Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 38 of 38
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,472
    vCash
    1500
    If the ownership assumes the risk and puts up the money to start their own network does this problem go away?

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    SG 9 Miles from Dodger Stadium
    Posts
    8,690
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by mOrphosis View Post
    MLB can suck it 280 million ways now for sticking us with Frank McCourt.

    The only thing that I do not like from the deal, or any sports TV deal, is that it will limit access in other ways in the long term. I am on the Apple TV (ala carte wagon) in regards for paying only for what I want to watch. By the Lakers and Dodgers signing long term with cable TV companies, it prevents that ability to see my teams without also having to pay for the man-hating Lifetime Network, FOX News propaganda, or the local access basketweaving with a $115 Time Warner cable/internet bill every month.

    If I could pay less than half that every month and get the Dodgers and Lakers in HD, whenever/wherever via my Apple TV at home, my computer/iPhone...I would much rather do that...BUT MLB blackouts and broadcast deals like this will force all of us to pay for things we really do not want. I am willing to pay for watching my teams...but I don't want to pay for other people to broadcast their crap.


    Quote Originally Posted by D Blue987 View Post
    MLB can suck a fat one. We have been in the shitter financially for years before Guggenheim came in. Now that we have money all of a sudden we are hated. **** the rest of baseball for hating on us now that we are the big dogs on the block with our fat wallets in ownership.
    exactly its like they want us to be mediocre **** them
    Last edited by bluedawgalex; 01-30-2013 at 01:47 AM.


    PWEEEG The Gawwd

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Downey
    Posts
    14,768
    vCash
    1500
    nice great news

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    10,556
    vCash
    1500
    So, in short, MLB wants the Dodgers to share more revenue for the new deal?

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    North Orange County
    Posts
    9,431
    vCash
    1500
    The San Diego Padres, brought to you by the LA Dodgers and New York Yankees.
    Lakers, Dodgers, Kings
    Bring Back the Los Angeles Rams

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    a higher plane
    Posts
    4,665
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by bluedawgalex View Post
    Major League Baseball isn't happy with the Dodgers' reported new TV deal, writes Bob Nightengale of USA Today. Nightengale reports that the previous fair-market value for a new deal called for an $84MM annual value. The Dodgers agreed to a deal with Time Warner Cable earlier today that would provide the team with roughly $280MM annually. That number has created significant revenue-sharing concerns among MLB officials.
    Hahahaha

    Tough Cookies.

    If the other MLB owners are unhappy then SUE the multi billion $ ownership group

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,749
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Dodgerbluemmm24 View Post
    So, in short, MLB wants the Dodgers to share more revenue for the new deal?
    Not even really that, MLB wants the Dodgers to share the normal league-wide percentage, but due to that deal that McCrook made in bankruptcy court, the amount they should have to contribute is substantially lower than the normal percentage.
    The Runnin' Rebels are back!!!!

    UNLV Class of '14

    LA Kings: 27-16-5 (4-2, 4-3, 1-4)
    LA Clippers: 56-26 (2-4)
    UNLV Runnin' Rebels:
    LA Dodgers: 33-42

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    542
    vCash
    1500
    pretty good news. no more drama.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •