Bally's to Make Final Offer to Twins for 2024; Amazon May Make Bid for Streaming

My wife has prime, so would be AOK for me.  At end of season I cancelled Direct TV and went back to Hulu.  So if they end up with Bally only, would have to jump through some hoops to find games in 2024.  

Bah Humbug as far as the Twins go, but Merry Christmas to everyone else.

My preference would be to have all games over the air on one of the alternate broadcast channels (45, 9+, etc). Next best would be a combination of cable and streaming that ends blackouts and makes sure all cable/satellite providers get the games.

Bally's still has issues with availability. It's not on Dish Network or Comcast, for example. What is the point of having a "broadcast partner" who can't get the games into people's homes?

I've been a fan since '61 as a kid. Our family vacation in the 60's was a weekend trip to MPLS for 2 games my dad was a big fan.  Our whole family of 8 would go and just have a hoot.  I did the same for only a couple of years with my family of 5.  Was present for the '87 playoffs and '91 WS.  Now with prices the way they are no way can I afford to bring family with grandkids.  I have no access to games on tv because of my location in SD. That said I have partially lost interest just because of no exposure. I for one would like to be able to go the Amazon route.   

We have to bring baseball back to MN, which means greatly limiting black-outs, ban black-outs outside let's say a 200-mile radius & have access to streaming. We can get by with the current payrole with savvy trades & by-pass FAs if that's what it takes to make Twins games more accessible.

We' ve got the prime so that part works for me. If the $$ looks good and blackouts are a thing of the past, I'd be all for it. Impossible for a Minnesotan in Iowa to watch the Twins the way things have been.

I'm a hard no on returning to Bally's. No one has done more to limit access to live sports than them. Do not like amazon either as anthoer subscription I will not do. Prefer over the air. Easily accessible as well as included in cable/satellite/streaming services already paying for. 

Hubbard broadcasting(MN/Western WI/Northern Iowa) kstp flagship, Forum Communications (ND/SouthernCanada) wday flagship, and Nexstar(SD/NW Iowa) keloland. All games would be on these companies secondary stations such as 5.2 in the twin cities. 

Get Bally's as far out of the picture as possible as soon as possible. I watch the Wolves on their app, and they frequently have server issues and sometimes fail to stream entire games.

Broadcast for free on Channel 45? Offer games on Amazon Prime? How would that work? Whatever the final deal, it needs to provide enough value to companies to justify a payout that would benefit the team.  How does giving away games on Prime justify more than a few million dollars in payout?  Where are the ad sales on Channel 45 that'll drive a payout over $5-10m?  

The cable deals worked because bundling gave a huge subsidy to the sports contracts that unbundling cleanly removes.  You need separate subscription dollars to replace that piece on top of viable ad revenue. Who is going to advertise on an anonymous mid-week Amazon Prime game between third and fifth place teams? It won't be local car dealers and air conditioning contractors, it'll just be the same crap that's underwriting FreeTV and that won't justify $40-50m.  Just because Amazon is wealthy doesn't mean the Twins will see much of that money without good justification. They didn't get rich throwing around stupid money.

A new deal has to be centered around good money from the streaming partnered with some money from broadcast. But the biggest change might be the new lower dollar figure from local deals.  Less income from those deals and more from national deals may become the new norm, and you could reach it by having MLB produce their own games and not have a third party in there trying to turn a profit. Sell the games locally for far less and also sell the streaming as the main revenue driver. That's the future.

29 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

Concur. The stand alone Bally Sports app is a disaster. 

I have heard lots of positives about the MLB.tv app.

They already have a path forward for streaming - use MLB.tv. For cable - use the MLB channel plus a couple of alternates.

35 minutes ago, Cris E said:

The cable deals worked because bundling gave a huge subsidy to the sports contracts that unbundling cleanly removes.  You need separate subscription dollars to replace that piece on top of viable ad revenue. Who is going to advertise on an anonymous mid-week Amazon Prime game between third and fifth place teams?

Apple can get advertisers for a game between a random 3rd and 5th place team. Prime has 5 times as many subscribers as Apple.

Even with all of the access issues MLB games are routinely the highest rated programming throughout the summer. If access is improved I would expect those numbers to increase quite a bit, perhaps as much as 3x in some markets. Ad rates for sports are the highest because people actually watch them in real time. The subscription fees will go down but that business model is on it's death bed (along with many cable subscribers). Advertisers still want to pay a lot of money for ads during MLB games.

People want to watch the Twins. The best option for watching a Twins game - MLB.tv - was only available to people who don't live anywhere near Minnesota (unless they broke the law). I heard Bally's is only available in 15% of households in the viewing area. That's pathetic. Make the games easy to access and people will come.

I am a Twins fan in Arkansas, and have had the MLB Extra Inning package (or whatever it is called now) for years.  

The closest MLB team to my front door is Kansas City--over 4 hours away.  Arlington is about 4.5, St Louis and Houston are 7+.  

And I'm blacked out from Royals, Rangers, Astros and Cardinals games.   

Until last year, I was unable to see 19 Royals/Twins games and how many of the other games were played against AL teams, plus the Cardinals when the Twins had them on the schedule.  

