True, but that doesn't mean that the Rockets are a brand that DOESN'T need more coverage than it would get with FSN. The brand is too big for FSN. The problem (from my outsider vantage point) is that CSN has too many contributors that need to get paid in the process leading to too heavy of a cost for the big carriage providers to justify paying to get the Rockets. I dont blame ATT & Dish for not picking up CSN Houston if the cost doesn't make sense. They are already paying for FSN and probably Longhorn at the same time. CSN needs to file for chapter 11 so they can get some contributors out of the picture to lower costs to make the large carriage providers be able to justify paying for another sports network. A network like CSN was the right idea all along, but the problem was it obviously wasn't well thought through before put into action. They didn't do their homework, communicate ahead of time enough with the cable providers, and they thought they could play hardball and corner the large cable providers into a corner. The Rockets brass are going to do everything in their power to not go back to FSN. So even if it means fans have to suffer a little bit longer, they will do it to get a better provider than FSN. Sorry. It sucks I know.
CSN Houston is not folding. Comcast/NBC is simply trying to gain control of the business or it's assets over the Astros via the chapter 11 process. It is likely a viable business if it can get the carriage deal done, which is more likely without the deadlocked board.
Matt, some of us have suspected this early on but Crane apologists continue to deny his responsibility. The fact is his asking price was too high, he refused to budge and everyone suffered for it.
This! I couldn't care less about that all that extra crap. There's plenty of Rockets coverage online. Just put the games on TV.
I posted this in the Astros forum, but realized that some of you might be interested and don't check that forum..sooo... My understanding from the articles is that the biggest creditor who forced this is the Bay Area Comcast entity. That's not true...I just pulled up the bankruptcy filing. The largest creditor is Houston SportsNet Finance LLC. They're a Delaware company that lists their business address as Comcast's offices in Philadelphia. There are other companies that appear to be Comcast financing entities...one called Comcast Funding, Inc. that are based in the same office. Houston SportsNet Finance LLC is claiming to be owed $100,000,000 in debt that they claim is secured by all of the assets of the CSN Houston (the corp name for the operating company of CSNHouston is Houston Regional Sports Network, L.P.). The other creditors are all unsecured: Comcast Sports Management Services, LLC -- $1,251,573 National Digital Television Center, LLC -- $10,517 Comcast SportsNet California, LLC -- $43,129.02. The newspaper story I read made it sound like the latter was the real heavy creditor...but that's not the case at all. So CSN Houston's operating company is a limited partnership. The Astros, Rockets and a company called Houston SportsNet Holdings, LLC, which is the corporate name of the Comcast partner. Houston Regional Sports Network LLC is the general partner. It has three members: 1. Astros; 2. Rockets; 3. Comcast. It's managed by a board of directors made up of: 1. One Astros rep; 2. One Rockets rep; 3. Two Comcast reps. This is all spelled out in the affidavit of a guy named Robert Pick, who is the Sr. VP of Houston SportsNet Finance, LLC (the Comcast lender). Most of his affidavit if redacted...blacked out. It does say that the Comcast Loan was fully drawn on as of May 29, 2013....if you'll remember, that's right about the time that Crane said "tough decisions" were going to need to be made in the press. The principal balance of the money owed on the Comcast Loan is $100,000,000, as I mentioned above. The affidavit goes on to say that CSN Houston may be unable to pay its quarterly interest payments in 2014. The affidavit says that Comcast believes that the General Partner (Houston Regional Sports Network, LLC) is "unable to operate the Network's business affairs...and that it would be in the best interest for a Chapter 11 trustee to be appointed to conduct an auction for the Network's business assets. Comcast goes on to say that it believes the Network's assets have "meaningful value" and that it "would be prepared to make a bid to acquire either Network (under a plan or reorganization) or substantially all of its assets. It says that should happen by the end of 2013. Some of this was well reported. Others have it are not. I have a difficult time seeing how the Comcast Lender and the Comcast partner in the Houston Regional Sports Network, LLC are not so intertwined as to be insiders. Comcast apparently does this all the time...and the financing arms for these new networks literally are in Comcast's offices around the country. But I do know that Isgur is a really good judge. Hearing today at 4:15 to consider whether the emergency request for a trustee should be granted. That will be really interesting to see what comes out of that.
