthy? Or is that just BS?
The real problem here isn’t the market, its Angelos & family. They have been neglectful stewards of a proud franchise. Baltimore fans deserve better..
2bad
Peter Angelos is not running the team. The Orioles owns this territory and MASN. MLB was wrong to denied Baltimore of the All Star game… they mad cause of loaning money to the National. If any team need to move, Moving DC to North Carolina or Kentucky or Tennessee would benefit both teams. A contract is a contract…… DC signed it, can’t be broken until DC move. Deal with it. A baseball team between Duke and NC? nice.
ghph
I believe your logic is faulty. This is based on my memory from the time, but the Nats are in the NL, so the Orioles could not veto the move of the Expo to the DC area on the grounds of giving up the market. The deal was set up to throw Angelos a bone by Selig, who were buddies, and give the Orioles some sort of financial incentive to make the marriage work. The Nats agreed to this to get Angelos on board with the move and show owner solidarity.
However, once they set up MASN, the Orioles and MASN seemingly did everything they could to kneecap the Nats, by focusing coverage on the O’s and minimizing coverage of the Nats, and limiting payouts to the Nats with potentially sketchy financial numbers. So clearly, the O’s were not operating in good faith.
Angelos is a combative lawyer, and the Lerners are equally litigious in their realm of real estate, so I think this fight is basically coming down to a pissing match between the owners. The teams and fans are just the proxies that have to suffer through this.
roguesaw
If AL/NL negated the territory rights the A’s would have moved to San Jose already. The Giants hold those rights and have kept the A’s out. Pretty sure Baltimore could have vetoed the Expos’ move.
AtlSoxFan
Mets and yankees can coexist. So can angels and dodgers. Rangers and Astros, along with As and Giants, also seem to manage things…
Let’s face it: Os flat out stink. Relocate them somewhere else, with new ownership, problem solved.
petefrompp
And this is a really crappy arrangement as well. Originally the A’s and Giants were co owners of San Jose territory – in order to keep the Giants in the Bay Area the Haas family that owned the A’s – lent McGowan their rights to the South Bay so the Giant’s could secure financing for the new ballpark.
The Giants now feel that the A’s should have asked for those rights back faster so they don’t recognize the A’s 50 percent rights to the South Bay
Haas family was pure class the current Giants ownership not so much
johnrealtime
That is completely ridiculous. Why the hell would you relocate the Orioles. A historic franchise with a large fanbase and recent success. The only problem is the owner. And Angelos has done nothing that would allow MLB to take his franchise away. I agree he sucks but it is what it is. Relocation, really ridiculous
AtlSoxFan
Brooklyn dodgers were pretty historic, with a nice fan base thenselves.
If a franchise can’t handle another team, in the opposite league, and play nice then perhaps this problem creator ought to be put somewhere that it doesn’t face this crippling problem.
Will mlb do it? No. Could they? Probably not. Should they? Maybe.
johnrealtime
Lol
Trevor 3
Why not relocate the Nats. Why should the O’s leave? I’m a life long O’s fan. Why should we suffer because Canadians don’t like baseball?
Greedy Petey
Move to Portland. Then turn Camden Yards into a parking lot so people from DC can have cheap parking when we take a cruise out of Baltimore.
airick_gee
Turn the best ballpark into a parking lot? Man, the Natinals’ stadium is cold cement garbage, much like a parking lot. Envious much? I mean, that stadium is truly unremarkable.
jbigz12
People in DC have a hard time finding cheap parking in Baltimore? Well you must be slow.. It’s only about 100x more expensive to park a car in DC.
roguesaw
Should also be noted the contract that was agreed to uses what was considered an industry standard formula for determining the rights fees the teams are arguing over. And, if I’m not mistaken, both teams get paid the same amount in rights fees per the contract.
The Nats are not arguing they should get more than the Orioles, just the formula isn’t representative of modern sports television rights. So, technically speaking, I guess the Nats are arguing both teams should get more money from MASN. Angelos has a controlling interest in the network itself. Keeping the money at MASN is in his benefit and the network’s benefit, but, really, not in either teams’ benefit. Orioles fans should want the Nationals to win this fight. Would force Angelos to move more money over from the network to the team itself.
emac22
you make it sound so much simpler.
