Will Twins.TV Save the Twins? A Look at the Financial Future

[DJL44]

20 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Part of a cable package I would have paid for regardless of the presence of the Twins.  Will cost me no less with the Twins not on it.

The Twins will not cost you any additional money to watch on cable next year. As a bonus, you won't have to worry about your cable company dropping them in the middle of the season.

[dxpavelka]

2 hours ago, DJL44 said:

The Twins will not cost you any additional money to watch on cable next year. As a bonus, you won't have to worry about your cable company dropping them in the middle of the season.

Good to know.  However, will also, from what I've heard, not generate any monies for the team.  Which tells me that that will be a not very long term solution.  Local television revenues will go from $40-$50 million to $4-$5 million. 

 

[DJL44]

Just now, dxpavelka said:

Good to know.  However, will also, from what I've heard, not generate any monies for the team.  Which tells me that that will be a not very long term solution.  Local television revenues will go from $40-$50 million to $4-$5 million. 

The Twins won't get as much subscriber $$ from cable (guessing less than $1 per subscriber per month) but they'll capture all of the advertising revenue. This is a very rough guess but I think cable subscriber $$ will go down to $3M-5M, streaming makes another $2.5M-$5M and then advertising revenue adds another $5M-$10M. TV revenue drops from $45M to $12M-$20M depending on fan enthusiasm.

[Major League Ready]

18 minutes ago, dxpavelka said:

Good to know.  However, will also, from what I've heard, not generate any monies for the team.  Which tells me that that will be a not very long term solution.  Local television revenues will go from $40-$50 million to $4-$5 million. 

 

How are you coming to this conclusion?   Do you think they are allowing the cable companies to broadcast for free?  Do you think the advertisers are paying nothing?    

[dxpavelka]

12 hours ago, DJL44 said:

The Twins won't get as much subscriber $$ from cable (guessing less than $1 per subscriber per month) but they'll capture all of the advertising revenue. This is a very rough guess but I think cable subscriber $$ will go down to $3M-5M, streaming makes another $2.5M-$5M and then advertising revenue adds another $5M-$10M. TV revenue drops from $45M to $12M-$20M depending on fan enthusiasm.

Which means that whatever they do next year will only be a short term plan.  Future years will need to generate more dollars or things will get quite grim around these parts baseball wise.

 

[dxpavelka]

12 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

How are you coming to this conclusion?   Do you think they are allowing the cable companies to broadcast for free?  Do you think the advertisers are paying nothing?    

At best local television revenues will be cut in half.  Good luck with that.

[DJL44]

9 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Which means that whatever they do next year will only be a short term plan.  Future years will need to generate more dollars or things will get quite grim around these parts baseball wise.

That would be true if the Twins had a unique situation but most MLB teams are going to see a cut in their local TV revenue. Relative to the competition in the AL Central it is no big deal.

[dxpavelka]

10 hours ago, DJL44 said:

That would be true if the Twins had a unique situation but most MLB teams are going to see a cut in their local TV revenue. Relative to the competition in the AL Central it is no big deal.

That will be great.  If all we have to do to win the World Series is be competitive with the AL Central. If we have to compete with the Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox, Phillies and Astros it might be a different story.

[Major League Ready]

11 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

That will be great.  If all we have to do to win the World Series is be competitive with the AL Central. If we have to compete with the Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox, Phillies and Astros it might be a different story.

The Yankees and Dodgers have a $300M revenue advantage over the average revenue team and far more over the bottom revenue teams.   I don't understand the fixation on that gap widening by $20-25M.  I didn't hear/see many fans complaining last year when the players pushed for a much higher luxury tax threshold.  The league has enormous revenue inequity, and this is not a new thing.   

[dxpavelka]

11 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

The Yankees and Dodgers have a $300M revenue advantage over the average revenue team and far more over the bottom revenue teams.   I don't understand the fixation on that gap widening by $20-25M.  I didn't hear/see many fans complaining last year when the players pushed for a much higher luxury tax threshold.  The league has enormous revenue inequity, and this is not a new thing.   

And as long as it remains teams like the Twins will struggle to make the playoffs 40% of the time and teams like the Yankees and Dodgers will meet for the title.  But if you're good with that who am I to disagree.

[Major League Ready]

10 minutes ago, dxpavelka said:

And as long as it remains teams like the Twins will struggle to make the playoffs 40% of the time and teams like the Yankees and Dodgers will meet for the title.  But if you're good with that who am I to disagree.

Once again you have missed the point by a country mile.  Let's say the Twins hired you to come up with strategies to compete given the ability of a number of teams to spend $100M-$200M more than the twins.  What do you suppose their response would be if you told them cutting that $200M delta by $20M was key to success.  You are ranting over something that is marginally important in the grand scheme.

BTW .... Lower revenue teams have been struggling to make the playoffs for a couple decades or more.  

[dxpavelka]

12 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

Once again you have missed the point by a country mile.  Let's say the Twins hired you to come up with strategies to compete given the ability of a number of teams to spend $100M-$200M more than the twins.  What do you suppose their response would be if you told them cutting that $200M delta by $20M was key to success.  You are ranting over something that is marginally important in the grand scheme.

BTW .... Lower revenue teams have been struggling to make the playoffs for a couple decades or more.  

And yet we all know better than that.