Bud Selig Nudges Frank McCourt Closer to the Door
February 25, 2011 at 7:53 am | Posted in Frank McCourt | 28 Comments
Wanted to get to this last night, but it’s too good to pass up, because there’s good news for those who like bad news for the McCourts. Bill Shaikin with yet another great scoop:
Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig has rejected a proposal under which Fox would have lent about $200 million to Dodgers owner Frank McCourt, three people familiar with the discussions told The Times.
McCourt would have used the Dodgers’ cable television rights as collateral, extending the team’s current contract with Fox by as many as four years if he did not repay the loan, according to the individuals, who were briefed on the proposal but who are not authorized to discuss it.
That, my friends, is what we call a sign, a pretty big sign that you’re not wanted in the club any longer. Selig may not have the power to outright force McCourt from ownership, but there’s plenty he can do to make it difficult. Selig scuttled a similar loan proposal to deadbeat Texas owner Tom Hicks last year, and that played a large part in forcing the Rangers into the hands of new ownership.
This is mostly a win for Dodger fans, because besides for the obvious great news that McCourt looks to be in even further trouble, not accepting the loan both avoids further indebting the team to FOX and keeps open the possibility of larger TV payments down the road. (Had McCourt defaulted on the loan, FOX could have extended the broadcast contract for years at far below market rates.) Yes, I realize some will point out that any future owner isn’t necessarily going to be the white knight we all hope for, and if the Dodgers’ valuation tumbles because of this it may open the door to another underfunded owner. This is a real possibility, and the grass isn’t always greener. But I think we’d all take the gamble that someone else may or may not be better than stick with the near-certainty that what we have now isn’t cutting it, right?
Of course, it’s difficult to know how this affects the short term? If McCourt was willing to mortgage the future like that, he may well be in an even worse situation than we know, though to be fair the Dodgers did spend more on free agents this winter than anyone expected. Still, this is a good step in the direction we all want, and that’s a McCourt-free future.
28 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a Reply
How Many McCourt Sins?
MSTI on the web
MSTI Library
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
I’m looking forward to a new owner taking over and send Frank and Uncle Ned packing
Comment by Rob— February 25, 2011 #
Ned just got a 5 year extension… that won’t be easy. But I’d love to see him go too. McCourt though? I don’t know. He’s spent plenty of money on the team. $120 mill is more than enough money to win with. It’s Ned who spends it in the wrong places.
Comment by @BrocNessMonster— February 27, 2011 #
McCourt made his money in real estate and litigation. He leveraged RE to get in the door, Fox took the parking lot and sold it, and now that the real estate bubble popped, we have Frankie No Nickels as owner and he is in what we call “deep $%I+”. His real estate fortune is in the toilet and he needs to sue somebody to come up with some cash. It’s what he does.
No guarantees with a new owner, but if Bud does due diligence in his vetting process, maybe the Dodgers can get an active go for it owner like Cuban in there. As far as I am concerned, the sooner the better.
Comment by Rory— February 25, 2011 #
Awesome, awesome photoshop…
Comment by Danny— February 25, 2011 #
I second that.
Comment by Mickey Hatcher— February 25, 2011 #
Great photo up top!!! Brilliant!
For once, Bud Selig has done the right thing. Let’s hope this is a very positive sign that McBroke is on his way out the door.
Comment by SamAdams— February 25, 2011 #
Man, if Bud Selig isn’t your friend anymore, you must be a real dirt bag. I believe the free agent “spending” was McCourt’s attempt to fool Selig and others that he was still investing in the team, when all he’s looking for is a little more house money to play with until Jamie “drowns” like Carol Rosenbloom.
Keep tightening the vice Selig!
Comment by Scott— February 25, 2011 #
McCourt didn’t really “spend” more on free agents this winter he just entered into player contracts that call for him to spend in the future. Remember, Fox has already advanced money to McCourt on the 2011 TV contract so that McCourt can fund the operations. My guess is that he needed the cash advance to make debt service payments. McCourt is likely to need further cash infusion down the road in order to pay for this winter’s free agent signings, the rest of the payroll and the team’s operating expenses. Given Selig’s position on the Fox loan it is hard to see how McCourt is going to raise capital. Bankruptcy could be in the future unless the Dodgers have a heck of year attendance wise, make the playoffs and generate a lot of revenue.
Comment by Dave K.— February 25, 2011 #
“Man, if Bud Selig isn’t your friend anymore, you must be a real dirt bag”
Now that is funny.
