The Oakland A’s and Sacramento River Cats (and Kings) owner Vivek Ranadive have issued a joint statement that the A’s will play the next three seasons in Sacramento’s 10,000-seat minor-league stadium while awaiting a move to Las Vegas:
The A’s and the San Francisco Giants‘ Triple-A River Cats will presumably timeshare, each heading to the road while the other is at home, which should be tons of fun for MLB’s and MiLB’s schedulers. (See update below.) But lots of questions remain:
- Is this a binding agreement, or could A’s owner John Fisher back out of it (either now or in future years) if he finds what he thinks is a better option?
- How much will the A’s pay to lease Sacramento’s stadium?
- Will the 10,000-seat capacity be expanded, or will any overflow fans just have to sit on the 4,000-person outfield lawn?
- Does the MLB Players’ Association have any say in its members playing in a minor-league stadium for at least three years?
- Will the A’s be able to keep their NBC Sports California TV deal, and if so how much of their current $67 million a year rights fee will they retain?
- There’s a one-year option if the Vegas stadium isn’t ready by 2028, but what happens if it’s still not ready by 2029, which seems increasingly possible given that’s less than five years away and there’s still no design or financing plan?
I’ll be updating this post if and when more information is available. In the meantime, here’s the new temporary home of your Las Voaklamento A’s:
UPDATE, 11:37 am: It just occurred to me that the Pacific Coast League plays week-long series against one team at a time, to cut down on travel. This is going to make drawing up an A’s schedule really interesting, to say the least.
UPDATE, 12:26 pm: Per the Athletic: “Asked if the team would change its name to the Sacramento A’s, a spokesperson said the club will be called the Athletics and A’s for the interim period.” So no city name at all, really? Couldn’t they at least follow ABA precedent and call themselves the Californians? The West Coasters?
UPDATE, 12:33 pm: Twitter is already debating where the A’s will move to next after this:
They will never play in Las Vegas. Fisher is gonna get curb-stomped by some interest or another there, they'll be the 1899 Cleveland Spiders, MLB will finally force a sale, A'swill end up in a would-be expansion city and then two others will be announced. https://t.co/4AHSG5RlmM
— Craig Calcaterra (@craigcalcaterra) April 4, 2024
I think SLC is the most likely destination. Little appetite for subsidies in Portland and none in Nashville. I think Charlotte is on this list. https://t.co/Yp5s3LyChe
— J.C. Bradbury (@jc_bradbury) April 4, 2024
UPDATE, 1:17 pm: A’s employees don’t know any more than we do.
https://twitter.com/RickeyBlog/status/1775934866070360248
UPDATE, 2:39 pm: ESPN reports: “Any move to a minor league ballpark will have to gain the approval of the Major League Baseball Players Association, which will assess factors such as player safety, weather and the suitability of dugouts and clubhouses.” Nothing on whether the MLBPA just has to sign off on playing conditions or can veto the move for other reasons as well.
UPDATE, 2:42 pm: Fisher gonna Fisher. To be fair, he wouldn’t be the only person who can’t name a single current A’s player.
John Fisher calls Sutter Health Park "the most intimate park in Major League Baseball".
He says he can't wait to watch the MLB's top stars like Aaron Judge hit home runs here. pic.twitter.com/DRIymos0yC
— Matt George (@MattGeorgeSAC) April 4, 2024
UPDATE, 2:47 pm: Trevor Hildenberger, who pitched for the River Cats the last two years, has a warning for A’s players:
No family room, no mother’s room, no shade or bathrooms in the bullpens, only 1 shared batting cage. If you thought the coliseum facilities were lacking… https://t.co/LlaSO8tDCV
— Trevor Hildenberger (@t_hildy) April 4, 2024
Based on the number of fans in the stands, it looks like the A’s have already moved in.
It’s a minor league team. I guess it makes sense for them to play at a minor league park.
It’s awesome for Sac, they will pack that place every night, if tickets are reasonable.
If the team is bad- there’s no reason for them to go. There’s no novelty to a bad baseball team, unless the dodgers or Yankees are visiting
Have you been to Sacramento? Unless things have changed radically since I moved, they will absolutely go see the A’s.
