Monday, June 20, 2011

Selig blocks Fox deal.

---
Over at ESPN Los Angeles, I wrote about the day's events. Hope the link works the first time this time.

http://sports.espn.go.com/los-angeles/mlb/news/story?id=6685326

If it doesn't, comment or email me.
---
Sent via BlackBerry

19 comments:

  1. And the only person angrier than Josh Fisher about this is Frank McCourt himself.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Two things:

    1. I'm not a great fan of Frank McCourt, and I believe his continued ownership of the Dodgers would be a disaster.

    2. McCourt is the aggrieved party here. MLB is taking his business. He has tremendous damages. MLB's treatment appears arbitrary and capricious, and seems to represent Commissioner Selig's personal opinion about McCourt and not an adherence to league principles. The Orwellian circumstance that MLB denies McCourt's TV deal and then asks why he can't pay his bills is a laughable connundrum.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm curious to know whether any lawyers out there see Selig's action as "tortious interference."

    Barristers..what say you?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I play a barrister in my day job . . .
    In all other businesses, this indeed would be interfering with Frankie's right to make a living. However, MLB has special rights recognized by federal law that allow Selig near dictatorial powers as long as his decisions "are in the best interests of baseball."

    Also, Frankie signed off on giving up/waiving his rights when he became an owner.

    As Josh has more eloquently (and intelligently) stated, how this will play out in bankruptcy court will be interesting. The trustee in bankruptcy has tremendous powers. Would s/he approve the Fox deal in the best interests of Dodger creditors???

    We all will stay tuned.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If he declares bankruptcy, MLB will take the team as thats another thing you can't do and continue to own a club.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Dodgers are insolvent. . . Frank's 'slicing and dicing' the various parts of the Dodger organization might be considered upon more scrupulous examination fraudulent conveyances. . . Frank and Jamie seem to think in these terms. . . The Post-Nup was an attempt to shield their personal assets from creditors in connection with the Dodger purchase.

    This 'theme' pervades the settlement and supports Selig's concern that Frank and Jamie have used the Dodgers to enrich themselves at the expense of the franchise.

    MLB is a 'partnership'. . . Frank bought into the 'partnership'. . . . The rules exist for the betterment of the whole. . . If Frank wants to sue MLB, then I say go ahead. . . He's going to expose himself and all of this dirty laundry. . . His arrogance has so much exceeded his 'imagination' that he has lost all perspective.

    For Frank this is a 'loss limitation' situation. He may try to 'game' the system like he has in the past with strategic lawsuits. . . But MLB has more financial fire power and staying power than does Frank. . . When he is squeezed further by the public of Los Angeles (who want to purchase the team - 100,000 people at $10K per person is $1 Billion), then Frank will find himself on the short end of the stick. . . There are just too many skeletons in the closet.

    Jamie seems to be panicking here out of concern for her own liability. If I were a major creditor of the Dodgers, Frank, or any of the subsidiary entities Frank set up, I'd find two or three more major creditors and throw them all (Frank, Jamie, the Dodgers, and these other entities) into an involuntary bankruptcy.

    That way, the true scope of Frank's 'games' will come out. . . Frankly (no pun intended), one has to wonder why anyone would want to 'buy' into this mess without full disclosure and information.

    That's why the Judge presiding over the divorce (Judge Gordon) should do his job and direct that a referee be appointed to advise him on the state of the finances so he and the public (buyers of the club - Jamie wants the team sold, right? She should have no objection to this) can evaluate the full worth of this very valuable marital asset.

    I don't understand why these million dollar lawyers are 'dicking around' with Frank the way they are. . . . It's time to rock and roll with this guy. . . He has blown his wad. . . The only question remaining is whether Frank demonstrates the common sense and 'imagination' and humility to recognize his limitations and limit his losses.

    It's 'ego' that got him where he is. . . and it's 'ego' that has brought him down. . . Fox is not Frank's piggy-bank; nor are the Dodgers.

    My only hope is that MLB does not screw the people of LA by negotiating a deal in secret. . .

    A $1 Billion purchase of the entire business (including the parking lots, real estate, etc.) with 100% equity (from the people) would represent a new citizen-empowerment era for the people. . . .

    Peter Uberroth demonstrated that a 'public-benefit' association (or organization - call it a corporation) can operate in the broader public interest and still make tons of money. . . .

    The people of Green Bay have done it with the Packers. . . .

    Time now for MLB to open things up for the 'little guy' before baseball gets priced out of middle class affordability (if it hasn't already).

    For those who think this Socialist, I have three words for you: Sarah Palin's Alaska (i.e. the Alaska Oil Trust)

    Noel Weiss

    ReplyDelete
  7. Beautifully stated, Noel. Phrased similarly, my only fear is that MLB does screws the people of LA by negotiating a deal in secret. . .

    ReplyDelete
  8. That article is so interesting and makes a very nice image in my mind. Thank you for sharing this info with us!

    ReplyDelete
  9. This Post gives me lot of information Great to read

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hm. interesting, but i don`t think that it wiil be very useful for me.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I find this information very useful and it has considerably saved my time.thanks..

    ReplyDelete
  12. I want to start blogging too what do you think, which blog platform is good for noob

    ReplyDelete
  13. Very good article is very creative, very innovative, very unique; thank you very much

    ReplyDelete