The ongoing litigation among the members of the Angelos family, who own the Orioles, have been dropped according to court documents first obtained by the Baltimore Sun’s Jeff Barker. The documents state Georgia Angelos and her sons, John and Louis, have agreed that “all claims, including all counterclaims and defenses, asserted therein be dismissed with prejudice.” The term “with prejudice,” from a legal vantage point, indicates that the charges within cannot be re-filed and that the case cannot be brought back to the courts at a future date. Specifics regarding the agreement to drop the suit were not provided.
Peter Angelos, now 93, headed up the ownership group and was the Orioles’ control person until 2018, when he began to cede more responsibility to his sons as his own health began to decline. Both John and Louis have held roles within the organization prior to that point and in the years since. John was formally approved by the league’s other owners as the Orioles’ new control person following the 2020 season.
The original lawsuit, filed by Louis, alleged that John had blocked his mother’s wishes to sell the team and that the two of them had taken control of the 93-year-old Peter Angelos’ assets — both the team and the family law firm — at Louis’ expense. The initial complaint from Louis alleged the following:
“John intends to maintain absolute control over the Orioles — to manage, to sell, or, if he chooses, to move to Tennessee (where he has a home and where his wife’s career is headquartered) — without having to answer to anyone.”
Georgia had subsequently filed a countersuit against Louis, alleging that he’d fabricated his claims in his own attempt to seize control of the family’s assets. Georgia’s suit sought to remove Louis as a successor and hold him liable for breach of fiduciary duty as well as exploitation of his father.
Needless to say, it’s been a bitter and ugly saga — the entire truth of his which may never fully come to light. John has vehemently denied the allegations made against him and has declared dating back to last June that the Orioles will remain in Baltimore for the long-term.
That said, following the Orioles’ decision to decline a five-year extension of their lease at Camden Yards, there’s some understandable unease among fans. The team says it plans to continue negotiating toward an even longer-term agreement to remain in Baltimore and remain at Camden Yards, where the current lease is set to expire on Dec. 31. John Angelos and Maryland governor Wes Moore both spoke optimistically over the weekend about striking an arrangement that would keep the Orioles at Camden Yards.
The now-resolved legal turmoil among the members of the Angelos family was just one of multiple legal battles surrounding the club. The Orioles and Nationals have been tied up in litigation regarding television rights fees from the Mid-Atlantic Sports Network, which broadcasts both their games, for more than a decade now. The Angelos family owns the majority share of MASN — roughly 77% — while the Nationals hold a 23% stake. Back in 2019, an arbitrator ruled that the network owed $105MM in unpaid rights fees to the Nats, but the subsequent MASN appeal of that ruling has not yet been heard. There’s no clear timeline for when a resolution might be reached.
kiddhoff
Wow!
RobM
I agree!
It’s so nice when the two bickering sons of a billionaire can stop putting words in their mother’s mouth and make peace so they can eventually divide up the family fortune. I wonder if this will increase the chances the team will be sold, if indeed there’s any interest in that? Removing a potential lawsuit that could have dragged on for an eternity can’t hurt.
Thanksgiving will be so pleasant this year at the Angelos household.
Codeeg
Just get an expansion team in Nashville, Montreal, Vancouver, and Mexico City already.
waterdog311
Great, can’t wait to welcome the line dancers, poutines, BC buds, and the cartels.
toomanyblacksinbaseball
Someone say poutine?
Yankee Clipper
Yeah, I used to take poutine after my workouts. Good for the muscle recovery I hear. Too much poutine makes you gassy though, so be careful.
ChiSoxPain
They’re going to expand with 2 teams, not 4…no chance.
RobM
Initially it will be four, but they’ll start with two.
Mexico City will never see a MLB team.
LordD99
Never’s a long time, Rob, but I don’t see it happening anytime soon unless things have improved over the past decade. I used to travel to Mexico City for a past job visiting one of Carlos Slim’s businesses, and as an American businessman, his company provided me with round the clock security.
LFGMets (Metsin7)
Mexico will never get a baseball team. Too dangerous of a country for the MLB to risk having a team there. Not to mention that I’m sure there would be some sort of VISA issues for some players
YankeesBleacherCreature
Lol. Have you ever been to Mexico? Also they dont require a visa for less than a 180 day stay.
