Given what has happened this year with the Dodgers’ Frank McCourt and the Mets’ Fred Wilpon, it seems that potential owners would be under greater scrutiny than ever. And yet, Jim Crane’s purchase of the Astros has so far gone almost completely unnoticed and unreported outside of Houston markets, which often report nothing more than that it was happening.
It’s hard to say why this purchase (scheduled to be approved by MLB owners on Aug. 18) would fly so far under the radar. Perhaps it’s because the Astros isn’t a historical franchise that garners the kind of media attention that clubs like the Mets and Dodgers do. Perhaps it’s because the Astros are so bad. Perhaps it’s because he’s tried to buy teams so many times before that the media thinks we know him.
Whatever the reason, it really seems that Crane warrants more coverage because he has a very controversial past worth covering. It’s very curious that the MLB would be so very opposed to an owner like Mark Cuban (whose biggest controversy is his mouth) but appear to be quite so at ease with Crane, who has a long list of professional controversies to his credit. The bullet points, from this must-read article by Maury Brown of Forbes (special thanks to Lisa Gray at Astros-holic Synonymous for linking to it:
- Crane was involved in negotiations for the purchase of the Texas Rangers last year. After former owner Tom Hicks had reached an exclusive agreement with Nolan Ryan and Chuck Greenberg, he continued negotiating with Crane to try to get a higher sale price. The move resulted in a strongly-worded (or at least ominious) press release from the MLB that read in part, “any actions in violation of MLB rules or directives will be dealt with appropriately by the Commissioner.”
- Complaints were filed in 1997 with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleging that Crane’s Eagle Global Logistics discriminated against minorities and women of child bearing age, including the allegation that Crane himself told subordinates not to hire African Americans because “once you hire blacks, you can never fire them.” A $9 million settlement was reached, though $6 mil was returned to EGL in 2005 when a review found that only (if you can say that in cases of discrimination) 203 of the 2,073 claims against EGL had merit.
- The Justice Department brought three different cases against EGL for war profiteering, alleging that EGL conspired to overcharge the US and UK governments for shipping to Baghdad and provided kickbacks to procure contracts. EGL settled all three cases by paying over $5 mil in penalties. Its VP in the Middle East and India, Chris Cahill, also served jail time and paid a $10,000 fine.
- Crane borrowed $220 million from Bank of America to purchase the team and the Astros already had $55 million in debt borrowed from the MLB credit facility. It doesn’t seem like anything that Maury Brown is terribly worried about, as he pointed out that Crane has a lot of capital in the deal. However, there are also rumors that owners are concerned about the amount of money being borrowed to complete the deal. To be sure, nobody wants another McCourt situation in the MLB.
There were other controversies, but those are the sexiest. And yet, with the $680 million dollar deal to purchase the Astros (second-largest in MLB history, behind only the $845 mil sale of the Cubs) these issues never really rose to prominence.
As with all things, there are two sides to the story and Crane strongly denies most of the allegations (albeit often through a lawyer or spokesperson). But you really would have thought that these would get more play, especially with the recent owner controversies. It’s hard to figure how this is somehow less controversial than the prospect of Cuban owning a team, and yet it appears to be.
It doesn’t necessarily spell disaster or corruption for the Astros, but it’s not terribly promising and should really be something that owners take into consideration when they vote on this sale in a couple of weeks.
Get all the latest Astros news and commentary by following me on the Twitter machine — http://twitter.com/astros290
Yes. But it could be worse, here’s an article head from LAT this June (idk how to link here on A290).
“Nine of 30 teams reportedly in violation of MLB debt service rules”
Bud would rather have any owner than a Frank McCourt, I’m guessing, to join his MLB ownership cartel. Just imagine MLB controlling 9 teams. He learned something from last year…
“Selig Lending Money To Dodgers At Twice Rate He Charged Rangers”
The Forbes article actually mentioned that LA Times article, and that the move would put the Astros on that list. It concluded, however, that the Astros weren’t in as much trouble (called it “debt, but within reason) because “Crane has considerable capital in the deal.” Apparently it’s collatoralized with far more caution than, for example, the McCourt deal.
Still, the deal has a $220 million debt component from Bank America and the Astros have already borrowed $55 mil from the MLB’s league facility fund. They seem to think this debt is alright and I’m inclined to believe the experts. Still, I really have to wonder why someone with Crane’s past is a more desirable owner than someone like Cuban. What — because Selig wants more unstable teams? Where’s the media on this?
