Still can't watch the Twins - I can't let this go.

[howeda7]

On 5/30/2024 at 10:20 AM, Craig Arko said:

What are the chances the Twins (and other teams) have been instructed by the league office to keep mum?

Possible, but really it's more likely there's nothing much they can do/say at the moment. They signed the deal they signed. They can't get out of it unless the bankruptcy court voids it (unlikely). It is what it is for the rest of this season. The Twins have very little say. They made their bed and are being forced to lie in it. If they come back yet again in 2025 they will have no one else to blame.

[MN Brian]

On 5/29/2024 at 10:07 AM, mrtwinsfan said:

V.P.N.  = NO ISSUES

I wouldn't agree.  I tried this last year.  I'm a very technical guy.  Setting things up to watch on my tv without redirecting all my internet traffic was fine, but a pain.  But MLB.tv was very aggressive about blacklisting the VPN's and it turned into a big cat & mouse game.  When I want to watch the game, I just want to sit down and watch it.  And you still needed to pay for the MLB.tv subscription, the VPN subscription (I wouldn't use a freebie), & potentially hardware depending on your set-up.  While the Fubo stream is about twice the cost for the season, it's worth it so far for ease of use.  Would be different if I was still young and my time was worth less.

So, can a VPN work?  Certainly.  No issues?  Don't buy it!

[Major League Ready]

18 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

These 2 entities were never going to work something out. Excellent business decision, Dave St Peter and the Pohlads!

I am wondering how all of the people who had coverage would have felt about being left high and dry had they dropped Bally's.  Another broadcast company was not going to sign a contract without exclusive rights.  Therefore, the alternative was to force everyone to buy a streaming service in addition to whatever service (ie. Comcast) that they were already paying for.  

Reasonable (not perfect) alternatives exist for those who opted not to pay for Comcast / DirecTV, etc.  Granted eliminating blackouts for in market games would have made those alternatives better but I doubt a large percentage of those people unwilling to pay $139/year for out of market games were going to sign up for a package of all games, given that package was going to be considerably more.  Perhaps not double but like somewhere around $240 and that's just the Twins.

For most people the solution needs to address multiple sports.  There are already streaming services that cover several sports and you can bet more are coming as the NBA and NHL seek alternatives.  If Bally's and Comcast's can't agree to a solution, Comcast customers have many other alternatives.   Isn't that what you do when a service no longer meets your needs?

[ewen21]

I live in upstate NY, far out of market, so I’ve not been affected.   Those who can’t watch don’t sweat it for the remainder of this week.  This team has reverted to “it’s hopeless” mode.  I’ve seen this rerun a million times.  I’ve taken the two hour trip to the Bronx well over a dozen times in the last twenty plus years and I seem just TWO wins.  One those wins was in May 2001.  Eric Milton was pitching and Dougie Mint was hitting over .400.  Since that game they’ve gone something like 1-13 at Yankee Stadium and it’s beyond pathetic that this team seemingly is in the mindset of simply assuming they can’t win in NY.  And don’t give anything about payroll.  The Rays do just fine against the Yankees.  Cleveland and Detroit beat them in the playoffs multiple times and the Marlins beat the Yankees in the series back in ‘03

 

I watched the game last night and it reminded me of one of the many playoff games I’ve watched them play in NY.  Part of me started to wish I was Riverbrain.  I’m so hopeless that I watched that garbage because I can, and I’ll watch tonight and tomorrow.  Does that make me better?  That’s the question I had for myself when that games wrapped up and I set my alarm for 4AM.

 

For those of you upset about not being able to watch?  Be happy you don’t have a choice for the next couple of days.  Do something else with that time.  Don’t waste a second while I watch them on the YES Network laying down like lambs.

[Brandon]

On 5/29/2024 at 9:52 AM, Parfigliano said:

The only ONLY thing either side cares about is the almighty dollar.  

So do we the fans, care about the almighty dollar, or we would pay the extra whatever to just move on and watch the Twins.  

[Major League Ready]

3 hours ago, Brandon said:

So do we the fans or we would pay the extra whatever to just move on and watch the Twins.  

Good point!  It does seem a little silly to be outraged that a business is concerned about profit.  Anyone here not care about what their job pays them?  Anyone not want to make more?  This situation was exacerbated by cable cutters.  In other words, people concerned about money.  I certainly don't have a problem with that choice but let's be realistic that the rub is money for everyone concerned, the teams, the RSNs, the carriers, and the consumers.  

