MLB "Removing blackouts would be favorable to some consumers and detrimental to others"

[NrM]

"MLB and the NHL argued that the plaintiffs can't be treated as a class because eliminating the territorial restrictions "would be favorable to some consumers and detrimental to others" and that many members of the putative class have no standing because they no longer subscribe to out-of-market packages, Scheindlin wrote. The judge rejected these arguments."

 

https://archive.is/20150516052957/http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/05/fans-suing-mlb-nhl-over-sports-blackouts-win-class-action-status/#selection-733.0-733.359

 

 

lol

[TroutBaseball]

Dumb argument is dumb.

[Stradling]

I can't think of a single way no blackouts would be detrimental to anyone.

[AngelsSurfer]

I agree, they wouldn't be detrimental at all to either consumers or MLB.com. MLB.com would probably get a lot more subscribers if the blackouts were lifted. They could even set up new a la carte packages for people who just want to see one team and don't need or want the unlimited coverage of every single game for every team.

 

The only ones I could see losing would be cable companies -- because there are probably people who subscribe just for the team coverage, and if the blackout-free MLB.com was available, they'd just go with that instead. I know that's a big thing in LA right now; Time Warner basically is holding the Dodgers broadcasts hostage. I really don't particularly care if the cable companies lose on this, though. Let them lose for setting up this situation in the first place. 

[Docwaukee]

the blackout thing is becoming irrelevant anyway.  one google search will show you how to work around it.  

[Guest]

the blackout thing is becoming irrelevant anyway.  one google search will show you how to work around it.  

My usual solution is to instantaneously teleport myself to Arizona when the game starts, then teleport right back immediately after it ends. Angels aren't blacked out in Arizona. During the playoffs I beam over to the UK but that process has a bit of an annoying delay

Edited May 16, 2015 by ScottLux

[AngelsLakersFan]

Lifting the blackouts across the board will cost MLB, cable providers and sports networks billions.

[ukyah]

Lifting the blackouts across the board will cost MLB, cable providers and sports networks billions.

 

no it won't. it will benefit the cable providers and the networks because they'll be able to show 162 games a year without any restrictions, if they so choose. that will benefit foxsports tremendously as they have made concerted pushes to become local providers for many teams. i don't see how having the option of showing more games hurts them. same thing with the cable providers. it hurts mlb because they lose some exclusivity with some platforms, but the real issue is that mlb is archaic in thinking and glacially slow in process. they think that people will stop going to games if they can watch it on tv, which has been proven false several times over. mlb needs younger people calling the shots. it's happened on the team level, in regards to coaches, gm's and team presidents, but now it needs to happen all the way at the top at the mlb level.

[Redondo]

I can't think of a single way no blackouts would be detrimental to anyone.

 

This

 

How in the world would it not be good?

[Vegas Halo Fan]

I can't think of a single way no blackouts would be detrimental to anyone.

 

Other than maybe MLB itself. I live in a six team blackout area, and I am 250 miles from the nearest MLB park. Tell me how that makes sense, and how anyone benefits from me not being able to see the games I want.

 

If I were deliberately trying to kill interest in the game, I would implement a system like the one that MLB has now.

[Capital_Dave]

My usual solution is to instantaneously teleport myself to Arizona when the game starts, then teleport right back immediately after it ends. Angels aren't blacked out in Arizona. During the playoffs I beam over to the UK but that process has a bit of an annoying delay

 

Funny, my teleport destination is Mexico City.  My son has been known to instantaneously materialize in Madagascar.  As Vegas Halo Fan has indicated, we have SIX blacked out teams here in Las Vegas.  If they're playing different teams, that's 6 of 15 games blacked out.  I consider my daily "commute" to Mexico City an act of civil disobedience. 

[Kenny]

Are these fans who, it would be detrimental to, execs at Fox, ESPN, NBC, and all the regional networks?

Edited May 17, 2015 by Kenny

[Vegas Halo Fan]

How can MLB legally lose this case? It's their product, if they don't want to offer it to millions of people (which is bad business for them) isn't that their prerogative? 

 

The problem is that they are offering their product to millions of people. They are just being disingenuous about how they are doing it.

 

One problem for MLB is deceptive advertising for MLB Extra Innings. They talk about "up to 70 out-of-market games each week" that you can get, when only a small fraction of the country could ever get anywhere near that many games. Most major cities that don't have their own teams are in blackout areas for at least four teams. Only remote rural areas that are in one-team blackout areas (under this agreement, everyone is in at least one) can even approach that total. It can also be argued that they are artificially restricting access in order to jack up their own profits while trying to convince the public that they can get around the issue by just ordering MLBEI.

