Cubs TV Deal Stuff

[seanimal]

i think you're highly discounting the boon that controlling a majority of their broadcasts will be for the cubs. as tt said, the cubs don't need a dodgers deal to make out like bandits in a few years. lots of people tune into competitive cubs teams, and those people buy things. this equation isn't going to change

[jersey cubs fan]

i think you're highly discounting the boon that controlling a majority of their broadcasts will be for the cubs. as tt said, the cubs don't need a dodgers deal to make out like bandits in a few years. lots of people tune into competitive cubs teams, and those people buy things. this equation isn't going to change

The equation has changed. Yes, lots of people will watch a good Cubs team, but other teams will dwarf their revenues based on timing of deals. The Cubs will be better off than the also rans, but that has always been the case. They aren't climbing the ladder to elite revenue status without the help of grossly overvalued cable contracts.

[seanimal]

i think you're highly discounting the boon that controlling a majority of their broadcasts will be for the cubs. as tt said, the cubs don't need a dodgers deal to make out like bandits in a few years. lots of people tune into competitive cubs teams, and those people buy things. this equation isn't going to change

The equation has changed. Yes, lots of people will watch a good Cubs team, but other teams will dwarf their revenues based on timing of deals. The Cubs will be better off than the also rans, but that has always been the case. They aren't climbing the ladder to elite revenue status without the help of grossly overvalued cable contracts.

just because other clubs have capitalized on better timing doesn't mean the equation has changed. a captive audience will be valuable whether the dollars come from direct subscriptions or advertising subsidies

but anyway, that doesn't really matter. the point is that the cubs can and hopefully will do significantly better in five years than what they do today because they can package their games together. i'm not sure what you find so objectionable about that statement

[Tim]

It is certainly important that they improve their revenues relative to what they are today. However, it is also important what their revenue streams look like compared to what the other 29 clubs will look like in five years. If you are trying to add free agents or buy IFA's, it doesn't matter how much more you make now than in the past. It matters whether you can outbid the other teams for those services.

[Bruno7481]

Rosenthal discusses tv deals and the NL Central a bit in his latest article. Summary is that the Cardinals, in his estimation, have the capacity to sign a guy like Price and a Heyward/Davis.

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/jord ... als-112915

[WrigleyField 22]

Only Price and Heyward? Phew, good thing they have that competitive balance pick to even things out a bit.

[Banedon]

Only Price and Heyward? Phew, good thing they have that competitive balance pick to even things out a bit.

They don't have one in 2016.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/07/2 ... sults.html

[UMFan83]

Only Price and Heyward? Phew, good thing they have that competitive balance pick to even things out a bit.

They don't have one in 2016.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/07/2 ... sults.html

yeah but not because they don't qualify for one, just that they lost the lottery. Don't worry though, every other team in our division will get one next year.

[SouthSideRyan]

Only Price and Heyward? Phew, good thing they have that competitive balance pick to even things out a bit.

They don't have one in 2016.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/07/2 ... sults.html

yeah but not because they don't qualify for one, just that they lost the lottery. Don't worry though, every other team in our division will get one next year.

I'll gladly trade a competitive balance pick every year for the right to play in the Chicago market.

[UMFan83]

Only Price and Heyward? Phew, good thing they have that competitive balance pick to even things out a bit.

They don't have one in 2016.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/07/2 ... sults.html

yeah but not because they don't qualify for one, just that they lost the lottery. Don't worry though, every other team in our division will get one next year.

I'll gladly trade a competitive balance pick every year for the right to play in the Chicago market.

Me too...its a unique situation that has put the Cardinals payroll higher than us the last 4 years (I believe)...it shouldn't continue like that very long, but I think it also shows that they don't exactly need an extra draft pick to maintain competitive balance.

[David]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ba ... story.html

The Cubs believe they would need to start their own network two years before they telecast their games.

"We would need a two-year runway," Cubs business President Crane Kenney said Saturday from the Cubs Convention at the Sheraton Grand Chicago.

The Cubs continue to explore all options for when their agreements with CSN, WGN and WLS expire after the 2019 season. But they seem leaning to running their own network unless an offer overwhelms them, as was the case when they struck a deal with CBS Radio for their rights before the 2015 season.

The Cubs will have a showcase studio in their soon-to-be completed new building but would need ample time to secure distribution and content partners if they elect to operate their own network.