This page will grow as our long national -- er, Angeleno -- nightmare proceeds.

Timeline of reports and signings

October 2003

• 10/8/03 -- the Los Angeles Times (simply the Times hereafter unless otherwise specified) reports McCourt has bid $330 million for the Dodgers. This deal specifically does not include broadcast rights.
• 10/10/03 -- the first details of the initial McCourt bid leak out in the Boston Globe. Sportscorp Ltd. president Marc Ganis says

  McCourt's businesses and holdings are reported to be in the hundreds of millions. "A person with a net worth in the low hundreds of millions would need a partner for acquisition in the $400 million range," Ganis said. "The Dodgers are losing money. There is not the cash flow to support debt."

  That should have been a wakeup call for Dodger fans. It wasn't.
• 10/17/03 -- the Times reports former Dodgers owner Peter O'Malley has offered his assistance to Frank and Jamie McCourt "as much as possible". Transition plan meetings begin, with former Giant Corey Busch brought on as an advisor. (Apologies for the link to the forums, but the article has expired.)
• 10/22/03 -- the Boston Herald says McCourt informed the Red Sox it's now or never for the team to acquire his waterfront property for a New Fenway. (At this point, 1/17/04, it looks like that would be a "never", Frank.)

November 2003

• 11/11/03 -- The first public doubts from within baseball gather as the Times reports "A Lack of Paperwork Delays Dodger Sale". Hm, could the paper be green, bearing the likenesses of dead presidents? No matter -- a "high-ranking official" at the GM meetings claims "we're still owed 99% of the paperwork". This will not be the last deadline McCourt misses.
• 11/15/03 -- in his column on the GMs' meetings, Peter Gammons predicts the team reverting to a $90M payroll. The GM meetings would conclude without the Dodgers signing a single player.

December 2003

• 12/1/03 -- After protracted negotiations, the Dodgers lose a tussle to acquire Brewers first baseman Richie Sexson to the Diamondbacks. Sexson was on the walk year of his contract, and it appears (still) as though the Snakes overpaid, sending Craig Counsell, Junior Spivey, Lyle Overbay, Chad Moeller, and minor league pitching prospects Chris Capuano and Jorge de la Rosa to Milwaukee. It's early, though, and there's still plenty of good free agents left -- including the grand prize, Vladimir Guerrero.
• 12/11/03 -- Newsday and the AP report the Yankees agree to a deal that sends Dodgers ace Kevin Brown to the Bronx in exchange for starter Jeff Weaver and $3 million cash. Later refinements to the deal would add Yankees pitching prospect Yhency Brazoban and subtract $600k from the Dodgers compensation because of pecularities in Brown's contract, particularly the clauses giving him a chartered jet.
• 12/13/03 -- The Dodgers trade for Juan Encarnacíon for a player to be named later.
• 12/15/03 -- The Times reports on the unflattering terms of the deal, with News Corp lending "more than half" the purchase price (sorry, no link).
• 12/16/03 -- Times sports humorist T. J. Simers writes his first column using the "Boston parking lot attendant" sobriquet.
• 12/18/03 -- Wilson Alvarez is re-signed to a one-year contract.
• 12/22/03 -- The San Francisco Examiner (via AP) reports McCourt in talks with baseball's ownership committee.
• 12/23/03 -- The Red Sox finally terminate talks with the Texas Rangers on a blockbuster trade-that-might-have-been: superstar shortstop and, by some accounts, spoiled child A-Rod for malcontent and flake outfielder Manny Ramirez. With no place to put star Boston shortstop Nomar Garciaparra, speculation was that the Dodgers were a likely destination, either directly or as part of a four-team trade involving White Sox slugger Magglio Ordoñez; but none of this ever comes to fruition, especially as the Times reports Kenny Williams demanding Odalis Perez, Guillermo Mota, and not one but two top pitching prospects (no link).

