Zell to Purchase Tribune Co., Sell Cubs

[USSoccer]

Is anyone else not intrigued, optomistic, excited......and more just flat out scared by this?

 

Yes. I have no faith that private ownership will be better than our current ownership.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I just don't see Cuban having more than a fleeting interest in purchasing the Cubs. If I had to place a bet, unfortunately, I believe Colangelo is the obvious front-runner. This is what scares me.

 

I think Cuban will have strong interest, but I agree that Colangelo is the front runner.

[daske17]

Potential buyers listed on ESPN.com,

 

 

• Jerry Colangelo, former D-Backs, Suns owner

• Mark Cuban, Dallas Mavericks owner

• George Will, national columnist

• Bill Murray, actor

• Don Levin, Chicago Wolves owner (minor-league hockey)

 

Colangelo would have to be considered the front runner. He has the connections and has allies with current owners.

 

Cuban would be my best choice.

 

George Will called TLR a genius which is enough for me not to want him.

 

I only like Cuban off that list.

 

I like Colangelo as well, but Cuban would definitely be my #1 option.

 

Yeah, but didn't Colangelo really hamstring the D-Backs with some bad contracts that they're now just coming out from?

[USSoccer]

I just don't see Cuban having more than a fleeting interest in purchasing the Cubs. If I had to place a bet, unfortunately, I believe Colangelo is the obvious front-runner. This is what scares me.

 

I think Cuban will have strong interest, but I agree that Colangelo is the front runner.

 

Wouldn't any Colangelo bid be heavily leveraged and financed?

 

Cuban and the Wolves owner are the only 2 individuals that I can see being solid. Everyone else terrifies me.

[Warren Brusstar]

White Sox games were more popular than Cubs telecasts last season (for the first time in over 20 years); the net effect is that during the 2007 season, WGN can make more advertising dollars for Sox broadcasts.

 

Do you have any support for that assertion?

 

With that in mind, I am merely bringing up the potential negatives that could arise.

 

If you're implying that Zell might look to ratings in 2006 and decide to cut back on Cubs programming, while increasing White Sox programming, don't you think a man that was able to make billions as an investor is more sophisticated than to base such a decision on ratings for only the last year? Also, doesn't it also assume that you're right about your initial point - that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be more than the cost of advertising on Cubs' games? I would be quite surprised if that's true.

 

On your first question, it's common knowledge that the Sox beat out the Cubs in radio and TV ratings (2006) for the first time in over 20 years. It really isn't a surprise considering the Cubs won 66 games and the Sox were basking in the glow of a WS.

 

It was published in the Tribune so you may want to search the archives.

 

On your second point, no, my view is that Zell doesn't care about the baseball part of the Tribune (he's admitted as much).

 

My point about the Sox was specific to the poster I was replying to---who implied that WGN must be profiting because they are running Sox games--as if to say there is minimal profit in Sox telecasts. My reply is two fold: because of the recent success of the Sox, WGN can charge more per advertiser in 2007 than they can for Cubs games... Also, the Cubs, Sox, and Bulls will always be shown locally in Chicago because it is a local station (with a national following).

 

You missed the point. Do you have support for your assertion that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be greater in 2007 than the cost of advertising on Cubs games?

 

I don't think that is true.

 

You missed the point because it is right. You don't have to believe it but the White Sox had higher television and radio ratings than the Cubs in 2006. Look it up. The ad prices are based on ratings which measures the most recent consumer behavior. An argument has already been made in this thread that the Cubs would look to their longer track record of ratings success when attempting to set advertising prices. However, that isn't a guarantee that they have gotten their intial price for this seasons ads.

 

Are you intentionally not answering the question?

 

I DO NOT DISPUTE THAT THE SOX HAD HIGHER TELEVISION RATINGS IN 2006.

 

You're not responding to the actual question: Upon what are you relying when you suggest that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be greater in 2007 than the cost of advertising on Cubs games? Is this reported anywhere? I don't believe this to be true and I'm not just going to take your word for it.

Edited April 2, 2007 by Warren Brusstar

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I just don't see Cuban having more than a fleeting interest in purchasing the Cubs. If I had to place a bet, unfortunately, I believe Colangelo is the obvious front-runner. This is what scares me.

 

I think Cuban will have strong interest, but I agree that Colangelo is the front runner.

 

Wouldn't any Colangelo bid be heavily leveraged and financed?

 

Cuban and the Wolves owner are the only 2 individuals that I can see being solid. Everyone else terrifies me.

 

I just figure Colangelo has the connections with the owners to make for a smoother transition. My guess is Colangelo would be managing partner for a larger group of investors. Don't be surprised if Steve Stone is part of such a group.

[98navigator]

White Sox games were more popular than Cubs telecasts last season (for the first time in over 20 years); the net effect is that during the 2007 season, WGN can make more advertising dollars for Sox broadcasts.

 

Do you have any support for that assertion?

 

With that in mind, I am merely bringing up the potential negatives that could arise.

 

If you're implying that Zell might look to ratings in 2006 and decide to cut back on Cubs programming, while increasing White Sox programming, don't you think a man that was able to make billions as an investor is more sophisticated than to base such a decision on ratings for only the last year? Also, doesn't it also assume that you're right about your initial point - that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be more than the cost of advertising on Cubs' games? I would be quite surprised if that's true.

 

On your first question, it's common knowledge that the Sox beat out the Cubs in radio and TV ratings (2006) for the first time in over 20 years. It really isn't a surprise considering the Cubs won 66 games and the Sox were basking in the glow of a WS.

 

It was published in the Tribune so you may want to search the archives.

 

On your second point, no, my view is that Zell doesn't care about the baseball part of the Tribune (he's admitted as much).

 

My point about the Sox was specific to the poster I was replying to---who implied that WGN must be profiting because they are running Sox games--as if to say there is minimal profit in Sox telecasts. My reply is two fold: because of the recent success of the Sox, WGN can charge more per advertiser in 2007 than they can for Cubs games... Also, the Cubs, Sox, and Bulls will always be shown locally in Chicago because it is a local station (with a national following).

 

You missed the point. Do you have support for your assertion that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be greater in 2007 than the cost of advertising on Cubs games?

 

I don't think that is true.

 

You missed the point because it is right. You don't have to believe it but the White Sox had higher television and radio ratings than the Cubs in 2006. Look it up. The ad prices are based on ratings which measures the most recent consumer behavior. An argument has already been made in this thread that the Cubs would look to their longer track record of ratings success when attempting to set advertising prices. However, that isn't a guarantee that they have gotten their intial price for this seasons ads.

 

Are you intentionally not answering the question?

 

I DO NOT DISPUTE THAT THE SOX HAD HIGHER TELEVISION RATINGS IN 2006.

 

You're not responding to the actual question: Upon what are you relying when you suggest that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be greater in 2007 than the cost of advertising on Cubs games? Is this reported anywhere? I don't believe this to be true and I'm not just going to take your word for it.

 

Yes, why don't you look it up.

[USSoccer]

I just don't see Cuban having more than a fleeting interest in purchasing the Cubs. If I had to place a bet, unfortunately, I believe Colangelo is the obvious front-runner. This is what scares me.

 

I think Cuban will have strong interest, but I agree that Colangelo is the front runner.

 

Wouldn't any Colangelo bid be heavily leveraged and financed?

 

Cuban and the Wolves owner are the only 2 individuals that I can see being solid. Everyone else terrifies me.

 

I just figure Colangelo has the connections with the owners to make for a smoother transition. My guess is Colangelo would be managing partner for a larger group of investors. Don't be surprised if Steve Stone is part of such a group.

 

I don't know that a group of investors would be the best owner for the franchise. I can see them slashing payroll at will.

[DiamondMind]

I think Colangelo is best-equipped to purchase the team. I'm hardly one with knowledge about such things, but it seems to me purchasing a baseball team and all that comes with it is much more complicated than the purchase of an NBA team. I just don't see Cuban committing to this. Colangelo has the connections, the cash, and the commitment.