BStrowman
Pretty sure the MLB season runs longer than 180 days.
YankeesBleacherCreature
Yes it does. For non-permanent residents, you leave and come back and the 180-day period resets – like a 360 degree turn at the border. I have friends whom live there.
BStrowman
That seems Like a crazy loophole. I don’t know the laws though.
YankeesBleacherCreature
Plenty of countries which rely heavily on tourism set it up that way. It’s also a lot easier to set up investments by foreigners.
Pads Fans
St Louis is more dangerous than most of Mexico. While border towns like Tijuana and Ciudad Juarez have very high crime rates, cites that might be a possible home to a MLB team like Mexico City or Monterrey have a much lower crime rate than St Louis, Detroit, or Baltimore.
Mexico City would rank between those “violent crime ridden cities” of Anchorage and Charlotte North Carolina if it was in the US.
Monterrey would rank between San Diego and Scottsdale.
LFGMets (Metsin7)
That crime rate you speak of is only whats reported. You really think every crime is getting reported in Mexico? The cartels are in bed with the police there
Pads Fans
LFG, you were dropped on your head at birth, right? Murder rates are not “what’s reported”. Its what happened because all deaths are reported.
The cartels WANT you to know when they kill someone. Drug cartel killings are designed to intimidate. They definitely don’t go unreported.
I travel to Mexico City 20+ times a year and I feel safer in Mexico City than I do in LA. Monterrey is like heaven compared to where you live in terms of crime. So please. STFU.
LFGMets (Metsin7)
You said “very high crime rates”, not murder rates. Read what you write before acting all high and mighty
BStrowman
Reporting statistics are most definitely not accurate in every country.
Crazy if you think they are.
bigbarn17
Yeah, pitching so good. Let’s try fill 4 more starting rotations
User 2079935927
Montreal is not going to happen. Happy for the Oriole fans. Now they can focus on getting the TV deal rectified and get inprovements on the ballpark.
Rsox
Montreal could work but they would have to start with a brand new stadium and not just rehash the previous team’s stadium issues playing in the mausoleum that is Olympic Stadium
willpatten
The Bronfman’s are ready to build a baseball only stadium as soon as they can get a team. Montreal would outdraw the Devilish Rays 3 or 4 to 1 and have a wonderful rivalry with Toronto.
And I live 90 quick minutes away. Move the Rays to Montreal!!!!!
Pads Fans
Montreal was at the bottom in attendance in MLB for most of their history.
All of the sites proposed for a stadium there have been turned down including in Peel Basin and both Quebec Economy Minister Pierre Fitzgibbon and Montreal Mayor Valérie Plante have said no public money could be used to build one there or elsewhere while Bronfman is on record as saying the ballpark would be a “community project”.
Serge Goulet of Devimco said recently that the plans for redeveloping the Peel Basin do not include a baseball stadium. Maybe it could be done on land owned by Loto-Québec, but they have yet to show interest in selling land for a baseball stadium.
Bronfman is partnered with the owner of the Rays, so the only possible deal would be moving the Rays there. If Sternberg won’t privately finance a ballpark in the Tampa area, what makes you think he is interested in doing it in Canada?
It would have to be a retractable roof facility, so the cost would be around $1 billion if started today and that the Innovation Zone designation of the Peel Basin area means the group building the ballpark would not also be getting a favorable deal on surrounding property for development.
So much standing in the way of a Montreal MLB team anytime soon.
tonypro7
Not reading all of this… happy for you. Or sorry that happened to you. Whatever is appropriate…
Pads Fans
Willfully ignorant is no way to go through life Tony. Neither is having a 10 second attention span.
socalbball
I don’t understand why people find reading 6 paragraphs, two of which consisted of one sentence each, to be such a burden. I also don’t understand the need to announce to the world that they are evidently incapable of reading anything longer than a tweet.
nitnontu
Thanks Pads fan for the info about Montreal! I enjoyed reading your summary and thought it was well written and not excessively long in light of the issues involved.
toomanyblacksinbaseball
Is this even news in the Baltimore newspaper?
theathlete
Move the Nationals out of DC and a lot of problems are solved.
