Angelos is about to bleed money

[joe cool]

On or about June 1, 2012, MLB's arbitration panel will rule on the Washington Nationals claim to more money from MASN.

They are sure to get a big raise for their tv rights. And it might be a Massive raise.

And Angelos, contractually, must give the Baltimore Orioles the same raise.

When it happens, will there be any Angelos supporters left here ? I mean, he selfishly sat on a pile of cash, while that cash could have been put into making the O's a better team.

IMO if/when this happens it only hurts the Orioles on the field even more than it hurts them now. If Angelos has to give a massive amount of money to another team he will get that money back somehow and the only thing left would be to cut payroll even more, sign even cheaper players, and invest even less on the O’s. I think the O’s are still at least a couple of years away from true contention, a deal like this could push that back to decades!!

[gps29070]

I keep telling you guys over and over and over that MASN isn't this huge cash cow everyone thinks it is. Both the Orioles and Nationals ratings are some of the lowest viewership in all of baseball, the Tampa Rays have more tv viewers then both teams combined.

[18-87-44-29]

Anyhow, I don't care that much, because Angelos won't spend money on the Orioles regardless. Yeah, re-signing Adam Jones was nice, but let's not forget it was like 10-15 years ago now that A-Rod got $240 mil. The Orioles still don't spend with the big boys, despite their big boy revenue.

And they most likely never will (at least whilst the current owner is in place)...credit Al Belle's hip for that. And it was 252M.

I'm sort at the point where I'd kind of like to see Angelos have to pay the Nationals through the nose. Not because I want to see the Nationals have more money, or I think it's fair, just because I feel like Angelos has pinched pennies at the Orioles' expense, and at the expense of Orioles fans, for years, in order to unjustly enrich himself further, and I'd like to see him have to spend something on nothing out of pure spite. I mean, I don't want to see any harm come to him or him not be able to afford to keep the electricity on in his house or anything extreme like that, but if something happened that made him slightly less rich, well, that would be kind of cool.

Careful what you wish for.....because when it comes to spite....few do it better than Peter G. You may wake up one day and it's 3/28/84 all over again.

[kudzu]

Not sure how many O's fans DON'T ALREADY REALIZE that they haven't been spending anywhere near as much (on the actual team) as they could have been for years now...

Here's one:

I keep telling you guys over and over and over that MASN isn't this huge cash cow everyone thinks it is. Both the Orioles and Nationals ratings are some of the lowest viewership in all of baseball, the Tampa Rays have more tv viewers then both teams combined.

[kudzu]

Also, what's the justification for changing the original contract? Aren't the Nationals contractually obligated to terms agreed to with Angelos way back when?

Yes, they are. And so is MASN/Angelos.

And the contract stipulates that every 5 years the rights fees paid annually to the Nats will be adjusted to reflect "fair market value".

If the Nats and MASN can't agree on $$$, it goes to arbitration. Which it has.

MASN will argue that no one watches the Nats.

The Nats will argue that's irrelevant, since MASN generates the lion's share of its revenue via monthly access fees per subscriber. And that "fair market value" is what the Nats could get from other RSNs if they were free to sell their rights to the highest bidder.

[Ravens2006]

And here's an example of MASN / Angelos failing to capitalize on more market territory, thus more subscriber and advertising revenue...

http://m.paulweiss.com/fourth-circui...le-05-16-2012/

"...the Federal Communications Commission reversed, finding that Time Warner Cable made its decision on the basis of legitimate business considerations, including the lack of interest in Orioles and Nationals baseball in North Carolina and the high cost of carrying the network..."

http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/05/...pute-goes.html

Instead of making it a more attractive business proposition to potential partners, widening the audience, and improving the product... which would likely lead to more interest, more viewers, and more ad revenue... they continue to squabble (and lose) about up front dollars while ignoring the bigger picture. It's all about everybody else adhering to his terms, all the time.

And there used to be quite a bit of interest in Orioles baseball in the Carolinas. That's of course faded over the last 20+ years for obvious reasons.

[weird-O]

I keep telling you guys over and over and over that MASN isn't this huge cash cow everyone thinks it is. Both the Orioles and Nationals ratings are some of the lowest viewership in all of baseball, the Tampa Rays have more tv viewers then both teams combined.

ratings will influence the amount of money an advertisor will pay for commercial time on MASN, but PGA reached an agreement with Direct TV and Comcast (although comcast faught it as long as they could) that MASN receives $2/month from every regional subscriber to their service.

in other words, every customer in the Mid-Atlantic region pays an extra $2.00/month for MASN. and they pay that fee even if they never watch a minute of programming. that $2.00 goes straight to MASN, the service providers don't take any of it.

add up how many households have D-tv or Comcast. then multiply that by 2. That's how much revenue streams in each month (not each month of the season. but rather, 12 months a year)

then add the advertising $$$ on top of that, and you should begin to get the picture of how much revenue is being generated by the network.

do you still think it's not a cash cow?

