PHILIPPINE Basketball Association commissioner Sonny Barrios has contradicted a published claim that Solar Sports never asked for a reduction of its TV franchise fees, quoting a letter sent to him last Feb. 27 to support his contention.

According to Barrios, the letter revealed ?as stated in our previous correspondences, Solar [Sports] would like to look at possible reduction of minimum guarantee of the rights fee in lieu of revisions of the lockout provisions.?

The commissioner explained that the request for a reduction ?came about as a result of our tug-of-war over the lockout provision? in the contract signed by Solar.

Barrios said Solar wanted to correct the impression that the reduction asked for is not because they have financial difficulties, which was not the issue, but rather a difference of position on the lockout provision in the contract.

He said Solar had indicated they were ?looking positively at agreeing to our [PBA] position if there is a reduction of the franchise fee.?

Barrios said the Solar position was that if they followed the PBA?s interpretation of the lockout provision, ?it would mean a limitation on their potential revenues. That?s why they are saying if the PBA is willing to look at a reduction of the fee, we are willing to look at it your way.?

It was only then that the PBA asked Solar what kind of reduction they were looking at and that?s where the 25 percent came about.

Barrios said the PBA?s lockout specifically covers TV premiums like the ?Budweiser Buddies,? during the Viva Vintage era, which San Miguel Corp. vehemently objected to and which Viva Vintage scuttled after the PBA itself was taken to task by San Miguel chairman Eduardo ?Danding? Cojuangco.

Barrios noted that in the current situation, it concerns the TM Tres premium since direct competitor Talk N Text has a PBA team and to use its players to promote a rival product in a premium was not acceptable although it has been going on.

But Barrios made it clear that ?traditional placements of television commercials of competing products is not covered by the lockout clause.? Ronnie Nathanielsz