Twins now in grace period with Diamond Sports group

[DJL44]

1 minute ago, wsnydes said:

In this particular case, I have an issue with paying $20/month for essentially just Twins games since I have the other "perks" covered elsewhere anyway.  It'd be more palatable if other local teams were included as well.

If it makes you feel better, I think MLB going directly to customers is going to blow up everything. Cord cutting will accelerate and we will see a far different way to view your favorite team's games. You'll be paying for a season pass for each team you want to watch.

[Brock Beauchamp]

59 minutes ago, CRF said:

Thanks Brock. I hope that's the way it goes down. I just have this feeling that it'll get screwed up here in MN, like everything else seems to.  

It feels like MLB is finally taking strides to fixing their broadcast problems. They literally hired a former network executive to figure out how to end blackouts and resolve some of these decades-old problems. 

[MABB1959]

I will gladly pay $20 a month to see all games.  Had Dish, once I realized Bally's wasn't coming back went with YouTube TV and really like it.  I also have Hulu, Netflix and Paramount+ and AppleTV.  Add an MLB subscription and it is still cheaper than Dish.

So my $162 a month to Dish is still much lower

[Parfigliano]

2 hours ago, CRF said:

What exactly does all this mean? For an old dope like me, this is too complicated and too hard for me to figure out. What channel, or source, will I be able to watch the games on? I get BSN on Spectrum cable now. 

Same as you dont understand any of this.  I watch on DirecTV through cable.  Im a dinosaur.

[ashbury]

I trust Dave St Peter, who I assume will call the shots on this business decision, to get it right.  Just so long as he leaves the communication of the end-result to the public to others in the organization.

[wsnydes]

1 hour ago, DJL44 said:

If it makes you feel better, I think MLB going directly to customers is going to blow up everything. Cord cutting will accelerate and we will see a far different way to view your favorite team's games. You'll be paying for a season pass for each team you want to watch.

No, I agree with that to some extent.  I think the NFL would have a greater likelihood of really blowing everything up, but I do think we're at a stage where things are about to change considerably and very quickly.  I also think sports will be a driving force in that.

[chaderic20]

2 hours ago, wsnydes said:

You're trading a cable and sports package for the ability to watch ONLY Twins games?  I'm a Hulu subscriber and that's my TV, local and live channels and all.  I'm not getting rid of that, so I'd be paying another $20/month on top of my Hulu subscription to watch only the Twins.  That's a non-starter for me.  Adding another channel to a cable package doesn't help me.  

At some point, the growing list of apps that are required to watch specific things you want watch has to hit a breaking point.  When Hulu dropped FSN, my subscription price didn't go do.  I'm still paying for it without the benefit of being able to watch the content.  It's not even about the money.  That isn't a problem.  It's the fact that I got rid of DirecTV because it was really expensive for what I watched.  If I have to keep adding apps at $20/month each, then I'm right back where I started.  At least with the Bally's app, you got access to TWO teams games.    

Sure, if my only choices to watch the Twins in-market are, $150 for cable or $20 for Twins games only, I take the $20 for Twins games only every day and twice on Sunday. That's not even close. They're not even in the same ballpark (if you'll excuse the pun).

And then if I want, I can take the extra $130 and subscribe to any or all of Netflix, Hulu/Disney+/ESPN+, Paramount+, HBO Max, Apple+, and Prime Video. Or swap one or two of those out for another sports team/league streaming service if you want, or to upgrade to all of MLB instead of just the Twins. Or change what combo of services you pay for every few months depending on what sport is in season and what services just released a new season of your favorite show.

Like I said, I don't see how MLB taking these and making them available in-market for ONLY $20 is anything but a dream come true for streamers.

[wsnydes]

3 minutes ago, chaderic20 said:

Sure, if my only choices to watch the Twins in-market are, $150 for cable or $20 for Twins games only, I take the $20 for Twins games only every day and twice on Sunday. That's not even close. They're not even in the same ballpark (if you'll excuse the pun).

And then if I want, I can take the extra $130 and subscribe to any or all of Netflix, Hulu/Disney+/ESPN+, Paramount+, HBO Max, Apple+, and Prime Video. Or swap one or two of those out for another sports team/league streaming service if you want, or to upgrade to all of MLB instead of just the Twins. Or change what combo of services you pay for every few months depending on what sport is in season and what services just released a new season of your favorite show.

Like I said, I don't see how MLB taking these and making them available in-market for ONLY $20 is anything but a dream come true for streamers.

This is my point.  I have all of those too, so I'm right back where you started and still have to get one more thing that is $20/month more in order to watch the one thing I'm interested in.  