Tiger Bob Rollie Fingers
You’re dancing around the real issue here: MLB profit sharing rules. In MLB, 48% of local revenues are subject to revenue sharing and are distributed equally among the 30 teams. So, for every dollar that Angelos gets from MASN for the Orioles broadcast rights, 48¢ gets shared with other teams. If, however, he low-balls the team’s broadcast rights, MASN pays less to the Orioles– and the Nationals– and the money saved becomes MASN profit. As co-owners of MASN, the Nationals get a share of those profits but only about 16%.
By low-balling the rights fees, Angelos gets to keep more in his pocket.
mehs
Actually the Nationals got 10% of the MASN profits in 2005 with the rate going up 1% per year for 23 years and then staying at 33% in perpetuity. So for 2019 they would get 24% of the MASN profits.
Greedy Petey
“Industry standards” can and do change. Angelos and O’s fans keep pointing to BORTZ as the standard. MLB and the RSDC ditched that years ago.
yankeemanuno23
Fake statement !
Tiger Bob Rollie Fingers
I love this argument because it’s exactly BACKWARDS. The truth is that the Orioles are the team who has filed suit to change the terms of the agreement– twice. The Nationals don’t need to violate the terms since they recognize that it contains two serious flaws that favor the Nationals. These flaws are:
1) the agreement specifies that the Nats and O’s shall get “full market value” but it does not specify how that number is to be determined, and
2) it specifies that the Nats and O’s are to receive the same rate despite the fact that their markets are vastly different in size.
I suspect that the first flaw was simply an oversight but its lack is why the second flaw becomes a flaw at all. If the Orioles had said something like “the amount to be paid to both team shall be pulled out of the a&& of the Orioles majority owner”, then the second flaw wouldn’t be a flaw at all. But they didn’t. They totally missed that determination, thus creating the second flaw and here we are.
mehs
1) Actually it does specify how the rights are to be determined using the BORTS method.
2) Actually if you look at the markets according to MLB territories they are the exact same market including parts of PA, DE, MD, DC, VA, WV, NC..
Greedy Petey
Wrong, The settlement agreement does not specify the BORTZ method anywhere, but rather “industry standards”. If BORTZ was supposed to be the required method, then the settlement agreement would have specifically stated that. Since industry standards can and do change over time, it’s not surprising that the settlement agreement did not specify BORTZ.
The RSDC has said BORTZ is inconsistent with RSDC standards. The RSDC is the authority on “industry standards”, not MASN or the Orioles.
roguesaw
The methodology is considered “industry standard” by all kinds of television providers, who would have a better say in what broadcast standard would be than any individual sports entity. There are multiple teams/networks in MLB that use that methodology, which makes it more industry specific and easier for the Orioles’ to argue it is an industry standard methodology. I believe its currrently a third of the league using Bortz. In fact the firm currently represents the Brewers and Indians, two of the teams represented on the current panel, and have worked with the Jays in the past (the third panel member). They also represent a dozen NBA teams and a dozen NHL teams, NASCAR, the PGA Tour and the Big East. So its not like this is some random thing Angelos pulled out of his backside.
You are correct in that it is not specifically stated as the required methodology. The issue the RSDC has with it in this case, is not actually a statement that it is not industry standard, but rather their issue is that it unfairly allows the O’s to bypass some revenue sharing rules.
Teams are required to calculate their rights fees into their revenue sharing numbers. The Bortz methodology is, in this case, keeping MASN incredibly profitable. Something like 20%. The Orioles, owning a significantly larger share of the MASN entity, can dip into those profits and bypass how revenue sharing calculates tv money. The Nats can too, but to a much smaller degree. The panels decision (which is still closer to the Orioles presented numbers than the nats) would reduce MASN’s profitability, but not make it unprofitable long term. Depending on how the back pay is worked out it could have a few years of tight margins, but this isn’t the network crushing crap Peter Angelos was trying to sell. I cant find it right now, but I believe Forbes had MASN worth more than the Orioles last year. They had the Orioles at 1.2B.
Greedy Petey
I don’t think the undefined standards was an oversight. It lets MLB to decide what the standards are, or more specifically the RSDC who makes a determination for every team. Those individual team decisions are the standards.