January 2004

• 1/1/04 -- the Times interviews an anonymous baseball executive, who says "I think the ownership committee would have already thrown out the McCourt proposal if any other entity than News Corp. was involved."
• 1/6/04 -- Bubba Trammell is signed to a one-year contract. No comment on a supposed "stealth run" at Vlad, though.
• 1/10/04 -- the Times reports the deal has been postponed yet again, though the bid "had undergone enough restructuring to bring it more in line with baseball requirements, including the debt-servicing rule." The last moment is 1/31/04, after which McCourt loses his exclusive window for purchasing the team, and must pay a fine to MLB.

  The Boston Globe runs a story indicating McCourt is actively rebidding the concessions. Since one of the entities helping him buy the team is concessionaire Aramark, this amounts to a knife in the back.

  Late Saturday, the New York Daily News reports free agent Vladimir Guererro, a widely-discussed target of the Dodgers in the offseason, has signed with a team thought out of the running -- the Angels. The Angels confirm the signing a scant two days later. For many Dodger fans, this is the last straw. The Halos have acquired four quality players in the offseason; the Dodgers, none, and with top free agents virtually all signed, the Dodgers begin to look in serious trouble for 2004.

• 1/12/04 -- In the most damning paragraph yet published about this affair, Bill Shaikin of the Times writes

  With major league owners scheduled to vote this month on whether to approve the bid of would-be Dodger buyer Frank McCourt, a source said Sunday that McCourt asked Commissioner Bud Selig whether some owners might vote against him if he spent freely to acquire Guerrero yet presented a financing package heavily dependent on loans. Selig offered no assurances, the source said, and McCourt sent word to General Manager Dan Evans to cease talks with Guerrero.

  In other words --
  1. Selig has no problems setting the team's roster.
  2. McCourt cares more about his own vanity than about the needs of the team.

  This is especially terrible considering that the McCourt-era Dodgers would start life immediately in violation of the terms of the debt service rule. Under that circumstance, Bud Selig can force any move to cut costs imaginable -- including vetoing any new signings.

• 1/13/04 -- Bill Plashke's Times column "Turning the Ravine Into an Abyss of Despair" summarizes the awful mess the Dodgers find themselves in, asking

  When are you going to turn around and sell the Dodgers to somebody like Arte Moreno?

• 1/15/04 -- Ross Newhan of the Times pens one of the most intriguing stories thus far, indicating that a high-ranking baseball official has said "there is concern about McCourt's operating revenue" if the sale is approved. Furthermore, even Bud Selig appears to have shifted, ever so imperceptably casting doubt on this deal:

  Selig took issue, however, with the perception that he may be forcing owners to accept McCourt simply because of his desire to placate News Corp., which subsidizes baseball through its national and regional TV contracts.

  "Rules are rules," he said, "and there are no exceptions.

  "We have very stringent ownership rules that are for everyone's protection and they will be fastidiously and aggressively applied.

  "We need the Dodgers to be the Dodgers; they're one of our flagship franchises, but we have to be positive they'll be operated in a manner that their fans deserve."

  This is the first indication we have that Selig realizes the scope of the tragedy if the Dodgers -- the principle team in baseball's second largest market -- were shanghaied by second-rate ownership just to satisfy News Corp. Cast in that light, his move to quash a Vlad-Dodgers signing may be the wakeup call some people needed.

• 1/16/04 -- A Times article interviewing Dodger CEO Bob Daly says the team under McCourt will be more like the "San Francisco Giants, who have been competitive with a payroll ranging from $65 million to $90 million." Bad enough that one of their own should recommend the Dodgers emulate hated rivals the Giants, but it utterly fails to account for the Dodgers' larger media market and the fact that the team owns its stadium outright. The Giants are in the nation's 19th largest TV market, and pay $15-$20 million in debt service annually on SBC Park. In a kick to Dan Evans' groin, Daly "has not recommended the general manager's retention to McCourt because, 'I don't think it's my place. I think Frank has to come in and make his own decisions.'" Daly's 5% ownership stake makes him unlikely, in this observer's opinion, to be forthcoming on the viability of the McCourt bid.
• 1/16/04 -- Steve Bailey's Globe column excoriates McCourt, quoting the 12/16 T. J. Simers piece; of McCourt's Boston tenure, he says

