southsider2k5 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2534944...ion-tv-contract Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan99 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 And yet the Cardinals are still eligible for compensation picks each year. So dumb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 1 billion for 15 years is about $67 million a year. Is that really that much these days? It's a little more than 400k a game. Isn't that what the Sox get now on CSN? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jul 30, 2015 -> 10:24 AM) 1 billion for 15 years is about $67 million a year. Is that really that much these days? It's a little more than 400k a game. Isn't that what the Sox get now on CSN? Well, the Mariners just signed a new one and theirs is around $110-115 million per season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 30, 2015 Author Share Posted July 30, 2015 http://www.forbes.com/sites/christinasetti...illion-tv-deal/ A source familiar confirmed this is a new deal that covers the 2018 through 2032 seasons. The first year rights fee will start around $50 million and grow with a single-digit annual escalator. It is estimated the final year rights payment would be around $86 million. Additionally the team gains a 30% equity stake in Fox Sports Midwest. With the contract signing bonus, the total value of the deal should then exceed $1 billion which would rank it close to one of MLB’s Most Valuable Television Deals. That’s five times more the amount of the Cardinal’s current 11-year deal which FORBES estimates is worth over $200 million. A source close to the team said the final rights payment in 2017 is around $30 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 30, 2015 -> 12:14 PM) http://www.forbes.com/sites/christinasetti...illion-tv-deal/ One thing is clear, now is NOT the time for the White Sox to begin thinking about getting the most favorable tv package in the world with their ratings being so abysmal this season. Are the Sox rights expiring after the 2018 or after the 2019 season? I'm pretty sure it's the latter. Same for the Cubs. So we still aren't going to see any new monies until 2018/19 at the earliest (which is a good thing, because you'd hope we were a perennial AL Central contender by then, at least theoretically). And I don't get how they can say it's one of the most "valuable" deals when almost every team in baseball that has signed a new one in the last 3-4 seasons is getting more per year than the Cardinals....maybe the total number is higher because it's for 15 years rather than 10, but it's not the best reporting just to throw out a word valuable and not define it. Valuable per year? Per game? Most valuable based on local metropolitan area size vs. other deals? Because of the team ownership stake in the network? Edited July 30, 2015 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 How can TV afford to pay these fees? Seems like no matter how bad the economy, TV rights deals as well as sports players salaries continue to skyrocket. What would happen if advertisers gave up on TV as they have on magazines, newspapers, etc.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 30, 2015 -> 01:02 PM) How can TV afford to pay these fees? Seems like no matter how bad the economy, TV rights deals as well as sports players salaries continue to skyrocket. What would happen if advertisers gave up on TV as they have on magazines, newspapers, etc.? Live sports events are much cheaper to produce than movies/dramas, so that's one thing. The problem is situations like the Dodgers' one, where the rights fees are so astronomical, a majority of people in Southern California can't even access their games even though LA keeps getting paid. Ultimately, that's not good for the game. For a long time, cable companies forced bundling (you have to take 120 channels or 30 or nothing) but it's heading more and more to a model where you can pick and choose the ones you want and networks like ESPN can't continue to up their rates or they'll continue to lose viewers and eventually be cut out. Kind of a tricky situation, where the short-term is great for the early teams to sign deals but where the rights fees environment is rapidly changing as a result of situations like in LA and with the Astros/Rockets in Houston, where you had a bankruptcy declared because the agreement worked out to be so disadvantageous and both those teams were struggling mightly to draw viewers 2-3 seasons ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted July 30, 2015 Share Posted July 30, 2015 How can TV afford to pay these fees? Seems like no matter how bad the economy, TV rights deals as well as sports players salaries continue to skyrocket. What would happen if advertisers gave up on TV as they have on magazines, newspapers, etc.? Since the advent of the DVR, commercials on sporting events get more views than other TV shows, because sporting events are more likely to be watched live. I can't tell you the last time I watched a commercial during anything other than a sporting event or the local news. Everything else gets DVR'd and the commercials fast-forwarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.