It's monthly fee and app fatigue.  And what started as a means to save some cash turns into just a more complicated way of getting the same thing in the end.

[chaderic20]

22 minutes ago, wsnydes said:

This is my point.  I have all of those too, so I'm right back where you started and still have to get one more thing that is $20/month more in order to watch the one thing I'm interested in.  

It's monthly fee and app fatigue.  And what started as a means to save some cash turns into just a more complicated way of getting the same thing in the end.

This is my point, if the Twins are the one thing you're interested in, then this is an amazing deal. Drop your $150 cable, and pay $20 for Twins. Then put the $130 to use for whatever you want, whether that be other streaming services, bump up the college fund for the kids, go out for a nice steak dinner, whatever.

And for those of us who dropped cable years ago, we now a way to watch the Twins without resorting to less-then-legal means. (In the hypothetical situation where MLB takes over Twins from BSN.)

You and I may just have to agree to disagree on this, cuz I see nothing but positives here. If you live in market and want to keep cable, you can, as the MLB produced games will be on multiple cable providers it sounds like. Or if you want, drop your cable and save a ton of money, or put that money to other uses.

[DJL44]

28 minutes ago, wsnydes said:

This is my point.  I have all of those too

Drop a couple. I hope you don't have time to watch that much television.

For years people complained that they had to pay for the whole cable bundle when they really wanted a-la-carte. Sounds like you were happy with the whole cable bundle.

[wsnydes]

31 minutes ago, chaderic20 said:

This is my point, if the Twins are the one thing you're interested in, then this is an amazing deal. Drop your $150 cable, and pay $20 for Twins. Then put the $130 to use for whatever you want, whether that be other streaming services, bump up the college fund for the kids, go out for a nice steak dinner, whatever.

And for those of us who dropped cable years ago, we now a way to watch the Twins without resorting to less-then-legal means. (In the hypothetical situation where MLB takes over Twins from BSN.)

You and I may just have to agree to disagree on this, cuz I see nothing but positives here. If you live in market and want to keep cable, you can, as the MLB produced games will be on multiple cable providers it sounds like. Or if you want, drop your cable and save a ton of money, or put that money to other uses.

I don't have a cable package to drop.  I'm a true streaming household.  I already get what I want, I just can't watch the Twins or Wild.  So for me, it truly is another $20/month in order to watch just the Twins.

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything.  It's obviously what I choose to do.  Your situation could be different.  I'm just saying that I'm not willing to pay another $20/month to just watch Twins games.  I got away from DTV to save money and if I keep adding apps, I'm right back where I started with largely the same content options.  

[wsnydes]

25 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

Drop a couple. I hope you don't have time to watch that much television.

For years people complained that they had to pay for the whole cable bundle when they really wanted a-la-carte. Sounds like you were happy with the whole cable bundle.

I wasn't happy with the cable bundle at all, which is why I got away from DirecTV.  I do alternate some of those apps to a degree, but I have other means of consuming Twins games that I've figured out over the last few years that at $20/month, I don't have enough of an incentive to change. 

I do have a pseudo a-la-carte set up at this point.  I'm getting less overall content, but more of what I want and paying less on top of that.  It may seem like it, but I'm not really complaining about the situation.  I'm perfectly fine with consuming baseball the way I am now, so $20/month isn't a price point that I'm interested in.  That's ultimately what I'm getting at.  Your mileage may, and apparently does, vary.  That's fine.  I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything.

[Florida Flash]

I hate the every friday games on Apple. I am already being gouged by Directv, because the only thing on there I watch are the Twins. Yeah I know Apple claims "It's freeeeee" but then they want my cc number. If it is "free" why do they need my cc number? I have learned a long time ago that when you hear the word "free" think "scam" and you will be right 99.999% of the time. Maybe even more.

[Florida Flash]

1 hour ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

It feels like MLB is finally taking strides to fixing their broadcast problems. They literally hired a former network executive to figure out how to end blackouts and resolve some of these decades-old problems. 

They simply need to hire someone with some common sense who realizes that everyone is not a mega millionaire or willing to pay anything to see a game on TV. They obviously dont have that now. That said, I was talking to a guy from Davenport Iowa who was complaining about MLB.TV. Games blacked out there were: Twins, White Sox, Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals, and Royals. That was about 2-3 years ago. Dont know if that is still the case, but I wont be surprised if it is.

[KirbyHawk75]

17 minutes ago, Florida Flash said:

They simply need to hire someone with some common sense who realizes that everyone is not a mega millionaire or willing to pay anything to see a game on TV. They obviously dont have that now. That said, I was talking to a guy from Davenport Iowa who was complaining about MLB.TV. Games blacked out there were: Twins, White Sox, Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals, and Royals. That was about 2-3 years ago. Dont know if that is still the case, but I wont be surprised if it is.