I have, plenty of times when I worked in California politics and regularly worked up there. It’s a lovely city with plenty of other things to do than sit in the sweltering summer heat and watch a bad baseball team with wholly disengaged management. Even the beloved Kings suffered from poor attendance during their peak Kangz era. I think Sacramento could be a great MLB market, but John Fisher makes the Maloofs look like savants and community saints. Once the novelty wears off, the A’s will be back to their regular attendance figures.
As a 30 year resident of the area I’ll respectfully disagree. If they price it right, it’ll be full. I also don’t really remember too many years of terrible Kings attendance honestly. Monarchs? Oh, yeah.
In the early 2010s before the Golden1 Center was built, the Kings were regularly in the bottom of the league in attendance. And that’s no shade to Sacramento residents either! The Kings were terrible and didn’t deserve fan support. I just think the same will happen with the A’s; yeah, having an MLB team is cool, but shit baseball is still shit baseball. Fisher already drove away diehard fans in one Northern California market, and he’d do the same in the capitol city.
2010s? Yeah, could be, I left in 08 or 09.
In 2022 the RiverCats average attendance was 4970 per game. That was for 75 games. I doubt it was much better in 2023. Can Sacramento sell out for every A’s game, without cannibalizing the RiverCats? Doubtful. If they could, you’d have to wonder why they wouldn’t move to Sacramento in the first place. And yes, I’ve been there many times – it can be very unpleasant when it is very hot in the summer.
FWIW Las Vegas averaged 6900 fans at the same time.
There’s no way the A’s and Cats could coexist logistically, even setting aside the attendance issue. When the Jays played in Buffalo, the Bisons played temporarily in Trenton.
My guess is the Cats play in Fresno, which has a ballpark built for AAA, and the AAA team from wherever the A’s end up then relocates permanently to Fresno. Alternatively, Stockton (nice ballpark but maybe not enough for AAA) or Tucson (spring training park) could work. (The Padres put their AAA team in Tucson for a couple years after they got kicked out of Portland.)
Triple A scheduling is built around six game homestands to minimize the travel costs because Major League Baseball wanted that.
Now we have a Major League Baseball team slumming in a Triple A ballpark.
Forgetful of the fact the Toronto Blue Jays utilized their Triple-A team’s ballpark in Buffalo when the international border was closed during the pandemic.
The Bisons played their home games in Trenton while the Jays were using Sahlen Field, though, so I don’t think they ever had to coordinate their schedules.
Rivercats could play at Sac State or Davis maybe, following that logic.
Probably makes the most sense for the Cats to play in Fresno. Back during the whole minor league contraction thing, Fresno got kicked down to the Cal League, but managed to get an assurance they’d be the first city if an AAA team moved.
Anyway, assurance or not, Fresno has an AAA stadium, and if the A’s end up in either Vegas or Sacramento, Fresno could keep one of those teams. Don’t think there’s a better arrangement available anywhere else relatively close to California.
But there were no fans coming, as I recall, so it didn’t really matter.
No, it was 2021, fans were allowed into games, just the border was still closed.
Oh, sorry. I misremembered that.
Still, I don’t see how that’s relevant. That was making the best out of a bad situation that was created by factors outside of MLB’s control.
This is making a bad situation – which Fisher and MLB created entirely on their own – even worse.
How dare you call the Oakland A’s a major league baseball team.
Unfortunately, Dave Kaval doesn’t have the Golden Baseball League anymore so it’s not like we could just shove the A’s there where they belong.
LOL!
Dave has been living off that great success for so long… good thing he found something new to feed on.
Disagree with the last bit – now there are two AAA teams in said ballpark. One just happens to play against major league opponents.
The Chargers slummed it at the soccer field for a few years, and they didn’t do half as much to deserve the shame of resorting to the minors as the A’s organization. I was hoping they would have had to play at Cal Berkeley stadium, but making those execs have to commute 80 miles each way for years while losing out on the Oakland tv money works for me.
With respect to Ranadive & Fisher’s bromance:
To paraphrase Bogart (Humphrey, not Xander…) “Louie, I think this could be the end of a beautiful friendship”
A team playing in an extra small venue “temporarily” until they get a new one build “soon?”
Are we sure they didn’t reuse the Arizona Coyotes’ press release?
BAZINGA !
Los Angeles Chargers press releases.
