wellbutrin 150 mg nebenwirkungen prednisone teva 5 mg xenical dosage mg viagra 25 mg effetti viagra 200mg dose precio xenical 120 mg augmentin 1 mg compresse levitra 10 mg 12 stk costo viagra generico buy viagra online 35008 lisinopril 20 mg hydrochlorothiazide generic cialis 20mg cytotec 200mg misoprostol 1000 mg cytotec online cialis unbeatable viagra cheapest paypal cipro 500 mg ilac buying liquid viagra metformin generic drugs clomid 50mg steroids levitra 10mg gde medicamento zithromax 500 mg viagra buy orlando viagra information online doxycycline buy europe strattera mg 60 cialis reviews online lisinopril 10 mg tabs bactrim generic drug prednisone buying online order nolvadex online bula zovirax 200mg clomid 50 mg bfp generic cialis 80 mg valtrex cheap mexico clomid 50mg success 2012 generic 50 mg cialis cheapests priced cialis cialis 10 mg kosten diflucan 150 mg use dose 40 mg cialis metformin 1000 mg dosage 522 mg wellbutrin nexium 20 mg dejstvo celebrex 100 mg capsules cialis soft 60mg wellbutrin 500 mg 5mg lexapro tablets viagra stockholm buy diflucan 150 mg capsulas cheapist 30 brand cialis zovirax oral generic buy cheap viagra 100 online herbal viagra viagra plus generic cheap viagra miami augmentin dosage 1000 mg cialis professionnel 20 mg cheap 200 mg cialis order nexium india 50mg clomid men prijs cialis 5 mg will cialis generic cialis 5 mg dzialanie clomid pct mg cialis online italia buy cheap celebrex cialis online free clomid 100mg online interresults order viagra cheap cialis generic 1.00 metformin er 750 mg cialis 40mg tablets levitra 10 mg funciona zovirax 800 mg cost lisinopril dosage mg cialis d40 mg lisinopril 10 mg cost lexapro at 5mg compra cialis 5 mg 150 mg viagra dangers buy viagra bahrain synthroid 25 mg bula viagra 2 pills online propecia purchase generic erythromycin 500 mg dosierung levitra 20mg 50 tab max viagra 100mg glucophage 850 mg prix viagra 100mg usa lisinopril 3759 buy lexapro 20mg night valtrex online consultation cheapest cialis 40 mg kamagra buy usa metformin online sale doxycycline 200 mg online augmentin 600 mg packungsbeilage cialis 5mg buy propecia generic generic cialis ph manfaat xenical 120 mg diflucan capsules 50mg branded levitra 20 mg fake viagra 800mg buy cytotec uk generic zoloft greenstone lexapro 10mg receita uses celebrex 200 mg cheap zovirax ointment propecia generic wallmart doxycycline 20 online valtrex versus generic augmentin 825 mg dosage buy cipro hc viagra generico ultrafarma cialis 20mg slovenia generic levitra cheapest ordering generic levitra amoxil 400 mg bula order nexium uk lexapro generic online order deltasone prednisone generic cialis 20 online nolvadex 20 mg astrazeneca 1200 mg zithromax chlamydia wellbutrin generic coupon order cialis 5 mg posologia augmentin 875 mg propecia oral 5mg levitra schmelztabletten 5mg uk online viagra zovirax suspension 200mg buy viagra pifzer cialis 5mg us nexpro generic nexium synthroid 137 mg viagra tabletas 25 mg augmentin apteka online cialis generico 40 mg 40 mg prednisone daily propranolol sintaser 10 mg cialis 20mg billig propecia online belgium cialis e genericos cialis 20 mg foro lisinopril buy cheap generic viagra doses cheap cialis levitra 20 mg works priligy 30 mg compresse viagra buyers india xenical roche order medicamento generico xenical lexapro 10mg escitalopram cialis daily 2.5 mg zithromax 500mg tab synthroid generic mylan diflucan 150 mg 2x diflucan 200mg pret levitra pricing 20 mg priligy 60 mg filmtabletten canada celebrex online zithromax 500 mg alkohol doxycycline hcl 100 mg hydrochlorothiazide 25 mgs viagra cialis generico viagra 