Isn’t he already on ESPN?
New NBA Media Deal: 11 years, $77B with Disney (ABC/ESPN), Comcast (NBC/Peacock), and Amazon. ESPN to license Inside the NBA
- Thread starter Anerdyblackguy
- Start date
Yeah he replaced Woj there. That’s his value.
How do you NOT have a relationship with a company that has peddled your product for over 30 years
is Adam trolling here
He's talking about Zaslav. When Discovery took over they obviously didn't think the NBA could leave in a few years and didn't massage the relationship. There was never a doubt Disney and the NBA were reupping because Adam and Bob Iger were always talking and seen together.How do you NOT have a relationship with a company that has peddled your product for over 30 years
Ah ok i gotcha
RennisDeynolds
I am untethered and my rage knows no bounds!
How do you NOT have a relationship with a company that has peddled your product for over 30 years
The new WBD ceo is a shytstain. Been fukking the whole company up left and right as far as content goes. This isn't surprising
Eventually he will try to go the private equity route where they bleed the company dry and scrap it for parts
Not just Zaslav
Longtime directors that Warner had who negotiated the current TV deal in 2014, the one in 2008, and the one in 2002 are all gone. They left even before the Discovery merger in 2022.
Ian Eagle is likely headed to Amazon:
The NBA on Tuesday filed a memorandum of law in support of a request to New York Judge Joel M. Cohen to seal what it terms “confidential provisions” of the league’s new national media rights agreements with Amazon and NBCU and of its digital rights agreement with Bleacher Report.
In July, TBS and Warner Bros. Discovery sued the NBA after the league determined they had failed to match an offer by Amazon to broadcast games from 2025-26 through 2035-36. TBS and Warner Bros. Discovery believe the NBA is in breach of contract while the NBA insists the plaintiffs not only didn’t match but couldn’tmatch the terms of Amazon’s offer, which contemplates the delivery of games through streaming rather than linear TV.
The latest development reflects the NBA’s concern that the litigation will lead to public disclosure of “highly sensitive financial and nonfinancial terms” contained in its business contracts. This concern is not unique to the NBA but is a pervasive one when businesses, especially non-publicly traded entities like the NBA and its 30 franchises, are compelled to divulge what they believe are trade secrets and other proprietary information to advance legal arguments.
The NBA’s high-profile status and its substantial interest to journalists and fans only amplify that concern. To wit: In July, Sportico published a story on interesting nuggets from the NBA’s 2014 contract with WBD, a contract that suddenly became public when it appeared in a court filing as the litigation started. Many business contracts contain arbitration and mediation provisions that mandate resolution of disputes in private forums to avoid the disclosure risks that have already surfaced in the Turner/WBD v. NBA litigation.
Cohen has already rejected a request by the NBA to permanently seal several documents in their entirety. Those documents include the NBA-Amazon media rights agreement, the NBA-NBC Universal media rights agreement, a signed offer by TBS to attempt to match, a redlined version of the Amazon offer that TBS prepared and the NBA-Bleacher Report digital rights agreement.
In an order dated Oct. 7, Cohen concluded the league’s “generalized assertions of confidentiality” failed to warrant full sealings. He noted there is a “broad presumption” consistent with constitutional safeguards that the public has a right to access judicial proceedings and court records. But the judge gave the NBA a chance to “isolate” specific portions of those documents that might warrant sealing.
The latest filing, authored by Richard C. Pepperman II and other attorneys from Sullivan & Cromwell as well as by NBA executives Rick Buchanan and Dan Spillane, targets specific portions of the contracts as worthy of a “much narrower sealing order.”
The league says if targeted provisions were made public, the NBA would suffer commercial disadvantage. To that point, disclosure would allegedly “enable other counterparties with which the NBA negotiates to understand issues that are important to the NBA and how the NBA has resolved them in these particular instances.”
The targeted provisions also concern terms related to specific games licensed to Amazon and NBCU, the assignment of intellectual property rights, advertising and sponsorship arrangements, and marketing and innovation plans. Other terms involve the structure of license fees, NBA’s future plans regarding games and negotiations, and the effect of a work stoppage.
The league warns that public disclosure could “prejudice the NBA in negotiations with other partners” that seek to license certain types of IP rights or that want to know what they’d be expected to contribute to a marketing plan and investment. The league further points out that its relationships with “current media and other partners” could be prejudiced if those businesses could “compare and contrast sensitive aspects of the NBA’s arrangements with similar partners, like the quality of games licensed to certain partners or the hospitality benefits granted to them.”
Additional arguments raised by the NBA include that potential business harm to non-parties, including NBCU and Amazon, could result if their agreements become public. Such disclosure could “compromise their ability to negotiate with other parties for rights in other areas unrelated to the NBA.” The NBA also stresses that some of the proposed redactions include reference to “sensitive bank account information, personally identifying information, and personal contact information that is not relevant to this litigation and should not be shared with the public.”
According to the NBA’s filing, when the league asked the plaintiffs for their position on the sealing request, they responded they could not “say today whether we will take a position.” Assuming Turner and WBD refrain from offering a position, Cohen will weigh the NBA’s arguments against the public’s interest in litigation filings. Given that Cohen has already signaled he is open to targeted seals, the NBA likely has a good chance of the judge agreeing with all or at least some of their requests.
