The Twins Need a Broadcast Partner. It’s Time to Go Local.

[terrydactyls]

48 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

That's why you have the local broadcast partner. Do you really think someone halfway across the country is going to pick the Twins to watch over the other MLB teams?

I know that question is a generalization but there are a significant number of Minnesota natives living all over the country (and world) who might like to watch the Vikings, Twins, or Wild. (I'm not a basketball fan.)  I left in 1982 and only get back occasionally.  Over the years, I subscribed to "single team" packages for the Twins and Wild at a reasonable price.  But those options are no longer available.  I would be happy to pay a subscription fee for the Twins, Wild, and Vikings if I could be assured that all games would be available.  I almost signed up for the Center Ice NHL package (even though I don't really want to watch the Oilers play the Canucks) but all three Wild games that were scheduled during a free trial they offered were not included in the "up to 40 games a week" they advertise.  I'm not paying for games I can't watch.

[Fatbat]

Its sad that anyone can get live streamed anything from across the world but we can’t get local sports streaming.  How can major league franchises not have the ability to show their product to the world in real time. It really shouldn’t be this difficult. 

[Jocko87]

This is a fascinating topic and not just with sports. Content distribution as we have known it is dead. The head is still moving but it’s dead.  What it becomes is anyone’s guess.

The first thing to know is that the advertisements are the money.  We are just looking at cutting out layers that need paid.  The Suns are really on to something here.  The Twins, and most sports teams have most of what they need in place to produce and televise their product direct to consumers.  They would need some beefing up here and there but they already sell advertising and produce video content.

I’ve been wondering with the Hollywood strikes going on why the strikers don’t just make a movie and release it on twitter.  The studios would give them all they want and more.  Clooney, Affleck, Johansson and Tyler Perry just offered $150m  deal to help fix the strike, which while a generous offer doesn’t fix the real issues behind the strike.  I promise those four have a script they love but can’t get a studio to take it out of their Marvel budget to make.  If they star in it, with all the other trades that are striking helping to make it, it makes over $500m.  It breaks the system, but if they want to win it’s the way to go.  Content creators are the value, distribution systems are changing.

The Twins are content creators.  Their fan base is beyond annoyed with how hard it is to watch the product.  I’m glad I live out of the blackout area, I don’t have to make the choice of not watching or being a felon.

The over the air digital television is actually quite good and would blanket the cities with coverage. Say it was on channel 12 but it would actually be channel 12.5 which doesn’t preempt CSI Duluth or whatever the network thinks is content.  Twins produced and sold advertising, win win.  It’s tougher in the rural areas but that is getting better all the time and you could still have distribution with local cable as well.  12.5 could just be a Twins channel, run the game three/four times. Grandpa will watch the one that best matches his schedule.

The ultimate goal, for me, would be to get attendance back to the 3 million range instead of 2 million.  They seem proud of the 2 million but they also know how much 3 million is worth.  Sustained attendance at that level makes up for a bunch of Bally money.  To do that, your local market needs energized and easy access.  The blackout in western North Dakota isn’t driving a lick of attendance.

[lecroy24fan]

Scripps owns the local ION affiliate (used to be KXLI 41 back in the old days). That's who the Phoenix teams went with so I think it is very likely they end up on there. 

 

As mentioned previously there is 45, which is basically an extension of KSTP 5 and that would also gain them a lot of coverage in outstate Minnesota. My 29 was also mentioned and that is now FOX 9+ so that is an option. The CW maybe but they've also been adding golf, college football, and are possibly going after an NBA package so i don't know that it is a good fit. 

[Fire Dan Gladden]

Does everyone here realize that a subscription to MLBtv does us no good?  MLBtv is still restricted by the regional blackout rules.  That is the whole problem.

A national television/streaming contract is the only way to ensure the long term viability of baseball.  Do you think Packers or Bills would survive without a national NFL contract?

[Craig Arko]

PBS.

[ashbury]

2 hours ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

Does everyone here realize that a subscription to MLBtv does us no good?  MLBtv is still restricted by the regional blackout rules.

Rules which may be about to go away if there is no RSN holding a contract with language specifying territorial rights?

[Brock Beauchamp]

20 minutes ago, ashbury said:

Rules which may be about to go away if there is no RSN holding a contract with language specifying territorial rights?

MLB hired someone whose goal is to end blackouts. I suspect there's a near-zero chance teams are going to happily jump into a new contract with the same old blackout rules. As contracts expire, I expect to see the anti-blackout movement snowball.

As for the article itself, baseball has the luxury of being able to straddle both worlds. They can easily sign a subscriber deal that earns them additional money while also keeping free Sunday games on broadcast television.

If you have 162 games to play with, losing one out of six to increase your footprint with local free broadcasts might be a decent path forward.