  Few in this town have talked the talk more and walked the walk less. McCourt is strong on vision. Doing is his problem. Cooperative is not a word often associated with the man. For years he has presented countless slide shows with his vision of the New Boston on the other side of the Fort Point Channel. No other plan was ever grand enough for McCourt. He was going to buy the Red Sox. He was going to build a new Fenway on the waterfront. Instead, 25 years after McCourt bought his South Boston land from a bankrupt Penn Central, what we have down there is acres of parking lots.

• 1/17/04 -- LA developer Eli Broad posts a rival $430M bid, says the Times. An important feature of this bid is that it is orchestrated and announced by Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn, making it crystal clear that McCourt is an unwanted carpetbagger. Broad is no penny-ante owner, and part of his bid is an immediate $15M renegotiation of the cable deal. This makes him bad from Fox's perspective -- he can't be blackmailed and he isn't bought out of the box.

  Broad's bid requires "credits of $50 million", and "Fox must agree to loan him $80 million, interest-free, for four years, or provide a credit of $16 million.

  This, by the way, is not the first bid Broad made for the Dodgers -- back in March 2003 he joined a ownership consortium with David Checketts offering to pay News Corp $600M for the team and the Fox Sports West networks. "Sources close to Broad, however, said Fox had treated him with 'disrespect' by never taking his overtures seriously." News Corp dawdled, preferring to find a buyer willing to pick up just the team... some sucker like McCheap, er McCourt.

  Steve Harvey's "Only In LA" column publishes a photo of another parking lot guy who wants to own the Dodgers.

• 1/18/04 -- Bill Plashke waxes eloquent on the return of Peter O'Malley to the Dodgers as chairman should his bid succeed. (Wait, wasn't he the guy who sold the team to Fox in the first place?) Plashke quotes an anonymous owner who rates the McCourt bid's chances of success at "50-50, at best."

  Ross Newhan of the Times says "It Still Looks Like a Pretty Hard Sell", noting that McCourt has one thing still going for him: his window of exclusivity that doesn't expire until 1/31. McCourt is "expected to meet with baseball officials and lawyers in Los Angeles this week in another attempt to resolve the debt-servicing issues. (But as I've asked before, if they haven't gotten these issues solved by now, when will they get solved?)

  In the flurry of reports, the Daily News publishes two articles after being silent for nearly a week. Rich Hammond quotes an anonymous source within baseball that

  "I'd give him three years before he has to sell the team," another source said. "He will either realize he can't do it, or he just won't be able to make payroll."

  Also, Steve Dilbeck weighs in with an opinion piece unequivocally favoring the Broad bid.

  Thanks to Jon Weisman of Dodger Thoughts for pointing out these Daily News stories.

• 1/20/04 -- Ross Newhan writes that the vote has been relocated to New York from Los Angeles due to "logistical reasons". More likely, they're worried about getting lynched. But fortunately, now begins the talk (from one owner) of McCourt getting "an extension". An extension on the vote with no extension of his window of exclusivity is exactly what we want.
• 1/21/04 -- MLB officials meet with McCourt for 11 hours in "the ongoing effort to iron out problems relating to the industry's debt service rule". Bob DuPuy is quoted as saying "I remain optimistic that the deal that both the buyer and seller want can be completed by" January 31st, but hinting that the deal that does get done may not "fully comply with debt service this year".

  The city council gets in the act, finally, as "Los Angeles City Councilman Jack Weiss introduced a motion that was seconded by six colleagues on Tuesday urging the team and baseball to pursue local ownership." Also, the Times runs an op-ed piece in favor of the Broad bid, and therefore, against McCourt. The Daily News runs a similar story, including additional confirmation that the McCourt bid has handcuffed Dan Evans ability to improve the team.