Why would it have been more acceptable if the team had forced every current fan paying for coverage to be forced into the situation that prompted Riverbrian to start this thread?   He sure did not seem to like it.  Yet, the majority here seem to think it would have been just fine had the twins forced this situation instead of Comcast and Ballys.  

[Mike Sixel]

5 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

Good point!  It does seem a little silly to be outraged that a business is concerned about profit.  Anyone here not care about what their job pays them?  Anyone not want to make more?  This situation was exacerbated by cable cutters.  In other words, people concerned about money.  I certainly don't have a problem with that choice but let's be realistic that the rub is money for everyone concerned, the teams, the RSNs, the carriers, and the consumers.  

Why would it have been more acceptable if the team had forced every current fan paying for coverage to be forced into the situation that prompted Riverbrian to start this thread?   He sure did not seem to like it.  Yet, the majority here seem to think it would have been just fine had the twins forced this situation instead of Comcast and Ballys.  

Point to anyone in this thread saying the Twins shouldn't worry about making money, please. 

[DJL44]

17 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

Why would it have been more acceptable if the team had forced every current fan paying for coverage to be forced into the situation that prompted Riverbrian to start this thread?   He sure did not seem to like it.  Yet, the majority here seem to think it would have been just fine had the twins forced this situation instead of Comcast and Ballys.  

If the team had said 1/3 of the way through the season that their television partner was not going to be available on television? The team said "get cable if you want to watch the Twins this season". People got or kept cable. The biggest cable company didn't have the games as soon as the NBA season finished. The Twins didn't say "get cable if you want to watch the games in April and then you're hosed for the rest of the season".

I think people would be thrilled with a $180/year streaming option for Twins games (like Arizona offers). At least they wouldn't be at the mercy of their local cable company deciding whether or not they would show the games or leave them off the air. I'm pretty certain the Diamondbacks aren't going to take people's money and cut off broadcasts for most of the season.

[ewen21]

34 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

Point to anyone in this thread saying the Twins shouldn't worry about making money, please. 

He doesn’t have to, because he never actually said that.

[Major League Ready]

46 minutes ago, ewen21 said:

He doesn’t have to, because he never actually said that.

Thank you!  The twisting gets tiresome.  The original post complained that Comcast and Bally's only cared about the almighty dollar.  Wow.  What a surprise that a business is concerned about profit,  Then, let's forget that anyone here could get the service if they were willing to pay for it.  Therefore, they are concerned about dollars which of course is reasonable.  Yet, somehow it's unreasonable for others involved in a business for the purpose of making money to be concerned about profit or for that matter survival in the case of RSNs and cable providers are getting hurt badly as well.   When expectations are that other parties should do something we won't,  there is no hope for logic to prevail. 

[Craig Arko]

36 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

If the team had said 1/3 of the way through the season that their television partner was not going to be available on television? The team said "get cable if you want to watch the Twins this season". People got or kept cable. The biggest cable company didn't have the games as soon as the NBA season finished. The Twins didn't say "get cable if you want to watch the games in April and then you're hosed for the rest of the season".

I think people would be thrilled with a $180/year streaming option for Twins games (like Arizona offers). At least they wouldn't be at the mercy of their local cable company deciding whether or not they would show the games or leave them off the air. I'm pretty certain the Diamondbacks aren't going to take people's money and cut off broadcasts for most of the season.

I’d be thrilled. I wouldn’t do it, but I’d be thrilled. 

[Major League Ready]

58 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

If the team had said 1/3 of the way through the season that their television partner was not going to be available on television? The team said "get cable if you want to watch the Twins this season". People got or kept cable. The biggest cable company didn't have the games as soon as the NBA season finished. The Twins didn't say "get cable if you want to watch the games in April and then you're hosed for the rest of the season".

I think people would be thrilled with a $180/year streaming option for Twins games (like Arizona offers). At least they wouldn't be at the mercy of their local cable company deciding whether or not they would show the games or leave them off the air. I'm pretty certain the Diamondbacks aren't going to take people's money and cut off broadcasts for most of the season.

That's convenient positioning.  People did not rush out and get cable.  They had services in place and those services consisted of programming far beyond the MN Twins.  The alternative would have been to force everyone of those Comcast subscribers and those from every other service to go purchase an additional service.   The vast majority of these subscribers value the other programming and would have been forced to purchase incremental services.  If that's not the case, switch to Fubo or DirecTV or whatever.  What's the problem.  

