Lip Man 1 Posted December 16, 2023 Share Posted December 16, 2023 Looks like they are hoping to televise MLB games this upcoming season: https://awfulannouncing.com/sinclair/bally-sports-2024-mlb-games-bankruptcy.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 16, 2023 Share Posted December 16, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said: Looks like they are hoping to televise MLB games this upcoming season: https://awfulannouncing.com/sinclair/bally-sports-2024-mlb-games-bankruptcy.html The main advantage of going to the MLB-driven/controlled model was going to be the blackout issue being resolved. And of course you have the streaming rights issues as well. Without that...you've just stripped away that $30-50 million so many small market teams were desperately relying upon last year....so you'd obviously have to address the revenue model's validity. Dodgers and Yankees emerging as the two theoretically dominant team helps a bit here, too. "The pending agreement with MLB is not fully done. There are three teams of the 11 not on board. DSG is looking to cut the fees of those three teams, in return for ending their contracts at the end of the ‘24 season. Two clubs–the Cleveland Guardians and Texas Rangers–had lawyers at the hearings (they are two of the three teams; it’s unclear the third)." Edited December 16, 2023 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 16, 2023 Share Posted December 16, 2023 (edited) https://www.cleveland.com/guardians/2023/12/framework-in-place-for-deal-between-mlb-guardians-and-diamond-sports-over-tv-rights.html Big repercussions for the AL Central "MLB, the Guardians, Atlanta, Detroit, Texas and Milwaukee filed a motion Wednesday saying that Diamond had to “assume or reject” their RSN contracts for the 2024 season by Dec. 31. Diamond holds contracts with 11 MLB teams, but only those five were able to ask for a “assume or reject” ruling because the other teams are part owners in their RSNs. In light of this possible deal, which was negotiated Thursday before Friday’s hearing, that deadline has been set aside." Edited December 16, 2023 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 16, 2023 Share Posted December 16, 2023 (edited) https://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2023/11/9/23954086/twins-rsn-money-bally-sports-payroll-cut The article goes on to say that the Twins got $54.8 million from Bally Sports North (part of the Diamond Sports Group) in 2023, and as that deal has expired, the Twins will have to look elsewhere for money to replace that. This is where the Twins payroll could be in 2024: #MNTwins to trim payroll in 2024. Nothing official, but it’s expected to sit between $125m and $140m. Last year, Twins payroll was a record $154m. https://t.co/HDs553IUnI — DanHayesMLB (@DanHayesMLB) November 8, 2023 "The Twins won’t be alone here. The Diamond Sports Group bankruptcy means that it’s possible the 12 teams that still have a deal with Bally Sports could wind up with a lot less revenue in 2024. In addition to the Twins, the other 11 MLB teams that still have deals with Bally are the Braves, Marlins, Tigers, Reds, Cardinals, Brewers, Royals, Angels, Guardians, Rangers and Rays." Edited December 16, 2023 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Side Hit Men Posted December 16, 2023 Share Posted December 16, 2023 (edited) All solutions to ending RSNs need to include the option for local, regional, national or international customers to give MLB their credit card and in return have access to every game at any time. Period. No fox blackout out. No Apple TV blackout. No Home and Garden Network blackout. Charge a second fee for rights to local teams to be returned to the Satanic cable companies your aligned with until those deals have expired, but just do it. And if the new Jerry-vision excludes a streaming option for local viewers than White Sox baseball will die. Return a dedicated broadcast day or two each week on WGN (say Sundays and Wednesdays) in a dual telecast with Jerryvision, and better still broadcast many/most/all games on Telemundo or Univision, with Ozzie on Color Commentary to capture the growing Spanish speaking Chicago populace for fan interest growth. Leave the Cubs to dying Seniors clinging to their cable television and their Marquee Network. In two generations the Sox will regain parity or perhaps have a majority of Chicago baseball fans backing their team. Edited December 16, 2023 by South Side Hit Men Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted December 20, 2023 Author Share Posted December 20, 2023 https://awfulannouncing.com/mlb/diamond-bally-sports-mlb-2024-rights-fees.