Hulu + Live TV will no longer have RSNs (2 Viewers)

epokopac

Thread Starter
Active SatelliteGuys Member
Jun 16, 2016
18
19
Lawrenceville, GA
Starting on October 23, 2020 Hulu will no longer have the rights to distribute certain Regional Sports Networks (RSNs) that are currently included with your Hulu + Live TV plan.

While we were unable to reach an agreement with Sinclair Broadcast Group to continue offering channels like your Fox Sports RSN, YES Network, and Marquee Network, the good news is that you will continue to have access to a wide variety of sports from other popular channels including ESPN, TNT, and TBS, as well as FS1 and FS2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ncted and chaddux

Tampa8

Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
17,916
7,352
Tampa/Eastern Ct
Starting on October 23, 2020 Hulu will no longer have the rights to distribute certain Regional Sports Networks (RSNs) that are currently included with your Hulu + Live TV plan.

While we were unable to reach an agreement with Sinclair Broadcast Group to continue offering channels like your Fox Sports RSN, YES Network, and Marquee Network, the good news is that you will continue to have access to a wide variety of sports from other popular channels including ESPN, TNT, and TBS, as well as FS1 and FS2.

They no longer have rights because they found out what DISH has known now for years and years. Too damn expensive.
 

SamCdbs

SatelliteGuys Pro
Lifetime Supporter
May 7, 2008
1,581
338
I have always loved the "I enjoy content free television" that runs through all such discussions.

However, I see a parallel to one of the, IMHO, worst mistakes made MLB in the previous generations happening yet again. For the better part of two decades the "superstation" loophole made it far easier to watch the Braves or Cubs, and to a lesser extent the Red Sox or Yankees, than one's natural geographically logical home team. This did great damage to the sport, particularly to the teams that draw regionally, damage that continues to this day.

Now, for streamers, there is only one major service that can get you your local teams. But you can subscribe to a fairly inexpensive "out of market" mlb.tv package and watch any team. Except your own.

Baseball, and hockey and basketball, need to get this fixed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AntiMoz

DetFan

Pub Member / Supporter
Pub Member / Supporter
Feb 27, 2006
2,022
121
Livonia, Michigan
What’s Sinclair going to do when they’re on no services? Makes no sense unless they’re up to something.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: syphix

Radioguy41

SatelliteGuys Pro
Aug 7, 2008
1,981
1,478
Lehighton, PA
However, I see a parallel to one of the, IMHO, worst mistakes made MLB in the previous generations happening yet again. For the better part of two decades the "superstation" loophole made it far easier to watch the Braves or Cubs, and to a lesser extent the Red Sox or Yankees, than one's natural geographically logical home team. This did great damage to the sport, particularly to the teams that draw regionally, damage that continues to this day.

Now, for streamers, there is only one major service that can get you your local teams. But you can subscribe to a fairly inexpensive "out of market" mlb.tv package and watch any team. Except your own.

Baseball, and hockey and basketball, need to get this fixed.
I kind of disagree that Superstations were the problem. The problem began when greedy team owners signed agreements with non-broadcasters thereby denying access to a large segment of fans. Here's one example. The Phillies signed an exclusive 25 year agreement with Comcast 5 seasons ago. Comcast has exclusive rights even extending so far as to blackout ESPN carried Phillies games in the local market. So as a fan I have no access to Phillies games on TV because I'm outside of Comcasts area but inside what is considered the Phillies market. Nice, huh? So far this postseason TV ratings are among the worst in history and the commish keeps crying they need to get young fans involved. Well why should they? If you can't see a team all season a young fan has nothing to sustain his interest so it certainly isn't going to magically appear in the postseason. You have to wonder, as cordcutting continues, at what point it dawns on Comcast that maybe tieing themselves to 25 years at $2.5B wasn't such a good idea.

Phils, Comcast SportsNet reach new TV deal
 
  • Like
Reactions: AntiMoz and Tampa8

Tampa8

Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
17,916
7,352
Tampa/Eastern Ct
Shouldn't this be in the Cord Cutters Forum?

It could be certainly. Seems appropriate here also because DISH has been for a long time the provider that fights with RSN's, drops them, so I can see posting that here that others now see the same problems.
 

Tampa8

Supporting Founder
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Sep 8, 2003
17,916
7,352
Tampa/Eastern Ct
I have always loved the "I enjoy content free television" that runs through all such discussions.

However, I see a parallel to one of the, IMHO, worst mistakes made MLB in the previous generations happening yet again. For the better part of two decades the "superstation" loophole made it far easier to watch the Braves or Cubs, and to a lesser extent the Red Sox or Yankees, than one's natural geographically logical home team. This did great damage to the sport, particularly to the teams that draw regionally, damage that continues to this day.

Now, for streamers, there is only one major service that can get you your local teams. But you can subscribe to a fairly inexpensive "out of market" mlb.tv package and watch any team. Except your own.

Baseball, and hockey and basketball, need to get this fixed.

Nah. The amount of games on free TV where Superstations are concerned for years and years have been minimal. Chicago Cubs was an exception for longer time than others. And for awhile the Braves. The others long before cut way back and now it is rare.
I see the problem as very different. It was only a matter of time given the business structure that something had to give with RSN's. Could it be the other Streamers found not enough people wanted to pay for RSN's so that contributed to it being too expensive for them to carry?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AntiMoz

ncted

SatelliteGuys Master
Pub Member / Supporter
Jul 4, 2004
5,009
3,366
Durham, NC
Amazes me what bothers people.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well, I went to post this news in that forum, and I was a bit surprised that it wasn't already there given the good community we have here, so I did a search and I was surprised to see it in the Dish forum, which really has nothing to do with Hulu or RSNs at this point.
 

DJ Lon

SatelliteGuys Pro
Nov 29, 2009
542
553
Phoenix, AZ
I really don't shed any tears for this. I wasn't able to watch any Diamondbacks games this Summer and even if they were on MLB they'd play for about 5 minutes and get blacked out.

We were big baseball fans and even went to Chase field for live games at least twice a year in the past. Now we're like meh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Juan and Tampa8

crodrules

Your Happy Guru
Pub Member / Supporter
Jun 14, 2014
7,095
5,576
North Central Ohio
Shouldn't this be in the Cord Cutters Forum?
The same poster put this exact same OP in the Dish forum over at dbstalk.
So, as soon as that site moves that thread to their equivalent of the Cord Cutters Forum, then maybe it should also be moved here. Until then, let's leave it in the Dish forum on both sites. There is nothing stopping the Cord Cutters Forum from having its own separate thread on the same topic.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts

Top