Cubs TV Deal Stuff

[davell]

I'm betting that the Cubs deal is near or on the bottom.

 

Not particularly. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dodgers-send-shock-waves-through-local-tv-landscape/

 

We're pretty much slightly better than middle of the pack as is. Bear in mind the Dodgers new TV deal doesn't even start until this coming season, yet somehow they found a way to spend money without it.

 

Honestly the only teams that are currently outclassing us are the Dodgers, Angels, Yankees, Mets, Orioles, and Red Sox.

 

But #PoorTomRicketts has created a wonderful narrative that everybody has bought that we don't make enough money to support a top 20 payroll.

 

 

Well, Tom IS spending the vast majority of his allowance anyway......

 

 

The Dodgers are a fans wet dream, when it comes to ownership. Lets all get pissed together.....

 

Dodgers spent 100 mill on their stadium already and will spend 100 mill more all before Ricketts gets started on our grand plan.....

 

Cubs payroll has dropped near 40% since Ricketts took over, Dodgers have upped theirs 150% in less than 2 years.....And have said recently they've got no issues adding a "couple more" 200 mill contracts, if they see value in the player.

 

Ticket prices have gone up at Wrigley more than they have at Dodger Stadium.

 

Ricketts debt load is talked about all the time as a crutch as to why we can't spend......The Dodgers debt load? ZERO. [expletive] ZERO.

[SouthSideRyan]

Is there any outcome that leads to the current 2014 deal being torn up and made a part of the extension to 2019? I imagine that has to be at least on the table if WGN is trying to outbid CSN for those intervening years, right?

 

This is my assumption with what happened to the Mariners deal considering the original article had them with an opt out after 2015. No idea how the Rangers deal has apparently doubled before it was even supposed to begin.

[Sammy Sofa]

I'm telling you, let's just make some minor tweaks and all become Dodgers fans.

[Irrelevant Dude]

I am amazed by all the negative responses to the article on the Tribune website. Apparently the Cubs are supposed to accept below market value TV deals so that some guy living in a trailer in Florida can continue watching the games for free.

 

I guess that is what I get for reading the comments section of a Tribune article.

[BeerHere]

I am amazed by all the negative responses to the article on the Tribune website. Apparently the Cubs are supposed to accept below market value TV deals so that some guy living in a trailer in Florida can continue watching the games for free.

 

I guess that is what I get for reading the comments section of a Tribune article.

I made the same mistake.

 

"Please keep the games on WGN, I need to see the games in " (for free like I always have, I don't care about the competitive landscape)

[Andy]

I am amazed by all the negative responses to the article on the Tribune website. Apparently the Cubs are supposed to accept below market value TV deals so that some guy living in a trailer in Florida can continue watching the games for free.

 

I guess that is what I get for reading the comments section of a Tribune article.

I made the same mistake.

 

"Please keep the games on WGN, I need to see the games in " (for free like I always have, I don't care about the competitive landscape)

I understand the sentiment as I would prefer all Cubs games widely available too - but these people don't get that's not the media age we live in anymore, and that's not the Ricketts' fault.

[XZero771679666304]

Ten or fifteen years ago this would have meant something, but there are so few games on WGN anymore anyway. WGN was awesome when it carried all (or nearly all) the games, but when it got to the point that I had to buy MLBEI, it became a total non-issue (as far as how I got to see the games goes).

[davell]

Is there any outcome that leads to the current 2014 deal being torn up and made a part of the extension to 2019? I imagine that has to be at least on the table if WGN is trying to outbid CSN for those intervening years, right?

 

I would definitely say we're at the mercy of how the Phils new deal turns out. There's absolutely no reason for either CSN, WGN, or any other potential interested party to set the market before its a necessity to do so. Not with the money involved. And not with the years it will take. It's potentially a gigantic mess moving forward for MLB. If streaming takes up much more of the market, which is likely, MLB could move to making a deal involving all teams without longterm deals in place and dividing money up based on market share. But that leaves the teams WITH the longterm deals with a humongous advantage over everyone else and the stupid teams(Braves) in a gigantic hole for locking in longterm at a horrible time and crippling themselves.

 

A buddy of mine who works for Time Warner swears the Dodgers made out like bandits and its the last one thats going to be of this magnitude. He has no idea how MLB can try and level the playing field, once its apparent the market has dried up for everyone else.

[Guest]

Is there any outcome that leads to the current 2014 deal being torn up and made a part of the extension to 2019? I imagine that has to be at least on the table if WGN is trying to outbid CSN for those intervening years, right?

 

I would definitely say we're at the mercy of how the Phils new deal turns out. There's absolutely no reason for either CSN, WGN, or any other potential interested party to set the market before its a necessity to do so. Not with the money involved. And not with the years it will take. It's potentially a gigantic mess moving forward for MLB. If streaming takes up much more of the market, which is likely, MLB could move to making a deal involving all teams without longterm deals in place and dividing money up based on market share. But that leaves the teams WITH the longterm deals with a humongous advantage over everyone else and the stupid teams(Braves) in a gigantic hole for locking in longterm at a horrible time and crippling themselves.