Anybody been following #P (number of pitches thrown) to the Astros power trio? True it constantly revolves the 3-hitter, but the veteran money took only 7 pitches according to the boxscore yesterday. $19m surrender
Also Bogosevic as 3-hitter…. #Millslogic!! Gotta luvit
I would have given my first-born child for Cuban to buy the Astros. He’s a cash-rich owner who isn’t afraid of spending money or being progressive. I’m just floored that the Padres can be bought in installments, but Cuban won’t be let into the good old boys club that is MLB ownership. I guess Selig really is afraid of anyone young and controversial.
Probably. He seems a bit old-fashioned, and Cuban is probably too young and hot-headed for the likes of him (though he was noticeably quiet during the NBA playoffs this year…hmm…). But it’s okay to have a sleazebag of an owner like Frank McCourt or George Steinbrenner, apparently.
MLB doesn’t care about crane’s past because the media doesn’t here in houston – he buys LOTS of advertising – and the national media doesn’t know what a houston is – some flyover hick town that don’t matter none.
MLB greatly prefers crane to cuban because crane won’t talk and he SAID and ON THE RECORD that he was going to reduce payroll (which he has already done) and he isn’t going to spend any money on the team – which is obvious – and he also doesn’t HAVE any money. The guy is “poor” for a millionaire. None of the people who put in money to BUY the team will agree to infuse cash in the future, if needed.
i would ALSO guess that crane has agreed, as part of being allowed to be frank mccourt version 2, that he will move the team to the AL, thereby destroying the fan base, but so what. Bud selig is most interested in destroying any difference between the AL and the NL and just marketing ML (like the NFL markets itself – no one cares about a “division” – in a gambling game, that doesn’t matter”
“(Crane)…he will move the team to the AL, thereby destroying the fan base”
How does this move destroy the fan base exactly?
Because we HATE the DH! I don’t know if that’s really true for Astros fans, but it’s true for me and I felt like throwing that in there. I hate the DH. I think the sport doesn’t need a position where you have some unathletic slug who comes up to swing a stick three or four times a night. I think it hurts the strategy and makes it boring for real baseball fans. I don’t want to root for a team with a DH.
I hate the DH too, but I’m not going to give up on a team I like for it. I love the Rangers, despite the fact that their pitchers don’t have to bat.
I support evening the leagues at 15 apiece, if only because it would align the divisions so that the NL central isn’t so jam-packed and the AL West isn’t so light (though the race for it is as heated as the AL East, right now). But I kinda wish the Astros weren’t the team that has to move for that to happen. On the other hand, the Astros & Rangers could turn into a legitimate rivals, which I think a lot of people would enjoy. I think I would.
Regardless of the possibly dirty past (which is a legitimate concern, but not the topic of my reply), I’m concerned about why he wants to cut the payroll. You pay $650 million for the team with the worst record in the league, and THEN you want to have a fire sale? He’s picking up some prospects, to be sure, but I doubt that even with the additions we got from the Hunter & Bourn trades, our farm doesn’t compare to, say, the Rangers’. Unless at least one of those guys turns out to be a Jeff Bagwell-type prospect (which is highly unlikely…), he traded 2 of our best current players for a CHANCE that we’ll get a few more players as good…in a few years.
I’m already skeptical about him and he hasn’t even been officially confirmed as the new owner. Maybe enough people will read this article and it will make its way into the right hands before the vote takes place…because I’m not sure he’s going to be any better than Drayton, and might be worse.
I completely agree. I’m very scared that this is a money-making venture for him. I’d much rather have a guy who wanted THIS team, not someone who’d been trying to buy two or three other teams. I’d really prefer someone who seems invested in this team’s success. Like Trace said, a Mark Cuban who’s willing to spend some money to help them succeed rather than hoping they can succeed while skimping on pay roll. Some teams have managed to pull it off, but it’s rare and difficult and requires the kind of front office prowess that, quite frankly, I don’t think the Astros have ever had.
I agree. In hindsight, I’m still not sure how we went to the WS in ’05. That was only 6 years ago, and I’m pretty sure not one guy is left from that team.
Why can’t we have someone like Nolan take an interest in our team and actually put some effort into it?
There are two, but neither of them played critical roles that year.
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teamstats/roster.php?y=2005&t=HOU
That was Wandy’s rookie year. He started 22 games, going 10-10 with a 5.53 ERA. But he didn’t start in the postseason and only pitched a total of 4.2 innings, 3.1 of which was in relief of Clemens in game one of the World Series when Clemens lasted only 2 innings because of an injury. Wandy pitched okay but took the loss.
It was Quintero’s first year with the Astros. He only played 18 games and wasn’t on the postseason roster. Somehow, incredibly, Ausmus started EVERY postseason game for the Astros.
Well, then I stand corrected. Thanks for looking it up.