I'm not sure about all of them, but CSN in DC doesn't air baseball, just hockey and NBA. Technically the teams, especially the Rockets, could even make a deal with CSN. They just wouldn't be partners anymore. Although I'm sure they'd want a guarantee of provider coverage first. So if the Rockets land on DirectTV, does that mean they won't air on Dish, ATT and Comcast now? Doesn't seem like a great solution.
Couldn't they line up a quick deal with Fox given past history? Or would they need to have full resolution on this pending case first, including disposition of equity?
sounds like the judge is considering giving both teams the chance to make something happen. we'll see.
Hockey and NBA are a lot of nights. I can easily see that working. If only we had a hockey team. The Rockets have specifically said in pleadings that if the Astros walk, they walk too. They say the station would implode.
No, the worst part of this whole deal is that I can't watch Rocket games on TV. Sorry to sound so crass, but frankly, I don't give a crap about any of that other programming or even who loses jobs. Things are tough all over. I just want to be able to watch Rocket GAMES on TV. That is literally all I care about in all of this.
This would describe the majority of us. Let CSN crash and burn in a hurry so the Rockets can get back on FSN asap!
This. Everyone else can go to hell in this debacle. I could care less who/what folds as a result of this, Astros included.
Looking at pleadings online this morning...a couple of things: 1. Clutch City Sports & Entertainment, L.P. leased space to CSN within the Toyota Center. They're claiming that as of October 1, 2013, the current year's installment of $312,965.50 became due and owing and it has not been paid. So Clutch City will join the bankruptcy as a creditor relevant to that debt. 2. The Rockets allege that they CSN is obligated to make "substantial payments in excess of $15,325 to them through 2032" for media rights. But they DO NOT claim non-payment of those fees at all. Just that they will be owed through 2032. So Rockets (under corp name Rocket Ball, Ltd -- presumably company that owns the Houston Rockets media rights) joins the bankruptcy as well, even though CSN is not in default to Rockets for those payments.
Why is Rocket Ball joining the bankruptcy even though CSN is not in default on the payments they owe?
3:58 AM MadMax?? Do you even sleep? And even if you just got up, there is no way I could write long, well written insightful comments like that. Impressive.
They wound walk as a PARTNER. If, IF, CSN could get their crap together, get distribution and outbid other networks I don't see why they wouldn't consider it. I'm just saying it's an option but not necessarily likely to happen.
I'm a vampire. I'm posting this from a coffin. Adopted a new dog and he got up and started walking around at about 3:15...I just had a hard time going back to sleep.
Yeah..I don't want to say it CAN'T happen...great point. I don't know enough about their business, itself, to know whether or not they could make it without the Astros. Just stuff that I've read in the pleadings is all.
You don't HAVE to be in default to join as a creditor. But the test for whether or not a company (or even a person) is insolvent is "are they paying their debts as they come due." As of the filing, all of the creditors who filed this bankruptcy had been paid as the debts came due. The only creditor who had not been paid was the Astros, and they weren't asking the Court for bankruptcy relief...they were an insider asking for the Court to dismiss the bankruptcy. It's a weird bankruptcy for sure...and it's why you're hearing Isgur ask questions about collusion.
Thanks. That is interesting to say the least. Could you imagine if the Judge came to the conclusion that there was collusion lol
It's something the Astros have been saying in their Motion to Dismiss. That there was collusion amongst Comcast Partner and the Comcast Creditors to skirt the VOLUNTARY bankruptcy requirements of the CSN partnership agreement. Does that make sense? Essentially they're saying, "Come on! You couldn't get unanimous consent for a voluntary bankruptcy so you colluded with all your insider creditor affiliates to force this involuntary on us in an attempt to rewrite the partnership agreement in the midst of a partnership dispute!"