AmaralFan1
Baseball isn’t going to move the more valuable franchise (in a Top 10 media market) just to bail out the ownership group that doesn’t want to play nice. The Nationals also have more than a decade to go on their lease in DC… unlike the Orioles who are without a stadium after 2023 (unless a new deal gets signed).
mikep2k
Playing nice has nothing to do with it. This was a 2005 agreement between MLB and the Orioles and it’s binding. Time does not make a contractual agreement go away. MLB created this mess and is now getting involved again because it’s screwing up the sale of the Nationals.
An agreement may be made but it will for sure favor the Orioles in some manner.
avenger65
They could move the Nats to Tennessee. Then, like when the Colts moved to Indianapolis, All of the franchise records counted. So all of the records from the St. Louis Browns, Senators, Rangers, Senators, Twins and Washington Nationals should count for the Nashville Nats.
avenger65
Oh, and the Expos.
C Yards Jeff
One entity owns both teams. All revenue, including the MASN take, goes in to one pot. How it gets dispersed back is decided between the entity and it’s Board of Directors/Trustees. Who cares how the MASN money comes in just so it goes back to each team equitably.
Brian 38
@ Jeff – “Equitably” is a loaded word when the MLB strong armed the move and the O’s fast-tracked MASN to cash in on it. Equitably for the O’s is “get off my lawn or make it worth losing fans’. Equitably for the Nats something closer to 50/50. If it lands closer to 50/50, then MLB screwed over the O’s for the benefit of the league.
C Yards Jeff
@Brian 38: quite the mess indeed. Of all the places to relocate the Montreal franchise, why did MLB choose a location that more than overlapped in to another teams territory? IMO, any finger pointing should be directed at the league not these two (2) franchises.
BStrowman
The metro area is big enough to support both teams though. Is the reasonable deal a large share split of MASN revenue in perpetuity?
I don’t know if that was the “fair” solution but that’s the deal the O’s and Nats agreed to.
Pads Fans
As you said, the contract between MLB and the Orioles is permanent or as permanent as any contract can be. The Nationals have no out. If they play in DC, they must adhere to the contract and it supersedes any bankruptcy by MASN.
The math of the TV situation is complicated, but I will try to lay it out.
The arbitration panel in the lawsuit that the Nationals have against MASN placed the total value of the combined Nationals and Orioles TV broadcasts at $192 million per year.
MASN has said that revenue much less than that with execs saying off record “less than 2/3 or that amount”, but since the records are not public, we don’t know exactly what that amount is
Per the contract, the Orioles get 77% of that and the Nationals 23% minus all costs of broadcasting the games.
The DC DMA ranks 8th or 9th in the country (it flip flops with Houston most years) and has 2.566 million TV households.
The Baltimore DMA ranks 28th and has 1.130 million TV households.
Combined they have 3.696 million TV households and would rank 3rd behind NY and LA in market size.
Orioles TV ratings have fallen 20% and ticket sales have fallen from the low to mid 30s to 16-18K since the Nationals came to the area. While part of the reason for declining ticket sales is the teams record the last few years, even in the 2012-2016 season when the team had the best record in baseball, the average attendance was 28k.
This was something predicted by MLB and marketing organizations and the entire reason for the Orioles getting the contract that gives them majority control of the TV market.
What would it take for the Nationals to buy them out? Its been estimated that using current TV contracts for a market of the combined size of DC/Baltimore, the share of MASN given to the Orioles in the deal, the difference between their 30% share of the market by DMA size and the 77% share of the market they now control, is worth $87.4-90.3 million per season to the Orioles.
Since the contract does not have an end date, what would be an equitable amount for the Nationals to pay the Orioles in total to get out of the contract? 20-25 years, the average length of a TV contract for a large market, at $90 million per year? A longer term like 30 or even 40 years?
Would they need to account for inflation in that deal? Would they need to pay it upfront or pay annually? So many questions.
The only answer I can see is that its more than $2 billion and likely $3 billion or more.
jccfromdc
The MASN agreement does call for the O’s to get the lion’s share of MASN revenue (currently 77%; the Nats’ share started at 13%, goes up by 1% every year, but is capped at 33%). It also calls for the two teams to split the broadcast revenues 50/50. Which also advantages the O’s for the reasons that you lay out, with the Nats getting the same cut despite having the much larger and more valuable media market. But with a 50/50 split the broadcast revenues, set at “fair market value,” are a cost to MASN that comes out of the profits (split 77%/23%). So the higher the rights fees are set, the less advantageous it is for the O’s. The Angelos family runs MASN, their lack of interest in investing into MASN is obvious from their laughable programming, which has all the production values of late 70’s local TV news broadcasts.
