From: b_hart@odin.dev.macsch.com (Bill Hart)
Subject: Hockeys TV deal ?? (was Re: TV Contract: $80 mil.  over 5 years)
Reply-To: b_hart@macsch.com
Organization: MacNeal-Schwendler Corporation
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 16:34:17 GMT


In article <1992Aug27.120226.18376@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>, ab870@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Eric Rickin) writes:
|>
|>McNall says he's optimisic that the TV Deal ($80 mil. over 5 years) will
|>be inked very very shortly.
|>
|>
|>Eric "It's a shame about [Ziegler]" - Lemonheads Rickin
|>-- 
|>Eric Rickin (ab870@cleveland.freenet.edu)
|>University of Michigan Class of 1996
|>East Quad - Cooley
|>
The following article concerning hockey's TV deal appear in the
San Gabriel Valley Tribune this morning (8/27/92). It was written
by Richard Sandomir of the N.Y. Times News Service and is copied
here without permission.

Hockey's TV deal in question

The National Hockey League is expected to announce in a few
days a five-year, $80 million TV deal with ESPN and  ABC that
will bring a game of the week and playoff contests to ESPN
and a smattering of games to ABC.

For Gil Stein, the league's acting president, it is a coup.
At $16 million a year, he can present to his owners TV money
nearly three times the $5.5 million SportsChannel America
paid in 1991-92.

But SportsChannel America is not leaving the hockey arena 
easily. If it can't return to the rink, the cable network
might head to court.

At issue is a clause in the 1991-92 contract that apparently
gave SCA the right to match any offer the NHL might get from
any competing TV entity.

So far, the league has not given SCA any sense that it will
allow SCA to match ESPN, and indications are that it won't.
Except for letters passing between the two organizations,
there have been no talks since last month.

About the coming battle with SCA, Stein would only say:"They
just keep rattling legal sabers."

Why is this loose end dangling over what should be a time for
league owners to be skating in the streets?

The dispute is not the existence of the clause but the fact
that the signatory for the NHL was Joel Nixon, a league
vice-president and director of broadcasting until he resigned
Tuesday. Nixon signed the document on behalf of the former
league president, John Ziegler.

League officials say they believe Nixon didn't have the 
authority to sign the deal, that nobody told Stein, then the
NHL's general counsel, or the league's broadcasting committee,
and that the league's board of governor's gave its blessing
only to accept SCA's $5.5 million.

Both sides have had an odd contractual relationship until now.
Their three-year, $51 million deal that expired after the
1990-91 season was never signed, which ostensibly could have
allowed either side to walk at any time.

When the 1991-92 deal expired, the league had an option to 
renew SCA for another season at $6 million. The league didn't
act in the required time, then asked for an extension. Extension
time came and went with no renewal.

If this goes to court, the NHL might argue that while it regards
the Nixon document as invalid and believes SCA knew that Nixon's
signature did not constitute approval, it operated in good
faith last month by offering SCA an option to renew for a year
at $18 million. That option ran out on Monday.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill Hart                Just when you thought that TV was coming
b_hart@macsch.com        to a living room near you, more Ziegler/Nixon
                         c%%p.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey