Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: mlb.tv part II

  1. #1
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    240
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    mlb.tv part II

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

    http://sports.yahoo.com/news/mlb%E2%...dark-ages.html

  2. #2
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,093
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    48
    Liked 1,581 Times in 822 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    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. #3
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    576
    Like
    0
    Liked 15 Times in 10 Posts
    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. #4
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    576
    Like
    0
    Liked 15 Times in 10 Posts
    Oops didn't realize the article talked about Iowa already.

  5. #5
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,093
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    48
    Liked 1,581 Times in 822 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by edavis0308 View Post
    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. #6
    Senior Member All-Star IdahoPilgrim's Avatar
    Posts
    2,421
    Like
    2
    Liked 10 Times in 8 Posts
    Blog Entries
    26
    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. #7
    Owner MVP Brock Beauchamp's Avatar
    Posts
    8,093
    Twitter
    @rocketpig76
    Like
    48
    Liked 1,581 Times in 822 Posts
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by sbknudson View Post
    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.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.