Comment of the day!
3 years with a 4th year option, is there California State Trust Land to bid on? Now ther are rumors Meruelo is selling, Fisher, copy that press release.
This whole fiasco just makes a great case for why relegation is such a good feature of sports leagues outside the United States.
The A’s have a minor league owner, a minor league roster, and will be playing in a minor league stadium. For years on end, they’ll continue being one of the very worst teams in their league.
They deserve to play against teams at their level, and let some other team play in the majors.
Yeah, no.
People you don’t know in cities you don’t live in who support teams you don’t care about do not have to be punished for players you can’t name losing games you did not watch.
Norfolk is not a major league market, adds nothing to what MLB is trying to do and does not belong in the majors by virtue of winning AAA.
There are no other teams that could play in the majors. As it is, there are major league teams that cannot stay competitive, so certainly no team playing in a AAA market with a AAA stadium could hope to make enough money from TV and gate to be relevant in the majors. They’d just go right back down. Meanwhile, their fans who were used to paying AAA prices would be suddenly charged major league prices. It would be pointless.
Relegation is fun for neutral fans, but it’s a terrible economic model. The rich just get richer, poorer teams go down and, very often, go out of business. Most teams never have a chance to win a title unless they’re bought by rich people willing to lose money. It’s boring, really. That’s why the big clubs don’t even really care that much about their domestic competitions (except in England, somewhat). They care about the champions league.
If the athletes want to get paid these outrageous salaries – which they do – they have to accept that this is a business and, as such, what matters is not how much they win, but how many eyeballs they can attract, because that’s what sells tickets and creates sponsorship revenue. Winning helps that to some extent, but it’s not the same. Just look at how much more money the Yankees make than the Rays even though the Rays have been a lot better in recent years. It’s not a “fair” system, but it makes everyone more money so they’ll stick with it.
Also, the MLB players could come to the same realization as the players in the other leagues; They will never get a salary floor that forces owners to spend unless they’re willing to accept some kind of a salary cap or at least a more aggressive luxury tax system. Their agents can complain all they want about the “free market,” but there is no “free market” in a system where teams get exclusive franchise territories, so that’s BS anyway.
A much better system than either European or US model would be one in which the cabal of owners in each league are actually willing to force out the bad owners in the best interest of their league overall.
Or, better yet, allow communities to own their own teams and profit directly from their success. Like the Packers. (Of course, that was true of the Edmonton Elks and they gave up and sold to private ownership after years of failure.)
Everyone likes the idea of punishing the failing and dysfunctional teams and get them off our tvs. The A’s deserve it. For years, the Kings and Clippers deserved it. That said, it doesn’t make for an entertaining league when there is no built-in structure for competitive balance. Look at the soccer leagues throughout Europe, how many are actually competitive? Man City have won 5 of the last 6 in England. Barcelona and Real Madrid have won 17 of the 19 titles in Spain. Bayern Munich have won 11 German titles in a row, though not likely this year. Paris Saint-Germain have won 9 of the last 11 French titles. Benfica and Porto have won 20 of the last 21 Portuguese titles. Italy has finally broken its domination from Juventus and had three different champions in the past three years, but Juventus won it nine years in a row prior. I don’t want American leagues to take that shape, and don’t think many do. The joy of seeing the worst get shamed and shipped off doesn’t offset the lack of competitiveness at the top.
As far as scheduling goes- moving the Rivercats to Fresno or Stockton, moving that team to an empty park in Lancaster or wherever seems to make sense. There’s no shortage of relatively new minor league baseball quality parks sitting empty.
I know Ranadive and Fisher are talked about as “pals”, but do you think the Cats owner would really do that?
He is the primary leaseholder, after all. We don’t know what his deal with his soon-to-be-former friend is, but even if he gets all the concession revenue or something like that, I find it hard to believe he would make more money off hosting the lame duck AA’s for three-twenty years than his own PCL franchise.
How about this: Sept 30th 2024 – A’s and River Cats play game 1 of a home and home series. Winner gets to be primary tenant at SHP for three years.
Loser becomes the Reno-Boise-Salt Lake Road Goats…. err, Athletics…
I think he believes appeasing Fisher gives Sacramento (and possibly himself) a shot at getting an MLB team.