Arizona's deal is $225.  What if you are also a Suns fan or want other TV programmng?  This type of deal has a limited audience because for many it's an incremental expense and it makes more sense to switch to Fubo or DirectTV streaming.

BTW ... Comcast and Bally's really need each other so the Twins believing they would come to terms is not exactly far fetched.  Comcast less so than Ballys but this promotes more cable cutting. 

[chpettit19]

11 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

That's convenient positioning.  People did not rush out and get cable.  They had services in place and those services consisted of programming far beyond the MN Twins.  The alternative would have been to force everyone of those Comcast subscribers and those from every other service to go purchase an additional service.   The vast majority of these subscribers value the other programming and would have been forced to purchase incremental services.  If that's not the case, switch to Fubo or DirecTV or whatever.  What's the problem.  

BTW ... Comcast and Bally's really need each other so the Twins believing they would come to terms is not exactly far fetched.  Comcast less so than Ballys but this promotes more cable cutting.

Why does it promote more cable cutting? These people "had services in place and those services consisted of programming far beyond the MN Twins." If they didn't have cable for the Twins why does Bally's not being on there matter? 

Did people not get or keep cable because of the Twins or are they going to cut the cable cord because of not having the Twins? Can't have it both ways. If people weren't signing up for or keeping Comcast because of the MN Twins then Comcast really doesn't need Bally's. Your first argument directly refutes your second.

[chpettit19]

Are there other businesses out there that make it hard for their customers to gain access to their product and then have people defending that practice as good business that shouldn't lead to customer complaints?

I know there are the "high end" type businesses that look to sell things for higher prices because of scarcity, and that's why the Twins sign exclusivity deals, but are there companies that rely on high customer volume that make it hard for customers to access their product and then people turn around and say "well, obviously the customer should just try harder to get this product, it's not the company's fault their customers won't jump through hoop after hoop to get their product?"

Because the Twins rely on high customer volume for both ticket sales and being able to sell broadcast rights at maximum revenue. And there are numerous people out here blaming fans for being unhappy having to guess which platform their games may be on from month to month. So I assume this brilliant business plan has many others who use it to great success and that's why people are suggesting fans are being ridiculous by complaining about this situation.

[cmoss84]

Many of you might want to look into a device called a super box. I live in CA and have 2. Few hundred bucks but worth it. Watch pretty much anything and very mobile.

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

Why does it promote more cable cutting? These people "had services in place and those services consisted of programming far beyond the MN Twins." If they didn't have cable for the Twins why does Bally's not being on there matter? 

Did people not get or keep cable because of the Twins or are they going to cut the cable cord because of not having the Twins? Can't have it both ways. If people weren't signing up for or keeping Comcast because of the MN Twins then Comcast really doesn't need Bally's. Your first argument directly refutes your second.

I did say Comcast did not need Bally's as much as Bally's needed Comcast, did I not.  What's your point?  Was it not reasonable for the Twins to believe these parties would work something out?  Comcast is suffering from cord cutters, are they not?  Is this not additional incentive for people to cut the cord even if it's in the form of something like Fubo.  Comcast cuts the Twins and the Twins somehow don't care about their fans but had they cut every Comcast customer as well the customers of every other service that would be just fine.  Sounds to me like the people who elected to not have coverage are mad that the twins did not throw paying customers under the bus.  Somehow it would be good business to prioritize potential customers who have been unwilling to pay for coverage.   

[DJL44]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

That's convenient positioning.  People did not rush out and get cable.  They had services in place and those services consisted of programming far beyond the MN Twins. 

Most of their audience does not have cable or a satellite dish. They have already rejected cable/dish because it doesn't have the programs they want at the price they want to pay and the customer service is awful. Now out of their customers willing to pay for cable/dish less than half can actually get the games. I can see why current cable subscribers would be hesitant to switch to a different service with no guarantee that they will have games next month. They've been burned once (or more) already.

[chpettit19]

48 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

I did say Comcast did not need Bally's as much as Bally's needed Comcast, did I not.  What's your point?  Was it not reasonable for the Twins to believe these parties would work something out?  Comcast is suffering from cord cutters, are they not?  Is this not additional incentive for people to cut the cord even if it's in the form of something like Fubo.  Comcast cuts the Twins and the Twins somehow don't care about their fans but had they cut every Comcast customer as well the customers of every other service that would be just fine.  Sounds to me like the people who elected to not have coverage are mad that the twins did not throw paying customers under the bus.  Somehow it would be good business to prioritize potential customers who have been unwilling to pay for coverage.   