“Unless the Dodgers have a heck of a year attendance wise.” Yep, that’s how I see it too. I am not going to Spring Training, nor will I attend any games. It’s my only way to register my vote.
Comment by Rory— February 25, 2011 #
Mike,
is there any credibility to those rumors last year that if the McCourts do have to sell, that Steve Garvey would be insterested?
Comment by format— February 25, 2011 #
Would he be interested? Sure. Would he have the capability to really do so? Doubt it.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— February 25, 2011 #
a man can dream right? a former beloved dodger great would be awsome. by the way I love the pic above. which movie is that from?
Comment by format— February 25, 2011 #
Format, please go rent The Godfather immediately, if not sooner.
Comment by Mike Scioscia's tragic illness— February 25, 2011 #
I know I know. ive only seen parts of the original and never actually seen part 2. Ill have to see them both.
Comment by format— February 25, 2011 #
Don’t feel too bad format… I’m in the same boat. Been meaning to rent it for years, never got around to it.
Comment by Dave— February 28, 2011 #
Format is on temporary ban for 48 hours :P
Comment by DodgersKings323— February 25, 2011 #
Part 3 aint bad either, i don’t know why people hated on it.
Comment by DodgersKings323— February 25, 2011 #
ha ha ha Im gonna watch the film tonight I swear!
Comment by format— February 25, 2011 #
I’m thrilled Bud stepped in and is forcing Frank to play his hand in this instance but really this is the same buffoon that let him in the club to begin with. In fact Bud is second on my voodoo doll list.
I understand your frustrations Rory but if we purchase a baseball TV package aren’t we putting money in his pocket? I don’t know but it just seems kind of like a vegatarian wearing leather.
How about instead we sell T-Shirts in LA that say on the front; Frank, need extra cash and on the back; I hear Jamie needs a pool boy.
peaceMan
Comment by picksrme— February 25, 2011 #
I say Selig is 1st on the Voodoo doll list, he wants to extend the postseason.
Comment by DodgersKings323— February 25, 2011 #
Meh, that’s what i think about this whole thing, we could have had a worse owner and getting a new one doesn’t mean anything, meh. Just like Dodgerfilms was until recently when people get nagging him to talk, indifferent.
Comment by DodgersKings323— February 25, 2011 #
I guess maybe the Dodgers get some trickle down from the various t.v. packages… the one I have here now is Direct t.v and I haven’t purchased anything yet from them. My veto power is in not buying actual tickets. If the Dodgers don’t draw 3 million, something might happen. I can still read about them, and watch when they are on national broadcasts.
As for no guarantees on a new owner, that is true. But, at this point I think I would like to take my chances. There would be some very powerful West Coast people lining up with interest and enough money to do it right. I still don’t understand how McCourt got in after being turned down three times before. McCourt never had real money, Selig and MLB owners approved a highly leveraged deal. Somfin very fishy about that one.
Comment by Rory— February 26, 2011 #
So Format, how was the movie?
Comment by Scott— February 26, 2011 #
dont stone me, but I havent watched it yet. I did download it though. Im planning on watching it tommorrow. no need for the temp ban ha ha ha
Comment by format— February 26, 2011 #
Is it possible for Frank and Fox to re-negotiate the current deal, frontload it and extend it down the road for another decade? That isn’t quite the same as borrowing money from them. It is a new deal, that would keep the Dodgers out of their own cable and in Fox’s pocket for another 10 years. It might also allow Frankie to buy off Jamie.
Or would that be included in what Bud just said “no” to?
Comment by Rory— February 26, 2011 #
Hey, MSTI, did you see that those shiny satin jerseys won the fan voting? In the mlb.com video, they didn’t look as silly as the pictures seemed to suggest. Still, Vinny may well have something golden to say about them.
Comment by Bip— February 26, 2011 #
MLB Trade Rumors saying that the Nationals could be looking to unload a catcher for pitching…
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/02/nationals-could-deal-a-catcher.html
Are any of these guys worth considering? Flores is coming off a shoulder injury but seems to be the guy they’re talking about shopping. Also, are these the types of pieces the Dodgers could have used McDonald as trade bait for, rather than the useless Dotel?
Comment by Wil— February 27, 2011 #
[...] Bud Selig trying to force Dodger owner Frank McCourt out the door? Mike Scioscia’s Tragic Illness thinks so. This article is worth it just for the [...]
Pingback by Weekend Round-Up – 2/27/2011 | Fire Brand of the American League— February 27, 2011 #