Cubs TV Deal Stuff

[Ryne Ween]

Do you not realize the difference between the rumored Fox numbers and the Comcast numbers?

 

We have never seen the comcast numbers.

[Sammy Sofa]

I will bet you my life that the money the Cubs make off of Comcast don't sniff the rumored numbers with Fox.

 

I'm sorry, but this is your worst rant yet, and you're the guy complaining about customer surveys.

[SouthSideRyan]

Do you not realize the difference between the rumored Fox numbers and the Comcast numbers?

 

We have never seen the comcast numbers.

 

Fangraphs has it at 450K/game.

[Ryne Ween]

I will bet you my life that the money the Cubs make off of Comcast don't sniff the rumored numbers with Fox.

 

 

Im sure they are not. But im also sure they are very substantial sums. More than enough, when combined with all the other sums, to sign not only one but many tanakas.

[Sammy Sofa]

I will bet you my life that the money the Cubs make off of Comcast don't sniff the rumored numbers with Fox.

 

 

Im sure they are not. But im also sure they are very substantial sums. More than enough, when combined with all the other sums, to sign not only one but many tanakas.

 

How do you figure that? Please show your math.

[Ryne Ween]

Do you not realize the difference between the rumored Fox numbers and the Comcast numbers?

 

We have never seen the comcast numbers.

 

Fangraphs has it at 450K/game.

 

Thats what comcast pays the cubs to air the games. Not what comcast generates in profit. I obviously dont know exactly what any of that is. But I would suggest that we are all smart enough to make the logical leap that if these broadcasters are willing to pay sports teams these huge contracts, than these broadcasters of live sports are hugely profitable. Comcast sports net chicago is one such broadcaster, owned (it seems on wikipedia) 20% by Ricketts.

Edited January 18, 2014 by Ryne Ween

[Hairyducked Idiot]

None of which is relevant, because we aren't selling the Comcast games for five more years. We're selling the WGN games.

[Ryne Ween]

I am no different than you all. We are all the same you and I. I am happy that resources are there to field a successful team I just feel like they have always been there, and now that a $ amount is publicly attached to it you are all so excited.

[davell]

None of which is relevant, because we aren't selling the Comcast games for five more years. We're selling the WGN games.

 

Which again, I think Gonzalez mistook radio and TV, no one else said this could be announced prior to the season.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

None of which is relevant, because we aren't selling the Comcast games for five more years. We're selling the WGN games.

 

Which again, I think Gonzalez mistook radio and TV, no one else said this could be announced prior to the season.

 

Even without Gonzalez, we've had lots lately to think a deal on this front is getting close, though.

[Sammy Sofa]

But I would suggest that we are all smart enough to make the logical leap that if these broadcasters are willing to pay sports teams these huge contracts, than these broadcasters of live sports are hugely profitable. Comcast sports net chicago is one such broadcaster

 

That is incorrect. Comcast Sports Net Chicago is not one of the networks dropping huge money on TV deals; they're essentially a step or two up above WGN.

[davell]

None of which is relevant, because we aren't selling the Comcast games for five more years. We're selling the WGN games.

 

Which again, I think Gonzalez mistook radio and TV, no one else said this could be announced prior to the season.

 

Even without Gonzalez, we've had lots lately to think a deal on this front is getting close, though.

 

True. And honestly, if we get Tanaka or not, I think the reports on what we're offering, lend credence to something being close as well. Just don't want people wondering why it's not done ASAP. But yeah, I definitely think its coming. Theo is too confident and he chooses his words as carefully as anyone.

[Ryne Ween]

But I would suggest that we are all smart enough to make the logical leap that if these broadcasters are willing to pay sports teams these huge contracts, than these broadcasters of live sports are hugely profitable. Comcast sports net chicago is one such broadcaster

 

That is incorrect. Comcast Sports Net Chicago is not one of the networks dropping huge money on TV deals; they're essentially a step or two up above WGN.

 

 

Lets say the margins on this broadcasting business are 20% (i dont know this im just using a figure) than the true value is 540k a game not 450k because they making money on both sides of the transaction. Add in whatever is made on bulls games the hawks games and the sox games and you have large ancillary revenue streams that are not generally available to sports teams. The Cards are not making money off Blues games. Is the comcast money segregated from the baseball business? We dont know. We dont know how the team finances are actually run. We dont know if the Fox money will be put on the field either. We also dont know if in the next CBA these issues, with now even larger disparities in the resources of all the teams, are not going to be addressed.

 

You are excited because you think the fox deal affords the cubs a competitive advantage and I am saying that the competitive advantage has always been there. They are already thought to be among the most profitable teams in the MLB, if not the most profitable.