Still the case.  NBA is pretty bad too.  

[lake_guy]

5 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

If MLB takes over broadcasts, they'll likely do the same thing they did with the Padres: create a new channel that will be available on your current cable package.

Sure hope it's the case it's just a new cable channel.  Streaming works for me but for my 87 year old mom it needs to be cable.  No idea what % of the Twins market my mom falls into but talking to the director of the facility one day she said if the Twins aren't in the cable package the residents will line up outside her office to tell her about it.  lol.

[DJL44]

What I'd like to see is games on over-the-air television again. Put the games on Channel 45; there are plenty of other ways to get reruns of Friends.

[lecroy24fan]

45 minutes ago, Florida Flash said:

I hate the every friday games on Apple. I am already being gouged by Directv, because the only thing on there I watch are the Twins. Yeah I know Apple claims "It's freeeeee" but then they want my cc number. If it is "free" why do they need my cc number? I have learned a long time ago that when you hear the word "free" think "scam" and you will be right 99.999% of the time. Maybe even more.

It's not free this year.

[ashbury]

43 minutes ago, lecroy24fan said:

It's not free this year.

Ah, well then, if you pay good money then it can't possibly be a scam. 😀

[Brock Beauchamp]

5 hours ago, Florida Flash said:

They simply need to hire someone with some common sense who realizes that everyone is not a mega millionaire or willing to pay anything to see a game on TV. They obviously dont have that now. That said, I was talking to a guy from Davenport Iowa who was complaining about MLB.TV. Games blacked out there were: Twins, White Sox, Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals, and Royals. That was about 2-3 years ago. Dont know if that is still the case, but I wont be surprised if it is.

It is still the case and have been for decades. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

On 6/2/2023 at 11:01 AM, DJL44 said:

Actually, you get more than just Padres games. It's also:

"eligible out of market games (subject to national exclusivities), plus access to MiLB and MLB Big Inning"

 

On 6/2/2023 at 11:12 AM, wsnydes said:

I haven't seen what the "eligible out of market games" actually includes though.  I haven't seen that that isn't just games that are already televised nationally anyway.  But that doesn't add a whole lot of value to me personally since I already have an MLB.tv subscription that covers all of that anyway.  

I suspect that "eligible out of market games" -- in the context of the single-team Padres package -- just means that those subscribers can still watch Padres games even if they live/travel outside the Padres market, as long as it's not a national exclusive. (That was the original behavior of the single team packages -- the new Padres arrangement just adds in-market streaming on top of that.)

[stringer bell]

1 minute ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

 

I suspect that "eligible out of market games" -- in the context of the single-team Padres package -- just means that those subscribers can still watch Padres games even if they live/travel outside the Padres market, as long as it's not a national exclusive. (That was the original behavior of the single team packages -- the new Padres arrangement just adds in-market streaming on top of that.)

Thanks, haven't seen anything from you in a long time. If I am correct, welcome back!

[Otto von Ballpark]

Friday June 9 is the next deadline -- the judge issued an order yesterday that Bally/Diamond has 5 business days to pay the Twins (and Guardians and Rangers).

But, don't get your hopes up for an immediate outcome here like Padres. The reason that Bally/Diamond declined to pay the Padres was because Bally/Diamond was losing money on that deal -- the Padres contract called for a higher rights payment. With a lower payment due to the Twins, it's likely that Bally/Diamond makes this payment before the June 9 deadline and kicks this can down the road a little further.

[wsnydes]

3 hours ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

 

I suspect that "eligible out of market games" -- in the context of the single-team Padres package -- just means that those subscribers can still watch Padres games even if they live/travel outside the Padres market, as long as it's not a national exclusive. (That was the original behavior of the single team packages -- the new Padres arrangement just adds in-market streaming on top of that.)

That's my suspicion as well.  That's what all of the context I've seen seems to point to.  My understanding is that you'd get all Padres games plus their televised affiliates games and that's it.

[Jocko87]

On 6/2/2023 at 12:02 PM, wsnydes said:

You're trading a cable and sports package for the ability to watch ONLY Twins games?  I'm a Hulu subscriber and that's my TV, local and live channels and all.  I'm not getting rid of that, so I'd be paying another $20/month on top of my Hulu subscription to watch only the Twins.  That's a non-starter for me.  Adding another channel to a cable package doesn't help me.  

