Pay me or I'm walking is part of being in a contract. I would imagine that, in your job negotiating contracts, you would never recommend that your employer stay in a contractual arrangement in which they are not be paid. You keep bring up that Astros "cockblocking" the revenue. Frankly, that's horse****. If the deals the Astros rejected were at a price that would not support the $80 million a year in rights fees, that's called smart business. If the rejected deals were at a price that would require additional future cash calls in a partnership they own 47% of, that's called smart business. Think about it. If they were seeking $3.50 per subscriber in order to make this thing work, and they take $2.25 per subscriber, they will have roughly 33% less revenue. How will an entity with 33% less revenue be able to pay the full rights fees? You know all of this, but you have your kind made up that Crane orchestrated this entire thing to keep the teams off TV. Therefore, you just aren't thinking through the issue.
In no way, shape or form are the Houston Astros requesting payment from CSN for anything in the bankruptcy proceeding. In fact, they're asking the Court to dismiss the bankruptcy altogether.
max, i didn't say anything to dispute your statement. all i'm pointing out is that the Astros said they had a disagreement on payments
refman if they sign the offered deal, they get $80MM and the carriage fees. how much money do they need? that's over $100MM before gate and other things.
Isn't that a fatal flaw on the part of the Astros though? If it was around $3.40 per subscriber, that's pie in the sky stuff. Even if they were promised that by Comcast
let me clarify one thing, i'm assuming Comcast didn't pay the full $80MM because they are unhappy about the Astros not signing with other carriers.
Ok.....So either you are foolishly stating that the Astros are in a contract that didn't contain a remedy for breach of contract provision or you don't know what you are talking about. Most contracts require you to formally request the other party provide remedy for your breach of contract claim (which would have been non payment of fees) within the time period stated in the contract which in this case appears to be 30 days. You can't not ask for / demand your money when you are claiming breach of contract for being owed money. That's what the 30 days was about and the Astros have stated they are owed the money in court documents. If CSN H paid the Astros before 30 days expired the Astros could not walk. If the Astros were in a contract with a breach of contract clause that did not have a remedy provision then they could walk without 30 day notice. Do yourself a favor and please don't respond. I'm on a plane back to Houston from Chicago as I type this in case someone else slaps Major with this first. This will be posted as soon as the plane lands.
Dude That's not a figure of speech and if it was it's certainly not an acceptable one to throw at someone unprovoked
That's not even close to how it would work. The carriage fees go to CSN. CSN pays the $80 million to the Astros and also rights fees to the Rockets. If after paying that and the expenses associated with the studios and the staff, etc...then they would be entitled to 47% of what is left. Even if there were profits to distribute and it would up being $100 million...that still puts them behind half our division in TV revenues.
The Astros, the Rockets and Comcast...yes. They all agreed to is deal which now seems impractical. When a deal becomes impractical, usually the parties terminate the agreement. That is what the Astros were going to do, and Comcast filed an involuntary bankruptcy. Lost in this is the fact that Drayton made this deal and it immediately increased the value of the franchise by $150 million. That's when he decided to sell. Any new owner (not just Crane) would want to realize revenues sufficient to justify that investment sooner rather than later.
Never said they asked in the bankruptcy proceeding. The only way to keep from paying or let the Astros walk was the bankruptcy hearing. The Astros had to follow contractual language requirements to terminate the contract because they feel it was breached.
That's exactly why... What should have happened is all parties agree to add an amendment to the contract to reduce media rights fees to both the Astros and Rockets by 60%. Then increase it from 40% to whatever marketshare a provider represented as they were added. That takes the burden off the network and allows it to survive. This isn't about the payroll. It's about the exhorbitant amount of profit Crane wants to make off the Astros.
I wasn't responding to a post from you at all. I quoted a post from otis. According to the parties, the contractual remedy for the Astros is that, once they haven't been paid for 90 days, they can cancel the agreement and move on.
