WGN No More?

[MrSheps]

Sounds like the team will be back on WGN TV (locally at least) next season through 2019 but may broadcast fewer games with some moving to CSN. It could be a revenue sharing deal, which lowers Tribune Media's commitment but increases the team's upside. Bottom line is anyone still claiming the team was dumb to opt out of a below market deal isn't paying attention.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/c...story.html

It's hard to remember, but didn't they have to opt out no matter what so they could negotiate a shorter deal to have all the games free by 2020 when the CSN deal was up?  When was the WGN's portion set to expire had they not opted out? 

 

As long as they get more than 250 per game, which seems very low, they're in better shape in the immediate in terms of money, obviously.  If it matches CSN at 500 per as the article suggests, good. But it sounds from this like they Cubs are, by current standards, getting a crappy contract with performance bonuses because they have few options.  I was hoping for a lot more, like a mega deal with FOX or Comcast, backloaded for sure, but still.  Not being able to cash in until closer to 2020 is worrisome only because in the current TV landscape that's feels like an eternity from now.

[Bricklayer]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231767" data-time="1415982652">
<div>
Sounds like the team will be back on WGN TV (locally at least) next season through 2019 but may broadcast fewer games with some moving to CSN. It could be a revenue sharing deal, which lowers Tribune Media's commitment but increases the team's upside. Bottom line is anyone still claiming the team was dumb to opt out of a below market deal isn't paying attention.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/c...story.html

It's hard to remember, but didn't they have to opt out no matter what so they could negotiate a shorter deal to have all the games free by 2020 when the CSN deal was up?  When was the WGN's portion set to expire had they not opted out? 

 

As long as they get more than 250 per game, which seems very low, they're in better shape in the immediate in terms of money, obviously.  If it matches CSN at 500 per as the article suggests, good. But it sounds from this like they Cubs are, by current standards, getting a crappy contract with performance bonuses because they have few options.  I was hoping for a lot more, like a mega deal with FOX or Comcast, backloaded for sure, but still.  Not being able to cash in until closer to 2020 is worrisome only because in the current TV landscape that's feels like an eternity from now.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
 

Without the opt out, it would have extended to 2022

[rok]

Yes, and for some reason the anti-Ricketts crowd have been ignoring that important detail.


And some of those WGN games will end up at CSN short-term at the $500k rate, presumably.

[MrSheps]

Yeah, anyone who thinks they shouldn't have opted out has no argument there. Still though, I hope the deal they get is better than it sounds in this article. It's hard to spin this as win, though the alignment means even if it is just what's spelled out here it's not a loss, obviously. That certainly trumps everything.

[rok]

This also buys them some time to continue negotiating with potential long-term partners for another year at minimum. If ratings are way up, it puts the team in a better bargaining position and/or opens up other doors.

[Coldneck]

This also buys them some time to continue negotiating with potential long-term partners for another year at minimum. If ratings are way up, it puts the team in a better bargaining position and/or opens up other doors.

Wait! I thought ratings had nothing to do with the value of the rights.

[rok]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231816" data-time="1416026430">
<div>
This also buys them some time to continue negotiating with potential long-term partners for another year at minimum. If ratings are way up, it puts the team in a better bargaining position and/or opens up other doors.

Wait! I thought ratings had nothing to do with the value of the rights.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
Of course ratings matter, long-term, but if a short-term pop helps bring in other interested parties to negotiate for the big post-2019 deal, then more time to negotiate doesn't hurt.

 

Also, no one ever argued that ratings aren't a factor in valuing the next contract, but I do recall some (who shall remain nameless) predicting that this team might not recover from bad ratings over the past few seasons. That is silly, and an organization shouldn't be run solely to "maximize" short-term ratings with an expensive but mediocre team.

[Coldneck]

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Coldneck" data-cid="231817" data-time="1416065334">
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231816" data-time="1416026430">
This also buys them some time to continue negotiating with potential long-term partners for another year at minimum. If ratings are way up, it puts the team in a better bargaining position and/or opens up other doors.

Wait! I thought ratings had nothing to do with the value of the rights.
</blockquote>
Of course ratings matter, long-term, but if a short-term pop helps bring in other interested parties to negotiate for the big post-2019 deal, then more time to negotiate doesn't hurt.

 

Also, no one ever argued that ratings aren't a factor in valuing the next contract, but I do recall some (who shall remain nameless) predicting that this team might not recover from bad ratings over the past few seasons. That is silly, and an organization shouldn't be run solely to "maximize" short-term ratings with an expensive but mediocre team.</blockquote>
Ummm, yes a couple people did argue that ratings are irrelevant to the value of the TV contract . I don't want to rehash the argument so I'll leave it at that.