[Guest]

Colangelo grew up on the south side. He went to Bloom high school in Chicago Heights. I know this because my mom was a classmate of his.

 

I'm guessing he grew up a sox fan, but could be convinced otherwise.

[DiamondMind]

 

You're not responding to the actual question: Upon what are you relying when you suggest that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be greater in 2007 than the cost of advertising on Cubs games? Is this reported anywhere? I don't believe this to be true and I'm not just going to take your word for it.

 

http://www.google.com

[swordsman]

I'm turning up my efforts to win the lottery so I can get in on this.

 

All of NSBB should buy up lotto tickets and hit Vegas (and other Casinos). If a couple of us hit big The Cubs could be the first ever team owned by a message board. Tim = GM?

 

Team President - Tim

GM - Hoops (or maybe OMC, he did play baseball you know...and he's a lawyer and all. ;-) )

[DiamondMind]

Colangelo grew up on the south side. He went to Bloom high school in Chicago Heights. I know this because my mom was a classmate of his.

 

I'm guessing he grew up a sox fan, but could be convinced otherwise.

 

I'm not scared of him for his possibly minor attachment to the Sox, I'm scared of him because he's a heartless money-eating robot.

[Warren Brusstar]

White Sox games were more popular than Cubs telecasts last season (for the first time in over 20 years); the net effect is that during the 2007 season, WGN can make more advertising dollars for Sox broadcasts.

 

Do you have any support for that assertion?

 

With that in mind, I am merely bringing up the potential negatives that could arise.

 

If you're implying that Zell might look to ratings in 2006 and decide to cut back on Cubs programming, while increasing White Sox programming, don't you think a man that was able to make billions as an investor is more sophisticated than to base such a decision on ratings for only the last year? Also, doesn't it also assume that you're right about your initial point - that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be more than the cost of advertising on Cubs' games? I would be quite surprised if that's true.

 

On your first question, it's common knowledge that the Sox beat out the Cubs in radio and TV ratings (2006) for the first time in over 20 years. It really isn't a surprise considering the Cubs won 66 games and the Sox were basking in the glow of a WS.

 

It was published in the Tribune so you may want to search the archives.

 

On your second point, no, my view is that Zell doesn't care about the baseball part of the Tribune (he's admitted as much).

 

My point about the Sox was specific to the poster I was replying to---who implied that WGN must be profiting because they are running Sox games--as if to say there is minimal profit in Sox telecasts. My reply is two fold: because of the recent success of the Sox, WGN can charge more per advertiser in 2007 than they can for Cubs games... Also, the Cubs, Sox, and Bulls will always be shown locally in Chicago because it is a local station (with a national following).

 

You missed the point. Do you have support for your assertion that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be greater in 2007 than the cost of advertising on Cubs games?

 

I don't think that is true.

 

You missed the point because it is right. You don't have to believe it but the White Sox had higher television and radio ratings than the Cubs in 2006. Look it up. The ad prices are based on ratings which measures the most recent consumer behavior. An argument has already been made in this thread that the Cubs would look to their longer track record of ratings success when attempting to set advertising prices. However, that isn't a guarantee that they have gotten their intial price for this seasons ads.

 

Are you intentionally not answering the question?

 

I DO NOT DISPUTE THAT THE SOX HAD HIGHER TELEVISION RATINGS IN 2006.

 

You're not responding to the actual question: Upon what are you relying when you suggest that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be greater in 2007 than the cost of advertising on Cubs games? Is this reported anywhere? I don't believe this to be true and I'm not just going to take your word for it.

 

Yes, why don't you look it up.

 

I can't find it.

 

The fact that you're unwilling simply to provide a link demonstrating the truth of your assertion tells me what I suspected all along - you're just making an assumption. And I suspect that your assumption is wrong.

[98navigator]

Colangelo grew up on the south side. He went to Bloom high school in Chicago Heights. I know this because my mom was a classmate of his.