Allowing the Os to get the same FMV was just dumb. Selig probably did that just to appease Angelos enormous ego. He would be livid at the though that the Nats would attract more fans. Furthermore, Selig publicly stated he expected MASN to be sold to Comcast or Fox. So he probably though this would never be an issue, especially because the Nats were getting reduced payments for the first five years. He didn’t anticipate the cable tv revenue to explode.
Greedy Petey
It’s Angelos who is not following the settlement agreement. He’s not agreeing to use the arbitration terms he AGREED too, namely the RSDC determines fair market value.
Senioreditor
And it’ll be another decade before Baltimore gets the all star game……..
echoes
Gotta love it, right? One of the best parks in baseball, would be perfect for ASG festivities, but it’s been 26 years since it’s been here thanks to the MLB’s grudge.
Tiger Bob Rollie Fingers
You can’t exactly blame MLB for that grudge, can you? I mean, Bud Selig and now Rob Manfred have both bent over backwards to appease Peter Angelos yet he still sued them and his other fellow owners. Angelos even implied that the MLB owners on the original RSDC panel were crooks.
Would YOU reward that with an all-star game?!?
roguesaw
Crooks or otherwise, a Court agreed that the original panel was not impartial.
I don’t see how Manfred bent over backwards in any way shape or form. Selig, kind of had to, to get the Expos in DC. He could have tried to force them in with his best interests of the game powers, but Im not sure how well that would go over with the other owners. Currently teams areas of control are written into MLB’s by-laws/constitution. To change them requires a vote from ownership. All 30 owners get a say. Im not sure they’d want to cede any of that power. If it went down that road, then the precedent would have been set for Selig or Manfred to strip San Jose from the Giants and give it to Oakland. And forward thinking owners would not put their asset at any kind of risk willingly. But yes, I do believe Selig could have tried to force the move, but took the path of least resistance.
26 years, 30 teams. Its not like Baltimore is getting totally screwed here. Im sure Manfred will give it to the team, regardless how MASN’s dispute is settled, shortly after Angelos croaks. Heck, he might even do it in “Pete’s Honor 😉 :wink:” pretending to bring baseball together and show MLB has no issue with the O’s.
bobtillman
O’s will give Chris Davis to Nats to finalize the deal……
hoof hearted
That’s a good idea
bobtillman
Hm, Chris is 2/2 tonight with a HR….O’s will need some international slots to complete the deal…..
wv17
The O’s wouldn’t know what to do with international money.
roguesaw
Fortunately its not money, but just slots giving a team the right to spend it. Which, or course, the O’s would trade for minor league nobodies so they could say they got something for nothing. Which is sort of true and entirely stupid at the same time lol.
66TheNumberOfTheBest
The Nationals moved into the Orioles house and agreed to live by their rules.
What am I missing?
Charles Russell
No, this is about a TV contract, not Orioles house rules, whatever the heck those are.
1.) MLB sets territory rights for every team. For the 2005 season, MLB changed those rights to accommodate the Orioles and Nationals. Part of this accommodation was to allow the Orioles to be majority owner of the TV network that the Nationals were going to be on.
2.) The Nationals were owned by MLB at the time they moved from Montreal and MLB ownership signed a TV contract for the Nationals with MASN .
3.) Ever since the Nationals existed, MASN has paid the Nationals to be on that network. When the original contract expired several years ago, the Nationals asked for more money. The Orioles (majority owner of MASN) countered with a figure way less than what the Nationals asked for. It’s been litigated ever since.
AtlSoxFan
So, if the contract expired, why can’t the Nats just sign their own deal with Fox or whomever else? Or set up their own network?
More to it than that, has to be, even though I’m no expert on the matter.
jbigz12
They have the right to renogiatiate the fees every 5 years. Their deal is not expired. MASN owns their television rights until 2028. ATLSOXFAN even if the deal were up setting up a new cable network is extremely Capital intensive. That’s not something you just shake a stick at and it happens. The Nationals will also own 33% of MASN at the end of this deal so it’s not as if they do not have a vested interest in the station itself. I believe somewhere down the line the ownership stake will get closer to 50/50 (With the Orioles still having a majority. Say 60/40 or a higher television deal will be reached.) because it makes sense for both sides. The Orioles will fight that for as long as they can. As they should. The Nationals came into their market and they’re going to get all they can out of it.
