CNBC: If NFL Lockout in 2011, D* still on hook for $700 Million

Status
Please reply by conversation.
BobMurdoch

BobMurdoch

Thread Starter
Playing XBoxOne SeriesX/Supporter
Supporting Founder
Sep 12, 2003
5,770
190
Brielle, NJ
No worries, just saw it and thought it was newsworthy..... We know the D* execs will be pulling for a speedy resolution, but the owners might have more funds to ride things out than people expect....
 
Jimbo

Jimbo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
65,199
4,975
NW Ohio - Buckeye Country
No worries, just saw it and thought it was newsworthy..... We know the D* execs will be pulling for a speedy resolution, but the owners might have more funds to ride things out than people expect....

Don't suppose if there are options available that they DO settle vs losing the broadcast to all of the out of towners using ST do you ?

D* does help the NFL in this instance of distrubuting the product on Sat/Sun's
 
S

Skyboss

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 9, 2005
182
0
The NFL would be stupid to not settle this issue with the players. As much as I love football, the whole money issue is so out of hand its disgusting.
 
L

LonghornXP

Supporting Founder
Supporting Founder
Doesn't contract law state that if one party cannot comply with the contract regardless of the reason that it null and voids the contract. I'm almost 100% positive regardless of what CNBC says that if the NFL cannot provide access to the game feeds (no games being played) as per the contract wouldn't that contract be null and void. Even if DirecTV signed a clause that they must still pay even with a lockout I'm sure a billion dollar company can sue for breach of contract because they signed it under duress. Simply put the NFL put a clause that is so unreasonable that they had to agree to the terms to get the contract.

I could be wrong but if DirecTV has to pay this they signed the worst contract I've ever seen in my life. The NFL can prevent and avoid a lockout so they should be held liable for DirecTVs contract. Simply put for the NFL to be liable this means they shouldn't get paid during the lockout year, the contract becomes null and void and a new contract must be drafted and signed once the lockout is over.

Edit...This would be like signing a contract with Verizon Wireless and Verizon deciding to upgrade their network using new technology that doesn't work with any existing phones. Verizon Wireless at that point couldn't just tell customers under a contract that their phone no longer works but you must still pay your bill, cancel and pay an ETF and/or buy a new phone at full price. This would completely null and void the contract wouldn't it. They would need to provide you with both a new phone to continue services at no cost with no change in service or contract terms. If they don't want to do that they must waive your contract at once. Yes I understand this isn't the best example in that the lockout would be a short term while the phone would be forever but still if they cannot provide you phone service (NFL cannot provide the games) the contract cannot be enforced and you as a customer shouldn't have to pay for services you cannot receive at no fault of your own. The NFL can prevent a lockout just like Verizon Wireless in this case can prevent their phones from losing services.
 
Last edited:
dcowboy7

dcowboy7

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 27, 2007
676
0
Pequannock, NJ
Yep we have been thru this:

- Its actually $1,000,000,000.
The directv sunday ticket contract is $700,000,000 for the 2010 season but the extension is then $1,000,000,000 each season for 2011-2014.

- It wouldnt be a lockout....it would be a strike....the owners can impose a "final last offer" deal & if the players dont accept they would essentially be striking.

- CBS, FOX, NBC, ESPN are in the same boat that they would all still owe the NFL $$ too....But the NFL said they would all get a break on future contracts so basically they would get their "lost" $$ back down the road & then some.
 
T

TigerpounceTN

SatelliteGuys Pro
Oct 22, 2009
505
2
Knoxville, TN
So, basically, a <portion removed> are going to cause my bill to go up. Lovely. I feel so sorry for everyone involved and hope that the NFL and the players can find a way to make it through their difficult time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jcrandall

jcrandall

Proud Staff Member
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Apr 3, 2005
10,913
379
Central Michigan
Lets keep it to DirecTV and not feelings of NFL owners, unions, etc. Thanks.
 
jcrandall

jcrandall

Proud Staff Member
Staff member
HERE TO HELP YOU!
Apr 3, 2005
10,913
379
Central Michigan
My conern was prompted by some things written about the owners that was over the top.

To discuss the NFL lockout possibilities and feelings on the owners vs. union, visit our sports forum.

To discuss the affect of a lockout on DirecTV, financially, this is the place.
 
dangue

dangue

Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Dec 29, 2007
4,887
1,226
SF Bay Area
Doesn't contract law state that if one party cannot comply with the contract regardless of the reason that it null and voids the contract. I'm almost 100% positive regardless of what CNBC says that if the NFL cannot provide access to the game feeds (no games being played) as per the contract wouldn't that contract be null and void. Even if DirecTV signed a clause that they must still pay even with a lockout I'm sure a billion dollar company can sue for breach of contract because they signed it under duress. Simply put the NFL put a clause that is so unreasonable that they had to agree to the terms to get the contract.

I could be wrong but if DirecTV has to pay this they signed the worst contract I've ever seen in my life. The NFL can prevent and avoid a lockout so they should be held liable for DirecTVs contract. Simply put for the NFL to be liable this means they shouldn't get paid during the lockout year, the contract becomes null and void and a new contract must be drafted and signed once the lockout is over.