[Ravens2006]

MASN's coverage / markets...
http://www.masnsports.com/masn_news_...find-masn.html

Census info re: Maryland
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/24000.html

Census info re: Virginia
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/51000.html

Completely ignoring parts of PA, WV, DE, and NC... there are about 5 million "households" in the MD / VA area. I've seen estimates as high as 90% for the percentage of households that pay for some form of cable / satellite TV.

For the purpose of being conservative, let's consider that estimate grossly over-inflated... do you think at least 50% of households pay for something more than rabbit ears? So you're looking at a minimum of 2.5 million subscribers in the MD / VA region that pay a fee to MASN every month... regardless of how much they watch the channel(s). Fees go down as you move away from the base market, so come up with a number less than $2 if you'd like to account for averaging. Monthly means you multiply by 12 for annual gross revenue.

Now consider that if the 90% figure is more accurate, you're looking at 4.5 million subscibers in just MD / VA... at 12 payments per year. That's 54 million "iterations" of subsciber payments.

Then throw in the outlying areas I've ignored. Then throw in likely modest contributions from satellite carriers. Then throw in whatever advertising dollars they ARE pulling in at present... even with low ratings. Then consider that MD and VA both rate well above the national average for income (which translates in to a wealthy market, and more advertising potential).

It's either a cash cow just like Peter Angelos predicted it would be (helping them improve the Orioles on the field)... or they're mismanaging it terribly and wasting gobs and gobs of untapped resources.

[Ravens2006]

It's June 8th... what's the story here?

[kudzu]

It's June 8th... what's the story here?

Wait for it...

[can you hear me now!]

MASN's coverage / markets...
http://www.masnsports.com/masn_news_...find-masn.html

Census info re: Maryland
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/24000.html

Census info re: Virginia
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/51000.html

Completely ignoring parts of PA, WV, DE, and NC... there are about 5 million "households" in the MD / VA area. I've seen estimates as high as 90% for the percentage of households that pay for some form of cable / satellite TV.

For the purpose of being conservative, let's consider that estimate grossly over-inflated... do you think at least 50% of households pay for something more than rabbit ears? So you're looking at a minimum of 2.5 million subscribers in the MD / VA region that pay a fee to MASN every month... regardless of how much they watch the channel(s). Fees go down as you move away from the base market, so come up with a number less than $2 if you'd like to account for averaging. Monthly means you multiply by 12 for annual gross revenue.

Now consider that if the 90% figure is more accurate, you're looking at 4.5 million subscibers in just MD / VA... at 12 payments per year. That's 54 million "iterations" of subsciber payments.

Then throw in the outlying areas I've ignored. Then throw in likely modest contributions from satellite carriers. Then throw in whatever advertising dollars they ARE pulling in at present... even with low ratings. Then consider that MD and VA both rate well above the national average for income (which translates in to a wealthy market, and more advertising potential).

It's either a cash cow just like Peter Angelos predicted it would be (helping them improve the Orioles on the field)... or they're mismanaging it terribly and wasting gobs and gobs of untapped resources.

here's the marketing pitch from MASN...http://www.masnsports.com/microsites...ates/print.pdf

according to the sainted owner when asked in a friendly interview stated the following:

Does that job get somewhat more manageable with the MASN dollars?

Well, I don't like to lose…That's not my game. And then a team was introduced into D.C. along with the disparities I am talking about (with the Yankees it's even greater). [The Yankees and Red Sox are] the two teams of the five in the AL East who are generating the enormous streams of revenue with which Toronto, Tampa Bay and the Orioles have had to deal with for these last seven, eight, nine years. I would really say the past seven years or so we have been, along with the other two teams, at the bottom of the totem pole with New York and Boston at the top…both of which have RSN's (Regional Sports Networks) like we just managed to accomplish, and have had them for years. So, their revenues have been so substantial by comparison to Toronto, Tampa Bay and the Orioles.

In answer to your question, now that we have an RSN and we can move forward with it…that is going get us on a more even plane with Boston and New York, and that was the purpose.

http://www.pressboxonline.com/story.cfm?id=738

this story is always a classic and a handy way to dispel any misguided thoughts that the owner has an credibility....


now in regards to MASN-- it's terribly mismanaged, which is a hallmark of angelo$er enterprises..it also bears another hallmark of angelo$er enterprises...run it on a shoestring and line the owners pockets...

he alienated the ravens and their fans, he tried to bully time warner, that failed....angelo$er is a parasite who, when confronted with situations he cannot manipulate, folds like a cheap tent.....

[kudzu]

Well, I don't like to lose…That's not my game. And then a team was introduced into D.C.

Well, when a team was introduced to DC, there had merely been a respite from that reality.

Did you actualy think, Mr Angelos, that MLB would forsake DC in favor of Charm City forever ?

Did you actually think that your claim to the DC market (which is bigger than that of your native Pittsbugh and Baltimore combined) would last forever ?

Squatters don't last...

[Ravens2006]

here's the marketing pitch from MASN...http://www.masnsports.com/microsites...ates/print.pdf...

