Amazon and Twins baseball anyone?

[old nurse]

https://www.axios.com/2023/12/18/amazon-diamond-sports-group

A lot would have to depend on the bankruptcy judge. 

Amazon Prime is 14.99 a month. It is hard to say how much Amazon would have to raise their price to pay for it 

[howeda7]

I doubt this will happen in time for 2024. It seems they are likely to go back to regular Bally's for a year and offer streaming either via MLB or Bally's.

I have to imagine Amazon would offer this as an add-on/stand alone. The majority of Prime Members aren't going to want to pay for it.

If Twins go this route, I think it's extremely important they go back to having a package of over the air games on local TV (it's important they do this regardless.) There is a fairly large subset of fans who either can't (not reliable enough internet) or won't pay for this via streaming. They need to reach those fans if they ever want to see them a ticket or a t-shirt.

[2wins87]

The Axios article doesn't have a whole lot of info, there is a bit more info here for those who subscribe: https://theathletic.com/5149762/2023/12/19/amazon-diamond-sports-investment/

Crucially, there are only 5 teams for whom Diamond group actually has digital (streaming) rights and that doesn't include the Twins. (The Twins' already declined to renew their contract with Diamond, so they will no longer be affected by any sort of bankruptcy resolution). 

That doesn't preclude the Twins from negotiating streaming rights with Amazon (or with Bally's after Amazon takes an ownership stake) on their own or collectively with other teams, but that kind of feels unlikely to me in the near term.

I also kind of doubt that Amazon would raise their prime price immediately if a deal goes through.  They generate tons of cash and would be probably be happy to use sports streaming as a loss leader if it drove new subscribers to their prime bundle.  Although I could also see it as an add on with some sort of pricing benefit available to prime members, like they already do with Audible and a few other services.  Honestly a big company like Amazon with tons of cash to burn obtaining sports streaming rights would probably be one of the more consumer friendly outcomes for streamers, at least in the near term.  The impression I get from the article and other discussions around this topic are that the streaming fees that teams get are much much much smaller than the cable fees though, so I'm not sure how enthusiastic teams will be about being on Amazon.

Most likely this deal won't effect the Twins in any way next year, but it will be something to keep an eye on for sure.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

On 12/19/2023 at 2:11 PM, old nurse said:

https://www.axios.com/2023/12/18/amazon-diamond-sports-group

A lot would have to depend on the bankruptcy judge. 

Amazon Prime is 14.99 a month. It is hard to say how much Amazon would have to raise their price to pay for it 

Edit: Ninja’d! Amazon pays $1b per year for 17 NFL games per year and didn’t raise the rates for prime. It’s been at the $120 per year annual rate for several years prior to its NFL deal.

Amazon uses the streaming service as a loss leader to keep the subscribers buying stuff online.

the Twins last broadcast deal was $54m per year, if Amazon paid that per team for all 30 teams it would be $1.6b. Likely a deal to stream every mlb game might be more than that because the Yankees and Dodgers (and some others) would be worth more… but $2b or 3, isn’t exactly a killer when YTD operating income through q3 was in excess of $22b

sports are great for advertising because it’s live, it’s also great for subscriber retention because fans are loyal

 

 

[Dave Borton]

On 12/19/2023 at 4:06 PM, 2wins87 said:

...Amazon ....generates tons of cash and would be probably be happy to use sports streaming as a loss leader if it drove new subscribers to their prime bundle.  ..  Honestly a big company like Amazon with tons of cash to burn obtaining sports streaming rights would probably be one of the more consumer friendly outcomes for streamers, at least in the near term.

Good observations (from an Amazon stock holder).

[Richie the Rally Goat]

10 hours ago, davidborton said:

Good observations (from an Amazon stock holder).

Hopefully you purchased in 1997

[Parfigliano]

41 minutes ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Hopefully you purchased in 1997

2003 here.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

1 hour ago, Parfigliano said:

2003 here.

Good for you!

[Eris]

https://nypost.com/2024/01/17/business/amazon-poised-to-save-bankrupt-diamond-sports-with-100m-deal-to-stream-five-mlb-teams-sources/
 

this works out to 20 million per team. 

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

1 hour ago, Eris said:

https://nypost.com/2024/01/17/business/amazon-poised-to-save-bankrupt-diamond-sports-with-100m-deal-to-stream-five-mlb-teams-sources/
 

this works out to 20 million per team. 

Is this article extremely lazy or am I missing something.  It says Amazon with Bally's would have the right to stream the Twins broadcast for this year, and would be part of the $100 million.  The Twins deal expired.  Did something else occur that I am not aware of?   