Edit...This would be like signing a contract with Verizon Wireless and Verizon deciding to upgrade their network using new technology that doesn't work with any existing phones. Verizon Wireless at that point couldn't just tell customers under a contract that their phone no longer works but you must still pay your bill, cancel and pay an ETF and/or buy a new phone at full price. This would completely null and void the contract wouldn't it. They would need to provide you with both a new phone to continue services at no cost with no change in service or contract terms. If they don't want to do that they must waive your contract at once. Yes I understand this isn't the best example in that the lockout would be a short term while the phone would be forever but still if they cannot provide you phone service (NFL cannot provide the games) the contract cannot be enforced and you as a customer shouldn't have to pay for services you cannot receive at no fault of your own. The NFL can prevent a lockout just like Verizon Wireless in this case can prevent their phones from losing services.

A little off the cuff analysis based of my memory of these types of issues...

It's honestly not that simple. It depends on the contract terms. The contract could give Direct the right to transmit all regular season games as part of Sunday Ticket without guaranteeing the number of games that will be played. It could in fact hold the league harmless for a lockout or strike reduced season. There are plenty of ways to write it so that Direct would have to pay even if no games were played. The contract must have been written in one of those ways if sources are reporting that Direct would still have to pay the NFL even if no games are played.

As far the whole duress argument (really a contract of adhesion, unconscionability issue), it's really not going to hold up for two reasons:

1) Sunday Ticket is not an essential item necessary for survival. It's not something the you would die without. So it's not like Direct had to have it or else disaster would strike them. The NFL didn't have this advantage when getting the terms added to the deal.

2) Direct isn't some Joe off the street that has no idea what he was getting into with the contract. Direct is a major corporation, with it's own stable of sophisticated and knowledgeable lawyers. The contract terms were negotiated by both sides and not simply imposed by the NFL. Direct knew or should have known exactly what was in the contract. That being the case, they agreed to it, so its terms are enforceable against them.
 
Jimbo

Jimbo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
65,199
4,975
NW Ohio - Buckeye Country
Which could/would all be a mute point if the Players Union and the Owners hash out an agreement before the deadline. :)

Which I expect to happen. :)
 
rmmrph

rmmrph

SatelliteGuys Family
Jan 12, 2004
92
0
Which could/would all be a mute point if the Players Union and the Owners hash out an agreement before the deadline. :)

Which I expect to happen. :)

I wouldn't hold my breath on this one, lockouts/strikes in the NFL can and have happened.
 
Jimbo

Jimbo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
65,199
4,975
NW Ohio - Buckeye Country
I wouldn't hold my breath on this one, lockouts/strikes in the NFL can and have happened.

That I AM aware of :D

Just don't WANT it to happen .... if they are going to have a stoppage, lets hope they come up with a Rookie Salary cap as well. :D
 
S

Skyboss

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 9, 2005
182
0
Then again, they REALLY need a Rookie Sal Cap.

Got that right. They should get a contract, but get the league minimum until they've played a season or two where the money would kick in. Or, if they are stellar players right out the gate the pay moves up. The drafts of the past are just riddled with players that made massive bank and didn't do jack. They need to bring the whole money thing back down to earth, this of course extends to what we pay each year to watch it.
 
Jimbo

Jimbo

SatelliteGuys Master
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
65,199
4,975
NW Ohio - Buckeye Country
Got that right. They should get a contract, but get the league minimum until they've played a season or two where the money would kick in. Or, if they are stellar players right out the gate the pay moves up. The drafts of the past are just riddled with players that made massive bank and didn't do jack. They need to bring the whole money thing back down to earth, this of course extends to what we pay each year to watch it.

I think the Rookie Salary Cap should be good for your first 2 full years, maybe 3, then you can get the big money.
I would also make it so the team that selected you can offer the best contract for you, something like the NBA does.
 
J

joed32

SatelliteGuys Pro
Jun 21, 2005
1,438
19
Riverside, Ca
I wouldn't hold my breath on this one, lockouts/strikes in the NFL can and have happened.

Only once though, and no one came out a winner. The players came back on their own without an agreement. This time would be different as they would be locked out. There will not be a strike because the players are fine with the current deal.

I think there is too much money to be lost on both sides if there is a lockout and they can't be stupid enough to let that happen. Or could they?
 
dcowboy7

dcowboy7

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 27, 2007
676
0
Pequannock, NJ
- It wouldnt be a lockout....it would be a strike....the owners can impose a "final last offer" deal & if the players dont accept they would essentially be striking.

Only once though, and no one came out a winner.

This time would be different as they would be locked out. There will not be a strike because the players are fine with the current deal.

- There were 2....1982 & 1987.

- As i had posted in this thread it would not be a lockout it would be a strike (see above).

The current deal is dead as it ends march 2011 & the owners have already opted out of the rest of the years after that.
 
Status
Please reply by conversation.

Similar threads

F
Replies
3
Views
3K
f13dfx
F
7
Replies
6
Views
9K
mrvince321
M
lern4483
Replies
28
Views
3K
DetFan
DetFan
J
Replies
3
Views
3K
harshness
harshness
IcEWoLF
Replies
27
Views
3K
88isgreat
88isgreat

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Latest posts

Top