Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

The Store

Photo

mlb.tv part II

  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Curt

Curt

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 240 posts

Posted 23 June 2012 - 11:17 AM

Jeff Passen dissects MLB's blackout policy and reports on a lawsuit challenging it.

http://sports.yahoo....-dark-ages.html

#2 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,506 posts

Posted 24 June 2012 - 02:13 PM

Interesting. I have no idea what kind of legal ground MLB is on with blackout restrictions but I know I'd love to see it done away with... Not that there aren't workarounds to avoid it in the first place but it's kind of a pain in the ass to do it every time a game is blacked out.

#3 edavis0308

edavis0308

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 576 posts

Posted 24 June 2012 - 02:19 PM

Being in Iowa, I am in the blackout zone for the twins, royals, cardinals, brewers, cubs, and white Sox. Which is totally fair. Also, im still trying to figure out why half my MLB network games get blacked out when neither team is even in the Midwest.

#4 edavis0308

edavis0308

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 576 posts

Posted 24 June 2012 - 02:22 PM

Oops didn't realize the article talked about Iowa already.

#5 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,506 posts

Posted 24 June 2012 - 02:25 PM

Being in Iowa, I am in the blackout zone for the twins, royals, cardinals, brewers, cubs, and white Sox. Which is totally fair. Also, im still trying to figure out why half my MLB network games get blacked out when neither team is even in the Midwest.


When it comes to the financial powerhouse that is Iowa, it's better safe than sorry. You can't let any of the midwest teams get the upper hand by showing their games to an additional 40 people.

#6 IdahoPilgrim

IdahoPilgrim

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,424 posts

Posted 24 June 2012 - 02:28 PM

Are we sure this will lead to more access? If the RSNs don't have exclusivity, they offer a lower bid for local rights. It then comes down to whether the amount they (MLB clubs) lose collectively is more than or less than what they get from mlb.tv. If it's more than what mlb.tv can provide, they'll just axe the service completely. There is no constitutional right to watch baseball over the internet.

#7 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,506 posts

Posted 24 June 2012 - 02:38 PM

Are we sure this will lead to more access? If the RSNs don't have exclusivity, they offer a lower bid for local rights. It then comes down to whether the amount they (MLB clubs) lose collectively is more than or less than what they get from mlb.tv. If it's more than what mlb.tv can provide, they'll just axe the service completely. There is no constitutional right to watch baseball over the internet.


They wouldn't axe the service. It would be a massive mistake. That's where the future is going and MLBAM is smart enough to know that. They might increase the price or do any number of things but they won't kill the service.