Everything You Need to Know About the New Twins TV Setup in 2025

[nicksaviking]

10 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

I am not sure how to remedy this. If they're that poor they're probably not able to pay for internet access or satellite TV. They're also really unlikely to attend a game. I'm fine if the Twins decide to leave people without any disposable income out of their business plans.

It's not about being poor nor about disposable income. But the small town fans tend to be more prudent with their money. Back in the day they paid a cable bill and channel surfed until they found the Twins as it was already included with their plans, but this is different; going out of their way to pay for a streamer that they will ONLY use to watch the Twins. And it costs more than the streamers they already pay for and watch a half dozen shows on.

I also don't know how you fix it AND keep the same cost expectations as the rest of the league. This is going to be a bigger issue for the Twins than most clubs. I'm not trying to generalize people, but the more fans you have that look like this:

The more fans you are going to have that are watching their budget. And the Twins have more fans like this than probably any other team.

[DJL44]

2 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

But the small town fans tend to be more prudent with their money. Back in the day they paid a cable bill and channel surfed until they found the Twins as it was already included with their plans,

There is only change for the better in that scenario. If they have cable, they can still channel surf until they find the Twins. Now they'll actually find the Twins game instead of seeing a notice that Twins games are blacked out in their area due to a contract dispute.

People who use cable will have Twins games. People who use a satellite dish (many rural folks) will have Twins games. They won't have to subscribe to a streaming package to get Twins games. It's only the cord-cutters who have to add a subscription.

[TheLeviathan]

29 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

There is only change for the better in that scenario. If they have cable, they can still channel surf until they find the Twins. Now they'll actually find the Twins game instead of seeing a notice that Twins games are blacked out in their area due to a contract dispute.

People who use cable will have Twins games. People who use a satellite dish (many rural folks) will have Twins games. They won't have to subscribe to a streaming package to get Twins games. It's only the cord-cutters who have to add a subscription.

Maybe we're misunderstanding one another or it's a matter of semantics, but those people on cable and satellite will have to elect an extra subscription to get access.  Like adding HBO or some other extra content to their package, they will have to subscribe through their provider.  It's not adding a separate provider, but it is adding a separate subscription to their existing package.

[DJL44]

22 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

those people on cable and satellite will have to elect an extra subscription to get access.  Like adding HBO or some other extra content to their package, they will have to subscribe through their provider.  It's not adding a separate provider, but it is adding a separate subscription to their existing package.

I can't find any information that the cable providers charged extra for Padres games last year. From what I can tell, MLB negotiated directly with the cable providers to add the channel for all of their subscribers. Do you have a source for your information?

The Twins are way better off getting $0.50/month per cable subscriber than they would be if they charged $15/month extra for an a-la-carte channel.

[TheLeviathan]

5 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

I can't find any information that the cable providers charged extra for Padres games last year. From what I can tell, MLB negotiated directly with the cable providers to add the channel for all of their subscribers. Do you have a source for your information?

The Twins are way better off getting $0.50/month per cable subscriber than they would be if they charged $15/month extra for an a-la-carte channel.

I think you are correct and I was incorrect, at least in terms of how the Padres operated.  Assuming the Twins aee handled similarly would mean no extra package.  I hope the providers play ball here in MN too.  Good catch.

[PatPfund]

7 hours ago, MN_ExPat said:

Not quite the case about the Twins+ thing.  As a MLB.TV subscriber (for years) I've been able to watch all the MLB broadcast teams games w/o any additional subscriptions.  Shouldn't change any with the Twins broadcast this year.

If you mean you'll be able to watch Twins' home games with a regular MLB.tv subscription (and without the extra-legal use of VPN to hide your location) instead of an MLB.tv + Twins.tv combo, I hope you are right, and if you (as exPat) don't live in the area, that might be true. But local fans like myself will almost certainly have to pay a premium for live home games on top of the base MLB.tv subscription (or the Twins are terrible at business). (Though we should also be able to skip the MLB.tv part if we just want Twins.)

[Major League Ready]

14 hours ago, DJL44 said:

I can't find any information that the cable providers charged extra for Padres games last year. From what I can tell, MLB negotiated directly with the cable providers to add the channel for all of their subscribers. Do you have a source for your information?

The Twins are way better off getting $0.50/month per cable subscriber than they would be if they charged $15/month extra for an a-la-carte channel.

This was Bally's issue with Comcast.  Comcast insisted that Bally's be part of their regional sports package for which customers pay an additional fee.  Same thing with DirecTV and Dish.  It is highly probable that the twins arrangement with providers will be based on subscriptions either specifically for the Twins or a sports package.  That sports package might include the Wild, Wolves, and other sports/outdoor related programming.  This will allow providers to make deals for programming at a cost of $X and package them for sale at X plus Y% and that's how they provider profits.

The Fee on DirectTV as an example is $15 and that includes a number of different sports.  Given that fee, they are not paying much to carry the games unless they are getting a portion of the advertising revenue.   The model could be that the Twins get next to nothing from the carriers and make their money on advertising revenue.  We just don't have nearly enough reliable information to understand how the revenues and operating costs flow.

