Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    Sometimes we do not think about the value of media rights. The Angels are currently in the midst of a 10 year, $500 million dollar deal. That appears to be about to change. Reports are appearing about a $3 billion dollar / 20 year deal. And we wonder why Henry bought Liverpool? The appreciated value of sports media rights is off the charts. The increased value of sports teams is obviously tied closely with the value of their media rights. $3 billion folks?


    The above is a trade journal which is not normal reading for sports fans. It does give insight though on recent developments and why maybe we will be going after Darvish after all. The worldwide media rights are a much bigger part of sports than we realize. How much would the NESN media rights be worth in Japan with Matsuzaka and Darvish in the fold? It might potentially pay for their contracts by itself if the Angels are worth $3 freaking billion over 20 years.

    There is no indication that we will bid for Darvish but then again, maybe we should be. Also, I have no idea if the Sox can sell any media rights in Japan. Possibly MLB owns all rights, I imagine that it could be all MLB owned internationally and this is all speculation. What if those opportunities are now available? The table would be getting set for significant media rights sales to an international sports channel. or possibly Henry could create one using existing media properties in part. I for one am curious where the money is in all these sports venture deals. The man is not stupid.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    Boom honestly how are two-thirds the rest of the league supposed to compete? MLB needs to mandate minimum $90 million pay-rolls and maximum $200 million, with a Luxury Tax that is 4 times as high as it is now for any team exceeding the $200 million.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    I think the current deal actually helps the league. It is more competitive than before and a lot of those small market teams absolutely milk the revenue sharing component. Now is the time to own a franchise in Pittsburgh or Miami. Look at the cash Miami has made basically spending the absolute minimum on their team and having virtually no fan support. Those small market teams have been banking millions for doing very little. They would make millions even if no fans showed up for the games in person. The small market teams will do even better financially going forward. The advent of wide screen TVS and revenue based streaming is going to make mlb an incredible cash cow. Who knows all the distribution channels which will be available, especially in the international market. We are talking some serious cash here when the Angels make that kind of money in a regional deal. What would it be internationally for a mega team made up of international stars? Think Real Madrid for the business model. Tourism. International friendlies maybe. There might be all kinds of opportunities. The new CBA might have unlocked a lot of them. It is a longer term deal than before if I remember correctly. Maybe the league really needed that stability in order to develop long term media deals?

    I'm just speculating here because I'm not an expet in that situation. I haven't researched who owns what rights...etc. Just speculating here.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    If the Angels go from $500 M to $3 B because of Pujols wouldn't you think all Major League teams would be able to get a TV contract with a Time Warner or Comcast in their area. Improve their talent even in a  small market and generate more revenue and be more competitive?

    Some might say KC or Tampa are too small--the potential to be creative is never too small!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    While I prefer a salary cap it is also criminal for teams like Pittsburgh do nothing year in and year out.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from caseycsw. Show caseycsw's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

         Excellent post, boom.  Of course everything is speculation, but I give credence to a lot of what you are saying, such as Henry's smarts for purchasing Liverpool.  When my wife moved from Ireland to New York, she was a huge Liverpool fan.  After we got married, I followed suit, and have been rooting for them since.  As one of the Premiereship's leading brand names, it almost surely is a winning investment, even with concerns over acquisition debts and related financial issues............... (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/nov/02/liverpool-john-w-henry-nesv).
    Nonetheless, Liverpool is on either the Fox Soccer or Soccer Plus channels nearly every week, even if the American embrace of soccer as a spectator sport has always been problematic.  Despite the reality of a severely challenged American economy, sports entertainment is likely to continue to draw top media dollars for the forseeable future.....

    “Pray for the dead, and fight like hell for the living.”

    -          “Mother” Mary Harris Jones (union and community organizer, born 1837 (Ireland) – 1930 (U.S.))

    “You see, until a few weeks ago, it seemed as if Wall Street had effectively bribed and bullied our political system into forgetting about that whole drawing lavish paychecks while destroying the world economy thing. Then, all of a sudden, some people insisted on bringing the subject up again. And their (Occupy Wall Street) outrage has found resonance with millions of Americans. No wonder Wall Street is whining.”

    -          Paul Krugman, Princeton economist, N.Y. Times column, 10/16/11

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    Boom,

      I hate to be the real grinch here, but any deal made over two decades is one that begs for myriad problems.

      The first among them is the validity of an institution to mortgage that much money over that lenght of time.  We see institutions go belly up all the time.  This kind of business reality is quite honestly a shaky one.  It may appear to strrenghten the LAA's, but if the other side of the contract goes south, then all bet are off.

      I find this kind of business deal to be very worrisome.

     
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    pin you are right, it looks like they were operating under the previous contract through the 2011 season. Knowing they had the new deal in place it gave them the confidence to go out and add $330 M in salaries. It appears they were kind of waiting for others to eastablish a price for Albert and blew them away at the last minute. Smart move--they will get an excellent return for their investment.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    Hey Zac. I'm not projecting that they go after Darvish as they have almost stated flatly that they will not but if they did it would be one heck of a sandbag.