[Kid]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231818" data-time="1416066507">
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Coldneck" data-cid="231817" data-time="1416065334">
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231816" data-time="1416026430">
This also buys them some time to continue negotiating with potential long-term partners for another year at minimum. If ratings are way up, it puts the team in a better bargaining position and/or opens up other doors.

Wait! I thought ratings had nothing to do with the value of the rights.</blockquote>
Of course ratings matter, long-term, but if a short-term pop helps bring in other interested parties to negotiate for the big post-2019 deal, then more time to negotiate doesn't hurt.

 

Also, no one ever argued that ratings aren't a factor in valuing the next contract, but I do recall some (who shall remain nameless) predicting that this team might not recover from bad ratings over the past few seasons. That is silly, and an organization shouldn't be run solely to "maximize" short-term ratings with an expensive but mediocre team.</blockquote>
Ummm, yes a couple people did argue that ratings are irrelevant to the value of the TV contract . I don't want to rehash the argument so I'll leave it at that.
 


</blockquote>
 

Just goes to show that you never understood the argument being made.

[PcB]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231818" data-time="1416066507">
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Coldneck" data-cid="231817" data-time="1416065334">
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231816" data-time="1416026430">
This also buys them some time to continue negotiating with potential long-term partners for another year at minimum. If ratings are way up, it puts the team in a better bargaining position and/or opens up other doors.

Wait! I thought ratings had nothing to do with the value of the rights.</blockquote>
Of course ratings matter, long-term, but if a short-term pop helps bring in other interested parties to negotiate for the big post-2019 deal, then more time to negotiate doesn't hurt.

 

Also, no one ever argued that ratings aren't a factor in valuing the next contract, but I do recall some (who shall remain nameless) predicting that this team might not recover from bad ratings over the past few seasons. That is silly, and an organization shouldn't be run solely to "maximize" short-term ratings with an expensive but mediocre team.</blockquote>
Ummm, yes a couple people did argue that ratings are irrelevant to the value of the TV contract . I don't want to rehash the argument so I'll leave it at that.
 


</blockquote>
Yeah that's cool and your argument was fun, but... this is the Cubs. If/when they win, ratings of previous years won't mean shit, and networks know this. So current ratings don't mean dick.

[funkster]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Coldneck" data-cid="231821" data-time="1416112851">
<div>
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231818" data-time="1416066507">
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Coldneck" data-cid="231817" data-time="1416065334">
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231816" data-time="1416026430">
This also buys them some time to continue negotiating with potential long-term partners for another year at minimum. If ratings are way up, it puts the team in a better bargaining position and/or opens up other doors.

Wait! I thought ratings had nothing to do with the value of the rights.</blockquote>
Of course ratings matter, long-term, but if a short-term pop helps bring in other interested parties to negotiate for the big post-2019 deal, then more time to negotiate doesn't hurt.

 

Also, no one ever argued that ratings aren't a factor in valuing the next contract, but I do recall some (who shall remain nameless) predicting that this team might not recover from bad ratings over the past few seasons. That is silly, and an organization shouldn't be run solely to "maximize" short-term ratings with an expensive but mediocre team.</blockquote>
Ummm, yes a couple people did argue that ratings are irrelevant to the value of the TV contract . I don't want to rehash the argument so I'll leave it at that.
 


</blockquote>
 

Just goes to show that you never understood the argument being made.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
Exactly.

[Coldneck]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Coldneck" data-cid="231821" data-time="1416112851">
<div>
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231818" data-time="1416066507">
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Coldneck" data-cid="231817" data-time="1416065334">
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231816" data-time="1416026430">
This also buys them some time to continue negotiating with potential long-term partners for another year at minimum. If ratings are way up, it puts the team in a better bargaining position and/or opens up other doors.

Wait! I thought ratings had nothing to do with the value of the rights.</blockquote>
Of course ratings matter, long-term, but if a short-term pop helps bring in other interested parties to negotiate for the big post-2019 deal, then more time to negotiate doesn't hurt.

 

Also, no one ever argued that ratings aren't a factor in valuing the next contract, but I do recall some (who shall remain nameless) predicting that this team might not recover from bad ratings over the past few seasons. That is silly, and an organization shouldn't be run solely to "maximize" short-term ratings with an expensive but mediocre team.</blockquote>
Ummm, yes a couple people did argue that ratings are irrelevant to the value of the TV contract . I don't want to rehash the argument so I'll leave it at that.
 