[Ryne Ween]

But I would suggest that we are all smart enough to make the logical leap that if these broadcasters are willing to pay sports teams these huge contracts, than these broadcasters of live sports are hugely profitable. Comcast sports net chicago is one such broadcaster

 

That is incorrect. Comcast Sports Net Chicago is not one of the networks dropping huge money on TV deals; they're essentially a step or two up above WGN.

 

 

Lets say the margins on this broadcasting business are 20% (i dont know this im just using a figure) than the true value is 540k a game not 450k because they making money on both sides of the transaction. Add in whatever is made on bulls games the hawks games and the sox games and you have large ancillary revenue streams that are not generally available to sports teams. The Cards are not making money off Blues games. Is the comcast money segregated from the baseball business? We dont know. We dont know how the team finances are actually run. We dont know if the Fox money will be put on the field either. We also dont know if in the next CBA these issues, with now even larger disparities in the resources of all the teams, are not going to be addressed.

 

You are excited because you think the fox deal affords the cubs a competitive advantage and I am saying that the competitive advantage has always been there. They are already thought to be among the most profitable teams in the MLB, if not the most profitable.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The "most profitable team in MLB" thing comes from a definition of profits that don't include debt repayment.

[Sammy Sofa]

But I would suggest that we are all smart enough to make the logical leap that if these broadcasters are willing to pay sports teams these huge contracts, than these broadcasters of live sports are hugely profitable. Comcast sports net chicago is one such broadcaster

 

That is incorrect. Comcast Sports Net Chicago is not one of the networks dropping huge money on TV deals; they're essentially a step or two up above WGN.

 

 

Lets say the margins on this broadcasting business are 20% (i dont know this im just using a figure) than the true value is 540k a game not 450k because they making money on both sides of the transaction. Add in whatever is made on bulls games the hawks games and the sox games and you have large ancillary revenue streams that are not generally available to sports teams. The Cards are not making money off Blues games. Is the comcast money segregated from the baseball business? We dont know. We dont know how the team finances are actually run. We dont know if the Fox money will be put on the field either. We also dont know if in the next CBA these issues, with now even larger disparities in the resources of all the teams, are not going to be addressed.

 

You're all over the place here.

 

The main thing you're missing is that the Ricketts' stake in CSN Chicago is a Ricketts FAMILY investment; it's separate from the Cubs investment that's spearheaded by Tom and Laura. It's a complete falsehood to say that the Cardinals aren't getting money from the Blues as if the Cubs are getting money from the Blackhawks; they're not.

 

Look at it this way: y'know those bison burgers you can now get at Wrigley? Those are provided by High Plains Bison, which Joe Ricketts founded. Do you expect all of the High Plains Bison money to go towards the Cubs? Of course not.

 

The proposed Fox deal would be a deal specifically based around and off of the Cubs themselves, hence the excitement and expectation that such a deal would lead to a lot more money available to the team.

 

You are excited because you think the fox deal affords the cubs a competitive advantage and I am saying that the competitive advantage has always been there.

 

You're wrong. Most people here, me included, would agree with you that the Ricketts have likely chosen to not spend money they have available so far. Where you're way off is in assuming that that money is comparable to what the team would make off of a massive new TV deal.

 

They are already thought to be among the most profitable teams in the MLB, if not the most profitable.

 

And they have a bunch of expenses they're either dealing with or prepping for coupled with the reported debt structure they took on with their purchase of the team. A huge TV deal with Fox would go a long way to hurdling past that.

[Guest]

What is exciting about this? The fact that the cubs will get market revenue for their tv rights shouldn't surprise or excite. They got lucky buying the team in '09 that the tv deals are falling into live sport promoters laps. They have owned 25% of Comcast chicago snce then they ALREADY own a substantial portion of a large station that airs games for tham and 3 other hugely popular sports franchises. A monkey would go out and get the best deal available in the market. Lets not act like this tv deal is some white knight riding in or that we have some john d rockefeller business genius running the team. I dont care what the tv deal is. Give me a [expletive] baseball team right now. Not a tv deal. First its video board and jumbotron revenue then its a hotel then its a party deck a public bond an entertainment tax tripped covenant rosemont naples IFA money leveraged partnership overslotting and now tv deal. They have 5 years now and 3 for theo. They have had a competitive advantage for that entire time. It doesnt start with a tv deal or a videotron or an amusement park in lakeview or sky harbor. I have never heard of a franchise with so many inherent advantages complain so much about all these challenges basically characteristic of owning any team and not exploiting the very obvious advantages to owning this particular team.

 

We are in a division in which every other team is in the bottom 10 by metro-area (3 of the bottom 5). This has always been the case. Just because we have always been run by idiots who cant exploit that doesnt mean that we still arent run by idiots. So the tv market swung wildly in ricketts' direction and hes is not too stupid to not get out of the way. Great hes liekly gonna make a fortune on this team but we all knew that already. Are they gonna take the tv money and give us all our money back for the seasons of [expletive] and burned tickets when they punted or are they gonna spend 50 more million on the payroll now like they should have been doing anyway all along.