Tiger Bob Rollie Fingers
My copy of the MASN Agreement did not specify an expiration date for the broadcast rights. How do you know that they expire in 2028?
jbigz12
Fangraphs has it listed until 2028. blogs.fangraphs.com/estimated-tv-revenues-for-all-…
I’m assuming they are correct. It could be longer I am not 100% positive. But the nationals ownership of MASN started in 2005 at 10% and was set to increase one percent each year up to 33% at maturity. 2028 fits that narrative as well. Either way they aren’t free to leave tomorrow or next year as some have suggested they try to do.
Tiger Bob Rollie Fingers
My understanding was that MASN owned the rights in perpetuity. I hope you’re right but, as I said, that date wasn’t in my somewhat redacted version of the Agreement.
Greedy Petey
That’s my understanding as well. MASN is supposed to pay fair market value to the Nats. The problem is that greedy petey was butthurt over the probability that the Nats would be a more successful team financially and that would hurt his ego, so he insisted that the O’s should get the same fmv as the Nats. Which is pretty stupid that MLB allowed this because there is no way the fmv for both teams could ever be the same. MLB probably thought this wouldn’t be an issue because they expected MASN to be sold to Comcast shortly after the agreement.
If the true FMV for the Nats were fairly determined, then MASN would have to pay the Os the same amount as the Nats. And MASN can’t do that because the Os true FMV is less than the Nats true FMV. That would make MASN insolvent. The Nats rightfully deserve their true FMV. Either MASN figures out a way to pay them, or the Nats are entitled to force MASN to dissolve and sue MASN for the revenue they are owed. They should sue the Os, MASN and Angelos personally for this revenue.
What greedy petey wants to do is set the “fair market value” well below what the Nats are worth. The lower the better because if MASN keeps the lion’s share he gets to pocket that at 80% or so as is his ownership stake, He thinks FMV should be set so that MASN can remain solvent. If the greedy F had let MASN develop original programming instead of airing ESPN news, rodeo, and poker coverage MASN could afford to pay both the Nats at true FMV and an inflated FMV to the Os. He would be essentially stealing from the Nats because that overage belongs to MASN, which the Nats take a cut. The Nats might be willing to accept that just to get their FMV. They shouldn’t, but that’s the terms of the agreement.
I hope Angelos lives just long enough to see MASN dissolved and the Nats frees from his thumb, his sons barred from ownership, and the Nats win the World Series. Then the flatline. Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeep!
roguesaw
A lawsuit from the Nats would likely be throw out in any court. The Nats are not the party with a controlling interest in their television rights. MASN is. At best, they could hope for binding arbitration, which is pretty much the same as what they are going through now, the two differences is that one: it would not be representatives from the Indians, Blue Jays and Mariners forming the panel, it would be court appointed, and two both teams would be stuck with whatever numbers the panel comes too.
Both sides would be at risk there. The court appointed panel could just as easily side with the orioles and the established methodology as they could the nats. Most likely? they probably use the current ruling as it averages out two different methods and arrives at a price deemed fair for both parties.
Also, even if the nats could force MASN into insolvency, they still do not improve their position in regards to their broadcast rights, rather they shoot their own foot because with MASN gone they get nothing for their now non-televised games until the Orioles sign some one to broadcast the Nats games.
From the current Panels findings:
Thus, while the Orioles will receive less compensation with the above license fees, the
Agreement’s compensatory purpose, is still fulfilled, including through the Orioles’ super-majority equity interest, under § 2.N of the Agreement. And this is in addition to the Orioles’
other compensation under the Agreement, including (as discussed at page 22, supra):
•
A guaranteed purchase price for the team, § 2.A.
•
A guarantee of the same rights fees as the Nationals, §§ 2.G, 2.J.3.
•
A right to broadcast the Nationals’ games in perpetuity, § 2.D.
•
A $150 million capital account without any cash paid, § 2.P.1.
