Media rights fees are half this debate. I want to hear what profits they expected to earn from 46% ownership.
Sorry to interject, but how much of this is Crane holding out for something Comcast promised the Astros during negotiations? Let's say Comcast said they are confident that they'll be able to add all carriers $4 per subscriber. Once they find out that none of the carriers will do it for that amount, Comcast goes back and says that the best they can get is $2 per. If I'm Crane, wouldn't it be prudent to wait it out? Especially if I have 'x' number of investors to satisfy and now I can't give them what was promised? If sign off with a vendor to buy widgets at $2 each but then the vendor comes back and says the price went up to $4, I certainly wouldn't pay $4. I'd wait for them to honor their commitment or I'd find somewhere else to buy widgets.
I am blaming him now based on sworn statements to the court. Where it's my personal feeling is that he was a horrible partner based on him blocking the Rockets season and then running behind them to look to cut a deal with Fox (if early is what I described) around the time his team's season started.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>Postolos: McLane adviser Steve Greenberg, told Astros bidders CSN would grow enough in value to pay for team and network share by 2020.</p>— David Barron (@dfbarron) <a href="https://twitter.com/dfbarron/statuses/394911379141849088">October 28, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Interject away, that's what a forum is for. I think what you describe is what could have happened. It's best to get things in writing when you are talking about deals that you absolutely have to have a certain amount to compete, survive or whatever Crane is calling it. In this case, it's doubtful that Crane gets anywhere near what he thinks he was promised.
So you have the proper context, enlighten me. Because we have what we have to go on. It's my belief that Barron wasn't talking about the period where the Astros were not getting paid because he would have just said that rather than use the term early this year when most people would consider that to be early in the calendar year.
he says "Astros bidders"...so potentially not just the Crane group. Would be interesting if they had testimony from another bidder.
Out of curiosity Max, why would McClane's valuation of the network and his statements be relevant to this hearing? I don't get it.
That's kinda my point. Just because the $$ changed when it came time to actually add carriers, that doesn't mean Crane should have to roll over and take whatever they tell him is the best they can get. That could've been all in writing, but if Comcast blew it and over-projected and in turn under-delivered...that's on them, not Crane. As a fan that totally blows, but I can see where he's coming from. Now it's also possible that he got all of the info from McLane's people about what to expect from Comcast. If he didn't do his due diligence (which I doubt when we're talking about buying a club for hundreds of millions) then that is on Crane and his investigative people.
It wouldn't necessarily...just a question/answer. There are all sorts of answers that pop up in hearings that aren't particularly relevant.
Hmmm.... Uncle Drayton told Crane he had some fools gold and Crane wanted some of that. Sounds like he needs to ask McLane for a refund.
he's still on the stand, Granville...we have no idea what he's saying that Barron isn't tweeting...nor do we have any idea what hasn't been asked yet.
You're g-dam right i did!!!!!!!!! I have friends who tell me they'll buy me steak dinners or a year's worth of beer if I'll work Fletch or Caddyshack lines in to questioning that I can verify with a court record.