• 1/22/03 -- Ross Newhan's report indicates that baseball is finally getting serious about selling the team, and/or McCourt realizes -- ever so dimly -- the gravity of his lack of funding. In the restructured deal, News Corp retains 20-25% of the $230M loaned as equity, and in effect becomes a minority partner. Given the overall debt, this merely provides a fig leaf to MLB ownership without providing the protections the debt service rule was supposed to address. In a sop to the city council, the deal now requires McCourt to find a local investor within 1-2 years; one official characterizes the Broad bid as producing a sour reaction within baseball, and "grandstanding". Unsurprisingly, "sources familiar with the situation said that the discussions leading to the new agreement between McCourt and News Corp. were not as amiable as portrayed." A deal like this could delay the hour of reckoning and prolong the Dodgers' pain.

  Late Thursday an Associated Press story says the sale package paperwork will be sent to owners as soon as Friday, 1/23, with a vote to be scheduled for the following week.

• 1/23/04 -- The Times reports the sale vote should be taken via conference call Thursday.

  It's all about formalities now.

  Steve Dilbeck of the Daily News wants to blame Peter Chernin for this mess.

• 1/24/04 -- City Councilman Jack Weiss delayed the vote on a resolution urging Fox to sell the Dodgers to local investors until next week. Present at the meeting was Frank McCourt and political strategist Joe Cerrell, a man with a rather impressive client list -- which includes Bill Gates. A clear return shot that McCourt does not intend to be pushed around by anything as trivial as the LA City council. My baseball team. MINE.
• 1/26/04 -- Two pieces in the Times, one by Ross Newhan discussing the firestorm McCourt will surely walk into, and recommending some (foolish, IMO) courses of action. But the big story is the story of the fan fury about the team being sold to someone so absent cash. The best hope, though badly unsubstantiated, came from an interview with Oak Park lawyer Keith Gregory, who said

  "With an owner who has less money than the guys who bought the Kings from Bruce McNall, they don't stand a chance," Gregory said, referring to Joe Cohen and Jeffrey Sudikoff, who drove the hockey team into bankruptcy proceedings in 1995, one year after they purchased controlling interest.

  If it takes bankruptcy, so be it.
• 1/28/04 -- Ross Newhan says the deal is done, with the vote a mere formality.
• 1/29/04 -- Black Thursday. McCourt becomes the owner of the Dodgers, made official at a press conference at Dodger Stadium. A flurry of news here:
  • Mike DiGiovanna of the Times writes of big changes expected in the front office,though Evans is not expected to go.
  • Ross Newhan breaks out a mess of bullet points, including
    • "McCourt insisted that he has put more than $200 million of his money into the $430-million deal, but industry sources maintained that he has none of his own involved."
    • Inconsistency between his comments about a $100M payroll and what was sold to the league -- a payroll in "the $65-million-to-$75-million neighborhood of the San Francisco Giants.
    • "Although McCourt revealed that there was no time frame for him to find an investor willing to buy out News Corp.'s equity in the reworked sales agreement, sources said there are built-in financial incentives that hinge on how quickly he can find an investor. News Corp. is loaning him $165 million and has a $40-million preferred share as minority owner. Reports circulating Thursday that McCourt owns only 52% and News Corp. 48% were not accurate, multiple sources said."
    These would be repeated in later issues.
  • In the most interesting article on the sale, the Daily News runs an article going over the same press-conference platitudes as the Times, with this interesting twist:

    A more telling sign, though, came from McCourt's wife, Jamie, who was introduced as the team's vice chairman, instantly making her perhaps the most powerful woman in all of sports.

    When asked about the Dodgers' ability to acquire a hitter, Jamie McCourt answered, "Well, when we get a GM ..." then quickly corrected herself and instead made reference to the "situation" being settled.