Looking further think it should be Brewers not the Twins.  Not sure how you could mess up an article that bad.  

[Vanimal46]

1 hour ago, Eris said:

https://nypost.com/2024/01/17/business/amazon-poised-to-save-bankrupt-diamond-sports-with-100m-deal-to-stream-five-mlb-teams-sources/
 

this works out to 20 million per team. 

I’m amazed how badly this was handled by MLB. 

[umterp23]

https://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/39327963/amazon-invest-diamond-sports-part-bankruptcy-deal

ESPN's article

[Brock Beauchamp]

26 minutes ago, Hawkeye Bean Counter said:

Is this article extremely lazy or am I missing something.  It says Amazon with Bally's would have the right to stream the Twins broadcast for this year, and would be part of the $100 million.  The Twins deal expired.  Did something else occur that I am not aware of?   

Looking further think it should be Brewers not the Twins.  Not sure how you could mess up an article that bad.  

Yep, came in to say they screwed up and swapped the Brewers and Twins.

[4twinsJA]

What I don't understand is if rights to broadcast Twins games is so lucrative that deserved a 50M annual fee. Why doesn't MLB just take over broadcasts?

[DJL44]

This overall negotiation between Diamond, Amazon and MLB is clearly slowing down the Twins TV negotiations. In the end it makes sense to have one home for cable/satellite and another for streaming. If Amazon Prime is the home for MLB streaming for most teams I'd be fine with that.

[DJL44]

7 minutes ago, 4twinsJA said:

What I don't understand is if rights to broadcast Twins games is so lucrative that deserved a 50M annual fee. Why doesn't MLB just take over broadcasts?

That's still an option. MLB could broadcast games on MLB Network and MLB.tv. They can probably still get more money as a tent pole program as the major streamers fight for audience. The streamer in that case isn't looking to turn a profit on baseball games but instead use that audience to market their other offerings. I would imagine MLB games on Amazon Prime would feature a lot of ads for other Amazon products.

[nicksaviking]

5 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

That's still an option. MLB could broadcast games on MLB Network and MLB.tv. They can probably still get more money as a tent pole program as the major streamers fight for audience. The streamer in that case isn't looking to turn a profit on baseball games but instead use that audience to market their other offerings. I would imagine MLB games on Amazon Prime would feature a lot of ads for other Amazon products.

Wait, what about Kars for Kids and Meshbesher and Spence? What would be the point of tuning into a Twins game without those gems.

[BK432]

2 minutes ago, 4twinsJA said:

What I don't understand is if rights to broadcast Twins games is so lucrative that deserved a 50M annual fee. Why doesn't MLB just take over broadcasts?

You answered your own question, I think. Just because Diamond was paying $50M doesn't mean it was worth $50M. There's a reason they're bankrupt now.

[DJL44]

16 minutes ago, BK432 said:

You answered your own question, I think. Just because Diamond was paying $50M doesn't mean it was worth $50M. There's a reason they're bankrupt now.

Part of that reason was the $500M Sinclair took from them that is now being paid back in a legal settlement.

[clone52]

1 hour ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Yep, came in to say they screwed up and swapped the Brewers and Twins.

 

I was wrong.

[Eris]

46 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

This overall negotiation between Diamond, Amazon and MLB is clearly slowing down the Twins TV negotiations. In the end it makes sense to have one home for cable/satellite and another for streaming. If Amazon Prime is the home for MLB streaming for most teams I'd be fine with that.

I am somewhat confused by the whole process. According to the article, Amazon’s original agreement with Diamond was for streaming 11 teams. But MLB mixed that. Presumably this is because MLB thinks they can make more money streaming the other 6. 
 

Doesn’t then Amazon’s streaming service compete with MLBs At Bat. I live in NJ and being able to watch the Twins on Amazon reduces my willingness to pay for At Bat (unless Amazon’s streaming rights are restricted to a specific geographic region)

[Hawkeye Bean Counter]

Even still, this shows you the streaming rights are worth at least $20 million for the Twins, and then you have the broadcast fees on top.   I think you get awfully close to that $50 million area.   I don't think the reduction is going to be as much as people feared.  

[BK432]

24 minutes ago, Eris said:

I am somewhat confused by the whole process. According to the article, Amazon’s original agreement with Diamond was for streaming 11 teams. But MLB mixed that. Presumably this is because MLB thinks they can make more money streaming the other 6. 
 