 

The main argument that has been advanced for the current blackout plan is that MLB is "protecting the rights of (their) regional affiliates". It's a bullshit argument. If the regional affiliate is not showing the game I want to see, I'm not going to watch what they are showing in its place. The game being on another network and being shown on MLBEI would not cost them a viewer who they would not have lost anyway. Rather than allow the game to be broadcast on another network, they choose instead to protect the exclusivity of each regional affiliate - which means that their stance is more about MLB's income from Fox and other regional networks than about promoting the sport. It's restriction of access for maximizing profit.

 

By offering MLBEI, MLB is pretending to market all of their games to anyone who subscribes. However, due to their backroom deals fans are getting a lot less than they are paying for. I bought MLBEI one year, and I kept it - until the night that I tried to watch four different games and they were all blacked out. They even black out replays of spring training games and games on the MLB Network - which is asinine. That is how MLB can lose.

 

It is not in their best interest to restrict access to their product, but Bud Selig was too dense to see this.

Edited May 17, 2015 by Vegas Halo Fan

[TroutBaseball]

To be fair to MLB, I might cancel cable and go straight to All Access. But this doesn't impact other fans, it impacts Cox cable and Fox Sports West.

[Mark68]

Blackout rules are dumb. They are counterproductive to the marketing of the product.

 

Besides, anything that screws Big Cable Monopolies out of some bucks is something that I can definitely be on board with.

[Vegas Halo Fan]

MLB's contract states that any team can claim any city as a "home market". In cities that have MLB teams, this is pretty much a void argument, since, for instance, it would be difficult for the Yankees to claim Los Angeles, although in theory they could. Other cities aren't as fortunate. As I understand it, there would be nothing stopping the Red Sox or Yankees from claiming Las Vegas by saying that there are a lot of transplanted fans here. They haven't done it, but they could under the terms of the agreement.

[mancini79]

Hawaii has the Giants, Dodgers, Padres, Angels and Mariners blacked out. I believe they don't even have a Giants cable affiliate. So it's impossible to watch a Giants game within the rules set by MLB.

[AngelsLakersFan]

no it won't. it will benefit the cable providers and the networks because they'll be able to show 162 games a year without any restrictions, if they so choose. that will benefit foxsports tremendously as they have made concerted pushes to become local providers for many teams. i don't see how having the option of showing more games hurts them. same thing with the cable providers. it hurts mlb because they lose some exclusivity with some platforms, but the real issue is that mlb is archaic in thinking and glacially slow in process. they think that people will stop going to games if they can watch it on tv, which has been proven false several times over. mlb needs younger people calling the shots. it's happened on the team level, in regards to coaches, gm's and team presidents, but now it needs to happen all the way at the top at the mlb level.

 

This isn't how things work though. Teams have negotiated exclusive rights to these cable stations in exchange for billions of dollars. Fox Sports West owns the exclusive rights to almost every Angels game played - this is how they make money. FSW and other sports networks sell access to these games to cable providers. In theory they could sell the channel to every provider that is willing to pay. Since Angels games are a fairly niche product, it's not easy for FSW to sell itself in other markets, or far away from Orange County. This is where the blackouts become a big issue in areas that customers don't have access to the games.

 

Blackouts become a bigger issue in areas where there already is access. Removing the blackouts introduces alternatives to cable providers for sports fans. Right now cable providers are paying top dollar for exclusive access to live events. All the current contracts have priced this in. If they remove blackouts baseball fans will be dropping cable in droves, which could potentially put networks like FSW out of business and its the huge cable contracts that have driven the huge growth in revenues in the last several years. 

[HaloMagic]

I don't understand why MLB has to offer the product in the way others want them to. It's their product.

As far as the argument that their claim of "70 out-of-market" games is bogus...why would they have to change their product? Wouldn't they just have to change their advertising? When a pill is marketed as having weight loss benefits despite it not having any the company is forced to change the advertising. They don't have to change the pill.

I don't get it.

Also, VHF said that by doing what they are doing they are showing they are more concerned with the money they get from the regional affiliates than they are with promoting the sport. I think it unwise to discount the effect the literally 10s of billions of dollars the regional affiliates are supplying when considering how the sport is being promoted. I'd say that money is pretty important for the promotion of baseball.

MLB very clearly states that blackout restrictions apply and then gives possible customers a VERY easy way of finding out what teams are blacked out in their area before they have to hand over a single dollar. I don't see the scam.