In addition to maximizing profits for the O’s, the Angelos family is also desperately fighting the teams actually getting FMV for the broadcast rights because, if set too high, they could not only completely swallow the 77/23 profits, but they could bankrupt MASN. It’s possible (they haven’t discussed it with me) that the Lerners see this as a potential escape clause. If MASN goes bankrupt, arguable the Nats could then make their own RSN deal.
jccfromdc
Problem: the Nats are committed to another ten years for their lease on Nationals Park. The O’s lease agreement expires at the end of this season. If one of the teams move (I don’t believe it, but assuming arguendo), it would be the O’s.
Also, while Orioles fans like to pretend it isn’t true, the St. Louis Browns are the team that Baltimore swiped away in 1954. The Senators did not contest the move, a precedent that Angelos was disinclined to follow.
BStrowman
There wasn’t local media rights in 1954. You can bet your ass that any owner now wouldn’t give up territory without compensation.
How the world works.
mikep2k
As a lifelong Orioles fan, I would love to have an ownership situation that is transparent where the owners are dedicated to winning. With revenue sharing, TV deal bonuses, gate receipts and concessions revenue, the Orioles should be spending more than they are currently and planned.
I fully understand we’re coming out of a rebuild and we need to have some measure of restraint. I also understand not going after big ticket free agents on the heels of one winning season. However, a sports team should not be seen as a money-making venture until the point that you sell it. I’m not asking any owner to lose money, I”m just asking that they not try to get an ROI on a sports team. It only devalues your franchise in the long run.
I loathe the Angelos family. Peter Angelos has caused more harm to the Orioles than the Yankees and Red Sox ever did. Chris Davis contract? Peter Angelos. Not empowering a GM (until Elias), Peter Angelos. I’m sure there are a ton more examples that I don’t feel like typing.
Don’t get me started on the MASN dispute. That was a manufactured problem introduced by MLB to get the Expos to DC. Weird how MLB now throws their hands up when they created the problem.
Samuel
mikep2k;
This was in the article:
“That said, following the Orioles’ decision to decline a five-year extension of their lease at Camden Yards, there’s some understandable unease among fans.”
I know of no unease among Orioles fans. I wonder if you have any or know of Orioles fans that do.
Would also ask any posters here that are Orioles fans either in Baltimore or who grew up in Baltimore if they have any unease.
BStrowman
I don’t but your casual “fan”who simply reads a headline and react might have a concern. You have to remember this city did lose the Colts overnight and there’s still some general uneasiness from the older folks who lived through that.
But all in all, not much chatter about them leaving in Baltimore. I have no concern personally.
O'sSayCanYouSee
@ Samuel — Nope. No unease on my part. Don’t know an O’s fan amoungst my group that even blinked twice.
Having been 9 years old when the Colts snuck outta town (and became a Cowboys fan, cause I couldn’t be a Skins fan). But this isnt that, times and circumstances are different.
Samuel
“I’m not asking any owner to lose money, I’m just asking that they not try to get an ROI on a sports team. It only devalues your franchise in the long run.”
mikep2k;
Where did you study Economics?
How does making a profit devalue the franchise? So if the franchise doesn’t make money people will want to buy it and pay more for it?
How about apartment building owners? See, if they don’t make money on their investment then then they can put it on the market and potential buyers will be outbidding one another to overpay to buy a property that’s a 24/7/365 headache that they won’t make a profit on until they sell?
This thinking is an example of why some economists believe America heading into a major Depression.
User 3595123227
Like I said several months ago they are going to sell the team soon. I stand by what I said. Money talks. Start talking about everyone getting millions when they sell the team and see how fast differences are settled.
