The bolded part should have been a huge red flag to not go in to the deal with Comcast or adjust their revenue expectations. It's been reported by some that the Rockets were willing to adjust their expectations but the Astros were not.
Noted. Glad you understand that you don't need my approval. It's too bad you still can't grasp that people don't have to suffer from lapses in reason (such as blinders and homerism) to see things differently than you do. It's narrow minded and obnoxious. If that means I'm on a high horse then so be it. At least I have the capacity to grasp and appreciate multiple points of view.
Everyone gets blame, but yes, part of it was bad timing. Part of it was all 3 entities creating a dysfunctional partnership. Part of it was a lack of planning by all the parties in case everything didn't go according to plan. The Astros look like the bad guys, but all they are doing is looking out for their own best interests - which is exactly what each party involved should be doing and is doing. It's just unfortunate that their interests don't align with the Rockets' interests.
Yet you lack the capacity to understand this is more than just about whether the bankruptcy case has merit. It's ironic that you slap yourself on the back for something you are not really doing at all. The horse wasn't beaten to death because there were more things to consider here than just the bankruptcy case. It was obnoxious of you to post that GIF and call me a dolt, so don't claim moral high ground on that front either. This discussion has to consider what happens next which means these "expert" opinions may start straying from their field. If the Network folds, which Comcast says could happen, where does the team go from there? Crane has 40% of the market at favorable rates today and that is at risk moving forward because of Crane's own agressive actions. If Comcast has waged war as some suggest, how do you think they will react to someone who they feel cost them credibility in a market they staked a flag in. Especially a partner whose team was garnering crappy ratings anyway. Crane could concievably gain the other 60% of the market at lower rates and be in worse shape than he is now because he won't make as much from the carriage deals as he was making from Comcast. Even if Crane gets 100% of the market,the total value will likely be less than the benchmark he set to be able to compete. Is that benchmark realistic? That is also an issue here.
No....At the expense of a partner who hadn't done his homework, before he acquired the team, on what a sound plan B was if CSN Houston wasn't able to secure the carriage rates he was expecting to help him run a "competitive" team. Crane's plan B was to make his team the laughingstock of the league with the smallest payroll until he got the deal he wanted even if it meant bankrupting the Network.
Absolutely. The Rockets refused to fund the last cash call, despite the fact the Astros and Comcast were ready to do it. They wanted to get an appraisal of the station, instead. Nothing wrong with that. Good for them. Are were here today in bankruptcy if the Rockets make that cash call? Probably not...because the media payments would have been made to the Astros per that agreement, and they wouldn't have the legal right to be able to pull away from the table...but because they were ready to walk, Comcast threw it all into court 3 days before then.
And neither Comcast or the Rockets had a Plan B for if the Astros - who value the TV revenues the most and have the largest ownership stake in the network - wanted to hold out longer than they did for a better deal. All of them failed in that regard. We've already been through this, but this was Plan A and has nothing to do with the TV deal revenues. He was getting his revenues through June of this year before CSN-H stopped paying the Astros. A lack of revenues has nothing to do with the Astros being terrible this year or having a small payroll - that's all by design.
Or that Rocket's refusal for making the cash call was simply just a calculated move to break the gridlock by getting an arbitrator (who could have ultimately seen things CSN-H and the Rockets way or not) to decide what was best for the Network to survive. The Astros excercising their right to pull out wouldn't have been unexpected by the Rockets or CSN H when the Rockets decided to not make the cash call.
Except their partner wasn't looking for just a better deal. He said that he wasn't blinking, remember? We may have been through it but that doesn't make your view gospel. You have no way to prove that Crane isn't looking to looking to consistently field low to mid payrolls while earning top TV money. All you have is his word and he's lied to us already about not vetoing the carriage deals last fall.
You assume incorrectly. I understand the idea and can evaluate its merits. I think the other positions given here are stronger, that's all. It's not about a lack of capacity, but it lines up with your modus operandi to say it is. That's the only plausible reason for an opinion differing from yours, right? You are correct, and I have contributed nothing of value to the conversation since doing it. Sorry; your constant Crane-bashing and reiterating of the same tired argument, whilst calling others "blind", etc, started to piss me off. But that's no excuse. Perhaps valid questions. Thing is, the first like 99 posts from you on this thread were "Crane this" and "Crane that", and it just gets annoying--even to those of us who aren't even sure whether we like the guy yet or not.
No, I have read Astros related posts of yours from a decade ago on another forum and I know where your heart lies. It's my opinion that your head is lined with your heart on this one. No sense in responding to the rest as I don't really think you are a bad guy.
My bad, I meant the trustee who I felt would be coming from a neutral position when deciding what was best for the company. The trustee could make decisions that negatively impacted the Rockets and Comcast.
A bankruptcy trustee represents the estate. It is their job to right the ship to maximize recovery for creditors. His is done through a plan of reorganization. If the entity isn't bankrupt as a matter of law, you don't get to the point where a trustee could be appointed.
And in this case...even if they are bankrupt as a matter of law, the appointment of a trustee is "extraordinary relief." There was never any guarantee that a trustee would be appointed.
Comcast affiliates, yes. Affiliates of the Comcast company that is a partner to the Rockets and Astros in CSN-H.
