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

[AngelsLakersFan]

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.

 

This is very true also and it's the reason why there is a 'bubble' in sports revenues, profits and player salaries that is going to burst at some point. As HaloMagic up above points out, MLB.tv subscribers are not going to duplicate the revenue of the RSN's.

[gotbeer]

Am I missing something in the link provided?  But the lawsuit seems to be more about in the sample provided, YES (Skank) fans not being able to get YES outside of the area, and thus having to pay for the MLB bundle where they are having to pay for all the games, instead of just the skank games they want to watch.  Thus being overcharged since they only want to pay for the skank games, and not the other games.  

 

While it seems more like a subscriber driving suit.  It sure does have a feeling of say FSW being able to offer FSW on the web, and charge for it on the web.  Similar to say HBO going a la cart on the web.  So if an out of area Angels fan wants to watch FSW, currently they cannot because of "blackout" rules.  Only through the MLB thing where they only get the game.  With this suit, it sounds to me, lilke it would open up, so that FSW could then charge directly and show you the game out of market.  So you could get all that great other programming about the Angels that barely exists.  This would be a huge thing though for Skank fans and possibly Doggie fans.

 

The winners in the above scenarios.  Local providers, like FSW, SportsnetLA, YES, etc.  Losers would be MLB/NHL for losing whatever subscribers jump to the local providers instead of getting the national package.  And this would hurt the NHL more than MLB because frankly, NHL local broadcast pulls crap for income compared to MLB local broadcast rights.  But the biggest losers will be the "cable" providers.  No longer will it be that sports is what is keeping people from cutting the cord.  Because now sports can go streaming.

 

So, it's a win for all of us.  And really will be a minimal loss for the Angels.  Ducks it might hurt more, but nothing a Cup can't cure.

[HaloMagic]

How would FSW be able to pay the Angels the $3 billion if they don't have the revenue of the entire region of cable subscribers to cover their costs?

The people who subscribe to a streaming-based FSW aren't going to be able to cover the costs. And ad revenue will go down because viewership will go down. No longer would you be able to get bored and just flip to the Angels game. If you aren't really a big Angels fan you wouldn't subscribe to that service. So you'd never be able to flip to the channel. So you'd never be a viewer. So the viewer numbers will decrease for every game as the casual viewers are eliminated. So companies will pay less for ad time because they are reaching a smaller segment.

So less ad money, less subscriber money. So less operating money. What happens when FSW folds? How do the Angels reproduce that money that they lose? Not with a new regional provider. They'd all be too smart at that point. So every team would have vastly less money. Which would most likely lead to owners tightening their purse strings. Which would inevitably lead to a strike or lockout.

But at least you can watch every game.

[Vegas Halo Fan]

I still fail to see any merit in MLB's claim that ending blackouts would be detrimental to any fans.

[stormngt]

I don't see how Ala Cart option is not provided. Part of the fees could go to the broadcast companies. Thus th r u make a profit by the added customers

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.

[HaloMagic]

I still fail to see any merit in MLB's claim that ending blackouts would be detrimental to any fans.

I still fail to see any merit in the fans' claim that they should have any say in how MLB operates its business.

[AngelsSurfer]

The way a business is run is always influenced by what customers want. If a business does not provide a product that consumers want to buy, their profits decrease. If they listen to what consumers want to purchase and adjust their product offerings accordingly, their profits increase, and that's what the business wants. Many businesses are willing to spend millions analyzing market information so they can better serve their customers.

 

A lot of industries have had to adjust their business models and product offerings to keep up with advances in technology and trends. This is no different. Phone companies like at&T and Verizon would have gone out of business if they had decided to only offer landlines and ignored the rise of cell phones. Instead they adjusted their product lines and plans, embraced the new technology and now generally make most of their money from mobile phones and data plans.

 

By continuing to cling to the blackouts and expecting people to purchase cable to watch local games, and not embracing new technology and ways of watching TV, MLB is missing out on an opportunity to make more money, and it will only hurt them in the end. People are ditching cable in record numbers, and with or without blackouts, they will find ways to watch the games online. The question will become whether MLB.com and these channels decide to capitalize on that and profit from it by offering new subscription options or if they still will insist on following a business model that is quickly becoming obsolete.

[NrM]

The way a business is run is always influenced by what customers want. If a business does not provide a product that consumers want to buy, their profits decrease. If they listen to what consumers want to purchase and adjust their product offerings accordingly, their profits increase, and that's what the business wants. Many businesses are willing to spend millions analyzing market information so they can better serve their customers.

 

A lot of industries have had to adjust their business models and product offerings to keep up with advances in technology and trends. This is no different. Phone companies like at&T and Verizon would have gone out of business if they had decided to only offer landlines and ignored the rise of cell phones. Instead they adjusted their product lines and plans, embraced the new technology and now generally make most of their money from mobile phones and data plans.

 

By continuing to cling to the blackouts and expecting people to purchase cable to watch local games, and not embracing new technology and ways of watching TV, MLB is missing out on an opportunity to make more money, and it will only hurt them in the end. People are ditching cable in record numbers, and with or without blackouts, they will find ways to watch the games online. The question will become whether MLB.com and these channels decide to capitalize on that and profit from it by offering new subscription options or if they still will insist on following a business model that is quickly becoming obsolete.

meh the hardcore fans will figure out ways. The rest will just stop watching and when(not if) the MLB finally does put an end to blackouts, those fans will be long gone.

 

Instead of the MLB trying to bring in new fans, they are scaring away the dedicated ones.

Edited May 19, 2015 by Poozy

[NrM]

I don't see how Ala Cart option is not provided. Part of the fees could go to the broadcast companies. Thus th r u make a profit by the added customers

 

The potential revenue gains don't matter.

The Cable companies and providers care more about prolonging the inevitable, slowing down the progression of cord cutters.

Edited May 19, 2015 by Poozy

[AngelsSurfer]

meh the hardcore fans will figure out ways. The rest will just stop watching and when(not if) the MLB finally does put an end to blackouts, those fans will be long gone.

 

Instead of the MLB trying to bring in new fans, they are scaring away the dedicated ones.

That's really it. MLB is the one who will lose by continuing to restrict viewing access at the end of the day, because many fans will just give up.

[HaloMagic]

What business model do you guys suggest to replace the money currently provided by the regional sports networks?

[AngelsLakersFan]

The way a business is run is always influenced by what customers want. If a business does not provide a product that consumers want to buy, their profits decrease. If they listen to what consumers want to purchase and adjust their product offerings accordingly, their profits increase, and that's what the business wants. Many businesses are willing to spend millions analyzing market information so they can better serve their customers.

 

A lot of industries have had to adjust their business models and product offerings to keep up with advances in technology and trends. This is no different. Phone companies like at&T and Verizon would have gone out of business if they had decided to only offer landlines and ignored the rise of cell phones. Instead they adjusted their product lines and plans, embraced the new technology and now generally make most of their money from mobile phones and data plans.

 

By continuing to cling to the blackouts and expecting people to purchase cable to watch local games, and not embracing new technology and ways of watching TV, MLB is missing out on an opportunity to make more money, and it will only hurt them in the end. People are ditching cable in record numbers, and with or without blackouts, they will find ways to watch the games online. The question will become whether MLB.com and these channels decide to capitalize on that and profit from it by offering new subscription options or if they still will insist on following a business model that is quickly becoming obsolete.

 

There is truth to this but it's a lot closer to asking the music industry to give up on CDs and embrace digital downloads. Eventually the customers always get what they want, but that doesn't mean that it is good for the industry. Where the music industry failed MLB has actually been quite successful. The fact is that we are complaining about blackouts and not complete lack of legal access to streaming (which is how the record companies handled their situation). MLB Advanced Media has proven that MLB's early investment in streaming has been well worth the effort. I don't think there is nearly enough demand or fan pressure at the moment to force their hand on the blackout issue.

[shellback]

The MLB brand is so big they can dictate the terms of how you're going to watch thier product.

[halobob]

HM has it right, there is too much in regional TV money that will be lost if the blackouts are lifted.  It is why the blackouts are there in the first place.  If I'm allowed to subscribe to NBA/MLB/NHL games as well as NFL redzone a la carte, I'm dropping cable in a heartbeat along with most other sports fans ages 20s-40s.  

Edited May 19, 2015 by halobob

[AngelsSurfer]

There is truth to this but it's a lot closer to asking the music industry to give up on CDs and embrace digital downloads. Eventually the customers always get what they want, but that doesn't mean that it is good for the industry. Where the music industry failed MLB has actually been quite successful. The fact is that we are complaining about blackouts and not complete lack of legal access to streaming (which is how the record companies handled their situation). MLB Advanced Media has proven that MLB's early investment in streaming has been well worth the effort. I don't think there is nearly enough demand or fan pressure at the moment to force their hand on the blackout issue.

 

MLB has definitely embraced changing times more than the music industry, and I think it's true that displeasure with blackouts hasn't yet reached critical mass. But I think it's on its way. In LA, the thing with the Dodgers being held hostage by Time Warner has definitely angered a lot of people and had a negative backlash on TW, and there have been similar concerns in NYC with YES, and I think that the level of dissatisfaction, and people who are so disgusted by it that they decide to walk away, will only continue to grow.

The thing with the music industry is that they've kept CDs alongside digital downloads so people can choose what they want. Customers can either buy an entire album or pick a song or two that they like. And they've also finally figured out that they can package and sell vinyl as a collectors' item to get people to buy. That's akin to picking one or two cable channels, or teams, or buying the whole package. Part of the death of the music industry also has a lot to do with the rise of indie recording, and the fact that artists no longer have to deal with record labels to efficiently and cheaply get their products to the public, and that's not something MLB has to worry about.

 

I just remembered Sling, too - it's a streaming service that does allow people to buy a very reasonably priced package of basic cable channels, and then pick other channels as they wish. Some cable channels are embracing the a la carte model...

 

At the end of the day, I think there are three things that will happen here: a) Cable subscriptions will continue to diminish, so that model, and those networks, will become less profitable. That's happening regardless of what happens with baseball broadcasts; b ) Some people will choose not to buy MLB.com subscriptions at all and will find, ahem, other means to watch the games, so neither cable nor MLB.com will make a dime off them; c) other people will choose to buy MLB.com will, ahem, travel a lot to get around the blackouts, which means the cable companies still won't make any money off them. If MLB and the regional sports networks don't fully address this and find ways to get customers who are not buying their current products, they will lose in the end.

Edited May 19, 2015 by AngelsSurfer

[stormngt]

What business model do you guys suggest to replace the money currently provided by the regional sports networks?

Allow the local networks to market the games online.  For example Foxsports could market the Angels game.  The consumer pays Foxsports to watch it online.  Foxsports pays a royalty to MLB (which would be passed on to the consumer).  The price of individual games would go much higher.  You wouldn't be able to watch all major league games for 100+ dollars.  That 100+ may only be able to purchase only Angel games.  

 

Consumer gets hit with higher cost for internet feed.  However, they get the internet feed that they currently don't have so they will be happy.

 

Local network profits from online streaming.

 

MLB profits through the royalties.