PKCasimir
What we don’t know is what arrangements Peter Angelos, one of the US’s shrewdest lawyers, has made for his estate. Is there a living trust? What is the state of Peter Angelos’ health? Is there a guardianship? It appears there is a struggle for control but we are having to try and read the tea leaves without knowing what the real legal status is of all the family participants. Selling the team is probably the only way to resolve what appears to be a bitter family dispute.
avenger65
If anyone should move, it should be the Nats. I say send them back to Montreal and give those fans another chance to come out and support the team. Of course they’ll need a new stadium since the one from the Olympics was a nightmare. They did it in Toronto, let’s give Montreal another shot. That way, no more fighting over TV rights. For many years WGN, a superstation in Chicago, broadcast both the Sox and the cubs. But media prejudice took over and the cubs always came first. Thank God the Sox finally got their own station and didn’t have to deal with “We now join the White Sox game in progress.”
Rex Block
@avenger65 “If anyone should move, it should be the Nats.”
That will never happen.
O'sSayCanYouSee
Rex Block — Why not? What are the Nationals prepared to offer the Orioles if their unsatisfied w/ the MASN deal? Ownership has an obligation to the team to maximize revanue streams, and being taxed by MASN is a tax no other team is willing to pay…should they be paying it just for a restricted market?
Leaving is more profitable (and possibly less expensive than decades of lawsuits/lawyers).
Leaving leaves no money on the table.
jccfromdc
Either team moving actually takes money away from MLB, in the sense that Manfred is looking to expand by at least two teams, and MLB really wants to get an exorbitant “franchise fee.” If either mid-Atlantic team moves, they would likely move to the most promising city – taking that city off the table for that competition for an expansion team.
jccfromdc
FYI, the oral arguments for the O’s latest appeal of the MASN case is set for March 14, 2023.. I only specify the year because this has gone on a LONG time – this case is for the rights fees for the five year period from 2012-2016.
This dispute is not over whether to break the MASN contract, the dispute is over MASN’s obligation to pay both teams fair market value for their rights fees. MASN is trying to duck that because those payments go equally to both teams, where the O’s get to keep 77% of profits that they keep with MASN.
O'sSayCanYouSee
jccfromdc — Well, we agree it’s about “fair market value”. The Nationals signed a deal to Not get fair market value….but now Want FMV. Woops,…buyers remorse.
jccfromdc
Nope. You’re only half right on the contract. The contract IS designed to be unfair to the Nationals. Hence the lopsided split of MASN revenues. The contract also advantages the O’s because MASN has to pay both team equal amounts for the broadcasts. That favors the O’s because they get what the Nats get despite having a smaller media market. BUT
The broadcast fees DO have to be set at “fair market value.” The O’s think that it should be something like “fair market value, taking into account the interests of the Orioles.” Their problem – as judges have pointed out – is that the contract says something different. It just says “fair market value.” The two teams were about $100M/year apart in how they valued FMV. The arbitration panel (once reconvened after the initial award was thrown out on COI grounds) actually set FMV closer to the O’s valuation. The O’s still sued because they don’t want to pay what they owe.
O'sSayCanYouSee
jccfromdc — Not close. The broadcast fees DO NOT have to be set at Fair Market value (the rates are in the deal, more on that in a sec) At each of the negotiating windows, the Nats get a larger % of FMV, but will never get 100%. (In addition, the % increases that the Nats can negotiate within are also clearly delineated (eg 10-16%, next window 16-24%, etc… (I don’t recall actual rates))
FMV — At the time of the MASN deal, local media rights were beginning to be a hot thing, but had not become what they would 5 years after the deal (totally crazy $$). So, the predermined rates in the contract, where quickly laughable bad. Obviously, predictably, and justifiably, the Nats ask for more than the % increase alotted for in the deal…IN ADDITION to arguing over the “methodology” MASN used to calculate that amount.
“The Orioles sued because they don’t want to pay what they owe.”. — hard false. The Orioles appealed the verdict, didn’t sue the Nationals.
And what MASN owes..is Why the Nationals sued. (they did sue MASN, right, not the Orioles…since it’s about the rates owed. Ummmmmmm)
jccfromdc
Source? I am relying on Judge Marks’s opinion in the original litigation (iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServl…). In that opinion the judge noted that section 2 of the agreement itself provides that the fair market value set by the process in the agreement “shall be binding on the Nationals and the RSN. Nowhere in that opinion is the kind of percentage adjustments of the FMV that you assert. Not that I don’t trust an O’s fan internet commenter, but I’ll have to see a source before I give that idea any credibility.