[DJL44]

59 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

It is highly probable that the twins arrangement with providers will be based on subscriptions either specifically for the Twins or a sports package. 

That isn't how MLB negotiated it with any other MLB team's rights they controlled. Why would they do that for the Twins?

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, DJL44 said:

That isn't how MLB negotiated it with any other MLB team's rights they controlled. Why would they do that for the Twins?

Why would MLB negotiate the rights of individual teams for their local broadcasts on platforms out side of MLB's streaming service?  What are the specifics of how MLB negotiated the rights of individual teams for local broadcasts with all the other platforms such as satellite and cable companies?   I have not looked extensively but I can't find any articles that suggest such a program is in place.  Perhaps you have a link.   I am genuinely interested to learn of established programs that would clarify how this works.

[DJL44]

4 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

Why would MLB negotiate the rights of individual teams for their local broadcasts on platforms out side of MLB's streaming service?  What are the specifics of how MLB negotiated the rights of individual teams for local broadcasts with all the other platforms such as satellite and cable companies?   I have not looked extensively but I can't find any articles that suggest such a program is in place.  Perhaps you have a link.      

Quote

Padres games will be available for MLB.TV subscribers, and will be broadcasted on the following cable channels:

Cox - channel 4

AT&T U-verse - channel 781

DirecTV - channel 694-3

Spectrum - channel 305

How to Stream, Watch San Diego Padres After MLB Takeover – NBC 7 San Diego

[Major League Ready]

2 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

How to Stream, Watch San Diego Padres After MLB Takeover – NBC 7 San Diego

Where in this article does it address how much revenue teams would get from cable and satellite carriers? It says fans will continue to have the option of getting coverage through traditional carriers and of course we knew this to be true with the Twins as well.  However, it says absolutely nothing about revenue models as they pertain to cable and satellite carriers.  

[DJL44]

4 minutes ago, Major League Ready said:

Where in this article does it address how much revenue teams would get from cable and satellite carriers? It says fans will continue to have the option of getting coverage through traditional carriers and of course we knew this to be true with the Twins as well.  However, it says absolutely nothing about revenue models as they pertain to cable and satellite carriers.  

MLB hasn't created a press release with that information in it. For some reason. The only precedent we have is that the Padres put games on cable without requiring a separate subscription.

This would be a fantastic question for a member of the press to ask the Twins because we clearly do NOT know "everything we need to know about the new Twins TV setup in 2025".

[USAFChief]

This article, in fact, ISN'T everything I need to know about the Twins new TV setup in 2025.

 

 

[Linus]

Regarding pricing the relative value is in the eye of the beholder.  I’m paying a really high amount to get DirectTv essentially to watch the Twins.  So for me $20 month would be a great bargain - can’t wait to cancel it.

[MN_ExPat]

On 1/21/2025 at 9:09 PM, PatPfund said:

If you mean you'll be able to watch Twins' home games with a regular MLB.tv subscription (and without the extra-legal use of VPN to hide your location) instead of an MLB.tv + Twins.tv combo, I hope you are right, and if you (as exPat) don't live in the area, that might be true. But local fans like myself will almost certainly have to pay a premium for live home games on top of the base MLB.tv subscription (or the Twins are terrible at business). (Though we should also be able to skip the MLB.tv part if we just want Twins.)

True, that might be a possibility that folks who live in MN have to pay extra for Twins access.  Somehow though... seems a bit overkill by MLB to have you pay for MLB.tv (not a huge amount, but still... not an insignificant amount either) and then pay for extra on top of that to watch in-market games (especially if Black Outs are a thing of the past).

Not saying with 100% certainty that folks back home won't have to pay for local access, just that from what I've read it sounds like your standard MLB subscription will cover it.

Of course if there are any folks who live in the areas that MLB has already taken over broadcasting, would love to hear from them on this.

[Otto von Ballpark]

6 minutes ago, MN_ExPat said:

True, that might be a possibility that folks who live in MN have to pay extra for Twins access.  Somehow though... seems a bit overkill by MLB to have you pay for MLB.tv (not a huge amount, but still... not an insignificant amount either) and then pay for extra on top of that to watch in-market games (especially if Black Outs are a thing of the past).

Not saying with 100% certainty that folks back home won't have to pay for local access, just that from what I've read it sounds like your standard MLB subscription will cover it.

Of course if there are any folks who live in the areas that MLB has already taken over broadcasting, would love to hear from them on this.

MLB.TV will not be necessary to watch the Twins games locally.

You'll only need the Twins.TV package.

You can optionally add/bundle that with MLB.TV if you want to watch non-Twins games too.

[USAFChief]

9 minutes ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

MLB.TV will not be necessary to watch the Twins games locally.

You'll only need the Twins.TV package.

You can optionally add/bundle that with MLB.TV if you want to watch non-Twins games too.

I don't think that was the point. 

An MLB.tv subscription won't get you Twins games in market.

 

For example, I watch the Twins in Tucson via MLB.tv. But when I'm in Minnesota, I'll need to pay extra for the Twins package, despite having an MLB.tv subscription. 

[MN_ExPat]

23 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

I don't think that was the point. 