Doesn’t then Amazon’s streaming service compete with MLBs At Bat. I live in NJ and being able to watch the Twins on Amazon reduces my willingness to pay for At Bat (unless Amazon’s streaming rights are restricted to a specific geographic region)

that's the way I read it. You can stream home teams via Amazon, or watch on RSN. You still need At Bat to watch out of market.

[Cris E]

“It will use its Prime Video platform to offer direct-to-consumer access to MLB, NBA and NHL games, including pre-game and post-game content of its various RSNs on a local basis.”

So that Local Basis weaselry could mean just about anything. Are they keeping blackouts, selling this to fill in the blackouts in MLB.TV, only selling it locally or what? And for how long? Is this a new model or a one year bridge to a new MLB plan?  The dollars don't indicate that this will replace the cable money, so it's can't be forever, but the equity stake by Amazon says they think there will be a longer term for this deal.  

This is a mess, but at least the Twins are in a spot to negotiate their own road out of it with a clear eye to what is coming from MLB next year. They may be the bellweather of that plan, so we'll have to wait to see what they sign for this season. Time's a wasting with only a month to spring training, so expect something in the next six weeks so they can show the ST games.

[BK432]

So long as Amazon is open to it, I don't see why the Twins wouldn't just glom on to this for 1 year. Then you can negotiate with half the league next offseason collectively.

[BK432]

19 minutes ago, Cris E said:

“It will use its Prime Video platform to offer direct-to-consumer access to MLB, NBA and NHL games, including pre-game and post-game content of its various RSNs on a local basis.”

So that Local Basis weaselry could mean just about anything. Are they keeping blackouts, selling this to fill in the blackouts in MLB.TV, only selling it locally or what? And for how long? Is this a new model or a one year bridge to a new MLB plan?  The dollars don't indicate that this will replace the cable money, so it's can't be forever, but the equity stake by Amazon says they think there will be a longer term for this deal.  

This is a mess, but at least the Twins are in a spot to negotiate their own road out of it with a clear eye to what is coming from MLB next year. They may be the bellweather of that plan, so we'll have to wait to see what they sign for this season. Time's a wasting with only a month to spring training, so expect something in the next six weeks so they can show the ST games.

While I agree it's not entirely clear, I read this as an end to local blackouts. If you're in "Twins Territory" and are a Prime subscriber, you can stream the team's games there. It will not give you access to all MLB games, only those available to you locally.

If I'm right, and if the Twins can get included in this plan, this is a big win for most of us. For me personally, I already pay for Prime and MLB.tv, so it will allow me to FINALLY cancel DirecTV.

As for the cable money, that ship has sailed. They won't get all that back. As for what the future holds, we shall see.

[Cris E]

@BK432 I think you're being too optimistic here. Take another look at that "Pricing and availability will be announced at a later date" and tell me Directv will just let MLB give away their games. Blackouts are very valuable and they're priced into a lot of other deals that are not open to renegotiation right now.  You think you're the only one who sees this as a direct step towards dropping them and they don't want a piece of this?  It's a complicated mess and I don't feel like enough parties are at the table right now to make a full change, so most of the stuff for 2024 will be similar to 2023.

[DJL44]

9 minutes ago, Cris E said:

@BK432 I think you're being too optimistic here. Take another look at that "Pricing and availability will be announced at a later date" and tell me Directv will just let MLB give away their games.

DirectTV doesn't have any Twins games at the moment. If the games aren't exclusive, they will pay Diamond Sports less to air them.

How much is that exclusivity worth? $10M? The Twins could take the Brewers TV deal, subtract $10M and call it done for this season.

[BK432]

1 hour ago, Cris E said:

@BK432 I think you're being too optimistic here. Take another look at that "Pricing and availability will be announced at a later date" and tell me Directv will just let MLB give away their games. Blackouts are very valuable and they're priced into a lot of other deals that are not open to renegotiation right now.  You think you're the only one who sees this as a direct step towards dropping them and they don't want a piece of this?  It's a complicated mess and I don't feel like enough parties are at the table right now to make a full change, so most of the stuff for 2024 will be similar to 2023.

I'm happy to await the details here, but I can't imagine MLB agreeing to anything without eliminating the local blackout. They have been full-throated about the desire to get rid of it.

[chpettit19]

Really complicated situation it looks like. NBA and NHL had already agreed to a plan that would've ended all Diamond Sports contracts after this season and MLB was working on a similar deal but now Amazon has swooped in and maybe changed the plans for all 3 leagues and would keep in place all existing contracts until they were scheduled to end. Whole lot of moving parts there. Hope they get it finalized soon so fans know where they can watch the Twins this year. We'll see what comes out after the hearing today.