From a scheduling/marketing perspective- I’m not sure both teams can effectively coexist.
Which immediately made me consider the possibility of The Giants changing PCL affiliates (back to Fresno?)
Who knows if this was some petty bullshit backhand from the brain slugs of Troop Fabric Fauntleroy, but it seems like a bad mix.
And the rumor of “Oh, The River Cats will just play some games at Oracle Park” is moronic.
Sidenote: Vivek Ranadivé penned THE POWER TO PREDICT, so I’m sure our pocket sized Criswell has this one all figured out.
Does Sacramento have even a vague plan on how it would build an MLB park?
As I recall, Sacramento could not even get an MLS stadium built. No shame in that, but MLS was going to give them a team if they could build a stadium. It wasn’t a spec thing. The deal was done.
But then the prospective ownership backed out and the city did not step in with public money, so I’m guessing there is not a ton of appetite for public expenditure on this sort of thing.
Zero plans..or planning..,just basking in the warm sensual glow of Athletics brand baseball, in the freezing rain.
But, might I interest you in some local-ish parking?
https://www.fieldofschemes.com/2023/10/23/20519/why-the-kings-arena-parking-revenue-fiasco-is-bad-but-not-really-that-bad/
“Does Sacramento have even a vague plan on how it would build an MLB park?”
They actually started to build one back in the ’80s for the A’s (and Raiders), but soon after construction the money ran out.
https://www.google.com/search?q=arco+park&udm=2
I can’t imagine that the MLBPA is happy about this – is this going to be grounds for grievances under the CBA?
Also, it feels like an echo of the lone Pilots season – being relegated to an undersized MiLB park while the ownership clings to relevance. Who’s gonna be the Jim Bouton of the 2025 A’s?
My money’s on Brent Rooker:
https://twitter.com/Brent_Rooker12/status/1765155627863609758
Brandon McCarthy should come out of retirement just for the Jim Bouton role.
FWIW the Mets broadcasters have been throwing shade at Failson Fisher’s Floundering Franchise this week… including today. It’s not helping the Mets on field performance, but it is fun…
I just know the answer to the trivia question “Who played for the Pilots and the Mariners?”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diego_Segu%C3%AD
The NHLPA has not been able to do anything about the Coyotes situation, but the MLBPA is generally a lot more powerful.
On the other hand, the arena at ASU is brand new and they built extra facilities for the Coyotes, so other than the size, it might not be that terrible. At least, from what I can gather, the players are not really all that mad about their personal accommodations in Arizona.
Whereas, that tweet above suggests this is not even that great of a facility by AAA standards. Are the A’s going to build a lot of extra new facilities to make this passably major league?
Now, when the Blue Jays were at Sahlen Field in Buffalo during the pandemic, they added resources necessary to operate at a MLB level. It also helped that the ballpark at one point in its life was proposed for configuration to a major league expansion had Buffalo ever won a bid.
I don’t see the Athletics adding those resources to Sutter Health Park for two reasons. The first is that it’s not relevant to the standardized requirements for minor league baseball before the 2025 season that are independent to the A’s coming to town, meaning that any renovations are unfortunately a River Cats problem. And the second is… It’s John Fisher. Do you expect him to actually PAY for something???
I think Calcaterra is correct in that the A’s will not make it to Vegas. Unless some real shenanigans go on in Carson City, I believe the Schools Over Stadiums referendum will make it on the ballot for this November. With a Presidential election maximizing turnout and the teacher’s union throwing their heft behind it, that measure will pass and repeal the public subsidy, effectively killing the deal. The old Tropicana site is such valuable real estate that none of the local money people will lose sleep if they end up building a theme park, an additional events venue, or more casino floor space instead of a ballpark.
I’m not sure if SLC is a done deal, though. The bill passed by the state legislature set up the Fairpark district, which is a much larger redevelopment on the city’s west side that *could* include a ballpark. The issue is that the funding for the $900 million commitment from the state is, well, unfunded. The statewide hotel tax portion was repealed after massive blowback from the ski resorts and southern Utah tourism industry, leaving only a small 1.5% levy on car rentals – and even that is limited because drivers who present a Utah driver’s license will be exempt from the tax.
