MLB ultimately has control over the product. They've stayed out of the way from teams negotiating their own deals thus far, but they "could" get involved if they wanted to. Comcast will have free reign to negotiate any and all deals if they buy out the Astros and Rockets. Till then, the Astros (as majority owner) have to take the deal that works out best for them. No, but MLB sure can. MLB can take CSN's broadcast and show it in china if they wanted. CSN really doesn't have much say as it was part of the lease agreement when they started paying to show Astros games (they agreed to be subject to the rules/provisions of major league baseball with regards to distribution/reproduction/rebroadcast)
The Astros are the majority owner and have the most to lose by accepting a bad deal. If Comcast wants to buy them out at a fair rate, they can gladly try to make a go of it without the Astros... the reason why they won't is because without the Astros, the network will die.
He cannot talk about going to another RSN while he is still contractually obligated to CSN. Of course, after the hearing tomorrow, he may be free to bolt pursuant to the contract. Then we would have the same resolution to this that we would have had months ago had Comcast not decided to grandstand with a very suspect involuntary bankruptcy filing.
Is this an act you are putting on or are you just forgetful? Crane said he will consult “with all the players — Fox, DirecTV, AT&T, Time Warner. I will work to try to get something favorable so that we can move on with or without Comcast in the deal.”
Please provide a link to prove that MLB could show a season's worth of Astros baseball programming in their local market without paying the entity which purchased the media rights from the Astros.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Lawyer count: Five for Rockets, three for Astros, six for Comcast, one for MLB, all in person. Could be more in audience and more on phone.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430725578266652673">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>It appears we only will have arguments today, not testimony. Lawyers are now going over areas of depositions that will be in evidence.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430726234062872577">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Rockets CEO Tad Brown now beginning his progress report.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430727195539955713">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Brown: “Our preferred option is no longer available at this time.” He did not identify this option.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430727394870050817">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Brown indicated that as of Monday, his “preferred option” was still an option and that his report was shorter than he would have hoped.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430728537838850048">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Brown is not in position to elaborate on his statement.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430730259214770176">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Judge is now back on the bench.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430730494901100544">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Astros attorney Paul Basta says it is impossible to reorganize CSNH in Ch. 11 because the Astros have right to take their media rights back.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430735301720305664">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Basta: “This whole thing (CSN Houston) is contaminated, and we need to get our media rights back.”</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430736012428316673">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> These next 2 tweets.... probably won't sit very well with some people here. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Basta says Astros and Rockets, working together, can relaunch a network that will be in best interests of the Astros.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430736471071289344">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>The Rockets, he says, want to “work it out in a bankruptcy setting.”</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430736700319338496">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Interpretation: Rockets and Astros are obliged to work together on broadcast deals. They differ, however, on how to proceed re CSNH.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430737179870916608">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Exactly what i've said earlier (and what really hasn't changed since this whole shakedown started)... Astros want to get out of CSN now, the Rockets want it to work itself out. If the Astros are allowed to leave CSN, the station could implode overnight... and the Rockets apparently no longer have a viable backup plan that suits them (acc. to Tad Brown). So, for those hellbent against CSN/Comcast and anything else preventing them from seeing the teams play asap... you should no longer blame the Astros for holding the city hostage.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Issue being debated is whether Jim Crane should be allowed to vote on CSNH matters as board member if he is best served if company fails.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430738900261154817">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Judge Isgur really hammering this point home with Astros attorney Paul Basta,</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430739010659418112">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Basta: “Mr. Crane does not want the network to fail. The network has failed. It has already failed. We have no revenue.”</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430739252284887040">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Basta is laying out case, which revolves around argument court lacks authority to affect Astros’ media rights agreement w/o Astros’ consent.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430740867247124481">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