The balanced schedule helped a little last year, but I still found myself either having to wait until an hour and a half after a game to see it (meaning I don't see any updates on Twitter/X), or find it on a simulator on my laptop.   Add to that the games on Apple or some other site, and it occurred to me that I'm paying for a full season of games but only getting about 80% of what I'm paying for. 

The blackout rules make no sense for me; when I decide to go to a live game, I go for a full series.  

I decided last year that I can make do with a simulator site in 2024, but I'll be watching to see what this Twins fan WAY out of their market can get with the paid package. 

JcS

That works because Apple only picks two games a week and makes an event out of them. If they were flooded with 12-15 a night for half a year and had to raise the payout substantially for the opportunity they wouldn't be nearly as pleased with the numbers.

As far as ad revenue goes, baseball works best selling local ads that can play off the fans' relationship with the club. And until the post-season, most national games won't draw viewers that aren't fans of one or the other participant. So maybe games on Apple or Amazon should be produced and marketed towards the local clubs and merely broadcast nationally.  But as streamers make up more of the viewership there will be more day-after speed viewing where most ads are completely skipped and we'll have to see how advertisers react.

Whatever, I hardly expect a 3x increase in subscriptions at a price point anywhere near the cost buried in a cable subscription, What was the ESPN tax, $8 per household? RSNs were about the same I think. MLB teams are not going to sell their games for $8 a month. So as they shed the cable subsidy they are going to need to charge 3x just to tread water, and to grow beyond the old income level will be very hard at $20-25 a month.

3 hours ago, Maybebaby said:

I've been a fan since '61 as a kid. Our family vacation in the 60's was a weekend trip to MPLS for 2 games my dad was a big fan.  Our whole family of 8 would go and just have a hoot.  I did the same for only a couple of years with my family of 5.  Was present for the '87 playoffs and '91 WS.  Now with prices the way they are no way can I afford to bring family with grandkids.  I have no access to games on tv because of my location in SD. That said I have partially lost interest just because of no exposure. I for one would like to be able to go the Amazon route.   

For a 130 dollars a year I use for streaming sports company called  uzzu TV app  , you can watch any sport year round ( in season ) , no black outs  , has worked for me , 

You can go month to month , cancel  anytime with a yearly subscription  , football  , hockey  , baseball  and who cares about basketball  ... 

College sports too ...

Lots of channels to watch ,  any team you want plus has history and tbs  channels and more ...

Personally, this won't affect me as I live out-of-state now and am one of the original MLB.tv subscribers going way back.  Just love our Twins.  Having said that, the Amazon package would just replace the Bally app, nothing more.  I think it just prolongs and maybe even exacerbates the current problem.

The real goal here has to be to grow the sport again, which means exposure.  I'd like to see at least two over the air broadcasts each week, one on the weekend and one night game during the week.  The rest should be on MLB.tv for a relatively low price.  This is basically the model that the High School Hockey tournament took a few years back when they realized that making people pay to stream was causing them to lose interest from the fanbase (yes, the Twins play a lot more games than the tourney, but the point remains).  For baseball, people who don't watch games don't come to the park and don't buy fangear and, most importantly, don't expose their kids and grandkids to the game.

If the Twins come up with a better model, I'm all for it.  Whatever grows the fanbase and creates interest, which will translate to revenue to make the team run well.

20 minutes ago, Blyleven2011 said:

For a 130 dollars a year I use for streaming sports company called  uzzu TV app  , you can watch any sport year round ( in season ) , no black outs  , has worked for me , 

You can go month to month , cancel  anytime with a yearly subscription  , football  , hockey  , baseball  and who cares about basketball  ... 

College sports too ...

Lots of channels to watch ,  any team you want plus has history and tbs  channels and more ...

It's illegal streaming.

As someone who lives in Iowa, it probably won't matter. We will get screwed no matter what they do.

Have the Amazon negotiations been independently confirmed? I wouldn't trust the word of Diamond Sports Group at this point. Seems like if Amazon were really involved, they would just want to buy the rights on the cheap from DSG out of bankruptcy and brand it themselves. I would not see them joining as an investor in a company like DSG with a terrible reputation that has mismanaged this whole enterprise.

Prime, please.  Already have it, millions do, and it is cheap and useful for those who could add it.

1 hour ago, Cris E said:

As far as ad revenue goes, baseball works best selling local ads that can play off the fans' relationship with the club

If Amazon has control over several teams they can change the whole model

1) Sell local ads to people who live locally, no matter which game they're watching. If someone in Idaho is watching Yankees vs Dodgers you can serve them an advertisement for a car dealership in Boise.

2) Sell ads to national advertisers who would like to get their ads in front of anyone watching baseball. Tell Gillette you'll put razor advertising on every baseball game.

3) Amazon could advertise the billions of products they have for sale on their website. Owning eyeballs helps them sell Fire tablets, Amazon Basics products and groceries at Whole Foods. Instead of buying ads on a sports network they're just buying a sports network to advertise on.

I am not sure what is the best solution but this is an enormous opportunity to increase access to the game.  MLB hired a group of heavy hitters with the right background to find a solution.  I would think they have developed a framework with the type of accessibility Ashbury outlined.  I think this is going to be a good thing that could take a couple years to fully unfold.  

1 hour ago, adorduan said:

It's illegal streaming.

Or just use a free website like thetvapp.to