 

I'm guessing he grew up a sox fan, but could be convinced otherwise.

 

He's a diehard Cubs fan.

[Guest]

Colangelo grew up on the south side. He went to Bloom high school in Chicago Heights. I know this because my mom was a classmate of his.

 

I'm guessing he grew up a sox fan, but could be convinced otherwise.

 

I'm not scared of him for his possibly minor attachment to the Sox, I'm scared of him because he's a heartless money-eating robot.

I was replying (but not quoting, shame on me!) to another post about him being a Cubs fan.

 

Keep in mind, he's a heartless money-eating robot who managed to bring a world series to an expansion franchise very quickly.

[98navigator]

White Sox games were more popular than Cubs telecasts last season (for the first time in over 20 years); the net effect is that during the 2007 season, WGN can make more advertising dollars for Sox broadcasts.

 

Do you have any support for that assertion?

 

With that in mind, I am merely bringing up the potential negatives that could arise.

 

If you're implying that Zell might look to ratings in 2006 and decide to cut back on Cubs programming, while increasing White Sox programming, don't you think a man that was able to make billions as an investor is more sophisticated than to base such a decision on ratings for only the last year? Also, doesn't it also assume that you're right about your initial point - that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be more than the cost of advertising on Cubs' games? I would be quite surprised if that's true.

 

On your first question, it's common knowledge that the Sox beat out the Cubs in radio and TV ratings (2006) for the first time in over 20 years. It really isn't a surprise considering the Cubs won 66 games and the Sox were basking in the glow of a WS.

 

It was published in the Tribune so you may want to search the archives.

 

On your second point, no, my view is that Zell doesn't care about the baseball part of the Tribune (he's admitted as much).

 

My point about the Sox was specific to the poster I was replying to---who implied that WGN must be profiting because they are running Sox games--as if to say there is minimal profit in Sox telecasts. My reply is two fold: because of the recent success of the Sox, WGN can charge more per advertiser in 2007 than they can for Cubs games... Also, the Cubs, Sox, and Bulls will always be shown locally in Chicago because it is a local station (with a national following).

 

You missed the point. Do you have support for your assertion that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be greater in 2007 than the cost of advertising on Cubs games?

 

I don't think that is true.

 

You missed the point because it is right. You don't have to believe it but the White Sox had higher television and radio ratings than the Cubs in 2006. Look it up. The ad prices are based on ratings which measures the most recent consumer behavior. An argument has already been made in this thread that the Cubs would look to their longer track record of ratings success when attempting to set advertising prices. However, that isn't a guarantee that they have gotten their intial price for this seasons ads.

 

Are you intentionally not answering the question?

 

I DO NOT DISPUTE THAT THE SOX HAD HIGHER TELEVISION RATINGS IN 2006.

 

You're not responding to the actual question: Upon what are you relying when you suggest that the cost of advertising on White Sox games will be greater in 2007 than the cost of advertising on Cubs games? Is this reported anywhere? I don't believe this to be true and I'm not just going to take your word for it.

 

Yes, why don't you look it up.

 

I can't find it.

 

The fact that you're unwilling simply to provide a link demonstrating the truth of your assertion tells me what I suspected all along - you're just making an assumption. And I suspect that your assumption is wrong.

 

I've already given you the evidence. Since you require more, I suggest you look it up. You are going on an assumption. I am not. Again, if you are convinced that I am wrong, find the evidence.

 

I understand how the ad prices are set. I also know the base price per ad. Use the internet to support your contention that I'm incorrect.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

I think Colangelo is best-equipped to purchase the team. I'm hardly one with knowledge about such things, but it seems to me purchasing a baseball team and all that comes with it is much more complicated than the purchase of an NBA team. I just don't see Cuban committing to this. Colangelo has the connections, the cash, and the commitment.

 

Why would the purchase of a team in one sport be any different than the purchase of a team in another?