Edited May 18, 2015 by HaloMagic

[NrM]

I don't understand why MLB has to offer the product in the way others want them to. It's their product.

As far as the argument that their claim of "70 out-of-market" games is bogus...why would they have to change their product? Wouldn't they just have to change their advertising? When a pill is marketed as having weight loss benefits despite it not having any the company is forced to change the advertising. They don't have to change the pill.

I don't get it.

Also, VHF said that by doing what they are doing they are showing they are more concerned with the money they get from the regional affiliates than they are with promoting the sport. I think it unwise to discount the effect the literally 10s of billions of dollars the regional affiliates are supplying when considering how the sport is being promoted. I'd say that money is pretty important for the promotion of baseball.

MLB very clearly states that blackout restrictions apply and then gives possible customers a VERY easy way of finding out what teams are blacked out in their area before they have to hand over a single dollar. I don't see the scam.

 

Who ever said it was a scam?

It's anti competitive and anti consumer. 

 

And it only hurts the sport we all love.

 

People in their 20s and 30s are canceling their cable subscriptions.  The last thing the MLB should be doing is driving away young fans.

 

I even convinced my 65 year old dad into dropping cable so he could save some money. He's been an angels fan all his life yet hasn't been able to watch a game since.(almost 2 years).

 

So with that being said. **** you MLB.

Edited May 18, 2015 by Poozy

[AngelsSurfer]

 

People in their 20s and 30s people continue cancel their cable subscriptions.  The last thing the MLB should be doing is driving away young fans.

 

I even talked my 65 year old dad into canceling his cable subscription so he could save money. He's been a angels fan all his life yet hasn't been able to watch a game since he canceled(almost 2 years).

 

So with that being said. **** you MLB.

 

This. While I'm sure that there are some people who keep their cable subscriptions to see the team they like, that ship is sailing fast, especially among xennials and milennials. MLB should be doing whatever it can to embrace that demographic. They're missing a huge market in not offering a la carte options that would allow fans to see ALL games of their chosen team. The blackouts only deter people from even considering MLB.com.

[Jeff Fletcher]

What I don't get is that when you watch a game on MLB.com, you don't see the commercials. Why not?

Seems to me the reason mlb doesn't want someone in LA watchjng the Angels on MLB.com instead of FSW is because you're hurting the ratings of FSW, which is paying big bucks for the games, if you do.

But you're still watching. They just need to track your viewership (and still show you the commercials) if you're on a computer.

[HaloMagic]

Who ever said it was a scam?

It's anti competitive and anti consumer.

And it only hurts the sport we all love.

People in their 20s and 30s are canceling their cable subscriptions. The last thing the MLB should be doing is driving away young fans.

I even convinced my 65 year old dad into dropping cable so he could save some money. He's been an angels fan all his life yet hasn't been able to watch a game since.(almost 2 years).

So with that being said. **** you MLB.

VHF implied that they get people to sign up by telling them they can watch their team only to have the customer find out that's not true. That implies a sort of scam. Which isn't true. It's very easy to see if you will be able to see your team.

Can they really be anti-competitive to a segment of industry they don't operate? They don't run the cable providers. That's like calling Amazon anti-competitive for choosing to only use OnTrac for their shipments. Anti-consumer is their choice. Since its their business.

I disagree it only hurts the sport. Unless you can show me where the money the regional networks provide is going to come from in the future. Not solely MLB.tv subscribers.

[laagamer]

I can't think of a single way no blackouts would be detrimental to anyone.

MLB is the only one who'd lose money no?

So I guess there's someone.

Poor multimillionaires.

[AngelsLakersFan]

What I don't get is that when you watch a game on MLB.com, you don't see the commercials. Why not?

Seems to me the reason mlb doesn't want someone in LA watchjng the Angels on MLB.com instead of FSW is because you're hurting the ratings of FSW, which is paying big bucks for the games, if you do.

But you're still watching. They just need to track your viewership (and still show you the commercials) if you're on a computer.

 

It's not really the ratings they are missing out on, it's the subscriber fees. It's the cable model that is so profitable that they won't do anything to jeopardize it. This debate on the blackouts is the same argument people make when they talk about a la carte cable tv, which would put most channels out of business and drastically raise the prices of those that survive. FSW, and the most successful RSN's are collecting subscriber fees from every single cable subscriber, even those that don't watch. The ads are just icing on the cake.

 

I'm also not sure that any of the money from MLB TV goes to the RSN's. I believe the money is divided up and then equally distributed to the 30 teams. I'm not sure on this part though.