•
Permanent control over MASN, § 2.O.
natsgm
The part where the orioles are the ones who dont want to comply with the agreement?
sjberke1
A few days ago, there was discussion on a local DC sports talk show to the effect that 1) Peter Angelos is apparently very ill and not able to do business, and MLB has officially inquired as to who is running the Orioles (unhappy that it may be Angelos’ sons), and 2) if Angelos departs in the near future, both the Orioles and MASN may be sold, the latter to NBC Sports Washington (formerly Comcast SportsNet, the sole regional sports network in the DC area.)
bobtillman
The O’s financial dealings are now done by Pete’s buddy, who can be reached at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington.
ctiger14
You obviously have no clue what you are talking about because pete angelos has been one of the most ardent Democratic party/candidate supporters and even held office as a Democrat in the past. He is well known as a financial backer of the D’s. Every once in a while, try not bringing your own political agenda to a discussion.
TreyMancini
Needlessly political much? Angelos is a raging democrat, and anyway what on earth would the president have to do with a baseball team?
basquiat
The idea that Baltimore should try to keep a baseball team out of the nation’s capital is ludicrous. Peter Angelos is a jerk, and I’m cleaning that up.
SFGiantsGallore
Wow I totally forgot about this lol. Thank you MLBTR
hothothotinc
Play baseball. Make money together. Point blank. People in the Baltimore area are going to Orioles games to watch baseball and people in the dmv area are going to watch the Nationals play ball. They can and for the most part are both loved for the sport, nostalgia and the chance for all off us to come together and watch baseball with our friends, family and loved ones. Concentrate on putting a winning team out there. Mr. Angelos… life is too short!
brucebochyisthemarlboroman
I mean, couldn’t the Nats just negotiate a contract with NBC Sports Washington and tell MASN to suck it?? I’m sure there’s more to it but it seems like that would solve the core issue.
Tiger Bob Rollie Fingers
Rights contracts are complicated and require months of work. Neither NBC nor the Nationals would be willing to invest that much time and effort for essentially nothing.
roguesaw
No, because the Orioles control their broadcast rights, not they themselves.
GarryHarris
Why can’t their turf overlap? What’s so different than the Chicago and NY teams?
Tiger Bob Rollie Fingers
It could, but both teams would have to agree to do so. They haven’t and I doubt if they ever will. The Chicago and NY teams share a single market but DC and Baltmore are two separate markets.
mehs
Their turfs do overlap exactly. This is about TV rights revenue. The difference is there was no such thing as TV rights when the Chicago franchises were founded. If they tried to put a team in Hartford, CT, the Sox, Mets and Yankees would all fight it since it would cannibalize their territory. Same thing if they tried to put a team in Portland.
roguesaw
The reasons their turf doesn’t overlap is part of this deal, when it was made to get the Expos in DC, was that the Orioles cede various parts of their “turf” to the Expos/Nationals.
In exchange the Orioles received controlling interests in Nationals’ broadcasts. The parties agreed to use a standard formula in distributing the rights fees to the clubs (which is the current cause of contention). The Orioles also cede a small percentage of their control over Nats broadcasts back to the Nats at regular intervals.
As far as that formula, MASN pays … I dont remember the law firm… to set the rights fees. It is or at least was, considered standard as this firm performs this function for many/most North American regional sports networks, including providing what YES is required to pay the Yankees (surpise! the yankees do not hold controlling interest in the YES network). Rogers Communications owns both the Jays and the channel that broadcasts them; they use this same firm to determine how much of that revenue stays withing the sportsnet entity, and how much goes to the Jays.
I think on its face, everything here favors the Orioles. The argument the Nats are making is essentially, the firm’s standard hasn’t been adjusted since the late 90’s and regional tv revenue is far and away at record highs, therefor the formula needs to be adjusted for the current market. They might just win that argument.
Teams that have agreed to fixed rights fees are bringing in much more than the Nats are. I dont know what the current figure actually is, but when this started the MASN was looking at paying the Nats 34 or 35MM. The Dodgers are pulling in over 200MM a year in rights fees. A better comparison is probably the Phillies. Forbes has the Phillies valued at 1.85B and the Nats at 1.75B. The Phillies get 100MM a year.
jccfromdc
The deal does NOT dictate a formula to use in calculating the rights fees. It simply doesn’t. This claim was oft-repeated by the O’s and their representatives, but as the NY court (in its 2014 opinion) pointed out, there is no such provision in the agreement. It’s remarkable that so many O’s fans continue to believe that there is a provision in the contract that simply does not exist.
roguesaw
I didn’t say it did, though I see that is not clearly conveyed in my comment. The teams DID agree to use a standard formula. The exact phrasing is “established methodology”. Nowhere in the agreement does it specify WHICH ONE. Instead 2.I simply states these rights are to be negotiated by the two teams, and, if they dont reach a resolution then the rights are determined by:
“using the RSDC’s established methodology for evaluating all other related party telecast agreements in the industry.” Id. at § 2.J.3.
