Padre Owner Might Vote No on Dodger Sale

By ROSS NEWHAN

Jan. 21, 1998 12 AM PT

TIMES STAFF WRITER

Saying the purchase of the Dodgers would give Rupert Murdoch “the opportunity for considerable mischief,” San Diego Padre owner John Moores indicated Tuesday he is “inclined to vote against” the proposed sale.

“I would emphasize the word ‘inclined’ because to this point, we have not been presented any information, absolutely zero information [on the sale and how Murdoch would operate the team], but you have to be concerned when you have a fellow like Murdoch involved,” Moores said by phone. “How responsible will he be about running his team? We’re terribly concerned about having that kind of monster only a hundred miles to the north.”

In becoming the first owner to speak openly about his likely opposition to the proposed purchase of the Dodgers by Murdoch’s News Corp., Moores said his primary concerns are the possibility that Murdoch would further escalate baseball’s soaring salary structure through indiscriminate spending on players and that he could recoup possible payroll losses through his global media connections, ignoring baseball regulations.

“There’s an opportunity for considerable mischief,” Moores said. “He could lose money on one hand and make it up many times over around the globe. This is an industry losing $200 million a year. Both the union and some irresponsible owners share the blame. I don’t want to add to the problem, but I haven’t heard anything that would lead me to believe he wouldn’t.”

Dodger owner Peter O’Malley refused comment. Vince Wladika, a spokesman for the Murdoch organization, bristled.

“What is irresponsible?” Wladika said. “News Corp. runs every one of its divisions in a responsible manner. They’re all profit makers.

“I mean, if you’re talking about running salaries up, I think the owners have done a good enough job of that without our help.”

Moores agreed with that.

“We have owners who run their other businesses in a very responsible manner but whose brains turn to mush when it comes to baseball,” he said.

“Given Murdoch’s resources and the extent of his media operation, I don’t feel he’d be motivated to help get the industry as a whole back to profitability.

“If his only motivation is to buy a TV market or win for his local fans, it makes a difficult situation, for us and for baseball, even more difficult.”

Moores built a fortune in the computer and software fields and has wide real estate holdings. He claims to have lost $41 million in the three years he has owned the Padres, who have long been sensitive about TV intrusions by the Dodgers in their neighboring market. Moores, however, said his concerns go beyond regional issues and that others share those concerns.

He would not identify other possible opponents of the sale but a story in the San Diego Tribune said he is aligned with the San Francisco Giants, Chicago Cubs and Atlanta Braves, and that the Houston Astros and Pittsburgh Pirates are on the fence.

However, a leading baseball official told The Times on Tuesday that the Cubs, Astros and Pirates will not vote against it, and that he remains confident the sale will be approved. He added that it is not clear whether a vote will be taken at the next regularly scheduled owners’ meeting in March or in a special February meeting or conference call.

Five National League teams would have to vote against the sale to kill it. The Times reported in September that the Padres and Giants were among the clubs most concerned by Murdoch’s possible acquisition of their California neighbor, but Larry Baer, executive vice president of the Giants, insisted Tuesday that his club is not aligned with anyone, that the Giants are reserving judgment until they have more information and the ownership committee makes a recommendation.

The Dodgers and News Corp. reached a sales agreement on July 30. Acting Commissioner Bud Selig reiterated Tuesday that there is nothing aberrational about the subsequent process or the time it has taken to bring the matter to vote and that he continues to discuss concerns and issues with various clubs.

Moores said he has received no response when expressing concerns about the sale to baseball officials and that it would take more than a handshake or pat on the back from Murdoch to convince him that the Dodgers would be operated responsibly, suggesting he wants written covenants.

Asked how Murdoch’s acquisition would differ from the team ownerships of media giants such as Disney, Time-Warner and the Tribune Co. of Chicago, Moores said those corporations “are already in the tent, and the experience hasn’t been all that great. We’re concerned about making a bad situation worse. This industry needs a lot more revenue sharing, and the fans want competitive balance. I don’t see how adding another media company helps that.”

Of course, Murdoch is already the single biggest investor in baseball through his national and regional TV contracts. He could eventually withdraw those investments if not approved as Dodger owner, but Moores said baseball “can’t worry about blackmail” and that “I don’t see how it would be in Rupert’s interest” not to have Fox involved in the telecasting of baseball.

Moores added that his admiration for O’Malley mandated a thoughtful consideration of the sale and that he was certain if it fell through there would be “no shortage of potential buyers in Los Angeles who could measure up to Peter’s character. I still consider it the greatest franchise in sports, and I’m sure what the fans in Los Angeles want most is an owner of Peter’s character and responsibility.

“Rupert Murdoch? He may be the devil incarnate or the greatest thing since sliced bread. We just don’t know.”

Then again, the Padre owner seems to have an idea.