The long-term future of the Nationals has been in question for the past few years. The Lerner family announced in April 2022 they would look into selling the franchise. Within a few months, it became clear that Ted Leonsis — CEO of Monumental Sports and owner of the NHL’s Capitals and NBA’s Wizards — was the frontrunner.
Talks between the Lerners and Leonsis fizzled out, largely because of uncertainty regarding the Nats’ television rights deal. The Lerners were reportedly seeking around $2.5 billion back in 2022. The family announced this February they were no longer interested in selling the team. That seemingly put the matter to rest, but Leonsis told Scott Allen, Barry Svrluga and Chelsea Janes of the Washington Post on Tuesday that he’s planning to put another proposal on the table at some point.
“I’ve told employees; I’ve told the Lerner family: ‘We are very interested. And we will figure out the right time and place to come with a thoughtful, dignified, real offer,” Leonsis said. “And they can say yes, they can say no. They can say, ‘We want to keep the team.’”
Leonsis can’t force the Lerners to sell, of course. However, the Post reports that the Lerner family may be willing to again entertain offers for the franchise after the 2024 season. While previous discussions haven’t been fruitful, it’s possible the ownership change on the other side of the Beltway Series will make a sale of the Nats more viable.
The primary complication to the Nationals changing hands has long been the team’s contentious TV contract with the Orioles. The franchises jointly own the Mid-Atlantic Sports Network, with the O’s holding a larger share. If Leonsis had agreed to a deal with the Lerners, he’d likely have tried to work out an arrangement with the Orioles to buy out of the MASN deal. Longstanding acrimony between the franchises made that difficult to envision so long as the Angelos family was in control of the Orioles. New Baltimore owner David Rubenstein has publicly expressed a desire to reach an agreement with the Nats to resolve the MASN dispute.
Whether that happens remains to be seen. There’s no indication anything is imminent on that front, and it appears Leonsis is willing to be patient in putting together a new offer for the Nats. “The Nationals and the Lerner family have said the team is not for sale, right? It’s not a formal process. And that is true,” he told the Post. “So there’s obviously no rush by them. They’re enjoying the season, right?” It’s nevertheless a situation worth keeping an eye on over the coming months.
Question is, what agreement did the Orioles make regarding the RSN with MLB in order to sell the team?
MMM…. MAY I PLEASE HEAR MORE MUMBO JUMBO ABOUT THE RSN MASN TV RIGHTS, IT MAKES ME SO HAPPY I COULD JUST S*#+%*##+
Hahaha you can say that again. A bunch of unnecessary and complicated BS that makes for a worse product for the fans
It is a fair question to ask, and the Orioles got compensation from MLB, not the Nationals, in order to allow another team to move in so close to their team in their already relatively small market. MLB guaranteed them this deal. There never should have been a case heard from the Nationals, because they aren’t the ones that had anything to do with the deal that MLB made.
If this author thinks that a new owner would just be happy to give up the percentage of that deal that still remains, they aren’t thinking too well. Why would anyone do that? What’s in it for the Orioles to do something like that? So far, only the Nationals are making out from what has been re-negotiated. The Nationals have given up nothing. That’s not how deals work.
First, MLB negotiated the original deal, then the franchise was put up for sale and the Lerner’s won the team. From then on, it has been Orioles/Nats sharing ownership of MASN but with vastly unequal shares. Nats were the ones being cheated and had full rights to contest it.
Second, for most of the life of the MASN entity, the Angelos-led Orioles tried every trick in the book to devalue and lower payments rightfully due the Nats. This went through arbitration and then the courts several times.
Third, Peter Angelos was a spiteful man. He applied this to everyone, it is just that MLB had given him a strong hand in screwing around with the Nats. Apart from Angelos spiteful behavior, there is no emnity between the two teams and the two fanbases….just friendly geographical competition.
Fourth, few if any businessmen (Angelos was an attorney) would have run the Orioles and the MASN relationship they way he did. Rubinstein is a prominent businessman and he knows that bad publicity is bad for business. His $ people will work out a fair settlement offer, it will be negotiated and the dispute will be resolved. This may take time but it will happen because it is good business that it does–at least good business as everyone else would define it except Angelos.