150mg buy viagra 25mg young cialis 5 mg ho lisinopril ratiopharm 20 mg lisinopril 20mg tab generic cialis exist cialis 5mg boner augmentin 325 mg bad generic wellbutrin lisinopril 2 5 mg efek cialis 80 mg zithromax 500 mg dosierung cheap lexapro 10 mg 45 mg buspar prednisone 1000mg day buy cheap metformin generic propecia erfahrung viagra pfizer 150mg strattera 25 mg cost dapoxetine tablets 30 mg lisinopril 0.25 mg zovirax tablets generic tetracycline 500 mg acne viagra 50 mg contraindicaciones cheap propecia 5 mg cialis 5mg rezeptfrei generic viagra boots online order propecia levitra 20mg information mg viagra propecia 1mg works augmentin 625 mg lupin lisinopril 40 mg cialis 2.5mg walgreens synthroid order canada generic levitra warnings lisinopril 5 mg w 928 nexium 20mg indication lexapro nausea 5mg metformin 500mg 3 times nolvadex 10 mg pregnancy discount 100mg viagra zovirax 800 mg dosis zithromax injection 500mg lisinopril 30 mg cost buy valtrex cvs clomid at 25 mg doxycycline buy overnight viagra generic 24 doxycycline purchase online diflucan 200 mg online prescription viagra 100mg xenical 500mg 125 mg. viagra glucophage metformin 500 mg 40 mg levitra online clomid 50mg ohss generic cialis milwaukee cialis 5 versus 20mg medicamento clomid 50mg lexapro online australia viagra 12.5mg experience doxycycline capsule 100mg viagra 100 mg dosage 400 mg of wellbutrin prednisone strength 20 mg cheapest viagra buy cheap viagra order generic strattera us 100 to 150 mg zoloft generico priligy portugal prednisone apotex 5 mg buy strattera cialis dosage 5mg wellbutrin panic disorder strattera becoming generic buy levitra cialis cheapest cialis 80 30 cialis 5mg europe generic viagra lexapro 20 mg efficacy viagra generico efectos xenical 120 mg kapsler buy nolvadex melbourne cheap propecia buy buy viagra bangkok 2013 canadian cheap levitra 40 zoloft dosage 100mg doxycycline doze 75mg nexium 20mg tablets difference viagra generic cialis 5 mg gabapentin viagra online jelly lexapro 20mg review viagra online 4rx assunzione cialis 10 mg augmentin 375 mg viagra 50mg kaufen lexapro 5mg ce cheap mexican cialis buy levitra women cialis generic cheap cialis posologia 20 mg amoxil 250 mg 5ml viagra bestellen 100mg wellbutrin generic companies levitra 20mg dose kamagra 100mg informatie strattera de 25 mg took 10 mg cialis nexium 10 mg preparacion metformin 500 mg po synthroid cytomel online levitra originale online wellbutrin 400 mg day prednisone 4 mg daily ordering cialis online kupovina xenical buy clomid montreal priligy buy usa cipro online sales augmentin tm 625 mg cialis generic timeline buy viagra sildenafil lasix 40 mg austria tadalafil generic viagra india cialis online generic cialis 200mg buy cialis discover cialis 40 mg ok levitra online cheap buy zithromax cheap dapoxetine hydrochloride 30 mg brand cialis 40 mg cialis 2 5 mg opinioni buy propecia turkey buy viagra edinburgh strattera 40 mg high synthroid generic alternative pauto cialis 20 mg glucophage 1000 mg tablets tetracycline 250 mg availability clomid 50mg usa synthroid 0.225 mg buy lisinopril 20mg mg doxycycline acne buy cialis brand lisinopril 40 mg buy 40 mg cialis usa remedio nexium generico ultrafarma viagra generico purchase clomid cheap buy viagra login anyone 40mg cialis get nexium online prednisone 5mg 6 taller bijsluiter diflucan 150 mg nexium generic costco generic cheap cialis levitra 20mg apotheke 100mg doxycycline dosage british levitra online viagra 100 mg beragena levitra 20 mg mg strattera lexapro over 20 mg cheap lexapro alternative order Cialis 10 cialis cheap canadian real generic cialis