 

A buddy of mine who works for Time Warner swears the Dodgers made out like bandits and its the last one thats going to be of this magnitude. He has no idea how MLB can try and level the playing field, once its apparent the market has dried up for everyone else.

 

We're talking about a 5 year deal(maybe 6 if we're lucky) for less than half of one team's games. I don't think should be a ton of worry about us setting the market or continuing to blow up a bubble since the majority of the games aren't up for grabs for 6 years.

[davell]

Is there any outcome that leads to the current 2014 deal being torn up and made a part of the extension to 2019? I imagine that has to be at least on the table if WGN is trying to outbid CSN for those intervening years, right?

 

I would definitely say we're at the mercy of how the Phils new deal turns out. There's absolutely no reason for either CSN, WGN, or any other potential interested party to set the market before its a necessity to do so. Not with the money involved. And not with the years it will take. It's potentially a gigantic mess moving forward for MLB. If streaming takes up much more of the market, which is likely, MLB could move to making a deal involving all teams without longterm deals in place and dividing money up based on market share. But that leaves the teams WITH the longterm deals with a humongous advantage over everyone else and the stupid teams(Braves) in a gigantic hole for locking in longterm at a horrible time and crippling themselves.

 

A buddy of mine who works for Time Warner swears the Dodgers made out like bandits and its the last one thats going to be of this magnitude. He has no idea how MLB can try and level the playing field, once its apparent the market has dried up for everyone else.

 

We're talking about a 5 year deal(maybe 6 if we're lucky) for less than half of one team's games. I don't think should be a ton of worry about us setting the market or continuing to blow up a bubble since the majority of the games aren't up for grabs for 6 years.

 

[expletive], I misunderstood what you were asking. I thought you meant to try and get CSN to buy out the WGN years AND lock in longterm as well.

[Guest]

Oh no, I don't imagine there's any permutation where CSN gets all the 2014 games. I'm saying that if WGN is desperate to keep 2015-2019, they might consider extending that back to 2014 to hold off CSN's bid.

[BeerHere]

There was an article a few weeks ago about WGN Radio opting out of the agreement and wanting to renegotiate with the Cubs. There was discussion about the losing decreasing the audience and impacting radio revenues. The Cubs are open to negotiate with another radio station. After 2014 the Cubs may be entirely off WGN altogether (radio and TV).

 

Whatever works to increase revenue and payroll.

[bhogg]

Maybe mlb will allow dishnetwork to carry the EI package

[davell]

Oh no, I don't imagine there's any permutation where CSN gets all the 2014 games. I'm saying that if WGN is desperate to keep 2015-2019, they might consider extending that back to 2014 to hold off CSN's bid.

 

 

Yeah, that makes sense. It's not a long term commitment by any stretch and they'd be able to make their last bit of cash off the Cubs. They could throw the Cubs that type of bone to seal off CSN.

[Irrelevant Dude]

Maybe mlb will allow dishnetwork to carry the EI package

I wouldn't count on that, but the good news is that MLB.tv is better anyway.

[Guest]

There was an article a few weeks ago about WGN Radio opting out of the agreement and wanting to renegotiate with the Cubs. There was discussion about the losing decreasing the audience and impacting radio revenues. The Cubs are open to negotiate with another radio station. After 2014 the Cubs may be entirely off WGN altogether (radio and TV).

 

Whatever works to increase revenue and payroll.

 

There's not going to be another radio station. WGN probably will get the Cubs for less.

[Sammy Sofa]

How much do they even get out of the radio deal? I have to imagine that's relative pennies to anything TV-related.

[Andy]

Maybe mlb will allow dishnetwork to carry the EI package

I wouldn't count on that, but the good news is that MLB.tv is better anyway.

I've had both and prefer EI for picture quality and no buffering, but MLBTV is cheaper and I can watch it at work, so it wins.

[Guest]

How much do they even get out of the radio deal? I have to imagine that's relative pennies to anything TV-related.

IIRC just a few million bucks

[Irrelevant Dude]

How much do they even get out of the radio deal? I have to imagine that's relative pennies to anything TV-related.

IIRC just a few million bucks

That was only a week's pay for Milt Rosenberg.

[Sammy Sofa]

How much do they even get out of the radio deal? I have to imagine that's relative pennies to anything TV-related.

IIRC just a few million bucks

 

Tom Ricketts just started uncontrollably salivating and he doesn't know why.

[Heisenberg]

So... what are the realistic chances of the Cubs creating their own network?

[Soul]

Maybe mlb will allow dishnetwork to carry the EI package

I wouldn't count on that, but the good news is that MLB.tv is better anyway.

I've had both and prefer EI for picture quality and no buffering, but MLBTV is cheaper and I can watch it at work, so it wins.

 

I did mlb.tv this year. No buffering on my connection, and I was able to get decent picture quality on my TV with HDMI port.

 

The real downside is seeing the same [expletive] Viagra commercial 10,000 times.

[Guest]

So... what are the realistic chances of the Cubs creating their own network?

For 2015? Virtually non-existent.

[davell]

So... what are the realistic chances of the Cubs creating their own network?

For 2015? Virtually non-existent.

Yeah, I doubt it's an option until after the CSN deal runs out.