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 21, 2023 Share Posted December 21, 2023 (edited) 7 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said: https://awfulannouncing.com/mlb/diamond-bally-sports-mlb-2024-rights-fees.html "Three teams are not included in the agreement. Those are the Minnesota Twins (whose deal with Diamond and Bally Sports North expired at the end of the 2023 season), Cleveland Guardians, and the reigning World Champion Texas Rangers. SBJ’s report notes that Diamond has committed to making offers for those three teams’ rights by the end of this week, likely at a lower rate." Immense impact at top of the AL Central... Edited December 21, 2023 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted December 21, 2023 Share Posted December 21, 2023 On 12/16/2023 at 5:30 PM, South Side Hit Men said: All solutions to ending RSNs need to include the option for local, regional, national or international customers to give MLB their credit card and in return have access to every game at any time. Period. No fox blackout out. No Apple TV blackout. No Home and Garden Network blackout. Charge a second fee for rights to local teams to be returned to the Satanic cable companies your aligned with until those deals have expired, but just do it. And if the new Jerry-vision excludes a streaming option for local viewers than White Sox baseball will die. Return a dedicated broadcast day or two each week on WGN (say Sundays and Wednesdays) in a dual telecast with Jerryvision, and better still broadcast many/most/all games on Telemundo or Univision, with Ozzie on Color Commentary to capture the growing Spanish speaking Chicago populace for fan interest growth. Leave the Cubs to dying Seniors clinging to their cable television and their Marquee Network. In two generations the Sox will regain parity or perhaps have a majority of Chicago baseball fans backing their team. If things go as they went last year, each affected team that went to MLBAM to help with broadcasting negotiated their own separate terms with MLB. Basically, the teams need to decide how much of the responsibility they want for the production/ad sales versus how much of the profit they want to reap. MLB has seemed generally willing to take on the ad sales in exchange for the bulk of the profits, or also perfectly happy to handle the production and take a cut of the teams sales to come out a bit on top. The Padres, apparently, wanted nothing to do with trying to figure out the ad sales midseason and ceded all of that to the league. I think it's likely that most teams would opt to expand their staff and get into that game if they're given enough runway to prep for the season, but we're probably already right up on the deadline for that being realistically possible for 2024. I can tell you that a handful of the local Bally RSNs are profitable, and thus interested in carrying on into the 2024 season to continue to make money while this is all settled. I expect those units, ultimately, to be bought by another entity and to continue operating with the current contracts where possible, maybe some by the teams they cover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 21, 2023 Share Posted December 21, 2023 1 minute ago, Eminor3rd said: If things go as they went last year, each affected team that went to MLBAM to help with broadcasting negotiated their own separate terms with MLB. Basically, the teams need to decide how much of the responsibility they want for the production/ad sales versus how much of the profit they want to reap. MLB has seemed generally willing to take on the ad sales in exchange for the bulk of the profits, or also perfectly happy to handle the production and take a cut of the teams sales to come out a bit on top. The Padres, apparently, wanted nothing to do with trying to figure out the ad sales midseason and ceded all of that to the league. I think it's likely that most teams would opt to expand their staff and get into that game if they're given enough runway to prep for the season, but we're probably already right up on the deadline for that being realistically possible for 2024. I can tell you that a handful of the local Bally RSNs are profitable, and thus interested in carrying on into the 2024 season to continue to make money while this is all settled. I expect those units, ultimately, to be bought by another entity and to continue operating with the current contracts where possible, maybe some by the teams they cover. Interestingly, there's still a contention that not even the Rangers were profitable (or profitable enough) in a year they won the World Series...part of that due to the fact that the ad sales/increased rate sheets don't usually show up until the post season and into the 3-5 years following a WS victory. As for SD, the Padres were heading for a disastrous season vis a vis pre-season expectations...that makes sense to an extent. And now there's even more chaos with Seidler passing away and heading into a transition period of trying to thread the needle between competing and preserving the farm system simultaneously. Of course, JR would never cede the control over his broadcast network (ad sales), as well as ticket