Second day in a row that the A's-Nats game isn't on the MLB package. As I was cursing why the games aren't televised, I stumbled across this old Hardballtimes article discussing how badly the Nationals are going to get screwed by Angelos. Now it all makes sense on why Angelos didn't receive a large lump sum of money that everyone thought he would need to allow the move. This is just shocking that Selig would allow this, since it seems that it will permanently put the Nationals in the poor house for the next 50 years.
Lee, who is picking up the Nats games? Is it just on local TV?
Daily Picks: Making this quick since I'm swamped with work.
TX (Young vs. Tejada) -110- Mark my words. By the end of 2006, Young will be considered the next Johan Santana.
KC (Hernandez vs. Fassero) +120- How do the Giants have 24 wins with Rueter and Fassero in their rotation?
Dodgers (Weaver vs. Johnson) -105- No explanation for this one except that I truly love watching The Weave pitch.
Brewers (Capauno vs. Mussina) -Even- If they lose, I wouldn't be surprised if we hear more and more Torre being fired rumors.
Yesterday: 2-3 -123
YTD: 16-8 +840
5 comments:
Here's how I understand it: They have a deal with DirecTV and on some cable companies, but do not have a deal with Comcast. It's convoluted, but Comcast believes that the newly-created and Angelos-owned MASN (Mid-Atlantic Sports Network) violates their contract with the Orioles. They believe that they have the right of first refusal on Orioles television rights and the O's moved their broadcasts to MASN. So, as retaliation, they are not televising any Nats games. Whatever the reason is that they are not on TV, it is truly an outrage. Although with Angelos involved, I'm really not surprised.
Is there any local TV coverage? Like Ch 4, 9, 50? Do they televise any games at all?
So, come September, the Nats may be in a race but no one is watching on TV. Oh well, that shoudl drive up attendance, no?
Attendance dollars are peanuts compared to TV dollars. That's what makes the difference between Yanks/Sox and everyone else.
And I believe that they are probably on local, but they don't pay that much for the rights.
The are on UPN 20 in DC, and I can see MASN as part of the DirecTV MLB package. UPN is going to broadcast somewhere around 80 or 90 games. Right now I think the Comcast thing is in court or going to court right? Both sides took out huge full page ads in the WashPost so I think it will get ugly like the YES/Cablevision thing a few years ago.
Angelos is getting a heavy ownership cut of the MASN fees as part of his payment for allowing the team to move. Several business analysts didn't think it was a horrible deal, but that it absolutely caps what the peak potential value of the franchise could be. BUT, it also **severely** minimizes any risk since there are revenue guarantees to whoever the final owners are. So it isn't entirely fair in my mind, but it isn't quite a total ass screwing either IMO. Last I heard, only one potential bidder has dropped out, so obviously people who have a ton of money, still think they will be able to make good money by owning the Nats. I tend to agree. It just sucks that Angelos will make more money along with them. Bastard.
Not to sound like Gammons but IF the Nats really take off in popularity and more $ goes to Angelos, and IF he reinvests that into the O's don't you think they could compete with the BOS and NYY payroll? I do.
Here's a good article from the post that summarizes much of the conflict between MASN/Orioles/Nationals/Comcast:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/13/AR2005061301494.html
Post a Comment