It was pretty well known before they signed their deal that Bally's and Comcast weren't seeing eye to eye. The idea that the Twins shouldn't/couldn't/whatever-you-want-to-say have known there was a problem with Bally's and Comcast before they signed a deal worth 10s of millions of dollars and dictated what options fans had to view their product isn't a good argument for the Twins doing things correctly. Either they knew and signed anyways or they didn't take their time to do even the slightest diligence in finding out what Bally's contract situations were with all their cable providers. Either way it's a failure on the Twins part. Because it was widely reported all offseason during the bankruptcy hearing what Bally's contract situations were. The Twins simply had to Google it to know it was far from a sure thing that Bally's and Comcast would work things out. Many of us knew it because we read a handful of articles on the bankruptcy stuff. And Comcast is most certainly not the first provider to drop Bally's so it's not like it's some unprecedented thing where Bally's is just so important YouTube, Sling, and others hadn't already cut them out and never looked back. The idea that the Twins signed a multi-million dollar deal without knowing is worse for them when it comes to the quality of their business decision making.

The Twins told their customers at the start of the offseason blackouts were going away. They flipped at the end of the offseason and told customers they were going back to Bally's and blackouts would still be a problem. Customers were then able to make their informed decision about which services they could use to gain access to the games, even though it was late in the offseason. In less than 2 months a large chunk of those customers had the rug pulled out from under them. And your argument is that those fans shouldn't be upset and should just continue jumping through hoops to find different ways to watch this team. 

What other businesses tell their customers they need to continually find a new way to access their product? And would you claim their customers should stop complaining and they should just deal with it if that were the case? Is it good business to tell your customers 1 thing, then tell them that was completely incorrect and do this other thing instead, then have half the people who did that thing be told to just go do a 3rd thing? I'm no business genius, but that sounds like poor business strategy that would likely lead to frustrated customers, some of which who would stop trying to access that product and find other things to spend their time and money on.

[Major League Ready]

38 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

Most of their audience does not have cable or a satellite dish. They have already rejected cable/dish because it doesn't have the programs they want at the price they want to pay and the customer service is awful. Now out of their customers willing to pay for cable/dish less than half can actually get the games. I can see why current cable subscribers would be hesitant to switch to a different service with no guarantee that they will have games next month. They've been burned once (or more) already.

Streaming requires no commitment so anyone switching can move on if something changes.  Bally's also announced the new contracts they have so anyone interested in switching would have assurance of the status of Bally's contract for at least the rest of this season.  By next season this market will evolve and there will be new / modified options.

[Major League Ready]

2 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

It was pretty well known before they signed their deal that Bally's and Comcast weren't seeing eye to eye. The idea that the Twins shouldn't/couldn't/whatever-you-want-to-say have known there was a problem with Bally's and Comcast before they signed a deal worth 10s of millions of dollars and dictated what options fans had to view their product isn't a good argument for the Twins doing things correctly. Either they knew and signed anyways or they didn't take their time to do even the slightest diligence in finding out what Bally's contract situations were with all their cable providers. Either way it's a failure on the Twins part. Because it was widely reported all offseason during the bankruptcy hearing what Bally's contract situations were. The Twins simply had to Google it to know it was far from a sure thing that Bally's and Comcast would work things out. Many of us knew it because we read a handful of articles on the bankruptcy stuff. The idea that the Twins signed a multi-million dollar deal without knowing is worse for them when it comes to the quality of their business decision making.

The Twins told their customers at the start of the offseason blackouts were going away. They flipped at the end of the offseason and told customers they were going back to Bally's and blackouts would still be a problem. Customers were then able to make their informed decision about which services they could use to gain access to the games, even though it was late in the offseason. In less than 2 months a large chunk of those customers had the rug pulled out from under them. And your argument is that those fans shouldn't be upset and should just continue jumping through hoops to find different ways to watch this team. 

What other businesses tell their customers they need to continually find a new way to access their product? And would you claim their customers should stop complaining and they should just deal with it if that were the case? Is it good business to tell your customers 1 thing, then tell them that was completely incorrect and do this other thing instead, then have half the people who did that thing be told to just go do a 3rd thing? I'm not business genius, but that sounds like poor business strategy that would likely lead to frustrated customers, some of which who would stop trying to access that product and find other things to spend their time and money on.