Yeah, funny to see them touting football with a big picture of Todd Heap and all the Ravens pre-season and RaveTV shows. They managed to piddle that away because they of the way they negotiate. And the Charlotte / North Carolina coverage is misleading now thanks to their inability to do whatever it takes to get on Time Warner.

[can you hear me now!]

Mister Angelos" Sports Network is much like Mister Angelos' Baseball Team..irrelevant but still sucking money out of people any way....before I moved out of the area, I was getting gouged 2.25 a month by the cable provider in Hanover for very little live sports and lots of ESPN News...which I had already.....

[kudzu]

Mister Angelos" Sports Network is much like Mister Angelos' Baseball Team..irrelevant but still sucking money out of people any way....before I moved out of the area, I was getting gouged 2.25 a month by the cable provider in Hanover for very little live sports and lots of ESPN News...which I had already.....

Bad baseball + a simulcast of ESPNews. = $100 mill+.

I don't know any other business that could get away with that.

[can you hear me now!]

Bad baseball + a simulcast of ESPNews. = $100 mill+.

I don't know any other business that could get away with that.

you can thank a bought and paid for set of congress critters in DC for this one...the cable companies have successfully lobbied to keep consumers from paying for only those channels they'd want...cable companies hate the words "a la carte"......

[Ravens2006]

The usual suspects will make a snarky remark about the source... but worth a read, and asks a lot of questions that other media types in the market never bother to ask... not that anybody with the club would bother to answer.

http://wnst.net/wordpress/baltimore-...the-nationals/

[weird-O]

The usual suspects will make a snarky remark about the source... but worth a read, and asks a lot of questions that other media types in the market never bother to ask... not that anybody with the club would bother to answer.

http://wnst.net/wordpress/baltimore-...the-nationals/

but it's as lopsided to the critical as the local media are to the flattering. there simply are no balanced writers when it comes to the O's. a balanced blog post would have mentioned that the Lerner's also own a portion of MASN. but that was left out so as to paint a more evil picture of PGA.

AJ's contract (and the timing of that contract) have me thinking that something is afoot at MASN. I'd be shocked if Angelos is allowed to pay the Nats $35M. the recent RSN contracts signed around the league project the Nats to be worth way more than that figure. somethings can't be swept under the carpet.

[Ravens2006]

but it's as lopsided to the critical as the local media are to the flattering. there simply are no balanced writers when it comes to the O's. a balanced blog post would have mentioned that the Lerner's also own a portion of MASN. but that was left out so as to paint a more evil picture of PGA.

AJ's contract (and the timing of that contract) have me thinking that something is afoot at MASN. I'd be shocked if Angelos is allowed to pay the Nats $35M. the recent RSN contracts signed around the league project the Nats to be worth way more than that figure. somethings can't be swept under the carpet.

The Nationals stake in MASN is far from "controlling". Just like the rest of the Orioles' ownership group combined. They have no real say in decisions, only the majority owner does. They invested their money and collect revenue thanks to that investment. Good for them. But they have virtually no influence in any operational decisions made re: the franchise and the team on the field (and some of them have no interest either).

I said it after the Jones deal was announced... I'm quite suspicious that the "new direction" we hope that deal indicates that ownership is willing to go in, was really a matter of making a popular P.R. move in the weeks ahead of a virtually mandated increase in player investment.

If they (MASN) are pulling in $168 million a year from Comcast alone... I think it's more than fair to be harshly critical of the $29 million figure being given to the Orioles organization. Even if that figure is a bit high AND includes all of the other sources too (FIOS, satellite, advertising, etc... I think the amount of reinvestment sent to the Orioles deserves much more criticism than it's gotten locally. As pointed out, Peter Angelos went on record in 2006 confirming "that was the purpose" of MASN.

[weird-O]

The Nationals stake in MASN is far from "controlling". Just like the rest of the Orioles' ownership group combined. They have no real say in decisions, only the majority owner does. They invested their money and collect revenue thanks to that investment. Good for them. But they have virtually no influence in any operational decisions made re: the franchise and the team on the field (and some of them have no interest either).

I said it after the Jones deal was announced... I'm quite suspicious that the "new direction" we hope that deal indicates that ownership is willing to go in, was really a matter of making a popular P.R. move in the weeks ahead of a virtually mandated increase in player investment.

If they (MASN) are pulling in $168 million a year from Comcast alone... I think it's more than fair to be harshly critical of the $29 million figure being given to the Orioles organization. Even if that figure is a bit high AND includes all of the other sources too (FIOS, satellite, advertising, etc... I think the amount of reinvestment sent to the Orioles deserves much more criticism than it's gotten locally. As pointed out, Peter Angelos went on record in 2006 confirming "that was the purpose" of MASN.

I agree with you on all points. I would rather read balanced pieces on the O's. just as I would rather read balanced pieces on politics and other interests of mine. the Learner's don't have a controlling stake, but they are still collecting revenue. leaving out that information only serves the purpose of painting the most negative picture they can of PGA.

the guy gives plenty of ammo to blast him with. there's no need to exaggerate his destruction of the O's, the hard facts are damning enough.