The current issue at hand is the Orioles think that “established methodology” means Bortz, used for the first part of the deal, used by a third of the league, and the nationals think that is outdated and want to use comparable markets and deals as the bench mark, arguing that that fulfills “evaluating all other related… …in the industry”
Current panel didn’t exactly find either to be right or wrong. The numbers are closer to the orioles proposals than the nats, but they rejected the orioles using bortz as an end around for other revenue sharing rules. While it doesn’t appear they outright accuse baltimore of this, they do state
Any team with some ownership and control of an RSN may find itself with an incentive to takes its portion of the revenues of the RSN as profit from the enterprise rather than as license fees because the former are not subject to revenue sharing.
And took that into consideration in their current ruling.
jccfromdc
The NY court did in 2015 hold that the phrase “RSDC’s established methodology” did not require the use of the “Bortz methodology.” In response to MASN’s contention to that effect, the Judge noted that MASN had “failed to identify any ‘well defined, explicit, and clearly applicable authority’ [citation omitted] that unequivocally defines ‘the RSDC’s established methodology for evaluating all other related party telecast agreements in the industry’ in the manner they prefer.”
Indeed, the court noted further that the original award was “reasonable on its face” and therefore sufficient to meet the appropriate legal standard. Indeed, the court found that on this grounds the award would have to be upheld “even if this Court were to conclude that the RSDC’s interpretation of its own established methodology was legally and factually incorrect.” This is because of the great judicial deference to arbitration awards.
Tiger Bob Rollie Fingers
Here’s how this story will end:
1) The MLB RSDC will award the Nationals more money than MASN and the Orioles can afford to pay, so
2) MASN will be put up for sale. Several entities will bid on it but the winner will be
3) Monumental Sports, the holding group owned by Ted Leonsis and at least one or two Lerners as minority partners. Monumental will re-sell the Nationals and Orioles rights to Comcast Sports for the next few years while Leonsis builds his own RSN, which itself will debut sometime around 2022.
4)Monumental Sports will acquire the broadcast and streaming rights to the Nationals, the Capitals, the Wizards, the Mystics and… the Orioles!
jd396
How about the O’s and Nats settle the issue with a high stakes winner-take-all game of baseball?
Papabueno
I think the Lerners should get together with Dan Snyder, and Ted Leonsis and start their own local sports network. Then it would be interesting to see what Peter Angelos had to say.
roguesaw
They could start a network, but it wouldn’t be able to broadcast Nationals games. The Orioles don’t just have controlling interest in MASN, they still hold Majority rights to Nationals television broadcasts (regardless of channel). That was part of the deal. The Orioles received the bulk of the rights to Nationals broadcasts and at regular intervals lose a small percentage of those rights by ceding them back to Washington. Until that balance shifts, Nationals games are going to be broadcast where-ever Peter Angelos wants them to.
jccfromdc
That’s not quite right; it’s not the O’s, it’s MASN that owns the right to broadcast the Nats games. What the O’s own is a majority stake in MASN. They are trying to keep the rights fees artificially low because the rights fees are paid equally to the two teams, while the O’s get most of any money that MASN takes as profit. Oh, and MASN has hired Angelos’s son to run it, at a nice six figure salary. The Angelos family is using MASN not to support the O’s, but as a family slush fund.
Senioreditor
How much are the Orioles loosing by not getting an all star game? Probably a lot and they won’t get one for quite a while.
NatsFan15
The O’s put more effort towards winning in the courtroom than they do to winning on the field.
Everyone needs W’s. Probably cheaper to get W’s in court than it would be to keep up with the Yanks and BoSox.
Ironman_4life
I love Sara Pearlman
bradthebluefish
Still feel bad for the Orioles. They had full control of the area but are now splitting it with the Nationals. Tough.