[Fire Dan Gladden]

12 hours ago, ashbury said:

Rules which may be about to go away if there is no RSN holding a contract with language specifying territorial rights?

If my memory serves, those rights are held by the teams, not the broadcasters.  Revisit the spat between the Orioles and Nationals from a few years back.

The big issue with regional broadcasting is that the big cities stay richer and the smaller cities suffer.  The bigger cities are not willing to give up that type of income, that financial advantage  for the greater good of the league.  Unlike NFL and NBA which grew on the back of national broadcast deals benefiting the entire league as a whole, baseball has always been about their region.  This is probably the biggest issue facing baseball today that does not get enough press.   

[DJL44]

7 minutes ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

If my memory serves, those rights are held by the teams, not the broadcasters.  Revisit the spat between the Orioles and Nationals from a few years back.

The big issue with regional broadcasting is that the big cities stay richer and the smaller cities suffer.  The bigger cities are not willing to give up that type of income, that financial advantage  for the greater good of the league.  Unlike NFL and NBA which grew on the back of national broadcast deals benefiting the entire league as a whole, baseball has always been about their region.  This is probably the biggest issue facing baseball today that does not get enough press.   

Baseball viewership is very regional. People in Minnesota are much more likely to watch the Twins than an MLB game featuring two other teams. The NFL doesn't have as much drop off.

But people DO watch if they can watch their local team. Local baseball broadcasts, even with the rules restricting viewership, are routinely the highest rated programs during the summer. If MLB focuses on growing their audience they could get 4-5x the viewers. This will only help attendance and TV ratings for the MLB playoffs.

They've been eating their seed corn for years. Now it's time to plant some of it.

[Fire Dan Gladden]

2 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

Baseball viewership is very regional. People in Minnesota are much more likely to watch the Twins than an MLB game featuring two other teams. The NFL doesn't have as much drop off.

But people DO watch if they can watch their local team. Local baseball broadcasts, even with the rules restricting viewership, are routinely the highest rated programs during the summer. If MLB focuses on growing their audience they could get 4-5x the viewers. This will only help attendance and TV ratings for the MLB playoffs.

They've been eating their seed corn for years. Now it's time to plant some of it.

I agree with the regional viewership statement because it has always been that way.  Baseball does not promote the league as a whole, the teams are generally left to fend for themselves.  Baseball is more a collection of independent contractors compared to NFL/NBA.  They need to pivot and start using a more national model or the smaller teams will eventually die. 

[SockNet]

I would love to see one mid-week night game on local TV, Fox 9+ or 45 or somthing like that (streaming and everything else, sure). Broadcast in the five state area (Twins Territory). I think this would be enough to generate interest and get newer and younger fans to the Twins.

If more games are televised, say one a series, now you grow MLB fans because those new Twins fans see not only the Twins but all other 29 teams once or twince a year. 

One free game a week I think would grow base by saciating the casual fan and wetting the appetite for those who will go find and pay for it. I don't think cramming streaming down ones throat through one pay service or another is the way to go w/o a minimalist free option.

On the side, I'm a big radio fan and think more could be done to promote that medium.

[TopGunn#22]

I'll weigh in on this as a former Hubbard Broadcasting Sales Manager in Rochester.  The problem with sub-channels are that very few of them allow you to sell advertising on them.  They're what is called "Pass-Through."  This-TV is a good example.  We were not allowed to sell advertising on it with 2 exceptions:  The Prep Bowl and the MSHSL Winter Tournaments for Boys & Girls Hockey and Basketball.  They are each short term commitments.  A two day football tournament and for the winter, one two day tournament, two 3-day tournaments and the 4-day Boys Hockey tournament.  And the ONLY reason we were able to sell ads in the Tournaments was because it was grandfathered into our original deal.

Not just the Twins, but MLB has a chance to come up with a model that would be cutting edge with sports.  As a kid growing up, I would have loved to see as many games as I could of Jerry West and the Lakers, of Sandy Koufax or Bob Gibson pitching, of Roberto Clemente hitting.  Kids will grow up being Twins fans but they may have other "favorite" players on other teams.  Julio Rodriguez, Corbin Carroll, or maybe Jackson Holiday.    

This is "somewhat" present with MLB Network, but it's still just a smidge better than the old "Game of the Week."  The old broadcast TV models were changed by cable, but cable is crumbling before our eyes.  We might see any of the cable providers in the near future just like we saw newspapers start to die off.  We have a saying in TV "Content is King."  Well, the Twins (and all MLB teams) are CONTENT providers.  

Could this be an opportunity to bring some kind of parity of revenue to MLB?  

[Whitey333]

It's too bad because many of us have been unable to watch the Twins, Wild, Timberwolves etc for the past couple of years already.  Unless you go to a bar or something.  When cable, got way too expensive and the streaming options came at a much cheaper price, I thought it was great.  Until of course those streaming services stopped carrying Bally Sports.  Now after going through 3 streaming services that all dropped Bally Sports we've been left holding the bag.  Thousands of us haven't had access to the local sports for 2-3 years. The time is now to get a deal with local TV that people have affordable access to watch.

