Awesome. It seriously kicks ass not being able to watch teams I have supported my whole life because of billionaires wanting more money. Of course, they DO give me the option of switching my service to a company that has arguably the worst customer service in the history of business... At least they get to continue to profit off of partially publicly funded stadiums downtown... Thanks!
As Max said before, its comparing apples and oranges. What's reasonable for the Rockets/CSN does not mean it would work for the Astros. Likewise, its not the Astros being greedy... its just that the economics of baseball require a certain figure to make things work. I believe that with a below average TV deal, it would put them at a huge competitive disadvantage compared to other teams in their division. Their market definitely won't match up to LA, but is comparable to the Texas and Seattle markets who both have favorable ownership RSN deals. We obviously do not want them to emulate Oakland (minus their annual success) because this market relates better to having core stars in and past their primes, rather than a rotating door where the team rebuilds every 5-6 years. It is possible for them to be "poor" when you consider they have an owner with not that much personal wealth... he's not going to dip into his own money to operate the team. The team needs to make enough money to operate itself... and from that standpoint, the Astros are poorer than mid-market teams that can withstand some bad years. This is more than just a "hobby" for Crane... its a vehicle for profits. He's come into this following the whole RSN bubble bursting. Cable/satellite companies realize that even though live sports is still viable from an advertising standpoint, its tough to force all of the cost on consumers that only a fraction of which care about the channel.
the astros, more than the rockets need the revenue from the network to operate, in free agency, in their farm system, as an mlb club. its not about billionaires wanting more money.. this line of thinking is why most peopele here sound so ignorant about this situation..
My question to you or anyone else is this: What is the supposed annual revenue difference for the Astros between what they are demanding from the other providers to what is being offered? You'd have to come up with a per subscriber fee difference x the number of subscribers for U-Verse, Dish and Direct TV? Is it closer to $10 million/year or $50 million/year?
Industry standard seems to be long term deals. I think the Rangers signed a 20 year deal with Fox. I'm sure they all want 20 year deals. Crane wants it locked in high, they want it locked in low. I just don't want to be in the situation the Thunder are in. I think their TV deal nets the team 15mm a year. That's INSANELY LOW.
Haven't done the math... but if the average MLB team which has an ownership in a RSN gets around $3.20 per subscriber, the Astros are going to want close to that number. Obviously the huge markets could charge less since there are more subscribers, whereas some of the smaller markets like Pittsburgh actually charge more per subscriber. Its all about average numbers to make things work... Astros likely want slightly above that, but from all accounts the other networks want a significantly lower number.
Bad players do sign one year deals and last time I checked the Astros are a bad team, a REALLY bad team. I realize long term deals are the standard however it is hard to negotiate when the Astros would have trouble competing against most other teams triple A clubs. If Crane needs money to build a team, then it would make a lot more sense to sign a short term carriage deal so he has the money to field even a serviceable major league team. When a team post a 0.0 Nielsen rating then they are really negotiating from a weak point. If Crane has to have a 20 year deal then we will more than likely never see the Astros or Rockets games on anything other than Comcast. Unfortunately, Comcast is not offered in my area (Beaumont) so the only way I can watch the games is through crappy streams.
I am hearing from people who have "inside sources" that the Rockets will be on FOX this up and coming season. Anyone have any info on this?
Seriously, unless you have an actual "source," please don't do that. Someone posted a similar rumor earlier in this (or maybe another) thread. If this is what you are referring to, please be clear on that. Otherwise, you wind up adding weight behind what could likely be an unsubstantiated rumor.
I am just saying that's what I heard from somebody on the marketing team. I don't want to give out any personal info but he said its highly possible. I just don't know if there are any other leaks or info on this other than word of mouth. Don't take what I am saying seriously. I am NOT the source. Just saying what I heard and looking for additional confirmation.
No other info was given about this season. Only the POSSIBILITYit could be this season. Next year though he said they will be on FOX. He did not specify which FOX affiliate but that's what I am hearing. Thats all the info I have from him. Take it with a grain of salt and in no way am I saying what I have been told is fact. Beware and don't crucify me if this proves to be false.
The Astros will get a long-term deal. Even though you equate them to a "bad player", that's really only a temporary issue... unlike players who will always be bad, the Astros will in fact be good again. They play in a top 10 market, have had a multi-state following, and have a good future ahead of them (even with idiots at the helm, they'll eventually get good by simply having the most talent). To accept a short-term deal now, when their peers/competitors (Rangers/Mariners) all get long-term deals would be financially irresponsible and short-sighted.