 

All of your posts are [expletive] horrific.

[Guest]

But I would suggest that we are all smart enough to make the logical leap that if these broadcasters are willing to pay sports teams these huge contracts, than these broadcasters of live sports are hugely profitable. Comcast sports net chicago is one such broadcaster

 

That is incorrect. Comcast Sports Net Chicago is not one of the networks dropping huge money on TV deals; they're essentially a step or two up above WGN.

 

 

Lets say the margins on this broadcasting business are 20% (i dont know this im just using a figure) than the true value is 540k a game not 450k because they making money on both sides of the transaction. Add in whatever is made on bulls games the hawks games and the sox games and you have large ancillary revenue streams that are not generally available to sports teams. The Cards are not making money off Blues games. Is the comcast money segregated from the baseball business? We dont know. We dont know how the team finances are actually run. We dont know if the Fox money will be put on the field either. We also dont know if in the next CBA these issues, with now even larger disparities in the resources of all the teams, are not going to be addressed.

 

You're all over the place here.

 

The main thing you're missing is that the Ricketts' stake in CSN Chicago is a Ricketts FAMILY investment; it's separate from the Cubs investment that's spearheaded by Tom and Laura. It's a complete falsehood to say that the Cardinals aren't getting money from the Blues as if the Cubs are getting money from the Blackhawks; they're not.

 

Look at it this way: y'know those bison burgers you can now get at Wrigley? Those are provided by High Plains Bison, which Joe Ricketts founded. Do you expect all of the High Plains Bison money to go towards the Cubs? Of course not.

 

The proposed Fox deal would be a deal specifically based around and off of the Cubs themselves, hence the excitement and expectation that such a deal would lead to a lot more money available to the team.

 

You are excited because you think the fox deal affords the cubs a competitive advantage and I am saying that the competitive advantage has always been there.

 

You're wrong. Most people here, me included, would agree with you that the Ricketts have likely chosen to not spend money they have available so far. Where you're way off is in assuming that that money is comparable to what the team would make off of a massive new TV deal.

 

They are already thought to be among the most profitable teams in the MLB, if not the most profitable.

 

And they have a bunch of expenses they're either dealing with or prepping for coupled with the reported debt structure they took on with their purchase of the team. A huge TV deal with Fox would go a long way to hurdling past that.

 

Damn. You know a lot more stuff about stuff than I thought. imb was wrong!

[Sammy Sofa]

I have my moments. For some reason minor league baseball talk puts me in a fugue state.

[Guest]

Seriously, though, I had never heard that the Bison stuff was a Joe Ricketts thing.

 

Is that common knowledge that I missed or just forgot about?

[Sammy Sofa]

Seriously, though, I had never heard that the Bison stuff was a Joe Ricketts thing.

 

Is that common knowledge that I missed or just forgot about?

 

When I was at a game last year and noticed them I looked it up on my phone before everything started.

 

I'm a real blast at parties.

[Guest]

Seriously, though, I had never heard that the Bison stuff was a Joe Ricketts thing.

 

Is that common knowledge that I missed or just forgot about?

 

When I was at a game last year and noticed them I looked it up on my phone before everything started.

 

I'm a real blast at parties.

 

 

oh my god

[Guest]

I've never actually tried it...but I think I'm gonna have to try the buffalo style bison dog

 

Turns out the Ricketts family brought more to the Cubs than fresh faces and a remodeled players' locker room. The family's ranch in Little Jackson Hole, Wyo., produces humanely raised, all-natural bison meat, which goes into the High Plains Bison hot dog, available at the Chicago Dogs carts at various points in the park. At a mere $5.25, this is one terrific hot dog, with meaty flavor and a satisfying bite. It's the best hot dog in the park. You can also get it buffalo-style (buffalo-style bison sounds redundant, but it isn't), and the Big Dawg's kiosk by the home-plate entrance offers footlong versions for $7.

 

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-05-06/news/ct-play-0506-vettel-ballpark-wrigley-20100506_1_hot-dog-captain-morgan-club-wrigley

[Sammy Sofa]

I've never had those, but I've had bison burgers and they are phenomenal.

[davell]

Seriously, though, I had never heard that the Bison stuff was a Joe Ricketts thing.

 

Is that common knowledge that I missed or just forgot about?

 

When I was at a game last year and noticed them I looked it up on my phone before everything started.

 

I'm a real blast at parties.

 

 

oh my god

 

Wait, so he's taking credit for increasing the bison population, even if he's just making hot dogs out of them?