[lunemann]

21 hours ago, DJL44 said:

They all have sub-channels showing 30 year old reruns that would work for broadcasting the Twins. Channel 45 would be a great fit for Twins games.

Isn't Ch 45 owned by Sinclair? The same parent company of Bally which I'm guessing would be a non-starter.

[ashbury]

1 hour ago, Fire Dan Gladden said:

If my memory serves, those rights are held by the teams, not the broadcasters.  Revisit the spat between the Orioles and Nationals from a few years back.

Probably so.  I think it's true that every square inch of the continental US (not sure about AK and HI) is divided into territories for teams.  But I would bet that this was done precisely for the purpose of fostering contracts with the RSNs etc., so that the latter have assurance that the dollars they pay aren't going to be undercut by competition from another market.  In that sense, the broadcasters hold certain rights.  The teams hold the underlying rights but can't just abrogate a contract willy nilly.  If MLB as a whole decides that their strategy is to move on from RSNs then they can decide market by market when to drop the exclusivity when those contracts expire (or are violated).

[Don't Feed the Greed Guy]

Two thoughts:

1) Drop the blackout on the MLB app for season ticket holders. 

2) Partner with the St. Paul Saints on local broadcasts when schedules don't conflict. 

Good conversation.

[Trov]

The Twins being a free agent for broadcasting they could do a wide range of things.  Part of the issue though is still what is going on with Bally.  When the Twins tried to depart from Fox Sports, the prior cable broadcasting partner, to start their own.  They were undermined by Fox Sports by making Comcast or then Turner now Spectrum cable carriers to pay more for Fox programing, not just Fox Sports, if they picked up Victory Sports.  

The Bally may be going under could allow MLB to fully sever from someone like that, but if Bally stays around and tries to force hands it could be an issue.  There is a reason teams went with cable broadcasting over just local, most likely they were getting paid more.  However, if Bally, or another cable partner cannot match what a local can do, the money is in local.  

Someone raised how much national broadcasting would get pushed if a local network tried to pick them up?  Most likely it would be someone like Hubbard and on Channel 45 like they show some saints on.  With the newer, well within like last 10 plus years, digital channels any local could pick it up, I know Kare has an all weather channel local, so really we would not have to worry about the local broadcast going against the national things. 

I am interested to see what all happens, but just hope I will get to keep watching. 

[Major League Ready]

MLB hired notable industry executives to come up with a solution, right?  I would hope they are supporting all of the teams work toward a distribution plan that maximizes availability.  I see this as an opportunity to significantly increase the number of households that can view games at a reasonable price.  The best way to do that is a medium that is widely available.  Obviously, doubling the viewers ship increases the advertising dollars and reduces the fees required to maintain broadcast revenue.  This should be a great opportunity for baseball to increase availability.  

[TwinsFan98]

9 hours ago, lunemann said:

Isn't Ch 45 owned by Sinclair? The same parent company of Bally which I'm guessing would be a non-starter.

45 is owned by Hubbard Broadcasting, not Sinclair.

[Jocko87]

10 hours ago, TopGunn#22 said:

I'll weigh in on this as a former Hubbard Broadcasting Sales Manager in Rochester.  The problem with sub-channels are that very few of them allow you to sell advertising on them.  They're what is called "Pass-Through."  This-TV is a good example.  We were not allowed to sell advertising on it with 2 exceptions:  The Prep Bowl and the MSHSL Winter Tournaments for Boys & Girls Hockey and Basketball.  They are each short term commitments.  A two day football tournament and for the winter, one two day tournament, two 3-day tournaments and the 4-day Boys Hockey tournament.  And the ONLY reason we were able to sell ads in the Tournaments was because it was grandfathered into our original deal.

Not just the Twins, but MLB has a chance to come up with a model that would be cutting edge with sports.  As a kid growing up, I would have loved to see as many games as I could of Jerry West and the Lakers, of Sandy Koufax or Bob Gibson pitching, of Roberto Clemente hitting.  Kids will grow up being Twins fans but they may have other "favorite" players on other teams.  Julio Rodriguez, Corbin Carroll, or maybe Jackson Holiday.    

This is "somewhat" present with MLB Network, but it's still just a smidge better than the old "Game of the Week."  The old broadcast TV models were changed by cable, but cable is crumbling before our eyes.  We might see any of the cable providers in the near future just like we saw newspapers start to die off.  We have a saying in TV "Content is King."  Well, the Twins (and all MLB teams) are CONTENT providers.  

Could this be an opportunity to bring some kind of parity of revenue to MLB?  