This lack of funding is really, really critical because the state constitution stipulates that any bill passed by the legislature under a 2/3 majority is eligible to be put up on a referendum. While the Fairpark bill passed with 2/3 vote, the eventual funding mechanism would have to be put up in a separate vote. I don’t know what they’d come up with that will be uncontroversial, because they would’ve done it if it existed. So at some point, there is a high probability that the actual funding portion of the ballpark will require a public referendum and present a total wildcard.
I’ve said it for the last few months, and I think Bradbury is absolutely right. There’s a desire to hand over public money in Utah for baseball that doesn’t seem to exist in any other of the expansion/relocation options (barring the amount Nevada has offered for a plan that has so many unanswered questions.) Short of Ranadive partnering with his buddy Fisher to stay in Sacramento long term, SLC is eventually going to win this race.
There are a lot of local dynamics missing in folks’ analysis of the Utah stadium situation. The legislature has stark divides between SLC proper, the greater Wasatch Front region, and the rest of the state. The latter 2 groups regularly conspire to screw the city over in everything from redistricting to funding. No legislator whose district falls outside of SLC wants to support any kind of measure that diverts state money to the city proper. When they passed the inland port a couple years ago, they stuck the city with the bill over the city’s objections. The new arena will be funded by a local TIF. They didn’t even put money behind the 2002 Olympic Stadium – the University of Utah was forced to eat that cost. The Governor and Speaker of the state house threw their weight behind the statewide hotel tax to pay for the ballpark, and it got stripped out within a week because the backlash was so bad.
That’s where I keep returning to – if there was a readily available way to come up with $900 million that wouldn’t piss off rural legislators, or could be shouldered entirely by SLC or Salt Lake County, they would’ve done it. They passed the bill to appear that Utah is fait accompli, but the actual funding is hundreds of millions short. People in Juab, Logan, Kanab, and St. George don’t give a shit about whether there will be an MLB team several hours away, and they will lose their minds if they have to pay out any tax dollars to the one godless librul city in the state that has the temerity to elect Democrats.
Utah could still get this deal done, and I’d never put anything past this state’s rank corruption. But reporters are acting like Utah is sitting on a pile of $900 million, ready to be used on a ballpark, and that is absolutely not the case.
Joe:
While we are (understandably) all imagining ways in which Fisher will screw over his pal Vivek on this deal (not paying rent or maintenance, skimming off concessions, stealing bathroom fixtures and other people’s deserts from the exec lunchroom community fridge etc), I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that there is a way Ranadive keeps the A’s (in Sacramento or elsewhere) long term without remaining Fisher’s buddy.
“Desserts”, sorry. Vegas moment there…
John:
I’m guessing you mean Manfred and the owners basically forcing Fisher out? If so, I’ll believe it when I see it. Fisher has been taking advantage of his other lodge members with revenue sharing for years, and part of this move was blatantly labelled as a way to keep getting that money. And yet, they not only approved the move (conceptually) with Manfred endorsing it, but they waived an expansion fee.
Everyone else seems to be making enough money that they aren’t real worried about the A’s dragging behind, and/or don’t want the hassle of forcing him out and/or figure it’s a bad precedent for them. It’s been done in the past but with far stronger commissioners. Selig himself did it to Frank McCourt but, for all the negatives about Selig, as a former member of the ownership club, he seemed to be willing to deal with a heavier hand than a career MLB employee like Manfred.
The Selig/McCourt situation was also not as straightforward as people remember it. Technically, Selig didn’t “force” McCourt to sell the Dodgers. He blocked the Dodgers from signing a really bad long-term broadcasting deal that McCourt wanted because it front-loaded the money he needed to keep him solvent. That forced McCourt to declare bankruptcy, which put the Dodgers in receivership and effectively made him liquidate his assets to pay back his creditors. Selig could do that – without needing the owners to vote on it – because McCourt was found to be stealing money from the club and using the Dodgers as his personal credit card. Despite all of John Fisher’s nonsense, he hasn’t done anything on the same level of brazen corruption as McCourt.
Not at all, Joe.
If they were going to do that it would have made more sense to do so while he was in Oakland than in Limbo (which is where he will be for the foreseeable future).
