Jump to content

Sox/Bulls/Hawks close on Stadium deal


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, soxfan18 said:

Purely speculative, but putting 2 and 2 together. 

https://twitter.com/soft_toss_lefty/status/1786975786651800003?t=tnt8ZPBaPbGiYJGOlXTwfQ&s=19

The hedge fund that owns Standard Media, operates Bally's. The corp that worked with MLB and the A's to develop the Vegas stadium. 

Watch out for a casino tie-in for a new White Sox stadium (in Chicago or elsewhere). Future team ownership doesn't seem absurd for the hedge fund.

I've been told more than once by others that when the Sox are sold the next owner won't be an individual, it will be a corporation. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lip Man 1 said:

I've been told more than once by others that when the Sox are sold the next owner won't be an individual, it will be a corporation. 

All it takes for that to be wrong is an individual with a fat checkbook that wants to own a baseball team.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Reached out tonight to some folks in the business and to say they are shocked by this would be an understatement and they don't understand the rational behind it.

One thing that was pointed out to me was that The Athletic's story was pretty shallow with not a lot of details. An individual thinks this whole story/document may be a plant that was delivered to The Athletic for a reason or reasons unknown by someone trying to get things moving forward with local/national distributors. In other words they were getting blowback and not a lot of response so by trying to bring in "another potential partner" (i.e. Standard) the bidding or interest may go up. Like Boras claiming there are multiple teams interested in a client of his (whether there are or not is debatable) 

All speculation. 

Another possibility may be that JR actually wanted to stay with NBC Sports Chicago but he may have been told privately, 'Hey we're eventually closing down our operation here like in other areas of the country that has already been done' and he didn't have a choice.

But then after spending all that money on Stadium to pivot from that? Just bizarre to me. It will be interesting to read the justification for this and also if it comes to pass,what type of distribution he'll get. 

 

In my lifetime, I'm 30 years old almost, I cannot point to one single major decision that Jerry has made that has any kind if sensical rationale behind it. And usually the decisions culminate into bad results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The news stories that portray Standard as a small-town TV station owner are missing the point.  Their parent company is a $100 billion hedge fund that owns Bally's casinos and has been trying to expand in television and media.  At one point, they owned the 71-station Media General group before selling it to NexStar. They then tried to buy the 68-station Tenga group, but the deal fell apart last year after the FCC raised concerns.

Starting a new RSN goes against industry trends, to put it mildly. But if Standard for some reason is willing to pay the teams a rights fee and take on all the burden of working out carriage agreements and selling advertising, I can see why the teams would prefer that to owning their own RSN and taking the risk themselves.

I'm not sure whether NBCSC is a factor in these negotiations. NBC-Universal shut down NBC Sports Northwest and sold NBC Sports Washington, so they seem to be getting out of the RSN business.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, kba said:

The news stories that portray Standard as a small-town TV station owner are missing the point.  Their parent company is a $100 billion hedge fund that owns Bally's casinos and has been trying to expand in television and media.  At one point, they owned the 71-station Media General group before selling it to NexStar. They then tried to buy the 68-station Tenga group, but the deal fell apart last year after the FCC raised concerns.

Starting a new RSN goes against industry trends, to put it mildly. But if Standard for some reason is willing to pay the teams a rights fee and take on all the burden of working out carriage agreements and selling advertising, I can see why the teams would prefer that to owning their own RSN and taking the risk themselves.

I'm not sure whether NBCSC is a factor in these negotiations. NBC-Universal shut down NBC Sports Northwest and sold NBC Sports Washington, so they seem to be getting out of the RSN business.

Well, the White Sox must be one of the better "short sell" bets in baseball today...at any rate, not sure how a casino in downtown Chicago being attached would work exactly, but Reinsdorf has certainly ruminated on the combo recently.

 

"Standard General L.P. is the largest shareholder of Bally's Corporation, formerly known as Twin River Worldwide Holdings. Soo Kim, Standard General's managing partner had been an independent director of the company since 2016 and was elected chairman of the board of directors in late 2019.[5] Kim oversaw a major expansion of its operations, including a reverse merger with Dover Downs Gaming & Entertainment to take Twin River public, and various casino acquisitions in 2020.[6][7] It also acquired rights to the Bally's brand from Caesars Entertainment and adopted it as its corporate name, with an intent to unify all of its properties under the brand.[8] The company also made moves to expand its focus on sports betting, including acquisitions in the field, and a partnership with Sinclair Broadcast Group and Entertainment Studios to rebrand its regional sports networks under the Bally name as part of a promotion and content agreement.[9][10][11] Kim was named "American Executive of the Year" at the 2021 Global Gaming Awards.[12]

In January 2022, Standard General offered to buy all outstanding shares in Bally's Corporation that it did not already own, valuing it at $2.07 billion.[13]

wikipedia

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://theathletic.com/5471933/2024/05/04/blackhawks-bulls-white-sox-partnering-with-media-group-for-new-broadcast-home/

Quote

The media group is expected to make the network, which is unnamed, available across “multiple platforms,” including over-the-air and carriage agreements with cable and streaming providers.