</blockquote>
Yeah that's cool and your argument was fun, but... this is the Cubs. If/when they win, ratings of previous years won't mean shit, and networks know this. So current ratings don't mean dick.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
I completely agree that previous ratings won't mean anything once they start winning. But they're negotiating now and they aren't winning now.  In 5 years they'll be golden. But the current rating are obviously affecting THIS contract negotiation. Obviously TV execs cannot just assume that the Cubs will be winners for most of the next 5 years. They use recent data and perhaps extrapolate some increases in ratings because the team is likely to get better. There's a reason why no deal has been signed this close to the new season. That reason is likely that the Cubs have not received an offer that is large enough. The reason for that is because the rating have been terrible. It's more complicated than that but the poor current ratings do have an effect and to i don't understand how you can believe otherwise. And this was the argument. I understand your argument I just don't agree with it.  

[Kid]

There's a reason why no deal has been signed this close to the new season. That reason is likely that the Cubs have not received an offer that is large enough. The reason for that is because the rating have been terrible.

[jstraw]

I'm going to a pizza joint and make an offer on a meal based on how appetizing that raw dough and toppings being slid into the oven looks *now*, and see of the proprietor will take the deal.

[MrSheps]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="PcB" data-cid="231825" data-time="1416118115">
<div>
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Coldneck" data-cid="231821" data-time="1416112851">
<div>
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231818" data-time="1416066507">
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Coldneck" data-cid="231817" data-time="1416065334">
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="rok" data-cid="231816" data-time="1416026430">
This also buys them some time to continue negotiating with potential long-term partners for another year at minimum. If ratings are way up, it puts the team in a better bargaining position and/or opens up other doors.

Wait! I thought ratings had nothing to do with the value of the rights.</blockquote>
Of course ratings matter, long-term, but if a short-term pop helps bring in other interested parties to negotiate for the big post-2019 deal, then more time to negotiate doesn't hurt.

 

Also, no one ever argued that ratings aren't a factor in valuing the next contract, but I do recall some (who shall remain nameless) predicting that this team might not recover from bad ratings over the past few seasons. That is silly, and an organization shouldn't be run solely to "maximize" short-term ratings with an expensive but mediocre team.</blockquote>
Ummm, yes a couple people did argue that ratings are irrelevant to the value of the TV contract . I don't want to rehash the argument so I'll leave it at that.
 


</blockquote>
Yeah that's cool and your argument was fun, but... this is the Cubs. If/when they win, ratings of previous years won't mean shit, and networks know this. So current ratings don't mean dick.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
I completely agree that previous ratings won't mean anything once they start winning. But they're negotiating now and they aren't winning now.  In 5 years they'll be golden. But the current rating are obviously affecting THIS contract negotiation. Obviously TV execs cannot just assume that the Cubs will be winners for most of the next 5 years. They use recent data and perhaps extrapolate some increases in ratings because the team is likely to get better. There's a reason why no deal has been signed this close to the new season. That reason is likely that the Cubs have not received an offer that is large enough. The reason for that is because the rating have been terrible. It's more complicated than that but the poor current ratings do have an effect and to i don't understand how you can believe otherwise. And this was the argument. I understand your argument I just don't agree with it.  

 

</div>
</blockquote>
Yes, this was always my point.  "So current ratings don't mean dick" is just not true.  You could argue they shouldn't mean dick, but they absolutely do.  The landscape is different from the last time we were good, and this is now a short term deal it appears only.  I am super optimistic that the the Cubs will be better next season, there's no reason not to be, but from a non-fan perspective, which is how the TV people are looking at this, it's not a home run we're suddenly a big ratings draw next year.  I'm sure the plan was to be one last year, or at least significantly increasing, which I guess we saw a week or so of re: JB.  We know how the team is been rebuilt, we know what direction things are going, but if you just looked at how the Cubs have performed since new ownership, the direction of the ratings, and absolutely bottoming out last year, the stock is low.  It's a big ask of network execs to assume our rookies will wow next year and trust ownership and even FO management until the results are tangible, not theoretical (no pun intended!).  Now, some free agent signings will probably help though.   

 

Either way, what's done is done, I just hope we get a really nice deal and then hit the jackpot in a few years.  If this deal is low, we just need to hope the bubble on the big deals doesn't/hasn't burst yet.