    With Matsuzaka and Darvish the Sox could make a strong case for a TV rights deal on at least some game feeds in Japan but I believe you are right Zac. I think MLB gets all of that along with T-shirt sales...etc.

    It seems that the teams with the small markets are really positioned to make a killing financially. No one expects them to spend much. Overslot signings and international signings are curtailed substantially. Most of this growth in media rights revenue is spread to all the teams. Sounds like a goldmine to me. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    All that said, a $3 billion dollar deal is unbelieveable. And fox entertainment group probably has the cash flow to deal with it ( I recognize that there may be some implications from the phone hacking scandal which could definitely affect that ). If Fox goes belly up the deal is available with another organization. What is amazing to me is that we are talking about $150 million per year just in regional TV rights. They are paying for probably 70% of the organization's salary needs just with the media rights. And ticket prices in Anaheim are not cheap. Add in revenue sharing (which is just going to keep growing in a major way with paid streaming of games), more apparel sales ...etc, and billboard advertising, stadium naming rights...etc and they are nailing at least a $100 million dollar profit per year I would think. Even with Pujols.

    And if Boras is right about the Sox, their TV deal is even more lucrative. BTW, we get the Yes network out here in California. The Yanks are able to syndicate their regional satellite network all over the country. We get NESN also but the games are not shown. Both of those options give lots of after game revenue...etc. I can't believe how much of NESN's programming is Sox related. I would expect some Liverpool content soon. International feeds could well have substantial value for the Sox I would think. that is the major area of growth for the big market teams going forward. I think it is inevitable that big market teams like the Sox are just going to blow past the luxury tax limit soon.

    Boras said some teams have over $300 mil in revenue after the cost of all player salaries. I would think that is even conservative but we all know Boras well enough to know that it is probably overestimating a little. What the Angels deal does show us though is that regional TV rights deals are rapidly expanding. What a cash cow these teams are!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    Old program media markets will be declining in modern social and economic fallout from entitlement bankruptcy that has taxes soaring and inflation soon to follow. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    Suffice to say that there is tremendous incentive for the Redsox to put a winning team on the field. And an exciting team to watch. All this helps explain why they want Ortiz back. He's a huge media draw. it's not only about winning. It's about monetizing the profits from NESN. They should go over the luxury tax limit IMO. It's a cost effective decision for them this year. Now deals like Crawford's and Agon's make a lot more sense ( Crawford's deal will probably never make comlete sense but it does make "more" sense).
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    Crawford will never make any sense, even at career norms.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    I still believe the Sox were out-manuevered by the EE in signing Crawford...the Sox jumped the gun because they thought wrongly that the Yanks wanted him.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    In all honesty, I don't think it was the Yanks they were worried about. It's possible it was the Angels or another team. Cashman said he wasn't interested and Gardner was coming off a very decent year.

    I just think Theo absolutely blew the amount projections badly. I've always thought that Crawford's defense was overated and even in his last year with the Rays ( which was exceptional ) I don't think he warranted that kind of money over a long term deal. 
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    The Angelinos may still be willing to deal and spend. How would CC fit in an outfield of Tori Hunter in RF and Peter Bourjos in CF? He would be the added speed in the 2 hole behind Bourjos. They would be a tough combo in front of Pujols.

    In return the Sox would get Trumbo to play left, Vernon Wells to play RF and Walden to close. This could(?) loosen up some dollars for Ben to work with. The Angels are not a lock--they still need a couple of more pieces.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    boomerrang, you were a cheerleader for Crawford signing.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    I certainly was.  Still am.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    And Crawford thanks you for his 20 million a year.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    In Response to Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!:
    [QUOTE]boomerrang, you were a cheerleader for Crawford signing.
    Posted by hankwilliams[/QUOTE]
    By the way Softbrain dimwit, taxes have steadily been going down since the Clinton era. Name one major tax which has gone up besides cigarettes. Whatever you do, don't let the facts get in the way or your very enlarged and misguided world view. God knows I've tried to help you but my patience ran out a long time ago.

    I was excited they signed Crawford but felt the deal was ridiculous from day one. I didn't even have him on my radar that year as an appropriate choice. I prefer a bopper in Fenway's LF.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    By the way Softbrain dimwit, taxes have steadily been going down since the Clinton era. Name one major tax which has gone up besides cigarettes.
     
    Wrong, nitwit, do as I say not as I do chasing personal wealth but advocating a Marxist public policy in regards to private property. By virtue of a percentage based graduated tax rates and inflation and property tax valuation hikes, tax revenues have risen every year. Spending on entitlements for Wards of the State like within your own family has far outpaced iincreasing tax revenues. And if all wars were ended, a dope pipe passed around a circle jerk 0rgy of Bill Ayers and Barry Obama, there will be no way for current federal revenues to pay for the increasing costs and number of Wards of the Welfare State. As nearly 50%of the American residents, illegal and legal, do not pay any income taxes at all, the burden on the upper 50% income legal citizens and residents will require a complete Statist lead appropriation of all private property. This is Karl Marx's dream, via the seductive artifice of economic class warfare of "rich v. poor". As only a tiny fraction of people have a million in annual income or liquid assets, this means that working people pay the federal State. Thus the middle class has not existed in this country since my cocaine smoking and free love intoxicated generation was seducing into an economic government administrated utopia. Of course, envy and personal wealth is the calling card of these slugs. Selling out was their Woodstock term for personal hypocrisy, and the entire lot of them has cheated and sold out at every opportunity. The worst of the lot are the entertainment Leftist millionaires and Billionaires.          