cytotec genericos valtrex 1000 mg cost buy alli orlistat order cialis sample propranolol 40 mg la generic synthroid ingredients kamagra 100 mg uputstvo zoloft generic version tetracycline 250mg capsules effets levitra 40 mg lexapro 2.5 mg tablet nolvadex 20mg bula anagen viagra generico generic cialis 10 mg. nogales buying viagra order celebrex uk cialis 5mg portugues cialis online acquisto 1mg propecia cost levitra generico farmacia viagra de 200 mg 50 mg of lexapro levitra 10 mg bucodispersable 50mg clomid cheap cialis soft 12.5 mg furosemide lasix clomid ml mg generic viagra st phenergan 50 mg im cialis 40 mg difference kamagra tablete 100 mg bangalore viagra online doxycycline 100mg kaufen 50 mg lexapro online levitra buy glucophage 850 mg anwendung purchase 5mg cialis cialis 30 mg erection online drugs cialis drug lisinopril 5mg order propecia online 503 metformin 1000 mg benefits erfahrungsberichte cialis 10 mg cipro online overnight generic propecia competition cialis 25mg purchasing viagra online propranolol 40 mg efectos generico para viagra test cialis 10mg levitra 20 mg reimport buy glucophage usa zovirax ointment order cialis online germany erythromycin ethylsuccinate 500 mg efeitos viagra 25mg erythromycin suspension 400 mg clomid online cheap comprimes cialis 5mg generic levitra 20 mg nome generico bactrim 1600 mg zoloft generic levitra images generic 10mg levitra iui clomid 25mg cialis 20 mg utilizzo kamagra online cheapest celebrex 200 mg pdf kamagra 100 mg prodaja celebrex 200mg srbija buy metformin india mail order kamagra doxycycline trihydrate 750 mg erythromycin order precio celebrex 200 mg lasix 40 mg pills pastillas metformin 500 mg levitra generico venezuela lasix 20 mg iw zovirax order augmentin 675 mg dosage levitra 20mg apteka buy 100mg clomid xenical 120 mg precio will valtrex generic celebrex 200 mg indicatii thuoc propranolol 40mg cialis 10 mg sulit strattera de 80 mg celebrex generic 200mg viagra online 25mg online levitra generic propecia dosage mg generic drugs cialis generic propecia august 2013 thuoc metformin 1000mg phenergan 50 mg pregnancy ordering nexium canada generici del cialis wellbutrin sr 200mg zithromax 2mg xenical online canada rischi cialis generico synthroid generic 2012 levitra generico orosolubile celebrex online canada securetabsonline cialis 20mg cytotec sale online lexapro generic wiki clomid generic 50mg viagra online 100mg clomid 50 mg ovulation cytotec tablets 200 mg propranolol 25 mg celebrex mims online foros viagra generico viagra generic au nolvadex 20 mg contraindicaciones generic toronto viagra valtrex cheap online amoxil bd 500mg cialis 8 mg cheap cheap cialis celebrex 200mg pfizer clomid 50mg tabs thuoc propecia 1mg levitra compresse 10 mg 20 mg cialis sufficient generico viagra online order viagra 150 mg buy lisinopril india buy cheap propecia viagra online amsterdam erythromycin 250 mg ulotka kamagra apteka online valtrex buy generic cialis france online xenical 120 mg wiki wellbutrin sr buy propecia 1mg canada doxycycline 100mg usage kamagra 100mg opis viagra 25 mg ausreichend viagra soho buy cialis 10 mg lilly clomid 50 mg success doxycycline cheapest 50 mg viagra cialis ontario viagra online india generic viagra singapore levitra buy buy doxycycline pattaya generic nexium 2013 cialis 40 and 100 mg lisinopril tab 20mg achat viagra 100mg indian generic cialis retirada genericos viagra prezzi levitra 5 mg commander cialis 10mg cialis instructions 20 mg buy viagra gels
Home Pete Toms LWIB: The Pirates and the Revenue-Sharing Debate, Cubs "Non-Sale Sale", Local ESPN.coms and MLB Local Digital Rights