sales. That's the ONE area he doubles or triples down on, especially when times are tough, trying to draw blood from a turnip. Ultimately it feels like the lowered payroll is merely covering "losses" from 2022-23 and not being reinvested (theoretical savings) into operations. And one would have to think that basically having your own network would insulate the Sox and Cubs, but not unless BOTH teams do something dramatic to shake up this offseason...couldn't imagine working for sales on either side of the city, despite the current Santa Claus rally fueling Wall Street, seems that corporations are still being largely risk-adverse with marketing/sponsorship budgets. (Lastly, AL Central impact/s. I guess we'll have to see if the Guardians end up dumping Bieber as well, they're going with almost all youth across their rotation, and betting on the critical bounceback from McKenzie. The one team that really seems to be screwing over their fans though is the Twins, especially after their first playoff series victory in decades. Like the White Sox with Andrew Benintendi, they're being largely blocked right now by the Buxton and Correa deals hanging ominously over their payroll.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted December 21, 2023 Share Posted December 21, 2023 What a great example of the challenges of operating a 100 plus year old organization structure in modern times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Side Hit Men Posted December 21, 2023 Share Posted December 21, 2023 2 hours ago, Eminor3rd said: If things go as they went last year, each affected team that went to MLBAM to help with broadcasting negotiated their own separate terms with MLB. Basically, the teams need to decide how much of the responsibility they want for the production/ad sales versus how much of the profit they want to reap. MLB has seemed generally willing to take on the ad sales in exchange for the bulk of the profits, or also perfectly happy to handle the production and take a cut of the teams sales to come out a bit on top. The Padres, apparently, wanted nothing to do with trying to figure out the ad sales midseason and ceded all of that to the league. I think it's likely that most teams would opt to expand their staff and get into that game if they're given enough runway to prep for the season, but we're probably already right up on the deadline for that being realistically possible for 2024. I can tell you that a handful of the local Bally RSNs are profitable, and thus interested in carrying on into the 2024 season to continue to make money while this is all settled. I expect those units, ultimately, to be bought by another entity and to continue operating with the current contracts where possible, maybe some by the teams they cover. Yes, but even if only say 10 RSNs are owned by teams, they will never give them up. What is needed is an agreement across all thirty teams in terms of Split across MLB for RSN revenue (if any). Elimination of all blackout restrictions in exchange for a surcharge paid to Direct TV/ Internet Providers/National TV Providers. This is theoretically what it would look like: Subscription to a single team: $79 Anywhere in the world beyond the local broadcasting market $129 Anywhere within the local broadcast market - The difference is paid to the RSN and providers. Subscription to all teams: $179 All games except for games broadcast in your local area & national telecasts $229 All games except national telecasts - A portion shared with RSNs $279 All games including national telecasts - A portion shared with both RSNs and National Broadcasters Playoff Subscription: $59 International Customers $99 United States Customers - Portion shared with National Broadcasters Don't think they can get all 30 teams done at the same time, but the whole lot of teams currently going through MLBAM can start the process, and the remaining teams will convert after their current contracts expires. No teams will have the right to not join the above once their current contracts expire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 21, 2023 Share Posted December 21, 2023 (edited) Padres felt the tradeoff was worth it due to almost doubling the base of fans they could reach... “While we’re disappointed that Diamond Sports Group failed to live up to their contractual agreement with the club, we are taking this opportunity to reimagine the distribution model, remove blackouts on local games, improve the telecast, and expand the reach of Padres games by more than 2 million homes,” MLB Chief Revenue Officer Noah Garden said in a statement. MLB announced Tuesday night that fans in the Padres’ home television market will be able to watch games on DirecTV, Cox, Spectrum, AT&T U-Verse and fubo. MLB will also offer a direct-to-consumer streaming subscription for $19.99 per month or $74.99 for the rest of the season by registering at MLB.TV. This is the first time MLB.TV is