HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Would Montreal Welcome the Expos Back

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-06-2014, 02:42 PM
  #601
HabsByTheBay
Registered User
 
HabsByTheBay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: London
Country: United States
Posts: 1,213
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats86 View Post
Sportsnet is paying Jays only $225,000 per game. Or 36 million annually. That's not much compared to similar clubs. Jays are in the 7th biggest baseball market. Number one market actually as they have territorial rights to all of Canada.

In comparsion, Texas Rangers have a 20 year deal signed at $150-million (U.S.) a season. The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim get even more. A small club like the San Diego Padres are getting $75-million a season. $36 million per is chump change to what is out there

Revenue sharing will end for them in 2016. Jays need a much better tv deal.
That's Rogers keeping the money off the books so it doesn't end up part of MLB's revenue sharing. Annual rights fees are meaningless when the TV network owns the team.

HabsByTheBay is offline  
Old
04-06-2014, 04:10 PM
  #602
ClasslessGuy
Registered User
 
ClasslessGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: St-Jean, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,416
vCash: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
Who cares? My country, my town, my rules.
that's what the charte is about

ClasslessGuy is offline  
Old
04-06-2014, 04:17 PM
  #603
beenhereandthere
Registered User
 
beenhereandthere's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Evergray State
Posts: 668
vCash: 500
Did they play "Les Expos sont la" anytime during the 2 games at the Big O? Anyone who was there know?

beenhereandthere is offline  
Old
04-06-2014, 04:49 PM
  #604
Burke the Legend
Registered User
 
Burke the Legend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,391
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsByTheBay View Post
That's Rogers keeping the money off the books so it doesn't end up part of MLB's revenue sharing. Annual rights fees are meaningless when the TV network owns the team.
I don't think they could do that, at least the NHL wouldn't let someone. Probably just an old contract.

Burke the Legend is offline  
Old
04-06-2014, 05:52 PM
  #605
BrimStone64
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsByTheBay View Post
That's Rogers keeping the money off the books so it doesn't end up part of MLB's revenue sharing. Annual rights fees are meaningless when the TV network owns the team.
That'd be fraud.

BrimStone64 is offline  
Old
04-06-2014, 06:28 PM
  #606
CrAzYNiNe
Registered User
 
CrAzYNiNe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats86 View Post
That'd be fraud.
Why is that fraud? They don't have competition for the Jays, so the price will remain low. Why pay 100 M a year for a TV deal, when you can do it for 20 M?

CrAzYNiNe is online now  
Old
04-06-2014, 07:48 PM
  #607
BrimStone64
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrAzYNiNe View Post
Why is that fraud? They don't have competition for the Jays, so the price will remain low. Why pay 100 M a year for a TV deal, when you can do it for 20 M?
Jays been getting 10s of millions a year in revenue sharing from MLB since it started.

BrimStone64 is offline  
Old
04-06-2014, 08:28 PM
  #608
CrAzYNiNe
Registered User
 
CrAzYNiNe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats86 View Post
Jays been getting 10s of millions a year in revenue sharing from MLB since it started.
And? If the MLB comes out and says "All teams owned by a TV Network, where the team is shown exclusively on their channel, must have a TV deal worth the average of the league."

Until then, why should they have to be the nice guys in a dirty game?

I have no real idea what I am talking about.

CrAzYNiNe is online now  
Old
04-06-2014, 08:41 PM
  #609
groovejuice
Registered User
 
groovejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 9,582
vCash: 500
Don't know about Montreal, but the Expos really got me into baseball.

I'd be tickled to have them back. Totally got screwed in the strike shortened season, when they had the best full season record in the NL, but it was decided to take the split season winners.

They should have more HOFers. A geographical tragedy.

groovejuice is online now  
Old
04-07-2014, 03:58 AM
  #610
Stats01
Registered User
 
Stats01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,337
vCash: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats86 View Post
Jays been getting 10s of millions a year in revenue sharing from MLB since it started.
They get revenue sharing because the media rights they own aren't on the books..well no I'm sure they are but I can guarantee Rogers isn't going to put down the rights are worth 100's of millions of dollars, that would be dumb. It would cut down on what they get. You can't get a proper valuation on tv rights when the company that owns them is showing them on their own station for peanuts. How can you tell a team owner is also a media empire "Yeah sorry you're going to have pay more to show your games"..plus all it is is money switching hands. It's all going to the same company. Sportsnet (Rogers) pays Rogers 250,000 a game..HMM I wonder where the money is going? It starts with an R.