I’ll use an analogy because I think Ranadive would be a much better owner than Fabric Fauntleroy (thanks Michael!):
‘Hey how u folks doin’? Nice ta see ya, I’m Nick I’m wit da Casino’
‘I unduhstan’ you had some trouble wit your card when you checked in? I’m sorry about dat, it does happen some times here we don’t know if it’s da bank or our terminals ahwhat but it happens frum time ta time. I apologize fuh dat’.
‘Tellya what, it’s slow as you can see and we really appreshate ya comin’ down. Mind if I ax yuh question?
How’s da weatha in Michigan dese days? Yeah? Oh man, not for me dats for sure.
Anyways, we aren’t supposed to do dis but how bout yaz step into de awwfice and we’ll see if we can help you out cos we’d sure hate to lose you folks over a card thing ‘a late wire, especially if it’s owwa fawlt yaknow?
Ranadive is famously a cryptocurrency crank, I wouldn’t bet on him as a stable long-term owner either.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewrossow/2018/06/27/sacramento-kings-become-the-first-sports-team-to-mine-ethereum/?sh=639fa95c3430
Fair enough, Ian. He has some high level connections (some of whom are also cranks).
But he doesn’t have to Gandhi.
He just has to be less pathetic than John Fisher.
I know the other owners will probably circle the wagons- but what’s preventing the MLBPA from holding out approval for Sacramento in exchange for a salary floor? Make it $75 million, 29 teams already pay more than that.
The union and agents will never request a salary floor because the same principle would naturally lead to a salary cap. Scott Boras notably shot the idea down years ago when more teams were realizing the art of tanking.
Not a bad idea Al. And it doesn’t have to be fixed floor either, it could be corollary to the luxury tax (without a Steve Cohen level).
Just an example but:
If you spend less than the avg of the bottom five teams on payroll, 50% of the difference is withheld from your MLB shared revenue payments and distributed to other owners (with a percentage for player agents, of course…).
Another would be some version of “spend less than 40% of the avg of the top six teams”…. there’s no shortage of options lawyers and accountants could use.
I was going to say given to local district agencies to feed hungry children, but then I remembered who we are dealing with…
$330m payroll 0 wins #LOLCohen
The Sacramento A’s should read up on the 1997 Memphis Oilers. Sometimes fans don’t get too excited about being temporary hosts.
#BillsinToronto
Hurricanes in Greensboro. “Great sections available.”
I think they may get decent crowds for certain away teams. I’m guessing that Sacramento has a lot of people who have relocated there from other parts of California, so there will be Giants, Padres, and Dodgers fans who might come out.
And, if it is significantly cheaper than their own stadiums, there might be some people who make the trip up there to follow there team.
But all three of those teams are in the National League, so they won’t play there very often.
Yeah, the Memphis Oilers and Toronto Bills drew well when they played the Steelers. Otherwise, not so much.
The thing is- the giants, padres and Dodgers might account for 10-12 games- out of 81. Add the Yankees, Cubs, Red Sox- you have maybe 1/4th of the schedule with desirable opponents? That’s a rough go. You’re also in a minor league baseball market, used to minor league baseball prices and a team that will likely lack stars. I’m sure when attendance stinks in July they’ll blame some heat wave or that the state assembly was in recess- anything besides accepting the blame for being the most incompetent management team in sports.
I mean, the Giants are more popular, but there are lots of A’s fans in Sac. The games have always been broadcast in the Sac market.
OKC did support the New Orleans Hornets well after Hurricane Katrina.
The Hornets were dealing with an epic tragedy. Out of gratitude they called themselves the New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets. They had an exciting rookie named Chris Paul. They only played 36 games there.
Also to consider- Oklahoma City has more Fortune 500 companies then Sacramento, they were happy to buy up premium seats.
mb was referring to the Tennessee Oilers, who played in Memphis in 1997 because the NFL wouldn’t let them go to Nashville right away.
So there are plenty of Oakland A’s fans in the Sacramento area. Or there used to be. I guess I’m one of them, living in El Dorado county, just west of Sac, with all my old A’s gear shoved into the corner of the closet, possibly forever. My best guess is that the once and former A’s fans in the Sacramento area will not be coming to games, just like the Bay Area fans not showing up to the Coliseum. Why would any fan support John Fisher, who cares nothing about putting a team on the field, regardless of location? His only game is wandering around squeezing things to see if dollars come out, and he’s terrible at it. The clown show continues, and will continue until he sells.
