Ahh..thanks. I saw someone ordered it, and the next day there was an entry in the electronic file on Pacer for it....but when you click on it, it just says it's unavailable.
You would have to pay for the transcription service's fee to get a copy, I believe. I had to do it once for a matter that became hotly contested. It gets expensive. It usually is cheaper to just take the time out and go to the hearing.
That was due to the fallout from the Adelphia Communications Corporation collapse in 2002. The majority of their assets were acquired by Comcast & Time Warner in 2006 and as a result Comcast picked up the northeastern cable systems which forced them to exchange cable systems with Time Warner in other areas of the country. For example, up here in Dallas we were Comcast customers who switched to Time Warner when this happened.
okay thanks, yeah i remember time warner moved to dallas and comcast moved to houston. i was like what was the point. there is updated info from the chron posted in the bankruptsy thread in GARM. the most prevelant news was that the other providers are pushing the rumor that the rockets and stros are moving back to FOX which may or may not be true.
http://blog.chron.com/ultimateastro...-dismissal-of-csn-houstons-bankruptcy-filing/ The Astros asked a federal bankruptcy judge Monday to dismiss an involuntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy case filed Sept. 27 against the parent company of Comcast SportsNet Houston, describing the effort by Comcast and its affiliates to restructure the Astros-Rockets-Comcast partnership through bankruptcy as a “road to nowhere.” The 35-page document was filed with U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Marvin Isgur, who has set an Oct. 28 hearing to determine whether he will dismiss the case, filed by four Comcast affiliates against Houston Regional Sports Network, the parent company of CSN Houston, and to determine if an interim trustee should be named to oversee the network if it remains in bankruptcy court. Monday was the deadline for the Astros, who own 46 percent of the partnership, to file their response to the Chapter 11 petition. The Rockets, who own about 32 percent, have not commented on the case. Comcast owns the remaining 22 percent of the network. Four creditors affiliated with Comcast – National Digital Television Center, CSN California, Comcast Sports Management Services and Houston SportsNet Finance – filed the Sept. 27 petition alleging that CSN Houston faces an “urgent financial and corporate government crisis” and cannot pay its bills because of “total gridlock” among the partners. The Astros, however, describe the bankruptcy filing as an effort by Comcast to “gain control over the Astros’ most valuable asset, the media rights to televise their own Major League Baseball games.” They argue in Monday’s response that Comcast is trying through bankruptcy to force the Astros to accept undervalued carriage deals for CSN Houston that would damage both the network and the ballclub. CSN Houston is available in only about 40 percent of the 2.2 million TV households in the 20-county Houston designated market area and has been unable to negotiate carriage agreements with such major companies as DirecTV, Dish Network and AT&T U-verse. Astros and Rockets games were not available to most local TV households in the 2012-13 Rockets season and 2013 Astros season, and the Rockets begin their 2013-14 regular season on Oct. 30, two days after the scheduled hearing. The Astros also say that Comcast “orchestrated the (bankruptcy) filing in bad faith” in an effort to gain a “tactical advantage over the Astros in their partnership dispute.” The request for a trustee, they add, is improper because the trustee would have power to make decisions regarding media rights agreements, which the Astros claim “cannot be assigned as a matter of law.” Because such intellectual property rights cannot be reassigned, and because the CSN Houston partnership dispute involves agreements that are governed by state law, the Astros claim that allowing the case to remain in bankruptcy is “a road to nowhere.” The Astros said CSN Houston failed to make rights fee payments to them that were due on July 31 and Aug. 30 and that the ballclub informed the network that it would terminate its agreement with CSN Houston and retake their broadcast rights as of Sept. 30 if the money was not delivered by Sept. 29. Comcast headed off that possibility by filing the bankruptcy case on Sept. 27 “as an end run,” according to the response filed Monday. The response touches on several familiar topics, including the requirement that any rights agreement must be approved unanimously by the four-member CSN Houston board, which includes one representative from the Astros and Rockets and two from Comcast, but also amplifies on the heretofore behind-the-scenes disagreements between the partners. Unanimous consent, the team said, is “indispensable to the protection of the Astros’ media rights because, without them, the Comcast and Rockets directors (voting together) could control the value of the Astros’ most valuable asset – their media rights – by causing the network to enter into undervalued affiliation agreements, modify the terms of the Astros’ media rights agreement or file for bankruptcy.” The Rockets have not commented on any disagreement with the Astros, and Astros owner Jim Crane referred to the topic only in general terms during an interview last week. The Astros’ response also touches on several elements of bankruptcy and contract law that in terms of complexity transcend the basic issue that has concerned Rockets and Astros fans: the inability to see their teams on their satellite or cable carriers. For example, they say the complaints by the four Comcast affiliates do not meet the requirement for an involuntary Chapter 11 proceeding of of three or more entities with “undisputed, bona fide claims.” The ballclub claims that two of the Comcast entities’ claims are based on “unauthorized oral contracts” to which the Astros did not consent. The Astros also claim that their media rights deal is a personal services agreement as well as a trademark agreement and cannot be assigned to another party through bankruptcy or without the Astros’ consent. The Astros also maintain that the case should be dismissed because there is no “reasonable likelihood” that Houston Sports Regional Network can be reorganized in bankruptcy court. Even if the ownership structure is changed under bankruptcy, the team claims, the Astros will retain their broadcast rights and will be free to sell them to another party. Officials with the NBC Sports Group, which manages CSN Houston, had no comment on the Astros’ motion.
Absolutely. The whole thing was filed to try to circumvent their partnership agreement...and they did it while failing to make payments to that partner. I don't think CSN Houston is going to be around a whole lot longer. I may be wrong...but I just don't see it.
It's typical in this type of commercial disputes. The bankruptcy "automatic stay" is a tool fairly frequently used to prevent the termination of contracts. The law is designed to allow just this kind of action to be taken in the right circumstances to help companies that are economically distressed reorganize if they have an viable business once their debts are reduced and paid off through the bankruptcy process.
That is going to be one hell of a hearing. The Astros present Monday morning fireworks at the federal courthouse.
One of the many questions the Court will face whether these are the right circumstances. I sure am glad I am not the one having to decide this.
Big distinction here is that this is an involuntary proceeding and all the creditors are affiliates of one of the partners of the debtor. That makes it a little less than typical.
A little less typical but not unprecedented. When a company's board is deadlocked and cannot authorize a bankruptcy filing under its governing documents, sometimes an involuntary filing is made to get around the deadlock (the filer could be outside creditors or affiliates of the debtor). The court will have to evaluate all the facts after hearing from both sides.
The logjam was created by agreements entered into by all 3 parties to require unanimous consent to deals with carriers. The Astros play in a league with very little revenue sharing where local media dollars are uber important...particularly playing in a division with other teams that have huge local media deals. All of this was done to make money...none of them were trying to be altruistic. Crane has other owners and creditors to answer to...and he needs revenue streams to help him answer to a fan base that wants a winning product.
If they could find one other creditor other than a Comcast affiliate who wanted CSN in bankruptcy, that would be a good thing for their cause, I think...it would at least create the impression in the judge's mind that this might be something other than a circumvention of an otherwise enforceable partnership agreement.
There was no logjam - the Astros had notified CSN that they were walking away. Then CSN could do whatever the hell they wanted without having to consider the Astros' interests.
I think the logjam was definitely created by the Astros. It's why CSN stopped paying the fees, to leverage the Astros to make a carriage agreement. Instead of giving in, the Astros threatened to leave and then CSN filed the suit through their associates.