[98navigator]

Colangelo grew up on the south side. He went to Bloom high school in Chicago Heights. I know this because my mom was a classmate of his.

 

I'm guessing he grew up a sox fan, but could be convinced otherwise.

 

I'm not scared of him for his possibly minor attachment to the Sox, I'm scared of him because he's a heartless money-eating robot.

I was replying (but not quoting, shame on me!) to another post about him being a Cubs fan.

 

Keep in mind, he's a heartless money-eating robot who managed to bring a world series to an expansion franchise very quickly.

 

I heard Colangelo talk about his love of the Cubs on a Score interview. This also talks about it. Link

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I've already given you the evidence. Since you require more, I suggest you look it up. You are going on an assumption. I am not. Again, if you are convinced that I am wrong, find the evidence.

 

Not taking sides, but you really haven't provided any evidence to support your claim that the slightly higher ratings will actually equal higher profits for WGN.

[USSoccer]

Colangelo grew up on the south side. He went to Bloom high school in Chicago Heights. I know this because my mom was a classmate of his.

 

I'm guessing he grew up a sox fan, but could be convinced otherwise.

 

I'm not scared of him for his possibly minor attachment to the Sox, I'm scared of him because he's a heartless money-eating robot.

I was replying (but not quoting, shame on me!) to another post about him being a Cubs fan.

 

Keep in mind, he's a heartless money-eating robot who managed to bring a world series to an expansion franchise very quickly.

 

And then went broke.

[UMFan83]

Colangelo grew up on the south side. He went to Bloom high school in Chicago Heights. I know this because my mom was a classmate of his.

 

I'm guessing he grew up a sox fan, but could be convinced otherwise.

 

I'm not scared of him for his possibly minor attachment to the Sox, I'm scared of him because he's a heartless money-eating robot.

I was replying (but not quoting, shame on me!) to another post about him being a Cubs fan.

 

Keep in mind, he's a heartless money-eating robot who managed to bring a world series to an expansion franchise very quickly.

 

And then went broke.

 

Yeah but who cares if they are almost bankrupt, they won the world series!

[DiamondMind]

I think Colangelo is best-equipped to purchase the team. I'm hardly one with knowledge about such things, but it seems to me purchasing a baseball team and all that comes with it is much more complicated than the purchase of an NBA team. I just don't see Cuban committing to this. Colangelo has the connections, the cash, and the commitment.

 

Why would the purchase of a team in one sport be any different than the purchase of a team in another?

 

Well, this is why I prefaced it by saying I have no knowledge of this. But, off the top of my head - larger roster size, bigger fan base, minor leagues, longer team history....I dont know. Just seems like dating a teenager as opposed to dating a feminist political science grad student.

[98navigator]

I've already given you the evidence. Since you require more, I suggest you look it up. You are going on an assumption. I am not. Again, if you are convinced that I am wrong, find the evidence.

 

Not taking sides, but you really haven't provided any evidence to support your claim that the slightly higher ratings will actually equal higher profits for WGN.

 

It was a more than slightly. In advertsing, rating are key. Both Nielsen and Arbitron show the Sox won the ratings battle in the most desired age demographic.

 

Edit; higher profits overall wasn't the point. The Cubs are/were an in house product of WGN so the net profit isn't equal. I'm talking about the price being charged for ad space during the 2007 season.

Edited April 2, 2007 by 98navigator

[DiamondMind]

Colangelo grew up on the south side. He went to Bloom high school in Chicago Heights. I know this because my mom was a classmate of his.

 

I'm guessing he grew up a sox fan, but could be convinced otherwise.

 

I'm not scared of him for his possibly minor attachment to the Sox, I'm scared of him because he's a heartless money-eating robot.

I was replying (but not quoting, shame on me!) to another post about him being a Cubs fan.

 

Keep in mind, he's a heartless money-eating robot who managed to bring a world series to an expansion franchise very quickly.

 

And then went broke.

 

Yeah but who cares if they are almost bankrupt, they won the world series!

 

I'LL go broke if it means a Cubbies world series victory :D