If Rogers ever sold their media rights the value would skyrocket. But then they'd have to split that up amongst revenue sharing which we all know they would be stupid to do. Rogers could treat the Jays like the Yankees but they're not dumb, they're in it to make money and treat it like a business.

Stats01 is offline  
Old
04-07-2014, 05:03 AM
  #611
BrimStone64
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrAzYNiNe View Post
And? If the MLB comes out and says "All teams owned by a TV Network, where the team is shown exclusively on their channel, must have a TV deal worth the average of the league."

Until then, why should they have to be the nice guys in a dirty game?

I have no real idea what I am talking about.
And??? Can't you see it?

If Jays are making more money from tv revenue than they are reporting, as alleged by some posters here, they are duking the other clubs out of revenue sharing money. In some years a lot of money. For example in 2005, MLB paid Toronto 34 million from revenue sharing.

Way revenue sharing is all 30 clubs pay into a pool. Every year the total amount would be different depending on how much they made. The teams whose revenue is below the average receive revenue sharing money. For example, last year Jays received 15 million, while Houston received 46 million. The less total revenue a team has the bigger revenue share they receive.


Last edited by BrimStone64: 04-07-2014 at 09:05 AM.
BrimStone64 is offline  
Old
04-07-2014, 07:46 AM
  #612
Habs 4 Life
No Excuses
 
Habs 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Italy
Posts: 36,243
vCash: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllanMTL46 View Post
14,000 attendance for a Friday night game last night in Tampa.
Unfortunately much better crowds for them this weekend, 30 000 on Saturday and almost 23 000 on Sunday. Much better average then the first 4 games against the Jays

Habs 4 Life is offline  
Old
04-07-2014, 08:59 AM
  #613
Burke the Legend
Registered User
 
Burke the Legend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,391
vCash: 50
I assume Rogers still has to bid on the TV rights, I would be really surprised if MLB let them negotiate exclusively since it does exactly what people have claimed, basically cheats the revenue sharing formulas. So far in Canada nobody else has made a serious bid at the contract, maybe it will change now that TSN has lost a lot of hockey content.

Burke the Legend is offline  
Old
04-07-2014, 09:17 AM
  #614
AllanMTL46
Registered User
 
AllanMTL46's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ste-Agathe, Lotb.
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs 4 Life View Post
Unfortunately much better crowds for them this weekend, 30 000 on Saturday and almost 23 000 on Sunday. Much better average then the first 4 games against the Jays
But kinda predictable. Anxious to see how things will go in the long run this season. This team has been good for years and can't even sell out a playoff game...

AllanMTL46 is offline  
Old
04-07-2014, 09:25 AM
  #615
BrimStone64
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke the Legend View Post
I assume Rogers still has to bid on the TV rights, I would be really surprised if MLB let them negotiate exclusively since it does exactly what people have claimed, basically cheats the revenue sharing formulas. So far in Canada nobody else has made a serious bid at the contract, maybe it will change now that TSN has lost a lot of hockey content.
As I think about it can't help but wonder how much Bell is behind this big Expos push? Where they own TSN.

BrimStone64 is offline  
Old
04-07-2014, 09:27 AM
  #616
CrAzYNiNe
Registered User
 
CrAzYNiNe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats86 View Post
And??? Can't you see it?

If Jays are making more money from tv revenue than they are reporting, as alleged by some posters here, they are duking the other clubs out of revenue sharing money. In some years a lot of money. For example in 2005, MLB paid Toronto 34 million from revenue sharing.

Way revenue sharing is all 30 clubs pay into a pool. Every year the total amount would be different depending on how much they made. The teams whose revenue is below the average receive revenue sharing money. For example, last year Jays received 15 million, while Houston received 46 million. The less total revenue a team has the bigger revenue share they receive.
I don't see it as revenue, but just expenses on Rogers. Why spend 100 M a years on rights when you can do it for any cost, since you win no matter what? (It's not really a monopoly when you own the team, right?).