Like Shoot to Thrill - An AC/DC Tribute on Facebook!

An authentic tribute of AC/DC that covers the best of the Bon Scott era and the best of Brian Johnson's material

Who's Online?

We have 1329 guests online

Atom RSS

LWIB: The Pirates and the Revenue-Sharing Debate, Cubs "Non-Sale Sale", Local ESPN.coms and MLB Local Digital Rights PDF Print E-mail
User Rating: / 16
PoorBest 
Pete Toms Article Archive
Written by Pete Toms   
Monday, 28 September 2009 08:38

Last Week in Bizball by Pete Toms

This week in LWIB, the abysmal performance of the Pittsburgh Pirates calls in to question the usefulness of revenue-sharing in MLB, the “nonsale sale” of the Chicago Cubs and will ESPN’s growing collection of local websites bring more urgency to the issue of control of local digital rights in MLB?

THE PITTSBURGH PIRATES AND THE REVENUE-SHARING DEBATE

The Pittsburgh Pirates last winning season was 1992. Even in that context, their dismal September performance has been noteworthy. LWIB, Dejan Kovacevic wrote for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, “This is, officially, indisputably, the worst baseball seen in Pittsburgh in more than a century.” Earlier this month LWIB reported that in reaction to the on field dominance of large payroll clubs this season, some small payroll clubs are agitating for increased revenue-sharing in the next CBA. Pirates President Frank Coonelly is among that group.

The continuing, long term, on field futility of the Pirates inevitably leads to a debate which has been ongoing within MLB since revenue-sharing was introduced after the 1994 strike. Are small market franchises investing their revenue-sharing receipts in improving their baseball teams or using that revenue for other purposes? Murray Chass wrote recently about the Pirates.

The Pirates, one of the smallest revenue teams in the majors, received approximately $40 million in revenue-sharing last year and most likely will get at least that much, despite the economy, for this year. One thing we know for sure. They aren’t spending the money to pay players.

Under the collective bargaining agreement, teams that receive money have to notify the commissioner’s office each April what they did with the money the previous year.

“They’re going to have some explaining to do,” a baseball official said. “It’s going to be difficult for them absent some substantial moves between now and April.”

High-revenue teams don’t appreciate revenue recipients that don’t spend the money to improve themselves but pocket it instead. The commissioner’s office is supposed to monitor the spending to make sure teams use the money as they’re supposed to, but no team has ever been disciplined or even reprimanded for not using it correctly.

The Pirates might be a good place for the commissioner to start.

This criticism of revenue-sharing is not new and not restricted to the Pirates. Since revenue-sharing was introduced there have been many examples of small market clubs (including the 2009 Pirates) whose revenue-sharing receipts exceeded their big league payroll. These same small market clubs also receive central fund dollars (national TV, merchandising). In fairness to the Pirates, Mr. Chass noted in a follow-up column that they have increased their investment in the amateur draft the past two seasons and also spent money on a new Dominican baseball academy.

According to Commissioner Selig, approximately $450 million will be redistributed this season as per MLB’s revenue-sharing formula. However the payouts and receipts of individual clubs is a bit of a guessing game as MLB is increasingly secretive about the details. Maury Brown reported for The Biz of Baseball in June that MLB has been withholding the figures from the media for the past few seasons.