Although it’s also beside the point. MASN and the Nats disagreed wildly on how the rights should be valued. The agreement contemplated that possibility and named the RSDC as the arbiter.. the litigation is over MASN’s continued refusal to pay what they owe based on the contract, It was MASN, not the Nats, that initially sued in 2014 to set aside the RSDC’s award for the 2012-2016 period. The judge set aside the initial award on COI grounds, but found against MASN on every substantive aspect of the case and noted that the simple remedy would be for the Nats to retain new counsel and return to the RSDC.. I predicted at the time (I can sent you a link if you’d like) that it would likely be Angelos and not the Nats to appeal, and that’s what happened. In the current action being argued next month, it’s MASN and the O’s that are the appellants and Nationals who are respondents.
Pads Fans
The payments don’t go equally to both teams. The Orioles keep 77% of the profits MASN makes for the combined TV markets and the Nationals 23%.
The dispute was not over that. There is nothing the Nationals can say about that split of revenue.
It is about what the Nationals and subsequently the MLB appointed arbitration board valued the combined market at and what MASN said the actual revenue and profits were.
kodiak920
…and probably the Orioles will lose, and the Orioles will appeal. Same as it ever was, same as it ever was.
Pads Fans
Unless they appeal to the US Supreme Court, this is as far as this case goes.
jccfromdc
And it’s really unlikely that the Supreme Court would pick this case up. The only federal question for them to consider would be whether the FAA permits a court to set aside an arbitration procedure to which both parties agreed after extended negotiations. I can’t imagine that any Supreme Court – and in particular as currently constituted – would want to change arbitration law in such a fundamental way.
RutgersESQ
YES!!! I love it when the attorneys are the only one who win!
Rex Block
The Angelos family and MASN need to settle the broadcast fee dispute yesterday. It’s shameful it has dragged on as long as it has. If the payments break MASN, then it can assign some more of the ownership share to Washington.
Pads Fans
The money to settle to dispute is already in escrow, so it won’t “break MASN”.
MASN cannot assign more of the ownership share to the Nationals. The agreement with MLB calls for 77% of the revenue from the combined media market belongs to the Orioles and 23% to the Nationals. Permanently.
Even if MASN went belly up, the new media deals for the combined market would still belong 77% to the Orioles and 23% to the Nationals.
BadCo
Shark eating shark
kje76
Ah, so the Angelos Family and the Orioles can get on with the true goal of baseball …
Getting Baltimore/Maryland to give them as much money as possible to stay.
Steve Rogers
Why would the Angelo’s family want to continue in a city on the decline? They should sign the 5 year extension with an out while they shop for a new home in Nashville and Las Vegas. Possibly they are short on cash and can’t move. However, they could sell corporate bonds in the team in order to make a properly financed move.
O'sSayCanYouSee
Why would Orioles leave Baltimore? As long as they stay, they get to keep their hand in the pocket of the DC team. You know what’s better than 1 market…2 markets! As long as you think money is the prime motivation for Owners, the money says Baltimore stays put.
Brian 38
The country has come a long way to see Captain America advocating for cities losing a source of their identity… The city itself may be in decline, the metro area is definitely not. The area isn’t in some type of death spiral. Plenty of businesses, resources, colleges, tech, and yes, even farms. Let’s not just parrot what we hear or see on the news.
No one wants to see any team move. Every time it happens, a bit of our hearts break. Sure, there are cases where it’s ultimately what needs to be done, but it’s far from the ideal.
Baltimore is not in that type of situation. The Orioles shouldn’t be leaving. Same for DC/Nats. The Baltimore/DC metro area is large enough to support both teams especially if there’s additional support from the RSN as they currently have. People are shifting away from cable and toward streaming services. The RSN’s need to adjust and not package with Comcast or other cable providers.
willpatten
Governor Moore stated in his Inaugual Address that rebuilding Maryland has to start with rebuilding Baltimore. He and Angelos will develop the entire CY neighborhood with housing, retail, hospitality, etc and make CY into a 9 month entertainment venue. Chill the hell out.
Monkey’s Uncle
This makes everyone happy. Except the lawyers of course.
Stop Giving Billionaires Money
If the Nats had to pay Baltimore to move to DC did the Angels pay the Dodgers or the A’s pay the Giants to move into their local markets?