I don't see it as wrong, since I feel legal business trades are already shady. They have a way to bring money into the organization, legally, collect revenue sharing. If they were doing something illegal, wouldn't MLB cry foul? (Again, the purpose of this is in LA, a bidding war among channels happens, thus the price of the contract is raised. In TO, no bidding war, price is much lower)

CrAzYNiNe is online now  
Old
04-07-2014, 09:30 AM
  #617
CrAzYNiNe
Registered User
 
CrAzYNiNe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke the Legend View Post
I assume Rogers still has to bid on the TV rights, I would be really surprised if MLB let them negotiate exclusively since it does exactly what people have claimed, basically cheats the revenue sharing formulas. So far in Canada nobody else has made a serious bid at the contract, maybe it will change now that TSN has lost a lot of hockey content.
Rogers got the NHL contract without a bidding war. In construction, you can get around going for tender by talking directly with one contractor and making them a "partnership". I wonder if TV deals can be struck in a similar manner. (Why would anyone want to go against Rogers for the Jays, when they own the team? I can't see how anyone would waste their time)

CrAzYNiNe is online now  
Old
04-07-2014, 10:20 AM
  #618
BrimStone64
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrAzYNiNe View Post
I don't see it as revenue, but just expenses on Rogers. Why spend 100 M a years on rights when you can do it for any cost, since you win no matter what? (It's not really a monopoly when you own the team, right?).

I don't see it as wrong, since I feel legal business trades are already shady. They have a way to bring money into the organization, legally, collect revenue sharing. If they were doing something illegal, wouldn't MLB cry foul? (Again, the purpose of this is in LA, a bidding war among channels happens, thus the price of the contract is raised. In TO, no bidding war, price is much lower)
I suspect this alleged Jays tv revenue is not there. For I have Sportsnet in my satellite package, pay $58 a month for between 100-125 channels. Whatever share Sportsnet gets out of that...i would guess a buck per month, likely less. Doing a search found Comcast offering NESN for $13 per month. Big difference in price. The question would I pay $13 per month to watch Blue Jays games? I wouldn't...just not that big a fan of baseball. Canadians in generally, are just not as enthusiastic over baseball as people are in parts of USA.

Would Quebecers pay $13 per month to watch Expos games? I would early on..but not over long term. Habs games on other hand, if only way to watch, I would definitely pay $13 per month to watch all their games.

BrimStone64 is offline  
Old
04-07-2014, 10:29 AM
  #619
Burke the Legend
Registered User
 
Burke the Legend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,391
vCash: 50
No way TSN/Sportsnet get less than 1$.

Burke the Legend is offline  
Old
04-07-2014, 11:13 AM
  #620
PernellKarl76
Registered User
 
PernellKarl76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 129
vCash: 50
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...ing-spree.html

Here is a good article that somewhat explains revenue sharing in terms of regional TV deals

The Blue Jays have Canada as a region, from what I can tell they aren't treated like an MLB national contract that would have to be shared between the rest of the other teams.

PernellKarl76 is offline  
Old
04-07-2014, 11:24 AM
  #621
BrimStone64
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burke the Legend View Post
No way TSN/Sportsnet get less than 1$.
That's about what I pay. I have the sports theme...must be 10-12 channels. Been getting it for $5...but went up to $10 this year. RDS, Sportsnet, 360, TSN, TSN2, GOLF, Speed, OLN, plus 3 or 4 others.

BrimStone64 is offline  
Old
04-07-2014, 10:01 PM
  #622
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,871
vCash: 500
Liberal majority is good news for Expos hopeful!

coolasprICE is offline  
Old
04-08-2014, 01:04 AM
  #623
QuebecPride
@Etienne_Pouliot
 
QuebecPride's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: MTL/Sherbrooke , Qc
Country: Martinique
Posts: 4,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
Liberal majority is good news for Expos hopeful!
Not necessarily. The Liberals didn't want to help fund the arena in Québec. You think they'll want to build a baseball stadium without a team?

QuebecPride is offline  
Old
04-08-2014, 06:14 AM
  #624
AllanMTL46
Registered User
 
AllanMTL46's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ste-Agathe, Lotb.
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuebecPride View Post
Not necessarily. The Liberals didn't want to help fund the arena in Québec. You think they'll want to build a baseball stadium without a team?
They did?

AllanMTL46 is offline  
Old
04-08-2014, 07:33 AM
  #625
BrimStone64
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,967
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
Liberal majority is good news for Expos hopeful!
Yes it is. But I think PQ handed it to them more than Liberals won. She sealed her faith when she admitted wanting a referendum soon. Bloc were wiped out federally, and the PQ just suffered their worst defeat. Sovereignty is what Quebec does not want to face right now. Too many still remember the '90s economic situation in Quebec. Expos, Nordiques plus many other things are gone because of it and still never achieved separtion.

BrimStone64 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:49 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2017 All Rights Reserved.