Rangers, Angels, and Mariners all have varying ownership stakes in their networks, with the Mariners owning more than 50%.
based on Faos's link, the rockets said: we are more valuable in our world (nba) than the astros are in their's (mlb), and i think they imply they are more valuable overall. that doesn't mean they want don't want something done quickly. obviously they want to be on television but they don't need cash flow right now.
If an $80 million rights fee is not enough for you to remain competitive, I think one could argue you are in the wrong business. He's not asking to be subsidized? sub·si·dize transitive verb \ˈsəb-sə-ˌdīz, -zə-\ : to help someone or something pay for the costs of (something) If he's not asking to be subsidized, why does he care about the cost per customer of sattelite and cable carriage? You just posted their own briefs which stated they feel they need to make as much money as possible from the network to off set player costs and remain competitive. Therefore, they believe they can't remain competitive without the public paying as much as possible for the channel.
He's not arguing that $80MM is not enough. Because it's a business and he's selling a service? If I sell you an item and you buy it, are you subsidizing me? If they have substantially lower revenues than their competitors, they wouldn't be competitive with those competitors financially. That seems like common sense.
this dude doesn't watch the news. its the wrong time to be complaining about money to average joe mr. crane. mr. crane can i run your pr department? if you would just shutup you wouldn't have half the hate you run into. details will emerge of your dealings. you've forced your partners's hand which are also public entities. did you not see this coming? Sincerely Otis Thorpe (of clutchfans.net)
Where has Crain complained to the average Joe recently? Or are you referring to his comments back in March or April?
major, i've said you aren't in this personally i think. everytime you question a statement like that i think its a stupid question. i'm not being mean, i don't get how you can say that crane isn't crying poor and that rubs people the wrong way. do you question that? do you not get that from my statement?
I'm confused, too. It looks like the market will not bear the price he is asking for providing that service. Who will make up that difference? What is the end game here, if the bankruptcy is denied? I assume the Astros walk, but can they sell the service to someone else at a price they would like, and if the answer is yes, why cannot CSN? Or is there some other benefit that would then accrue to the Astros.
I asked a fairly simple question to clarify what specific statement you're referring to. Are you unable to answer it? Where, exactly, do you seem him complaining to the average joe?
FSN has the ability to pay more than CSN because they have more leverage than CSN when negotiating carriage deals. But that said, only Crane knows what he's been offered from others or what he thinks the market would bear for him. The endgame for the Astros is to have the right to try to generate whatever fees they are looking for. If they can't do it, so be it - that's their loss.
Is there a reason that CSN can't survive with only the Rockets as their partner (provided they get the carriage deals soon)? Weren't they trying to buy out the Astros in the first place? I think I'm missing an obvious piece of information.
Rangers and Angels have what % ownership? The Mariners number of $2 billion over 17 years (only an estimate) is a total valuation, not a rights fee valuation.
Let me be clear, I don't have a problem with Crane demanding and trying to get whatever he wants or thinks he needs to run the team. Not at all. Just don't get suckered into thinking they can't compete without the number he wants. Of course they can.
According to this: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dodgers-could-be-last-team-to-strike-gold-with-local-tv-deal/ Rangers: $150MM rights fees, 10% ownership, Fox Sports Southwest Angels: $150MM, 25%, Fox Sports West Mariners: $115MM, Over 50%, Root Northwest Astros: $80MM, 45%, Comcast Houston Don't have any idea of profitability or carriage rates of the various networks, but 10% ownership in FSSW which covers Big12 football and has a much wider footprint, seems like it would be worth more than an equivalent ownership in a CSN-H. Root Sports NW has the Mariners, Utah Jazz, and various other college/minor league teams in the region so their reach is also probably broader than CSN-H due to the fact that they cover Washington, Oregon, and Utah at the very least. Not sure what FS West' reach is.
I don't believe the Ranger's deal is worth $150 million. Wasn't that disputed? Just a quick google search and I see it at $80 million.
