I think that's an important question to answer. Pure speculation on my part, but if the parties have to pony up the cash in some kind of proportion to their ownership, then the Rockets share is the smallest. Maybe their media rights minus their share of CSN-H losses are still profitable and better than what they can get elsewhere since their deal was one of the best in the NBA. Meanwhile, the Astros, as the largest owner, would have to pony up far more cash, so it may make less sense for them.
Then the correct response should've been "wait until the Comcast lawyers ask their questions"...there's no need to be insulting or passive aggressive. Give straight answers and it will be clear to everyone. The facts you've heard from both sides are still facts, no matter what questions the Comcast lawyers ask.
Dude, do you know what was asked barron's tweet? I bet I do. the Astros are throwing a number out there that they say they have been offered. that's the number that was asked about on the stand. we have also been told that no one (Comcast or the Astros or the Rockets) are saying what the offer has been. thirdly, that is a number that is applied to all three carriers. that is for arguing sakes, different carriers may have different. you don't jack **** from that tweet.
but it makes sense that Comcast would just admit that they want the partnership to lose $200MM over 20 years. I mean that just makes sense didn't you read barrons tweet --->
you know before posted this I was going to apologize. it is hard not to react like that when know is reading what you are saying. they are just on the bandwagon agreeing with someone else. I questioned that post three times without vitriol vitriol seems to be the only language some understand
It's all they could get. It's all the market would bear. And they threw over $100 million at it. So yeah, they'd take it to salvage it. And now they're spinning. Filing involuntary bankruptcy through its own affiliates.
And you don't have to be an ******* either. He doesn't have to say what the deal was for. It doesn't matter, if the deal was for $2 a customer or $20 a customer. He (a comcast representative on the stand sworn to tell the truth) said they would be in the hole $200 mil. thru 2019 if they used the direct TV deal. What could comcast possibly come back with to make this look like the Astros were fools for turning that down? Seriously, I'm curious what you think they can say that makes a $200mil loss over the next 6-7 years look like a great deal??
Part of this is because you're not always very clear about what you're saying or referencing. I'm not trying to be rude, but just FYI - your posts are often confusing and need clarification.
Madmax, thanks for sticking around in this thread and giving your expert opinion. Especially given the fact that a few are treating you like ****. Good job.