At some point, the growing list of apps that are required to watch specific things you want watch has to hit a breaking point.  When Hulu dropped FSN, my subscription price didn't go do.  I'm still paying for it without the benefit of being able to watch the content.  It's not even about the money.  That isn't a problem.  It's the fact that I got rid of DirecTV because it was really expensive for what I watched.  If I have to keep adding apps at $20/month each, then I'm right back where I started.  At least with the Bally's app, you got access to TWO teams games.    

For some reason Apple TV has the most absurd marketing especially when compared to everything else Apple does. Part of the great hook of the Apple TV device (not service, or maybe it works under the service on a different device but how the hell would anyone know) is that it integrates all the different apps and sign ins.  You can just open the Apple TV app on your Apple TV device (two different things) and watch anything on any app you are signed in on. I presume this is only functional on an Apple device. 

I use Apple TVs as my main streaming devices but don’t really use the app at maximum value.  It’s just intuitive to use individual apps for me but a one stop shop is nice too. I need to mess with this more. The Apple TV device is a really nice piece of hardware for not much more than a Roku etc.

Here’s a basic video describing it, sounds like that functionality is in Hulu and prime as well.

https://youtu.be/U0hpHfDve7Y

Back on the original topic, I’m really curious how this will all break down with the blackouts in Iowa where several teams are dark. 
 

 

[Jocko87]

On 6/2/2023 at 3:50 PM, Florida Flash said:

They simply need to hire someone with some common sense who realizes that everyone is not a mega millionaire or willing to pay anything to see a game on TV. They obviously dont have that now. That said, I was talking to a guy from Davenport Iowa who was complaining about MLB.TV. Games blacked out there were: Twins, White Sox, Cubs, Brewers, Cardinals, and Royals. That was about 2-3 years ago. Dont know if that is still the case, but I wont be surprised if it is.

I think now we can all understand why Iowa football is such a thing despite 3 yards and a cloud of dust offense. 

[Major League Ready]

On 6/2/2023 at 2:31 PM, wsnydes said:

I don't have a cable package to drop.  I'm a true streaming household.  I already get what I want, I just can't watch the Twins or Wild.  So for me, it truly is another $20/month in order to watch just the Twins.

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything.  It's obviously what I choose to do.  Your situation could be different.  I'm just saying that I'm not willing to pay another $20/month to just watch Twins games.  I got away from DTV to save money and if I keep adding apps, I'm right back where I started with largely the same content options.  

It's not worth 75 cents per game?

If the teams/league takes control, they could offer packages just like they do for tickets.  The season pass could be $20/month.  They could also offer 80/40/20 game or per game streaming packages.  Playoffs could be a separate package for these packages and the season packages include playoffs. 

I would be surprised if we didn't see a per game streaming option.  It will probably be $3 instead of 75 cents but still a great option for the occasion viewer who would not otherwise buy the streaming service.  This would be a great way to build viewership as some of these casual viewers are likely to become more frequent viewers.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

On 6/2/2023 at 3:12 PM, heresthething said:

Sure hope it's the case it's just a new cable channel.  Streaming works for me but for my 87 year old mom it needs to be cable.  No idea what % of the Twins market my mom falls into but talking to the director of the facility one day she said if the Twins aren't in the cable package the residents will line up outside her office to tell her about it.  lol.

I bet the age for MLB viewership skews older than other sports.

gotta get mom’s building a firestick and a teenager to run it

[wsnydes]

2 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

It's not worth 75 cents per game?

If the teams/league takes control, they could offer packages just like they do for tickets.  The season pass could be $20/month.  They could also offer 80/40/20 game or per game streaming packages.  Playoffs could be a separate package for these packages and the season packages include playoffs. 

I would be surprised if we didn't see a per game streaming option.  It will probably be $3 instead of 75 cents but still a great option for the occasion viewer who would not otherwise buy the streaming service.  This would be a great way to build viewership as some of these casual viewers are likely to become more frequent viewers.

The odds of me watching every single game are zero.  As it is, I follow about half of the games on the radio because I'm not near a TV in the first place.  So, the cost per game would be higher.

It's simply not worth the cost to me.  I'm not trying to convince anyone otherwise.  

[Major League Ready]

26 minutes ago, wsnydes said:

The odds of me watching every single game are zero.  As it is, I follow about half of the games on the radio because I'm not near a TV in the first place.  So, the cost per game would be higher.

It's simply not worth the cost to me.  I'm not trying to convince anyone otherwise.  

The league is in the infancy of a new business model.  At the moment, they have not developed an offer for those who consume their product in small quantities.  Any business is going to first consider their most devoted customers.   As I said, I think it's a matter of time before they offer single game streaming or small packages.