Very interesting, and good context. Obviously an advertisement exception can be made as there is some precedent. I was also curious if they just never cut to commercial? Sounds crazy but hear me out. The time between innings becomes a cutaway feature piece sponsored by Joe Mauer Buick etc and the Twins now control the ad flow front to back.

Just like the signs on the walls aren't for the people at the game but for the repeat exposure on the TV. It would make the park look like the Astros Nascar field but getting over the air broadcasts might be worth it.

[dcswede]

On 10/25/2023 at 12:29 PM, Karbo said:

I don't know which local broadcaster would be able to handle the schedule. All 4 of the local majors (4,5,9,11) are network channels and I'm pretty sure the networks (NBC,ABC.CBS,FOX) would not be trilled having their programs pre-empted.

Why not PBS? Seriously. TPT has virtually zero ratings. And as long as they don't interrupt games for pledge drives (as most PBS stations do with the only programming they have that people actually want to watch), it might be a good, statewide solution.

[Karbo]

11 hours ago, dcswede said:

Why not PBS? Seriously. TPT has virtually zero ratings. And as long as they don't interrupt games for pledge drives (as most PBS stations do with the only programming they have that people actually want to watch), it might be a good, statewide solution.

I just can't see that happening.

[DJL44]

11 hours ago, dcswede said:

Why not PBS? Seriously. TPT has virtually zero ratings. And as long as they don't interrupt games for pledge drives (as most PBS stations do with the only programming they have that people actually want to watch), it might be a good, statewide solution.

PBS is not going to ask people for money to pay for the rights to show the Twins. Baseball is going to be on television in order to sell advertising.

I watch a lot of TPT (nature, biography and history) and the pledge drive programming is mostly terrible.

[TopGunn#22]

Good point Jocko.  We are in somewhat uncharted territory and it probably needs some "outside the box" thinking.  My son sent me a 3 hour podcast he had listened to that I finally got around to listening to myself last night while I watch Football and Basketball on mute.  It was Lex Fridman interviewing Jared Kushner. 

They were discussing how Kushner was able to broker the Abraham Peace Accords.  Kushner said something to the effect of "Long standing problems need a novel approach.  If you approach the problem in the 'traditional' manner, you will ultimately fail like everyone else did.  That's why the problem itself has become a "longstanding' problem."  Kushner, while having a decent understanding of the prevailing issues in the middle east approached the parties involved with a pretty common sense idea.  What was the most important concern they each had if a peace deal came to pass?  And then he went about making sure the primary concern of each party involved was addressed.  Remarkably, no one had ever approached it that way.  

So there certainly needs to be some outside the box thinking.  Someone has already pointed out that Hubbard Broadcasting owns Channel 45 (KSTC).  As a true independent station they have zero programming obligations like the network stations do.  In this case, the simplest solution would be for KSTC to take on the Twins games.  Here's the issue with BASEBALL:  It's a MASSIVE programming commitment.   162 games is a LOT of programming time.  Regional sports channels build their programming around the baseball games.  Hubbard would have to juggle the programming they've already put into place and have invested time, talent and treasure into promoting by taking on that massive programming burden.

But it would be worth the risk.  KSTC could see a tremendous jump in viewers to their station during the Twins season.  Maybe those viewers hang around and watch the late news after the Twins game is over.  That would cover the metro area, but Hubbard would need to put together a Twins network that could deliver games in some way to greater Minnesota as well as the upper midwest.  THAT is a HUGE challenge if approached the "traditional" way.  But Hubbard, thru KSTC channel 45 is the best place to start.  They already deliver the Prep Bowl and MSHSL Winter Tournaments statewide.  How would they tie in opportunities for the upper midwest?  

[DJL44]

1 hour ago, TopGunn#22 said:

But it would be worth the risk.  KSTC could see a tremendous jump in viewers to their station during the Twins season.  Maybe those viewers hang around and watch the late news after the Twins game is over.  That would cover the metro area, but Hubbard would need to put together a Twins network that could deliver games in some way to greater Minnesota as well as the upper midwest.  THAT is a HUGE challenge if approached the "traditional" way.  But Hubbard, thru KSTC channel 45 is the best place to start.  They already deliver the Prep Bowl and MSHSL Winter Tournaments statewide.  How would they tie in opportunities for the upper midwest?  

Hubbard owns broadcast stations in Rochester and Duluth. It's relatively easy for cable stations anywhere in the state of MN to add channel 45 to their basic packages.

I watched several Saints games on the CW network this summer. They're owned by Sinclair. A less satisfactory compromise would be to show some Twins games locally on the CW and all of them on BSN.

Outside of that, the solution is to end blackouts on MLB.tv. That would make Twins games available for the upper midwest at a much lower cost than the cable package currently required to see Twins games. Streaming is the solution for everyone not in the broadcast area. It makes the TV package less lucrative but the Twins should be more concerned with increasing viewership than making every last cent off this next contract.