No, the revenue sharing never had anything to do with Lerner. THAT was the agreement MLB made with the Orioles to move the Nationals into their market. PERIOD.
Angelos had every right to fight for WHAT WAS NEGOTIATED BETWEEN MLB AND HIS FRANCHISE.
If I was Angelos I would have fought harder, tell MLB they are in breach of contract, now move the Nationals out of MY market.
Angelos was a terrible owner who drove the O’s into the ground until he was too sick to screw up the team any more. He drove away many former fans from the DC area by thwarting DC getting its own team for as long as he could even before MLB granted him the MASN deal. Then he didn’t even live up to it and has run the network on the cheap, to the disservice of both teams and their fan bases, but especially to the disadvantage of the Nats. There are numerous grounds for MLB to abrogate the deal now.
It is beyond ludicrous to claim DC is a sub-market of Baltimore.
Great points, Steven. I hope the heirs of that awful man are less spiteful and more business savvy than their patriarch. I am a former full-season ticket holder of both teams, but completely disavowed the Orioles when it became clear that Angelos was a greedy, spiteful tyrant of a human being. Kinda like another awful tyrant (Dan Snyder) did to my also-disavowed Redskins.
The massively-unbalanced MASN partnership was forced upon the Nats as a condition of birthing the franchise. Peter Angelos could have chosen to make it a partnership that ensured both teams prospered. Instead, he chose to treat the Nats the way that George III treated the American colonies. Karma is a female dog, Peter.
I wish the best for both teams going forward – whether they start working co-operatively over MASN, take some other path like a big $$ buyout of the deal, or whatever.
And to Brownsbacker9, geez dude! You sound as angry and spiteful as Angelos was. Maybe stop pontificating as though no one else can ever disagree with you and be correct? We all need less bad karma in this world.
@brownsbacker9, agree. Which begs the question. Of the possible locations to relocate Montreal, how did MLB conclude DC was the best option? Obviously, there’s this territorial compensation issue. But also, 2x DC had a team leave town. What went on behind the scenes at MLB “headquarters” to make this happen?
George Bush was president and wanted a team in town.
As good a reason as any?
Nats took os fans making the team less profitable. The masn deal in a minor way pays the os for that loss of revenue. Nats can move back to Montreal if they now don’t like it.
Yes please say expos fans
Bob—the Rubenstein’s owning the Orioles is likely to run parallel to Josh Harris running the Skins/Commanders. They are both good businessmen taking over from owners who had a scorched earth approach to life and no actual business experience. They will surely make mistakes, but the tone and expectations are now completely different and much better.
The way MASN was run by Angelos….was value-depleting for both teams. The arbitration and court cases were not about the initial uneven split of MASN (which may be been justified as a new team moving close to an existing team). Rather, the problems were caused by Angelos’ persistent efforts to pay the Nats less than they were contractually entitled to…and then fighting on for years after he clearly lost.
DC is a sub market of Baltimore. Has been since the Senators left. Don’t believe me? Look up the O’s blackout zone then.
Lol what a joke. O’s lost out when Expos moved. This was a fair shake. The Lerners didn’t have to buy in, and then spend a decade whining about a pre-determined business parameter.
LOL no. Nats were not being cheated whatsoever. Thems were the rules of the game, son.
MASN does suck but it was a decent revenue stream as a consolation prize for MLB gutting Baltimore’s market – by all but stealing away DC, VA, and northern NC.
Didn’t the o’s take over the territory as a windfall when there was no longer a DC club though?
What value did the o’s give to mlb to ‘buy’ those rights, not originally theirs in 1954 when moving to baltimore to acquire those rights?
It wasn’t about something that was always Baltimores, it was about getting a yes vote.
@ bobelam
“Angelos was a greedy, spiteful tyrant of a human being.”
“, geez dude! You sound as angry and spiteful as Angelos was. Maybe stop pontificating as though no one else can ever disagree with you and be correct?”
Angelos was the Only owner to reject Scabs from playing during the players strikes. If it weren’t for Peter Angelos there’d be no Jeter, Sosa, Big Mac etc.