All of this when your position is they should have told every customer we don't care that you have chosen services to meet all of your needs, you need to buy an additional service.   By the way, we are doing away with every option that would allow you to bundle sports coverage with all of your other desired services.  First rule in sales or any business for that matter is to keep your existing customers.   

When did the twins organization say they were doing away with balk-outs.  Corey Provus is not a Minnesota Twins executive and he has no standing to make statements on behalf of the organization.  He should have known better and I would guess someone from the Twins informed accordingly.

[chpettit19]

7 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

All of this when your position is they should have told every customer we don't care that you have chosen services to meet all of your needs, you need to buy an additional service.   By the way, we are doing away with every option that would allow you to bundle sports coverage with all of your other desired services.  First rule in sales or any business for that matter is to keep your existing customers.   

When did the twins organization say they were doing away with balk-outs.  Corey Provus is not a Minnesota Twins executive and he has no standing to make statements on behalf of the organization.  He should have known better and I would guess someone from the Twins informed accordingly.

So the Diamondbacks and Padres are the poorly run businesses? And, reportedly, the Twins will be the poorly run business next year when they join 13 or 14 other teams in doing exactly what you're saying is the bad idea?

Your belief is that Corey Provus just went out making stuff up about black outs and the team never once corrected him? Yeah, that's very believable. Rogue employee making promises for the team that they never refuted even though it was wrong. That's definitely what happened. Weird that someone in the Twins informed him, but not any of their fans. That's definitely a great business decision. Even weirder that he said it on more than 1 occasion with multiple days between them. So either the team was slow in telling him to stop or he just ignored them and kept saying it. Which do you think it is? 

Edited to add: Dave St Peter came out after they signed with Bally's again and apologized for failing to meet their promise about ending black outs. And I'm pretty sure he is a Minnesota Twins executive with standing to make statements on behalf of the organization.

[Linus]

People are way overthinking this thing. The Twins made a complete mess of the TV situation. It’s literally their job to make this stuff work. It’s called customer engagement. It’s not my job to switch providers multiple times and pay exorbitant prices for that pleasure. It’s their job to bring the product to the customer. Anybody that says anything different is a shill for the Pohlads. 

[Major League Ready]

11 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

So the Diamondbacks and Padres are the poorly run businesses? And, reportedly, the Twins will be the poorly run business next year when they join 13 or 14 other teams in doing exactly what you're saying is the bad idea?

Your belief is that Corey Provus just went out making stuff up about black outs and the team never once corrected him? Yeah, that's very believable. Rogue employee making promises for the team that they never refuted even though it was wrong. That's definitely what happened. Weird that someone in the Twins informed him, but not any of their fans. That's definitely a great business decision. Even weirder that he said it on more than 1 occasion with multiple days between them. So either the team was slow in telling him to stop or he just ignored them and kept saying it. Which do you think it is? 

Edited to add: Dave St Peter came out after they signed with Bally's again and apologized for failing to meet their promise about ending black outs. And I'm pretty sure he is a Minnesota Twins executive with standing to make statements on behalf of the organization.

The Padres have not produced exactly one 90 win team since the turn of the century and the Dbacks have not been a model either.    That said,, their model looks good.  The Twins were not prepared to launch their own channel.  Perhaps they should have been but we can't judge this until we see what they roll out next year.  I am not going to bitch that the Twins are poorly run because they did not throw their paying customers under the bus until we see their long-term plan.

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, Major League Ready said:

The Padres have not produced exactly one 90 win team since the turn of the century and the Dbacks have not been a model either.    That said,, their model looks good.  The Twins were not prepared to launch their own channel.  Perhaps they should have been but we can't judge this until we see what they roll out next year.  I am not going to bitch that the Twins are poorly run because they did not throw their paying customers under the bus until we see their long-term plan.

The Diamondbacks and Padres didn't launch their own channels, they're being produced by MLB. The Twins had that as an option. Both the Twins and MLB even said as much. MLB took over broadcasts in the middle of the season last year. The idea that they couldn't have done that for the Twins is nonsense. You're making stuff up to defend things that the team themselves have already apologized for and claimed the opposite of. Good for you for defending the honor of the Twins while they apologize to their fans for the very things you say they shouldn't apologize for, I guess.