MLB acknowledged during the last CBA negotiations that there were problems with the revenue-sharing formula in MLB. MLB concluded that under the previous CBA, the revenue-sharing formula provided too much disincentive for clubs to increase local revenues ( i.e. win more games, improve stadiums ). Put too simply and crassly, it was too often more financially advantageous for clubs to field inferior teams and maximize on revenue-sharing. The current CBA was amended to address this problem. Sports Economist Andrew Zimbalist was employed by MLB during the last CBA negotiations to change the revenue-sharing formula with the goal of improving upon its contribution to greater competitive balance. Again, too simply and crassly, the marginal tax rates upon which revenue-sharing are calculated were lowered in the current CBA. Mr. Zimbalist explained the new revenue-sharing formula in The Sports Business Journal in 2006. Of the former formula Mr. Zimbalist wrote;

Such a high marginal rate discouraged the low-revenue club from improving team performance and undermined the system’s goal of greater competitive balance.

Second, it created a cliff problem, whereby a team initially just above the median could, after revenue-sharing, end up with less net revenue than a team just below the median.

The new deal addresses these problems

And of the new formula Mr. Zimbalist wrote that it, “…provides a stronger incentive to teams to increase local revenue.” Mr. Zimbalist also wrote of the new formula, “These factors encourage team success as well as entrepreneurial behavior by the owners.”

Whether or not the changes made to revenue-sharing under this CBA have ameliorated the problems present in the former formula is probably only known by the owners and the MLBPA. Prior to this season there was evidence of greater competitive balance under the current CBA. Last season the Rays and Brewers both competed in the post season and in 2007 no club either won or lost 100 games - a rarity. However this season large payroll clubs will comprise practically all of the playoff teams, resulting in renewed concerns about “competitive balance” amongst pundits. Earlier this month, Joe Posnanski provided a broader perspective at SI.com.

There have only been 20 streaks in baseball history where a team finished below .500 for 10 or more seasons in a row -- and a quarter of those have come in the last decade. And those five long losing streaks don't even include the Royals, whose quirky 2003 season interrupted 14 losing years, or the Reds, who are one year away from a 10-year losing steak of their own.

Maury Brown argued recently at The Biz of Baseball that increased parity in MLB (if parity is measured by the number of small payroll clubs in the postseason) is a direct result of the introduction of the wild card. Will the next CBA (the current agreement expires in December 2011) see more teams qualifying for the playoffs? While not advocating for the change, last week Peter Gammons discussed the benefits of expanding the playoffs. No doubt an expanded playoff format would prompt a bitterly negative reaction from many hardcore baseball fans and writers but it could satisfy the small market franchises demands for greater competitive balance.

Select Read More to see details of the Chicago Cubs "Non-Sale Sale". and Local ESPN.coms and MLB Digital Rights Fees

 

 

THE “NON-SALE SALE” OF THE CHICAGO CUBS

LWIB saw the sale of the Chicago Cubs from Tribune Co. to a group headed by Thomas Ricketts move forward when a Delaware bankruptcy judge gave his blessing to the transaction. As the deal nears completion (MLB owners could approve the deal in November) LWIB saw reports very critical of the structure of the sale. Maury Brown explained for The Biz of Baseball, “The structure of the transaction is technically not a “sale” with Tribune continuing to own a minority stake. In what is called a “leveraged partnership”, Tribune would avoid hundreds of millions of dollars in capital gains taxes.” The Chicago Tribune (also owned by Tribune Co.) reported, “Such partnerships require the blessing of the Internal Revenue Service, and Tribune Co. has been careful never to call the transaction a sale, a legal treatment that would negate the favorable tax treatment.”

LWIB, Allan Sloan wrote a column very critical of the deal. Mr. Sloan speculates that the deal could well attract scrutiny from the IRS. Mr. Sloan’s piece received much attention, being published in the Washington Post, CNNMoney.com and linked in the New York Times. From Mr. Sloan;

….Zell's nonsale sale of the Cubs, which would work like this. The Ricketts family, founders of Ameritrade (now TD Ameritrade), would put $150 million of cash into a partnership that would also borrow up to $698 million. Tribune would put the Cubs, Wrigley Field and related assets into the partnership.