    Whatever you do, don't let the facts get in the way or your very enlarged and misguided world view. God knows I've tried to help you but my patience ran out a long time ago.

    You are a hypocrite and a drone, so patience would be a waste of time.
    I was excited they signed Crawford but felt the deal was ridiculous from day one. I didn't even have him on my radar that year as an appropriate choice. I prefer a bopper in Fenway's LF.

    No sober mind gets excited by acts of reckless and indifferent financial incompetence. Crawford is not responsible and is a pretty good player, but InEpstein hurt the team by not knowing the difference between a young superstar and a middle baseball aged high mileage above average player.

    But rest assured Inesptein is a fellow Leftist hypocrite from the entertainment business, who new zero about baseball when he was gifted a job over millions of people who know a little bit more about the game and the business. And you should be outraged that the little rich kid was gifted the job over the homeless baseball genius ;_
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!

    In Response to Re: Angels appear to be set to announce a $3 billion dollar TV Deal...Ergo Pujols!:
    [QUOTE]By the way Softbrain dimwit, taxes have steadily been going down since the Clinton era. Name one major tax which has gone up besides cigarettes.   Wrong, nitwit, do as I say not as I do chasing personal wealth but advocating a Marxist public policy in regards to private property. By virtue of a percentage based graduated tax rates and inflation and property tax valuation hikes, tax revenues have risen every year. Spending on entitlements for Wards of the State like within your own family has far outpaced iincreasing tax revenues. And if all wars were ended, a dope pipe passed around a circle jerk 0rgy of Bill Ayers and Barry Obama, there will be no way for current federal revenues to pay for the increasing costs and number of Wards of the Welfare State. As nearly 50%of the American residents, illegal and legal, do not pay any income taxes at all, the burden on the upper 50% income legal citizens and residents will require a complete Statist lead appropriation of all private property. This is Karl Marx's dream, via the seductive artifice of economic class warfare of "rich v. poor". As only a tiny fraction of people have a million in annual income or liquid assets, this means that working people pay the federal State. Thus the middle class has not existed in this country since my cocaine smoking and free love intoxicated generation was seducing into an economic government administrated utopia. Of course, envy and personal wealth is the calling card of these slugs. Selling out was their Woodstock term for personal hypocrisy, and the entire lot of them has cheated and sold out at every opportunity. The worst of the lot are the entertainment Leftist millionaires and Billionaires.           Whatever you do, don't let the facts get in the way or your very enlarged and misguided world view. God knows I've tried to help you but my patience ran out a long time ago. You are a hypocrite and a drone, so patience would be a waste of time. I was excited they signed Crawford but felt the deal was ridiculous from day one. I didn't even have him on my radar that year as an appropriate choice. I prefer a bopper in Fenway's LF. No sober mind gets excited by acts of reckless and indifferent financial incompetence. Crawford is not responsible and is a pretty good player, but InEpstein hurt the team by not knowing the difference between a young superstar and a middle baseball aged high mileage above average player. But rest assured Inesptein is a fellow Leftist hypocrite from the entertainment business, who new zero about baseball when he was gifted a job over millions of people who know a little bit more about the game and the business. And you should be outraged that the little rich kid was gifted the job over the homeless baseball genius ;_
    Posted by hankwilliams[/QUOTE]

    Like you knew the difference between an emerging superstar ( Ellsbury ) and an average player ( Lugo / Crisp...ad infinitum ).

    Where were the tax increase you mentioned above? Property values have also gone down. Again, with all the opportunities one would think of to note the "tax increases" you guys freaking MOAN about so often you have ZILCH.

    And when you state the Republican talking points of "Only 50% of Americans pay income taxes at all" that statistic is for Federal income taxes, not local income taxes, not payroll taxes, not state income taxes...etc. It's just a lie. 

    If your guy Newt had his way taxes for the rich would drop precipitiously AGAIN. Leaving guys like ME, and the rest of us to pick up that tab. Maybe we would like to be "historians" who could make $1.6 million from part time consultancy for a few hours of work with FANNIE MAE. All the while saying guys like Barney Frank should be INCARCERATED for their association with FANNIE MAE.

    With the exception of Ron Paul, all the Republican presidential candidates are COMPLETE HYPOCRITS like you and Ron Paul is a nut.

    And you have no idea of my families financial situation. Just because we grew up poor doesn't mean we stayed that way and my parents WORKED their tails off rather than live off welfare. I was the embodiment of that poor kid who Newt is now saying doesn't even know what work is. He couldn't be more insulting to poor americans, except perhaps if he were YOU.

     

Share