David Barron @dfbarron Lawyer count: Five for Rockets, three for Astros, six for Comcast, one for MLB, all in person. Could be more in audience and more on phone. Rockets CEO Tad Brown now beginning his progress report. Brown: “Our preferred option is no longer available at this time.” He did not identify this option. Court now in recess while the judge goes over portions of depositions that will be in evidence when arguments commence. Brown indicated that as of Monday, his “preferred option” was still an option and that his report was shorter than he would have hoped. Brown says long-term plan was “carriage solution w/primary carriage partners w/long-term incentives to support the success of the network.” Brown is not in position to elaborate on his statement. Astros attorney Paul Basta says it is impossible to reorganize CSNH in Ch. 11 because the Astros have right to take their media rights back. Basta: “This whole thing (CSN Houston) is contaminated, and we need to get our media rights back.” Basta says Astros and Rockets, working together, can relaunch a network that will be in best interests of the Astros. The Rockets, he says, want to “work it out in a bankruptcy setting.” Interpretation: Rockets and Astros are obliged to work together on broadcast deals. They differ, however, on how to proceed re CSNH. Issue being debated is whether Jim Crane should be allowed to vote on CSNH matters as board member if he is best served if company fails. Judge Isgur really hammering this point home with Astros attorney Paul Basta Basta: “Mr. Crane does not want the network to fail. The network has failed. It has already failed. We have no revenue.” Basta is laying out case, which revolves around argument court lacks authority to affect Astros’ media rights agreement w/o Astros’ consent. Ch. 11, of course, could result in changes to CSNH structure, possibly resulting in changes that could affect Astros' media rights. Therefore, the Astros are arguing, the case should be dismissed. Basta: “It is crystal clear that we can terminate in bankruptcy.” Judge Isgur: “I will not conclude by the end of the day whether this bankruptcy was a wonderful idea.” Basta elaborating on argument reorganization is futile because reorg must result in assignment of Astros’ media rights to a new entity. Basta: “Comcast has indicated that in any new network (under Ch. 11), the Astros are out (as part owners) but that the media rights are in.” Basta: Astros "are not going to support a transaction tt separates the ownership of their media rights from their ownership of the network.” Isgur bringing up fact that Astros filed suit against Comcast and Drayton McLane, after which they stepped aside as lead negotiator for net. Isgur: “It’s pretty hard to stomach listening to the fact that the Astros don’t think things are going well when the Astros had a chance to make things go well and took a different route.” Isgur doesn’t say Crane wrong in rejecting Comcast carriage deals: “I think they (Comcast) were presenting rotten business deals to him.” Current conversation is Isgur trying to determine Astros’ answer to question of why reorg is better outside Ch. 11 rather than in Ch. 11. Basta says Ch. 11 would be “pressure point” to force Astros into taking a deal that would not be in their best interests. Basta now arguing another key Astros assertion, that Comcast acted in bad faith by soliciting affiliates to file involuntary Ch. 11. Basta: All Astros have seen from Comcast is “driving (CSNH) to a distress sale that would benefit them." Basta: "It’s a wealth transfer from the Astros to Comcast.” Conclusion by Astros attorney Paul Basta: “The Astros’ position here is not nefarious. It is not in bad faith. It’s not wrong. It’s what any fan of the Houston Astros would hope the Astros would do, which is to enforce the bargain they reached and enforce the structures they put in place so that the long-term value of their media rights were within their control. We ask this court to dismiss the case and let the Astros get their media rights back and set a media rights foundation that is good for the Astros and the city of Houston.” The CSN Houston bankruptcy hearing is in recess until 1:45 p.m.
Issue being debated is whether Jim Crane should be allowed to vote on CSNH matters as board member if he is best served if company fails. Judge Isgur really hammering this point home with Astros attorney Paul Basta Seems like the Judge doesn't see it through your Astros glasses.....
See J.R.'s edits This can seems like it's going to be kicked the entire length of I-10 in Texas. Probably longer.
Becoming more and more clear that Ballstreams was possibly the best $60 I have spent, ever. The Astros can rot.
Huh? The Astros want the company to fail, so everybody can move on. How is that any different from what I just said? If the Judge wants to prolong this, the Rockets won't be on TV any time soon.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Basta: All Astros have seen from Comcast is “driving (CSNH) to a distress sale that would benefit them."</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430758128531943424">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Basta: "It’s a wealth transfer from the Astros to Comcast.”</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430758244542214144">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Conclusion by Astros attorney Paul Basta: “The Astros’ position here is not nefarious. It is not in bad faith. It’s not wrong. ...</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430761196824707072">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>"...It’s what any fan of the Houston Astros would hope the Astros would do, which is to enforce the bargain they reached ...</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430761353398087680">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>"...and enforce the structures they put in place so that the long-term value of their media rights were within their control. ...</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430761447656669184">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Hmm, this seems like an interesting tweet. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Isgur doesn’t say Crane wrong in rejecting Comcast carriage deals: “I think they (Comcast) were presenting rotten business deals to him.”</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/430753172143865856">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>As Astros, Rockets, CSN in court today, worth noting: Portland in year 7 of 10-year deal with Comcast SportsNet and still not on DirecTV.</p>— Reid Laymance (@ReidLaymance) <a href="https://twitter.com/ReidLaymance/statuses/430763720088645632">February 4, 2014</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
I found that interesting too. That's what I've thought all along as well. Sad how many fans of the Rockets AND Astros just immediately start dumping on Crane/Astros about all of this. Even the judge sees that Comcast has acted in bad faith or at the very least, misrepresented to the Astros what they thought they could provide given their extensive expertise in the industry.