Tribune would emerge with $740 million of cash and 5 percent of the partnership, while the Ricketts family would have 95 percent and operating control. Call me naive, but it sure seems to me that when you start with 100 percent and full control and end up with 5 percent, $740 million and no control, you've sold 95 percent.

Zell's tax folks, however, will argue that Tribune is getting nontaxable proceeds from a leveraged partnership. They'll also argue that Tribune's guarantee of some of the partnership's borrowings makes it a true partner of the Rickettses. Hello? A debt guarantee from a bankrupt company? What's that worth? Can you spell "nothing"?

By my estimate, Tribune would have about a $720 million gain -- the $740 million, less 95 percent of the $21 million Tribune paid for the Cubs in 1981. At a 40 percent federal-state combined rate, the gain would generate about $290 million in taxes. Instead, that money would go to Tribune's creditors.

For additional analysis of the structure and legality of the transaction, see George Washington Law School Professor Sarah Lawsky here and here.

LOCAL ESPN.coms AND MLB LOCAL DIGITAL RIGHTS

The Biz of Baseball has reported extensively on the ongoing efforts within MLB to resolve the issue of control of local digital rights. (See here, here and here.) Clubs (most notably the Red Sox and Yankees) with interests in RSNs have long lobbied for greater control of local digital rights. Their position has been that the clubs, in conjunction with their RSNs, are better positioned than MLBAM to maximize the value of these rights. This season MLB made progress on the long divisive issue, with MLBAM reaching agreements with the Padres and Yankees to provide live “in market” streaming of games.

As ESPN aggressively expands its roster of websites devoted to local content, will RSNs react by pressuring MLB for greater access to digital content? Is there now greater urgency for MLB to strike live “in market” steaming deals with more clubs? Last week Eric Fisher reported that today ESPN will launch ESPNDallas.com. This on the heels of the launch of ESPNBoston.com and the spring launch of ESPNChicago,com. Mr. Fisher also reports that early 2010 will see ESPN sites devoted to Los Angeles and New York. LWIB John Ourand reported in The Sports Business Journal that RSNs are, out of necessity, reacting aggressively to ESPN’s local initiatives.

RSNs have spent years virtually ignoring their Web sites, largely using them as placeholders while waiting for a digital business to develop. While ESPN was developing video and social-media applications, RSN sites offered little more than tune-in information.

In their defense, RSNs had no reason to ramp up an online strategy that promised little revenue. But that inaction is as responsible for opening the door for ESPN to expand locally as the problems local newspapers face.

AND

RSNs, though, believe they have a competitive advantage thanks to the local relationships they have developed with the teams and their fans. Several teams hold stakes in Comcast’s RSNs, including baseball’s Giants and White Sox. In Boston, NESN is partly owned by the Red Sox. Just last week, team owner John Henry launched a blog on NESN.com and told a personal story about David Ortiz.

“That’s the kind of access I’m going to have and no one else is going to have,” said NESN President Sean McGrail.

Most RSNs I talked to believe they will start streaming live local pro basketball and baseball games within the year, something they expect will give them another competitive advantage over ESPN, which will not have those rights. To do that, though, RSNs need to upgrade their sites, and that is something most are already planning.

MLB President and COO Bob DuPuy stated earlier this season that MLB plans to have live “in market” streaming deals in place for most teams at some point next season. ESPN’s local initiatives could accelerate this timetable.


OTHER NEWS FROM THE BUSINESS OF SPORTS NETWORK

(THE BIZ OF FOOTBALL)

(THE BIZ OF HOCKEY)

(THE BIZ OF BASKETBALL)


Pete Toms is an author for the Business of Sports Network, most notably, The Biz of Baseball. He looks forward to your comments and can be contacted through The Biz of Baseball.

Don't forget to register and log in on The Biz of Baseball site to get updates via your in-box, and see information only logged in members can see.

Follow The Biz of Baseball on Twitter Twitter

FacebookFollow the Business of Sports Network on Facebook

 
 
Banner

Poll

Should MLB Force Jeffery Loria to Sell the Marlins?