This really all looks to me like a breath-taking example of bad timing coupled with an astonishing lack of awareness of the market on the part of all parties involved. The bad timing seems to me to be a result of the rapidly-changing mindset of the general customer base - who now prefer 'a-la-carte' models for purchasing their entertainment, along with an overall mentality of 'spending more wisely' in the face of a dreadful economy. These things alone make the notion of starting up an expensive new RSN targeted at those customers a losing proposition from the get-go. The demographics have changed, not just here in SE Texas, but across the country, if not the world. Franchises which already had locked-in long term deals are (or were) in the clear - although, if the consumer demographics continue to change, there is no way those existing deals can remain viable either, in my opinion. Had the Astros/Rockets attempted this RSN say, 5 or 6 years ago, this likely would have gone through without a hitch. But the carriers see the writing on the wall, and unfortunately for us as fans, they decided that this was where the line was going to be drawn in the sand. They said no to the extravagant asking price, and I don't blame them. The other aspect of all of this is the fact that Crane and Alexander bought themselves a Cadillac of a sports network when they should have started with a Kia and worked their way up over time. They started out with this ridiculously expensive network to run, expecting the carriers to just bend over and take whatever deal they were told. Crane and his side show me the worst lack of awareness - 'tone deafness' perhaps - when they talk about projected losses over 20 years. I'm sorry. You run a Major League franchise, multiple farm affiliates, AND the majority stake in an entire RSN, and you are assuming that your costs are static and stable from year to year? Sorry Crane, we are not buying it. First of all, nobody is stopping you from agreeing to a shorter-term deal with the carriers, so you can build your fan base back and increase demand that way, and then you cam gradually bump up your price. Second, just like EVERYONE ELSE, you can learn to cut some costs. Your RSN costs too much to operate? Then make some cuts! Figure out what the freaking PRIORITIES are and make the deals work. These guys continue to behave as though they think the fans and citizenry in general are just plain stupid. What this boils down to is this: The Astros (and to a lesser extent the Rockets) were greedy, arrogant and completely out of touch. Through their greed, they allowed themselves to be sweet-talked by a company with a terrible track record, making all sorts of ridiculous promises of untold riches to follow, if only they would *sign on the dotted line*.. And now that they have all sobered up, they get to deal with the hangover. They bought themselves a brand spanking new shiny Cadillac on credit, without having any actual guarantees of success. And when the carriers and the fans called their bluffs, and said 'Hell yeah we will go an entire season without our teams on TV!', they are suddenly realizing what they should have known over a year ago - they have all these bills coming due and absolutely no way to pay them. The fact that Crane still seems to be expecting the golden goose he was promised speaks volumes to me. It's not gonna happen, dude. You changed leagues, you changed uniforms, you made the team a nameless faceless JOKE, and no nobody cares or wants to watch. And the Carriers know it. My guess is, the Carriers were probably offering somewhere in the neighborhood of 70 cents on the dollar for what the original price was. Had Crane not been arrogant and greedy, along with Les and those Comcast scumbags, they could have their teams in every household by now, and, yes, having also had to make some belt-tightening cuts. But so what? It would have been preferable to what is happening now, which is a total cluster-***. And how much do you guys think you are going to get from Fox now eh? Stupid stupid stupid.
The problem is...only one carrier is remotely interested at all. DirecTV is the only carrier that made an offer according to all the testimony yesterday. The blogger who was there yesterday not named David Barron wrote this morning that it was clear from the testimony that the other carriers were not interested at all. Only DirecTV, and they seemed to be a wild card. Comcast wanted everyone to buy into the notion that there would be a domino effect...sign with DirecTV and the others will fall. The Astros, apparently, refused to buy into that. And we have no idea if those carriers will do shorter-term deals. I don't know if that's common..or something that they would explore at all. I agree with you wholeheartedly that the timing is terrible and that all the parties showed an "astonishing lack of awareness of the market." One of the Comcast guys testified yesterday that they were deeply disappointed when they found out what the market would bear....and that's Comcast's business!!! Their very business is penetrating markets around the country with new RSN's. And they were completely taken by surprise, they say.
