BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: LA Times: Angels, Fox to sign 20-year, $3 billion deal

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, December 09, 2011

LA Times: Angels, Fox to sign 20-year, $3 billion deal

The Angels have agreed to a new deal with Fox Sports worth at least $3 billion and expected to cover 20 years, two parties familiar with the deal said Thursday. The parties declined to be identified because the deal has yet to be officially announced.

Spokesmen for Fox and the Angels declined to comment.

Moreno last year opted out of a 10-year, $500-million contract with Fox, according to sports media consultant and former NBA TV President Ed Desser.

Desser, testifying Thursday in the Dodgers’ bankruptcy case, said the Angels and Fox agreed at the time to a one-year extension while the parties negotiated a new deal.
...

The Rangers agreed with Fox last year on a new contract worth an average of $80 million per year. The Angels’ deal is expected to top that in average annual rights fees — the rejected Dodgers’ deal had an average annual rights fee of about $85 million — and include an ownership stake in FSW.

The timing of this with the Pujols signing is curious. I wonder if Arte prodded Fox into upping the rights fees once he had Pujols in the fold. This would be much cooler if Fox was paying for an investment in the team, than Arte taking his windfall and turning around and spending it.

Harold can be a fun sponge Posted: December 09, 2011 at 09:27 PM | 24 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: angels, business, dodgers, rangers, television

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

1. The District Attorney Posted: December 09, 2011 at 10:30 PM (#4011921)

Jerry Dipoto has surpassed Alex Anthopoulos as the best general manager in history.

2. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 09, 2011 at 10:33 PM (#4011931)

This is going to suck for the Angels when the hyper-inflation hits.

3. salvomania Posted: December 10, 2011 at 12:03 AM (#4012028)

So if the Angels draw zero fans for the next 20 years, they'll still make $150 million a year for their TV rights?

Sweet deal!!!

4. puck Posted: December 10, 2011 at 12:13 AM (#4012034)

Wasn't the Lakers' deal also supposed to be something like 20 yrs, $3 billion?

5. PreservedFish Posted: December 10, 2011 at 12:15 AM (#4012036)

This is going to suck for the Angels when the hyper-inflation hits.

Man, BTF is hyper-inflation crazy today.

Snapper, what am I supposed to do with my savings?

6. BWV 1129 Posted: December 10, 2011 at 12:20 AM (#4012038)

This is good. I like this.

7. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: December 10, 2011 at 12:23 AM (#4012041)

Give Pujols a raise!

8. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: December 10, 2011 at 12:30 AM (#4012048)

what am I supposed to do with my savings?

Spend it. Then after the hyper-inflation, you can sell the stuff you bought a little at a time and live off of it.

9. Swedish Chef Posted: December 10, 2011 at 12:32 AM (#4012050)

Snapper, what am I supposed to do with my savings?

Some say switch to gold, but I say invest in spam, handguns and ammo.

10. The District Attorney Posted: December 10, 2011 at 12:34 AM (#4012051)

I say invest in spam, handguns and ammo.

And spam.

11. Shock has moved on Posted: December 10, 2011 at 12:36 AM (#4012053)

I was thinking that's a lot of money for Chad Fox. Also kind of mean if it means he has to throw an inning to collect. I don't think he has any arms left.

12. DA Baracus Posted: December 10, 2011 at 12:40 AM (#4012058)

what am I supposed to do with my savings?

Aren't you supposed to get drunk and spend even more?

13. t ball Posted: December 10, 2011 at 01:45 AM (#4012101)

This is going to suck for the Angels when the hyper-inflation hits.

Well, actually hyper-inflation would reduce the real amount they owed Pujols, but would also make their tv contract worthless.

14. t ball Posted: December 10, 2011 at 01:46 AM (#4012103)

er, just realizing that may be what you meant...never mind.

15. ray james Posted: December 10, 2011 at 02:16 AM (#4012125)

Well, now we know where the Pujols money is coming from.

16. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 10, 2011 at 02:28 AM (#4012134)

Man, BTF is hyper-inflation crazy today.

Snapper, what am I supposed to do with my savings?

That was a joke, based on the other appearances of hyper-inflation talk.

I do expect some decent inflation in the US though. I'd guess it starts within 2-3 years, and then we average 5-7% for a decade. It's the only rational response by the gov't to our debt problems.

If you fear inflation the best investments are 1) a home or commercial real estate financed with fixed rate mortgages - in case of inflation rents rise while the debt payments stay the same 2) blue chip common stock - strong companies should be able to raise their prices with inflation.

I'd avoid any fixed rate bonds with maturity >5 years like a plague. I'd rather earn 0.75% in the bank than 2-4% on a bond where I could take a price hit of 20%+ if yields spike.

17. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 10, 2011 at 02:32 AM (#4012139)

Some say switch to gold, but I say invest in spam, handguns and ammo.

Screw handguns, in a real fight a handgun is about as useless as the spam. It takes a hell of a shot to hit someone more than 10 feet away in a combat situation.

You need rifles. Preferably .30 calibre, semi-auto, with a min. of a 20-rd magazine.

An M-1A1 or FN FAL if you're serious. If you're budget constrained, there are 20 different AK varieties.

18. The District Attorney Posted: December 10, 2011 at 02:35 AM (#4012142)

Wait, are we talking about inflation or zombies?

19. Fancy Pants Handle struck out swinging Posted: December 10, 2011 at 02:40 AM (#4012146)

Screw handguns, in a real fight a handgun is about as useless as the spam. It takes a hell of a shot to hit someone more than 10 feet away in a combat situation.

You need rifles. Preferably .30 calibre, semi-auto, with a min. of a 20-rd magazine.

For rural and suburban areas yes. For urban environments, without many open spaces, you want a semi-automatic shotgun.

Also, you want landmines.

20. smileyy Posted: December 10, 2011 at 02:50 AM (#4012155)

For urban environments, I think you don't want to be in an urban environment.

The ending of "Reamde" is probably a good start as a how-to guide.

21. depletion Posted: December 10, 2011 at 03:00 AM (#4012163)

Clorox and Sani-flush. And that Streetsweeper that Fancy Pants mentioned.
Hydrogen peroxide and nail polish remover. Ammonia, formaldahyde, sulfuric acid and sodium nitrate.

22. Walt Davis Posted: December 10, 2011 at 03:14 AM (#4012183)

Wasn't the Fox-Dodgers deal supposed to be 17/$3 billion?

23. TerpNats Posted: December 10, 2011 at 03:35 AM (#4012208)

Well, now we know where the Pujols money is coming from.

Doesn't Fox have a TV deal with the Cardinals? If so, there could be some grumbling in St. Louis over all this.

24. Fancy Pants Handle struck out swinging Posted: December 10, 2011 at 07:18 AM (#4012347)

Wasn't the Fox-Dodgers deal supposed to be 17/$3 billion?

The Fox/Dodgers deal was 17/3bn less what Jamie and Frank would have siphoned off for their private issues. The reason it was rejected had less to do with the total dollar amount, and more with how much off that would have actually gone towards the Dodgers.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Friday, December 09, 2011

LA Times: Angels, Fox to sign 20-year, $3 billion deal

Reader Comments and Retorts

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

Hot Topics