MLB-DirecTV deal whiffs diehard fans
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 66
- Views 7K
- Status
So is Dish and the cable companies willing to add the 24/7 baseball channel from MLB to the basic tier like D* ?
And what about the $30 million difference from what the cable companies were offering than what D* paid?
Does MLB have to take less money and negotiate terms for the MLB 24/7 channel just because less than 300,000 subs would be have to switch to D* ?
And what about the $30 million difference from what the cable companies were offering than what D* paid?
Does MLB have to take less money and negotiate terms for the MLB 24/7 channel just because less than 300,000 subs would be have to switch to D* ?
Mlb Ei = Nfl St
OK so what is the difference between this and Sunday Ticket?? You still get to watch a few games for free on local channles and ESPN just like Football.
But if you want to watch your favorite team every game of the season you go through DirecTV. I see a pattern here. I came to DirecTV for the Sunday Ticket to see Giants games as I'm sure true baseball fans will come to see thier teams.
OK so what is the difference between this and Sunday Ticket?? You still get to watch a few games for free on local channles and ESPN just like Football.
But if you want to watch your favorite team every game of the season you go through DirecTV. I see a pattern here. I came to DirecTV for the Sunday Ticket to see Giants games as I'm sure true baseball fans will come to see thier teams.
Sen. Kerry in a statement said he continues to be concerned.
"I have serious problems with any mega-deal that makes it harder for people across the country to follow their favorite baseball team," he said. "I'm especially troubled by this agreement, which I believe is not in the best long-term interests of the sport. Major League Baseball is making a short-term profit, but they are shutting out fans that can't or won't be able to keep up with their teams if this deal goes through."
If Kerry has a problem with this deal I would like to hear is opion on the Philadelphia market.
"I have serious problems with any mega-deal that makes it harder for people across the country to follow their favorite baseball team," he said. "I'm especially troubled by this agreement, which I believe is not in the best long-term interests of the sport. Major League Baseball is making a short-term profit, but they are shutting out fans that can't or won't be able to keep up with their teams if this deal goes through."
If Kerry has a problem with this deal I would like to hear is opion on the Philadelphia market.
No doubt, including the 24x7 MLB channel on a BASIC tier is a big part of this deal. DISH and the cable co's like to put that type of channel on a mid- or premium-tier, limiting its exposure and commercial revenues.
As for Sen Kerry, I have no doubt that he is only involved b/c some small number of significant contributors to the DNC just happen to be transplanted Sox fans, and those people have pushed his Re-Election Campaign button. He's as in-sincere as they get.
As for Sen Kerry, I have no doubt that he is only involved b/c some small number of significant contributors to the DNC just happen to be transplanted Sox fans, and those people have pushed his Re-Election Campaign button. He's as in-sincere as they get.
That's one example. There are many others where money and tier-placement have kept channels off E* altogether. Anybody in the greater-NYC area knows that E* has never carried YES or SportsNet New York (SNY) due to cost/subscriber and tier-placement. D* does not usually make issues of tier placement or cost.
When cable companies initially did not carry YES there was an outcry by (literally) hundreds of thousands in NY. E* avoided criticism, apparently its market has much less interest in baseball (at least its NY subscriber). That also underscores how E* is less concerned with not carrying MLB EI as much as it is by D* having an exclusive anything.
The whining by E* and cable is not about fans, not about what's good for the vast majority of consumers; it's about competitive advantage.
- Status