Pads Fans
The Angels were in LA before the Dodgers as a minor league team. They came into the majors in 1961, just a few years after the Dodgers moved there. When local media deals came into being, the Angels were already there.
What is at stake in Baltimore and DC is media rights. Prior to the advent of cable TV in the 1980s there were no local media rights in baseball. That was when the Orioles were appointed the media rights to the DC/Baltimore area by MLB.
If you wanted to move into LA today, you would be looking at paying the Dodgers and Angels a huge fee for imposing on their portion of those media rights if they agreed to it al all.
Same goes for the A’s and Giants.
Stop Giving Billionaires Money
I understand the situations were different and thanks for pointing out the facts. Though I was already aware of the Angels being a minor league team. I still don’t agree with the way baseball set this up. Tv media rights could be dealt with similar to local rights used to be. And being w minor league team means nothing. Will a MLB team have to pay Charlotte or Las Vegas AAA team if they expand in those cities?
I know people will say those situations are different but the MLB is still the deciding factor. And they had even more authority to get the DC rights back when they made the deal because they literally controlled the expos. What about Las Vegas and Reno current markets when Nevada gets a team, do they have to pay 6 different teams? It belongs to Dodgers, Angels, Giants, Padres, A’s and dbacks.
This whole situation is wrapped up in silliness and the way teams have set it up is ridiculous. The MLB should’ve done what’s right for the league in the long run instead they bent to the will of the worst owners in the sport. A family that is constantly suing each other
O'sSayCanYouSee
@ Cookie Bitts — How would you have compensated the Orioles organization for loosing it’s territorial rights over some of the wealthiest counties in the Country?
If the government showed up at your door and said they’re putting another house on your property…but their doing it for the “right for the country” so you get nothing…just loose out on what was yours?
(Not to mention, the League is interested in All of the franchises. Devaluing one Org, to promote another, isn’t in the Leagues best interest. Future buyers would not spend on MLB franchises if the League could cut their revanues “because it’s right for MLB” without compensation. Thier money goes “poof” by edict?! Think it through.)
Pads Fans
Nevada won’t get a team. Too small of a media market.
Minor league teams don’t have existing MLB media rights.
This whole situation is of MLB’s making because they wanted to move the Expos to DC, a media market they had already allocated to the Orioles. They signed the permanent media agreement to get the Orioles ok to allow the Nationals to move there.
BStrowman
It’s “lose”
“Loose” describes your belt buckle after thanksgiving.
Just one of those things for me……
jccfromdc
FWIW, at the time that the Nationals moved to DC, the MLB Operating Constitution defined the “operating territory” of the Orioles was defined as “the city of Baltimore and the counties of Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Howard and Harford. It did not include Washington, even though the Orioles then had a retail store there..” Source: Baltimore Sun baltimoresun.com/business/bs-bz-os-nats-marketing-…
jccfromdc
As I just noted, the MLB Operating Constitution does not include DC, or PG and Montgomery County in MD as part of the O’s “operational territory.” So they didn’t have to buy Angelos out of something that he didn’t own. But they were terrified that he would litigate and, even though not likely to succeed, that in the discovery phase he would convince a court to open their books.
utah cornelius
You don’t make an elipsis with five dots. It’s three.
Just one of those things for me…
BStrowman
Yeah………………….
O'sSayCanYouSee
@ jccfromdc — Whaaa?? So, MLB legally could have just put Nationals into DC w/o Orioles say so…BUT were so scared of Angelos, they GAVE him a deal??!!?! WOW… that’s warped!
Peter Angelos and his law firm wrote/authored and delivered the MASN deal to MLB. It was reported that MLB didn’t want to negotiate w/ Angelos because of timelines AND he’s a s.o.b. of a lawyer. It was a bad deal or no deal. They held their noses and signed it.
But I see how your narrative helps you better than truth.
O'sSayCanYouSee
Yeah, the Orioles store at Fargaute North Metro. The bus would pick up O’s fans in DC for the games. Great fun of a bus trip, did it twice myself!