Uhhh, El Dorado County is east of Sacramento. Ask anyone who lives along the US 50 corridor toward Lake Tahoe.
I’m surprised he thinks he can keep his TV deal if he does this. The Sacramento market is half the size of the SF Bay.
Me too. One might imagine that a businessman would have a firm commitment from his tv partners to, at least in part, support this move to a stadium and city that cannot possibly generate MLB level revenues, and which would normally hold little to no interest for tv viewers or providers.
But think of who we are talking about here. He’s probably thinking he can get more out of NBC because of all the local competition for rights in Sacramento…
If I’m the A’s RSN, I only agree to continue broadcasting with a minimum 50% cut in fees… possibly declining by 10% per year thereafter so long as they are in Sacramento.
As I mentioned before, if I’m Comcast/Universal, I’m probably thinking about shutting down NBC Sports California altogether. Just leave the keys on the table. Whatever they have to pay to get out of those deals is probably ok.
As I understand it, their three big properties are the A’s, the Sac Kings and the Sharks and they simulcast NBCS Bay Area, which has the Giants and, I guess, the Ws.
The A’s are now a toxic brand in California. The Sharks have some loyal fans, but they are not going to be very good for at least a few years. Their local ratings were way down this year as usually happens with the teams in the bottom of the standings.
The NBA is the next big league (I think) that will do new media deal and, as I understand it, they are planning for the post-cable world. So I don’t imagine having the Kings rights is anything to be too excited about.
It’s certainly an option, and they may not have to pay anything to get out of the A’s deal if they want out.
With the general decline/failure of the bloated RSN model, it could be a good way out. I’ve no idea how their subscriber renewal/growth is trending (I would guess a negative number…), but the pathetic state of the franchise and it’s bumbling clueless owner cannot be helping that trend at all.
At worst I would say the RSN should negotiate hard on any points they can leverage. Fisher has no options (who wants to buy the released rights to a 3yr minor league adventure in Sacramento should they become available?) other than joining the MLB streaming franchises – and getting no streams.
IMHO the only thing that Fisher has shown up until now is that he finds it difficult to see anything clearly past the end of his nose. He appears to have the strategic smarts of a house brick.
So the Royals need a new stadium to be competitive, even though they have a nice major league facility now, but the A’s can spend 3-4 years in a minor-league park?
That’s a non-sequitur.
The A’s are not trying to even pretend to be competitive. They have never been under this ownership. Their current travails do not in any way prove that new stadiums do not help make teams more competitive.
However, it is still very clear that, by themselves, new stadiums do not make teams more competitive.
A new stadium for the Royals might make them slightly more competitive if the owners plowed every new dollar into the club, but they probably won’t and, regardless of their stadium, they still wouldn’t be a big market team. They’d have to rely on the same combination of luck and great scouting that won them the world series 10 years ago.
The big markets are where the problem comes in. The Yankees, Cubs and Dodgers dominate huge, wealthy markets, the Mets, White Sox and Angels are just a nucence. Same with the Giants, who created this situation so they can monopolize the Bay Area once they force the A’s to leave. All the Giants care about is fattening their bloated pockets. F+ck the fans, forget the 3 World Series in a row and the Earthquake World Series. Then you have tons of small markets, Milwaukee, Kansas City, Pittsburgh and Cleveland that struggle to get a fraction of the revenue the big markets get. Shaking down taxpayers by threatening to move to another small market, Portland, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, Nashville or Charlotte, is a way to make some money. The problem is a baseball stadium in a weak market instantly depreciates to a fraction of it’s cost. The revenue generated by a small market team will never justify a billion dollar plus price tag in a small, or even medium market like Arizona or Florida.
Petitioning that the “sure Sacramento okay” tag remain in place throughout this situation!
It seems only right and just.
No love for #A’smovingtoLimbo ????
How about they play in the domed Naming Rights Stadium in Vegas until Taxpayer Financed Field is ready? The Dodgers played in L.A. coliseum from 1958-61 until Dodger stadium was completed. Besides, what else is there to do in Vegas in the summer when it’s a 100 degrees?
Not sure if he has veto power, but Davis would probably disallow that based on his longstanding animosity with the A’s organization.