Ive been reading the last pages, and i must say we have some very intelligent people here that know what they are talking about.. Does anyone have a prediction of the outcome at this point? do you think we will be watching any Rockets games anytime soon? besides the people that have Comcast?
I am pissed off at every one involved with this situation. I think the fact that the Astros are the majority shareholder and they make the decisions is the problem that people have and thus being why they are blaming the Astros. I don't think it has anything to do with their play on the field (well it doesn't with me). I knew once Crane bought the team and gutted it, it would be a few years before we were relevant again. It is all part of the process. I personally think if this was the other way around and the Rockets were the majority shareholders, there would likely be a lot more hatred towards the team Rockets (this being the rockets website and all.) People are frustrated, annoyed, pissed off, and need some one to blame. People hear "Astros blocked the deal" so people are like "**** the Astros". I won't lie, I have said it a few times myself. Just out of frustration. Not that I hate the Astros and don't want them to succeed.
The Astros have no bigger right to veto than anyone else. Their ownership in the deal is not reflective of their voting rights. They all have equal voting rights with respect to carriers. They just have different needs than the others relative to their league and their division.
The Astros don't make all the decisions though. All the parties gave all the other parties veto power over anything. So unless there's unanimous consent, nothing can get done. It just happens to be that the Astros interests are not aligned with the other two parties.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Bond is discussing fall 2012 and spring 2013 negotiations with DirecTV and Astros’ opposition to offers below original biz plan.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/395309032438632449">October 29, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Once again, details of suggested offers are not being shown in courtroom because of confidentiality requirements by Comcast/NBC.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/395309266250121217">October 29, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Astros have needs that Crane should have considered when he bought the team. He bought the team and then wanted to change the structure of the TV deal that was in place. You can spin it how you want, but that's what happened. That conversation should have taken place before he purchased the Astros not after.
That's not true. He only wanted to change the structure after Comcast failed to deliver on their promises. The TV deal he bought into gave him that right through the veto power it afforded him. If the Rockets and Comcast didn't want that to happen, then should have considered it when putting the deal together in the first place.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Judge Isgur taking issue with Comcast/NBC position that Astros refused across the board to OK carriage rates below business plan.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/395310668192043008">October 29, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Judge: “It (G Postolos email) doesn’t say stick with the old plan. It says if you don’t want to stick with the old plan, get me a new one.”</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/395310935436324864">October 29, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Just want to thank everyones contributions to this thread. I've read every post, very informative and enlightening. Oh and I'll have a beer on my couch in honor of you guys
Is it just me, or do these tweets contradict one another. First it says the Astros refused carriage rates below the original plan, but the next tweet says that if the old plan wouldn't work, present a new plan. Isn't that what they did when they brought the new offer from DirecTV? Perhaps Granville and Max are both correct?
No you are misunderstanding. Postolos wanted a business plan presented that worked under the lower carriage rates. Basically CSN came back with an offer from DTV and the Astros didn't feel like the existing plan was workable at that number so they told CSN to create a new business plan. This is part of of CSN's problem with the Astros. They feel like the Astros have been obstructing because they wanted to scrap the agreement in place and create a new one all along.
He did consider it. He bargained for veto rights. He was able to veto deals he didn't want. That's how you deal with it ahead of time.
What terms did he want changed? Clearly you know definitively. What terms specifically did he want changed? Because what I see here is Comcast going doing an end-around throwing the whole deal into bankruptcy because they no longer like the terms of the partnership agreement they signed. That's the entire crux of the bankruptcy proceeding. Please judge...I didn't mean to agree to this...and I don't have authority to get this to you ordinarily...but thankfully all my affiliates are creditors, so we'll just throw this whole thing before you using affidavits from guys who serve as officers of creditors as well as directors of CSN.
Really all parties (except the Rockets funny enough) have decided they are unhappy with the partnership and either have tried or are trying to make serious amendments to it OR to get out of it. To your point, CSN basically believes that the Astros were going to reject all offers (unless their target was hit) because they wanted a new business model put in place. The bankruptcy end run is their way to try to strong arm the Astros the way they feel the Astros have strong armed them. Edit: I'm not saying they are right or wrong, just explaining. I never want to defend Comcast.
They wanted a new business model despite the fact they were the majority interest? color me doubtful. They wanted out because they realized they were in a bad deal? That Comcast would never be able to deliver to the expectation? Absolutely. And Comcast affirms all that. Comcast attorneys lead off opening statements yesterday talking about how disappointed they are in this deal. We don't even know what the Astros target was. Comcast was able to get exactly ONE carrier to come to the table. How in the hell can anyone counting on the equity in the deal to be worth anything bank on that? It's ridiculous. Blow it the eff up already. It's beyond salvageable. The Astros used their bargained for exit strategy...what Comcast is doing is embarrassing.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Looks like testimony has ended in CSNH hearing, but we're in recess as lawyers continue to huddle in various combinations.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/395325403847344130">October 29, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