Doesn’t seem spiteful to recognize the rights of labor above the rights of ownership. Cal Ripken Jr might have “saved” baseball…but Peter Angelos made it possible.
Nats fans keep thinking they should have equal/fair amount of revenue from MASN. That was never the deal. And it shouldn’t be the deal.
Maybe if you keep calling people spiteful and angry it’ll obscure the fact the Nats have no legal leg to stand on. Probably not though …
I think NATS fans are not thinking they should have equal amount of revenue. As clarified by Steven,
“The arbitration and court cases were not about the initial uneven split of MASN (which may be been justified as a new team moving close to an existing team). Rather, the problems were caused by Angelos’ persistent efforts to pay the Nats less than they were contractually entitled to”
I don’t agree to call Angelos a spiteful tyrant, though. Just business and profit maximizing. No need to go persional. But there is also no need to keep fighting for a “right”/profit that has been ruled by court not belong to you.
The Nats got paid exactly what they were supposed to get under the MLB agreement. The Nats just kept wanting more of that. There was an agreement in place that if the Nats wanted more, they could buy out more shares, because again, this team coming in was invading the Orioles market. This was the compensation for this happening.
Angelos when he first arrived on the scene spent a ton on the roster and even outdid the Yankees in payroll for a couple of years. Things changed when a few things took place. Notoriously the Scott Erickson deal, and Angelos refusing to trade David Wells and Bobby Bonilla for future talent when a bit salary team was falling out of contention. With the Erickson problem, Angelos decided he would no longer spend big money over a long term contract for a pitcher. With Wells and Bonilla, after he kept them, the team turned around. He then thought he knew better than his baseball people. Then the team tanked forever.
Then came the Showalter years and the team went back into contention and the playoffs. Then Angelos went out and got Elias with the sole effort of getting this team back to prominence, and it worked.
He ran the team into the ground? Take a look at what he bought the franchise for and what it sold for.
No, the MASN deal was already hammered out between the Orioles and MLB. The Orioles lived up to their end of the bargain. The Nats were just greedy and kept wanting more and more.
DC wasn’t a ‘sub market” of the Orioles. It was the Orioles market since DC didn’t have a team. Just like part of the Orioles market is Delaware, Virginia, West Virginia, and even parts of Pennsylvania.
You are not getting what we mean. No one is saying that the Orioles should not be compensated according to the initial agreement. It is purely about executing the contract. Both sides are arguing that the other side keep wanting more than what is detailed in the contract. That is why we need the arbitration. And now the arbitration rules that the Orioles loses based on the evidence presented. The Orioles can keep fighting for it and stalling the final resolution. Both sides will fight for themselves. But in the end, we should resolve it according to the arbitration.
Your message might be “heard” by more if you weren’t typing with voice immodulation syndrome. Just saying 😉
That was to sad tormented
A pox on both their houses.
The Lerners knew what they were getting into when they bought the team.
The Angelos family has not always negotiated in good faith as relates to MASN.
As an aside: MASN is pretty terrible when it comes to production values, and it’s other programming is worthless.
Monopoly?
And a probable lousy one at that. Look at the Bullets, err Wizards, track record under Ted. And IMHO, without savior Ovi, the Caps would be a bottom dweller like the Wiz as well. I’m thinking the Lerner’s r interested in selling just not to Ted. When the right group comes along, they will move the team.
This would be the end of me going to Nats games. Ted got a $600M consolation prize from the DC Council after his dreams of moving the Caps and Wizards blew up publicly in his face. He’ll almost certainly pull a similar stunt with the Nats, He’ll threaten to move to northern VA, only this time he won’t screw up so badly so DC will get shafted even worse in the end.. I don’t think it can be underestimated how hated Leonsis is in the area right now.
Can I show you something in Cincinnati Red, sir?
Nashville would love to have the NATs.
NO, not “mediocre is good enough for me” Leonsis, whose word isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. No, no, no!
I think it would be better if Ted DiBase were to purchase the Nationals. He was the Million Dollar Man!
Too bad the Iron Sheik has passed on to his reward. They could form an ownership group
S/O The Sports Junkies who weren’t able to coax him into breaking any more news Tuesday morning