My problem is blaming the Astros for the Rockets not being on the air. Or blaming the Rockets for the Astros not being on the air. If they truly signed a deal where they have to have complete agreement, then they signed a deal where their own media product's ability to hit the airwaves was subject to another sports franchise in a completely different league. The local TV money is far more important to an MLB club than it is to an NBA franchise, so of course their interests aren't entirely aligned. If the Rockets signed a deal like that, then deserve a heaping helping of blame for it. That the Astros are pursuing a deal to make money similar to other clubs in their division is only to be expected...and the Rockets would know that from the beginning. The best way they could have dealt with this is to put some formulas in the agreement....numbers already agreed to that, if reached, mean the deal happens. But pretending as if its the Rockets fault that the Astros weren't on TV this year...or vice versa...is just dumb. Only the Rockets can grant their own media rights in the first place....if they signed off on a deal that required the Astros to get them on the air, then it's on them.
You know, Crane really could use some good PR. This ought to be his moment. He needs to lead this effort and get the deal done for the city. That he seems to be squandering it with each passing day has made me realize he may just be a horrible, horrible owner.
What incentive does he have to blink right now? The season is over. He has a ton of time to negotiate. He has creditors and investors to answer to within the Astros. His job is to maximize profits for those folks...not to make sure the Rockets get on TV. This is the problem with agreements between parties partnering up despite competing interests. You have to address those competing interests in the documents to begin with. When you don't, this is the kind of thing that happens. Uncertainty leads to this.
Wasn't this deal done under Drayton's time before he sold to Crane? I wonder how much of the structural deadlock issue is caused by the fact that Drayton had different financial goals and a better working relationship with the other partners than Crane has so that the "veto power" wasn't an issue with Drayton in charge.
i just want to know if this makes it easier for the channel to be on carte for the satellite companies? you can order comcast sportsnet from other regions so that right there shows you it's nothing personal against comcast sportsnet. It's just the 'Houston' part. ugh i just want to watch the rockets on a big tv and not burning my eyes out even more on the pc.
Comcast is not available in my area, will I be able to watch Rockets games? I don't care about their business problems.
I think Drayton constructed and facilitated the idea of the network as more of a selling point than anything. He knew he wouldn't own the team long enough to profit off of it. Hey, we've got the framework of a TV deal in place that's going to make a huge profit. Who wants to buy my team?
This smelled fishy, and it looks like you may be reinforcing that fishiness here. Comcast may have used this scenario to basically 'steal' and entire RSN for pennies on the dollar by luring the teams to put up 75% of the costs, and then deliberately refusing to enter into a carriage deal, thus devaluing the network so substantially that they could 'buy the assets', reduce costs even further, and THEN strike a more reasonable carriage deal. Just a theory of course, but the Astros and Rockets should have NEVER entered into this agreement without having some clear safeguards in place AND while the obligations under Fox were still in place. Terrible terrible decision-making, driven by greed and predatory business practices on the part of Comcast. And people wonder why Comcast is such a hated corporation. Dirtbags, all. It's one thing to get in bed with the devil. It's another thing entirely to get in bed with the devil and then say 'You're wearing a condom, aren't you? Never mind, I trust you.'
Over lunch, I had this very conversation with Refman. It's ridiculous. I will be interested to see if Judge Isgur throws the case out. Interesting stuff at the very least..particularly for someone like me who has been following this thing closely and now there's a legal angle to it. Totally agree with you...Rockets and the Astros should never ever never have gotten into bed with this group. Just terrible.
Duh, of course it's also on Les for joining hands with a jerk like Crane. You sleep with a crocodile and you'll wake up with teeth marks all over, if you wake up at all. But Crane was the one who wouldn't accept what the market offered.