And if you know the region, you know why the Orioles shop was in DC, and at that specific spot.
dpsmith22
The MASN debate is comical. Nats signed the deal now they want more $. Hypocrisy is DC has no bounds.
jccfromdc
Ironically the Nationals are simply asking for what they are owed under the terms of the contract. The O’s are the ones that are trying to keep more $$ that they aren’t entitled to under the deal.
jccfromdc
Nope. The o’s signed the deal and now they want to get out of paying the $$ that they owe.
slowcurve
Birds of a feather flock together…or something.
Ga
And these are the mafia scu* taxpayers want to continue to give hundreds of millions to?! It is time to remove Oligarchs from control over our national sport. Teams taken over by cities/regions/fans as NPOs. These Oligarchs bought out at the market rate when purchased + x%. GMs hired to run teams to win. If taxpayers pay hundreds of millions — even 1 billion for Tampa’s new stadium+! — taxpayers OWN it, not some ruthless twa*s who steal the money and shower some of it on politicians. Run like Packers, European and other soccer teams. For example, the Orioles used to be owned by the fans. FC Barcelona is owned by the fans and is one of the richest teams in sports. “Unlike many other football clubs, the supporters own and operate Barcelona. It is the fourth-most valuable sports team in the world, worth $4.76 billion, and the world’s fourth richest football club in terms of revenue, with an annual turnover of €582.1 million.” To get this new system up and running Congress removes anti-trust exemption from the Oligarchs and, if the Oligarchs resist, a new league is created with a new NPO structure and taxpayer dollars flow there instead. Bye-bye greedy and incompetent mafia Oligarchs! No “socialism” for the rich!! Go steal daddy’s cash but not the taxpayers’ cash!!
gary55wv
Mexico has 8 of top 50 in world violent cities
willpatten
Don’t forget that the U.S. Congress threatened MLB with revocation of their antitrust waiver if they didn’t move a team to DC for the entertainment of the Congress.
I don’t like a lot of what Peter Angelos did but he’s a pretty good attorney and the deal he cut was pretty sweet.
Orioles Magic
Listen Y’all- Old Angelos had less of an impact than you think. Young guns just want validation. They will stay and leave the hands in the experts. This isn’t the Commanders.
Thornton Mellon
This was a long time ago and I believe it was that MLB was in a big hurry to move a team to DC and Angelos resisted. Angelos cut a good deal. Since it was rushed the language wasn’t clear which is much of the dispute, but this is completely MLB’s fault for being in a big hurry. This was also not a rich owner wanting to move a team to DC that was approved by the other owners, it was driven by MLB baseball – that makes a difference.
The markets DO intersect. I know plenty of folks from the northern and western DC suburbs who were Orioles fans in the 80s and 90s. I went to games at Memorial and Camden Yards with some. When DC got a team, they switched. Same as when the Colts left in 1984. Many people where I grew up became Redskins fans (I am from northwest Baltimore County) and then switched to the Ravens in 1996. Frederick is a small city roughly equidistant from both and you’ve got Howard, Montgomery, and PG counties in the middle, among the wealthiest in the US, where its about the same drive.
The Home Team Sports cable market prior to the Nats used to stretch all the way to North Carolina, I believe, showing Orioles games. Certainly the Orioles lost viewership from the Nats moving in.
Not saying the cities are viable, but certainly MLB would hear from Cleveland and Cincinnati if they wanted to put a team in Columbus, OH. For Nashville they’ll probably hear from the Braves, Seattle would squawk at a team in Portland, OR, etc.
AssumesFactNotInEvidence
That’s a lot of typing there…
Thornton Mellon
Not really. I type 115 WPM
In Seager/Hader We Trust > the 70 MM DH Ohtani
He said typing, not time. That’s still something. I’m probably 70 or so and still proud about it. I guess it’s all relative.
In Seager/Hader We Trust > the 70 MM DH Ohtani
Family Feud!
Ga
“Socialism” for the rich is something Americans just love. Taxpayers paying for stadiums because they are blackmailed by a few guys who also pay off politicians. If taxpayers are going to pay to build stadiums and all of the rest — 1 billion to the Rays, for example — taxpayers should own the stadium and the team. Buy these Oligarchs out at market rate for when the teams were bought and run it is an NPO like FC Barcelona (one of the richest and most successful sports teams ever). Listen to John Oliver about how y’all have been suckered to believe it is the “free market” that runs your sports teams when it is actually taxpayer cash with no control that does: youtube.com/watch?v=xcwJt4bcnXs