Wondering if this means that the new channel will be an actual over-the-air channel (perhaps taking over channel 26 or channel 50) or if the new channel will be a cable channel looking to simulcast some/most games on an existing over-the-air channel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, CentralChamps21 said:

https://theathletic.com/5471933/2024/05/04/blackhawks-bulls-white-sox-partnering-with-media-group-for-new-broadcast-home/

Wondering if this means that the new channel will be an actual over-the-air channel (perhaps taking over channel 26 or channel 50) or if the new channel will be a cable channel looking to simulcast some/most games on an existing over-the-air channel.

Just a few thoughts.

Chicago unlike New York or Los Angeles has never had a large number of 'independent' stations for potential over the air options. A big key to this will be if WGN wants to get back into the sports business. I have no idea if they do or not, if they do, that would really be a boost for the Sox if this report is legitimate.

And to that end, for whatever it's worth, a reliable source told me today: "I'm getting some feedback that The Athletic story is inaccurate." I was hearing that last night as well, some are speculating that this was a deliberate plant to spur activity which wasn't coming to bear on what the Sox wanted to do. 

We'll see how this plays out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Just a few thoughts.

Chicago unlike New York or Los Angeles has never had a large number of 'independent' stations for potential over the air options. A big key to this will be if WGN wants to get back into the sports business. I have no idea if they do or not, if they do, that would really be a boost for the Sox if this report is legitimate.

And to that end, for whatever it's worth, a reliable source told me today: "I'm getting some feedback that The Athletic story is inaccurate." I was hearing that last night as well, some are speculating that this was a deliberate plant to spur activity which wasn't coming to bear on what the Sox wanted to do. 

We'll see how this plays out. 

The CW is returning to WGN (both NexStar properties now).

The independent to watch is WCIU, who just lost The CW, in all likelihood. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, soxfan18 said:

The CW is returning to WGN (both NexStar properties now).

The independent to watch is WCIU, who just lost The CW, in all likelihood. 

I know about the CW read it last week, that certainly could be a factor in any WGN decision. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said:

And to that end, for whatever it's worth, a reliable source told me today: "I'm getting some feedback that The Athletic story is inaccurate." I was hearing that last night as well, some are speculating that this was a deliberate plant to spur activity which wasn't coming to bear on what the Sox wanted to do.

 

13 hours ago, soxfan18 said:

The CW is returning to WGN (both NexStar properties now).

The independent to watch is WCIU, who just lost The CW, in all likelihood. 

I will choose to believe that WCIU giving up the CW a month before the rumored start of a new sports channel with over-the-air distribution are coincidental.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a small RCA brand digital antenna in my attic pointed at the Hancock building (via an app and my iphone compass) and my picture quality is indistinguishable from cable. If broadcast TV offered more prime content,  including at least for me, the WSox, I would cut the cable. Similarly, after enjoying HD radio reception and fidelity at home and in my autos I cancelled Sirius. IMO, it would be great to have more digital broadcast content, especially sports. They can make money off commercials so no reason to charge subscription services.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tray said:

I have a small RCA brand digital antenna in my attic pointed at the Hancock building (via an app and my iphone compass) and my picture quality is indistinguishable from cable. If broadcast TV offered more prime content,  including at least for me, the WSox, I would cut the cable. Similarly, after enjoying HD radio reception and fidelity at home and in my autos I cancelled Sirius. IMO, it would be great to have more digital broadcast content, especially sports. They can make money off commercials so no reason to charge subscription services.

My dude, they are not going back.  And eventually, one of them will decide that they don’t want to provide you with an antenna signal either, and that will go away too.  

  • Fire 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:

My dude, they are not going back.  And eventually, one of them will decide that they don’t want to provide you with an antenna signal either, and that will go away too.  

 

My point was that free broadcast TV is now on par with digital cable in terms of quality. IMO, that is going to create a bit more demand for more free over-the-air broadcasts versus exclusive monopolized subscription based coverage. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, tray said:

 

My point was that free broadcast TV is now on par with digital cable in terms of quality. IMO, that is going to create a bit more demand for more free over-the-air broadcasts versus exclusive monopolized subscription based coverage. 

 

 

So you think they are just going to stop doing more Apple stuff, and go back to free stuff?   Hmm.  I don’t know if I agree with that 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...