offering a DTC (direct-to-consumer) option in a team’s home market and also lifts the blackout rules that were in place for games previously distributed on Bally Sports San Diego. Padres games through Sunday will be available for free with an MLB login at MLB.com, Padres.com and in the MLB apps on mobile and connected devices. MLB said that the new arrangement expands the reach of Padres’ games in its home television market by 189% from approximately 1.13 million homes to approximately 3,264,000." https://apnews.com/article/padres-bally-sports-mlb-906f9f1ad0d66264b92b9cbe0ecd888a https://www.castiron.media/locations/san-diego/padres/ If you want to work selling advertising for MLB teams, here's your unique opportunity Edited December 21, 2023 by caulfield12 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted December 21, 2023 Share Posted December 21, 2023 7 hours ago, South Side Hit Men said: Yes, but even if only say 10 RSNs are owned by teams, they will never give them up. What is needed is an agreement across all thirty teams in terms of Split across MLB for RSN revenue (if any). Elimination of all blackout restrictions in exchange for a surcharge paid to Direct TV/ Internet Providers/National TV Providers. This is theoretically what it would look like: Subscription to a single team: $79 Anywhere in the world beyond the local broadcasting market $129 Anywhere within the local broadcast market - The difference is paid to the RSN and providers. Subscription to all teams: $179 All games except for games broadcast in your local area & national telecasts $229 All games except national telecasts - A portion shared with RSNs $279 All games including national telecasts - A portion shared with both RSNs and National Broadcasters Playoff Subscription: $59 International Customers $99 United States Customers - Portion shared with National Broadcasters Don't think they can get all 30 teams done at the same time, but the whole lot of teams currently going through MLBAM can start the process, and the remaining teams will convert after their current contracts expires. No teams will have the right to not join the above once their current contracts expire. The MLB won’t mandate a model that doesn’t permit teams to seek the highest revenue choice for their own market. Those numbers you listed may pass your smell test for what seems reasonable for a fan to pay given the precedents set by the old model, but they only make sense if the ad sales can make up for the loss of carriage fees in the background, and that answer will vary greatly from market to market. The Yankees are not going to forfeit the profits from their enormously successful YES network in order to take the pressure off the Padres to figure out their own s%*#, for example. The “new normal” very well may end up looking something like you suggest, ultimately, if media-viewing habits continue to evolve such that RSNs become universally non-viable, but the league won’t be in a position to mandate a shift. Each team is scrambling to come up with a way to salvage or grow an important revenue stream, and the size and terms of those streams are different enough in each market such that a one-size-fits-all solution will have clear winners and losers among the teams, and the owners in a position to lose won’t stand for it. 4 hours ago, caulfield12 said: Padres felt the tradeoff was worth it due to almost doubling the base of fans they could reach... “While we’re disappointed that Diamond Sports Group failed to live up to their contractual agreement with the club, we are taking this opportunity to reimagine the distribution model, remove blackouts on local games, improve the telecast, and expand the reach of Padres games by more than 2 million homes,” MLB Chief Revenue Officer Noah Garden said in a statement. MLB announced Tuesday night that fans in the Padres’ home television market will be able to watch games on DirecTV, Cox, Spectrum, AT&T U-Verse and fubo. MLB will also offer a direct-to-consumer streaming subscription for $19.99 per month or $74.99 for the rest of the season by registering at MLB.TV. This is the first time MLB.TV is offering a DTC (direct-to-consumer) option in a team’s home market and also lifts the blackout rules that were in place for games previously distributed on Bally Sports San Diego. Padres games through Sunday will be available for free with an MLB login at MLB.com, Padres.com and in the MLB apps on mobile and connected devices. MLB said that the new arrangement expands the reach of Padres’ games in its home television market by 189% from approximately 1.13 million homes to approximately 3,264,000." https://apnews.com/article/padres-bally-sports-mlb-906f9f1ad0d66264b92b9cbe0ecd888a https://www.castiron.media/locations/san-diego/padres/ If you want to work selling advertising for MLB teams, here's your unique opportunity That message is 100% PR fluff. They made the decision that lost them the least amount of money in the short term. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 21, 2023 Share Posted December 21, 2023 (edited) 42 minutes ago, Eminor3rd said: The MLB won’t mandate a model that doesn’t permit teams to seek the highest revenue choice for their own market. Those numbers you listed may pass your smell test for what seems reasonable for a fan to pay given the precedents set by the old model, but they only make sense if the ad sales can make up for the loss of carriage fees in the background, and that answer will vary greatly from market to market. The Yankees are not going to forfeit the profits from their enormously successful YES network in order to take the pressure off the Padres to figure out their own s%*#, for example. The “new normal” very well may end up looking something like you suggest, ultimately, if media-viewing habits continue to evolve such that RSNs become universally non-viable, but the league won’t be in a position to mandate a shift. Each team is scrambling to come up with a way to salvage or grow an important revenue stream, and the size and terms of those streams are different enough in each market such that a one-size-fits-all solution will have clear winners and losers among the teams, and the owners in a position to lose won’t stand for it. That message is 100% PR fluff. They made the decision that lost them the least amount of money in the short term. 1) The majority of streaming services won’t survive the ongoing price wars. 2) Advances in AI are going to continue to shake up Hollywood and the entertainment world ingeneral…but nothing can realistically replace live sports in terms of content creation. “Facing tens of billions of dollars in losses, streaming services are flipping over couch cushions to cut costs and scrounge for revenue. They are slashing spending on new content, killing password sharing and running more ads.” 3) MLB and gambling/Las Vegas/Draft Kings/Fan Duel will continue to innovate new profit schemes… 4) Ways to increase profits from Japan and Korea will continue to rise…along with Mexico/MCDF. Edited December 21, 2023 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Side Hit Men Posted December 21, 2023 Share Posted December 21, 2023 5 hours ago, Eminor3rd said: The MLB won’t mandate a model that doesn’t permit teams to seek the highest revenue choice for their own market. Those numbers you listed may pass your smell test for what seems reasonable for a fan to pay given the precedents set by the old model, but they only make sense if the ad sales can make up for the loss of carriage fees in the background, and that answer will vary greatly from market to market. The Yankees are not going to forfeit the profits from their enormously successful YES network in order to take the pressure off the Padres to figure out their own s%*#, for example. The “new normal” very well may end up looking something like you suggest, ultimately, if media-viewing habits continue to evolve such that RSNs become universally non-viable, but the league won’t be in a position to mandate a shift. Each team is scrambling to come up with a way to salvage or grow an important revenue stream, and the size and terms of those streams are different enough in each market such that a one-size-fits-all solution will have clear winners and losers among the teams, and the owners in a position to lose won’t stand for it. I noted this needs to be negotiated. No team or league is going to leave money on the table. The league needs to balance accessibility to reach the maximum viewers / revenue, and also balance the different places as you mention each team is at (some own RSNs, some are much more profitable). That said, both are leaving a lot of money on the table by limiting subscribers with these arcane blackout rules. These made sense 30-40 years ago between media right sales and a large portion of the country dutiful cable TV / satellite subscribers. However, people have finally caught up to me 25 years ago and are cutting the cord in the millions each year, and streaming/maximum subscription avenues are required both for the short and long term health of the game. Its going to take a delicate balancing act. The Yankees must play other MLB teams for the YES! Network to succeed. I would incision some sort of solution with the larger market teams sharing a FMV portion of the RSN revenue (MLB team side, not the networks themselves), and in return that being part of an offset the revenue sharing formula. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted January 5 Author Share Posted January 5 https://awfulannouncing.com/mlb/sinclair-rob-manfred-vendetta-bally-sports-bankruptcy.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted January 17 Author Share Posted January 17 https://awfulannouncing.com/amazon/diamond-sports-announces-amazon-investment-in-comeback-plan.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.