And they've already announced the long-term plan is to have MLB produce their streaming games moving forward starting in 2025. The only thing they haven't openly stated is exactly why they chose to wait a year. But the team has apologized for not meeting their promise of no more blackouts. They've admitted they failed at their number 1 goal of expanding their fan base. They've admitted all of this stuff was bad and wasn't their plan, but you still defend it. Are you going to bitch that the Twins are poorly run next year when they drop Bally's like their stated plan was to do and go with the MLB streaming package? Or will those paying fans not matter? I'd guess they won't matter because the Twins will have told them where they can access their product and the fans will have the choice on whether or not to go with those options. Instead of telling their fans 2 separate things that within months were wrong. But maybe I'm just a bitchy fan who doesn't understand that making your customers jump through hoops is actually a genius plan.

[DJL44]

14 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

Bally's also announced the new contracts they have so anyone interested in switching would have assurance of the status of Bally's contract for at least the rest of this season. 

Unless they abruptly go bankrupt and stop broadcasting because they didn't make a deal with Comcast and don't have enough money to pay their employees.

[Major League Ready]

9 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

The Diamondbacks and Padres didn't launch their own channels, they're being produced by MLB. The Twins had that as an option. Both the Twins and MLB even said as much. MLB took over broadcasts in the middle of the season last year. The idea that they couldn't have done that for the Twins is nonsense. You're making stuff up to defend things that the team themselves have already apologized for and claimed the opposite of. Good for you for defending the honor of the Twins while they apologize to their fans for the very things you say they shouldn't apologize for, I guess.

And they've already announced the long-term plan is to have MLB produce their streaming games moving forward starting in 2025. The only thing they haven't openly stated is exactly why they chose to wait a year. But the team has apologized for not meeting their promise of no more blackouts. They've admitted they failed at their number 1 goal of expanding their fan base. They've admitted all of this stuff was bad and wasn't their plan, but you still defend it. Are you going to bitch that the Twins are poorly run next year when they drop Bally's like their stated plan was to do and go with the MLB streaming package? Or will those paying fans not matter? I'd guess they won't matter because the Twins will have told them where they can access their product and the fans will have the choice on whether or not to go with those options. Instead of telling their fans 2 separate things that within months were wrong. But maybe I'm just a bitchy fan who doesn't understand that making your customers jump through hoops is actually a genius plan.

The first rule for anyone who has ever done this kind of work is to have the facts before drawing a conclusion.  If I knew why they opted to wait a year I might agree with you.  It's just really hard to imagine that they did this for no reason.  I will be right there with you if it turns out they gain nothing by waiting a year.   

[DJL44]

14 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

When did the twins organization say they were doing away with balk-outs.  Corey Provus is not a Minnesota Twins executive and he has no standing to make statements on behalf of the organization.  He should have known better and I would guess someone from the Twins informed accordingly.

Wow. Let's throw Cory Provus under the bus like he was saying something without approval from the Twins. Provus is a pro, he's not going to make statements without approval from above.

[Major League Ready]

1 minute ago, DJL44 said:

Unless they abruptly go bankrupt and stop broadcasting because they didn't make a deal with Comcast and don't have enough money to pay their employees.

What do you think the odds are that happens in the next 4 months?  

[Major League Ready]

1 minute ago, DJL44 said:

Wow. Let's throw Cory Provus under the bus like he was saying something without approval from the Twins. Provus is a pro, he's not going to make statements without approval from above.

You are making an assumption.  I have seen similar statements many times made by employees of clients who I know for a fact did not authorize them.  I had to sign NDAs with every client to assure them I was not letting any cats out of the bag.  This was big news, worthy of a press conference or official statement.  While it's remotely possible Provus was authorized, this kind of statement is made my team executives, not broadcasters.

[chpettit19]

Just now, Major League Ready said:

You are making an assumption.  I have seen similar statements many times made by employees of clients who I know for a fact did not authorize them.  I had to sign NDAs with every client to assure them I was not letting any cats out of the bag.  This was big news, worthy of a press conference or official statement.  While it's remotely possible Provus was authorized, this kind of statement is made my team executives, not broadcasters.

Again, the team never once corrected him and then the top team executive apologized for failing to meet the promise. This is such an awful take. His employment is dependent on the team liking what he says. Literally. That's his job. If he says things the team doesn't like they fire him. He made this statement multiple times over multiple days and the team never came out and said it wasn't true. He even explained that part of the reason he jumped to TV was because he was told the blackouts were done. Then, after they signed with Bally's, Dave St Peter (who is a team exec) came out and apologized for not ending blackouts like they'd said they would. Corey Provus absolutely had permission to say those things and it's willful ignorance to think he didn't.