An MLB.tv subscription won't get you Twins games in market.

For example, I watch the Twins in Tucson via MLB.tv. But when I'm in Minnesota, I'll need to pay extra for the Twins package, despite having an MLB.tv subscription. 

I also live out of market so I'll be the first to admit that I may have missed anything new on that.  Although I would be curious to see what extra Padres fans paid (if any) to watch local broadcasts since they were available on multiple local options w/MLB taking their broadcast over.

[Otto von Ballpark]

7 hours ago, USAFChief said:

I don't think that was the point. 

An MLB.tv subscription won't get you Twins games in market.

 

For example, I watch the Twins in Tucson via MLB.tv. But when I'm in Minnesota, I'll need to pay extra for the Twins package, despite having an MLB.tv subscription. 

Got it. Yes, that is true. You can bundle both packages for $200 for the season, if you need it. Or just add one for a month as needed.

I recommend all baseball fans pick up a MLBTV subscription during the T-Mobile opening week promotion. Free if you or someone you know has T-Mobile, or ~$10 to pick one up from a T-Mobile customer in the Slickdeals forum.

[Otto von Ballpark]

The speculated Twins.TV pricing is now official: $20 per month, or $100 for the season.

 

[tony&rodney]

Once again. I already subscribe to mlb.com.

Does that allow me to now watch Twins games?

Is there going to be an add on fee?

I understand the stand alone subscription for someone who does not have mlb.com.

[Parfigliano]

4 hours ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

Got it. Yes, that is true. You can bundle both packages for $200 for the season, if you need it. Or just add one for a month as needed.

I recommend all baseball fans pick up a MLBTV subscription during the T-Mobile opening week promotion. Free if you or someone you know has T-Mobile, or ~$10 to pick one up from a T-Mobile customer in the Slickdeals forum.

That MLB free is the reason we have TMobile

[Fatbat]

On 1/20/2025 at 7:41 AM, UpstateNewYorker said:

One in-the-weeds question: I have been watching the Twins on MLB.tv (which I get free as a T-Mobile customer). On my LG TV the MLB app is available. On my discount Visio smart TV the MLB app is not available -- it is not pre-installed and is not in the list of apps that can be downloaded.  So I watch the games on the LG TV or on a PC.  But is there any solution to the MLB app not being available on the Visio TV?

Download the app to the visio tv and log into it. Or you can stream the game on your smartphone and screen mirror it to any smart tv. 

[dxpavelka]

Slice it anyway you want.  I'm going to be paying extra for something that I have not paid extra for in the past.  I learned something last year when I went without that product for three months.  I'll get by just fine without it.

[Andy D]

On 1/20/2025 at 2:50 PM, thelanges5 said:

Looks like I am covered here in NE IA. Will have to make sure before I spend any $$

The original announcement mentioned "northern Iowa" and Cedar Rapids market was not shown in red on the distribution map.  Now the full state is red and Dave St.P mentioned no blackouts for "the entire state of Iowa".

Something must have changed, but I'm looking for confirmation -- as a Twins fan in Cedar Rapids I am excited to be able to (hopefully) just subscribe to Twins.TV and watch every game.  Been battling blackouts in Iowa for decades!

[Richie the Rally Goat]

3 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Slice it anyway you want.  I'm going to be paying extra for something that I have not paid extra for in the past.  I learned something last year when I went without that product for three months.  I'll get by just fine without it.

Living in NW Wi, cable/dish providers picked me up as Brewers area but MLB.tv picked me up as Twins area. I haven’t been able to watch legally for years and I missed it, especially last year when Provus went to TV.

i go to 10 games per year, and I’m super excited to pay my $100 per year to watch the Twins on TV!

[dxpavelka]

11 hours ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Living in NW Wi, cable/dish providers picked me up as Brewers area but MLB.tv picked me up as Twins area. I haven’t been able to watch legally for years and I missed it, especially last year when Provus went to TV.

i go to 10 games per year, and I’m super excited to pay my $100 per year to watch the Twins on TV!

I see where you are coming from.  I'm not.

 

[UpstateNewYorker]

On 1/25/2025 at 8:40 AM, Fatbat said:

Download the app to the visio tv and log into it. Or you can stream the game on your smartphone and screen mirror it to any smart tv. 

Thanks. I am able to "cast" from some (bt not all) phones.  The MLB app is not one of the apps that can be downloade to my Visio TV (it's not in Visio's list of apps).  

[Fatbat]

38 minutes ago, UpstateNewYorker said:

Thanks. I am able to "cast" from some (bt not all) phones.  The MLB app is not one of the apps that can be downloade to my Visio TV (it's not in Visio's list of apps).  

Hmmmm I just bought a visio for my bar tv. I will have to check into the availability of mlb on it. 

[Major League Ready]

On 1/24/2025 at 9:14 AM, USAFChief said:

I don't think that was the point. 

An MLB.tv subscription won't get you Twins games in market.

 

For example, I watch the Twins in Tucson via MLB.tv. But when I'm in Minnesota, I'll need to pay extra for the Twins package, despite having an MLB.tv subscription. 

Do you get Dbacks coverage in Arizona with the MLB package?