Sinclair(Bally's Sport) nearing a deal for NBA streaming rights for direct to consumer offering


short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
16,723
Reaction score
9,608
Points
113
Don't know if we'll hear anything today - but this is the deadline for Diamond to make the payments it owes to the Twins and Guardians. (due date was earlier but there is a grace period)

if by close of business today the payments are not made, then as I understand it MLB will likely go to the bankruptcy court and request that the court declare Diamond to have violated its contract with the teams.

UPDATE: just saw on a different site that a court hearing on the matter has been moved from today (Apr 13) to Wednesday, April 19. more from that article:

MLB said time is of the essence, and argued Diamond Sports' request to delay a hearing on the matter to mid-May wasn't reasonable. Still, it agreed to delay the hearing from the originally requested date of April 13 — this Thursday — to April 19, at which point it hopes the court will approve its motion to compel payment or return of the telecast rights.

If the judge approved MLB's motion to compel, Manfred said the organization would tap into its TV channel, MLB Network, to make the games available to fans while it worked out agreements with other cable networks. MLB could also offer the games directly to consumers through streaming, or make one-off deals with local broadcast stations in the teams' home markets.


the info was on "Fierce Video" - a website that covers the TV industry, streaming, equipment, etc.
 
Last edited:

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
36,316
Reaction score
15,472
Points
113
Well youtube tv recently dropped MLB Network so that may not be good for some.
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
6,231
Reaction score
4,140
Points
113
Well youtube tv recently dropped MLB Network so that may not be good for some.
Would that matter in terms of the Twins? Would they clear their programming to show them (and the Guards & D-Backs)?
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
36,316
Reaction score
15,472
Points
113
Would that matter in terms of the Twins? Would they clear their programming to show them (and the Guards & D-Backs)?
I don't know how it would all work to be honest. Just noticed it talked about MLB Network.

The easiest solution to me would be to make these 3 teams games available through MLB TV for free without blackouts until they figure out the long term solution.
 


howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
73,900
Reaction score
30,015
Points
113
Would that matter in terms of the Twins? Would they clear their programming to show them (and the Guards & D-Backs)?
Presumably they would offer an alternate channel feed just as Bally sports extra is.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
16,723
Reaction score
9,608
Points
113
just saw a story online that the bankruptcy court judge has set a hearing for May 31 - but the story was behind a paywall so I only saw the headline and don't have any context. If that is accurate, that is a win for Diamond, because they were pushing for a later hearing date while MLB wanted the hearing as soon as possible.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
15,471
Reaction score
3,882
Points
113
People are being slow to learn that paying $19.99 for the app doesn't get you Twins games even though that's been said from the beginning. You have to log in through a cable/satellite provider that has Bally's to watch the Twins.
What a joke.

What the hell does that $20 get you, then? I don't want to know, was asking rhetorically.
 






Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
15,471
Reaction score
3,882
Points
113
The Wolves and Wild. There's zero reason for anyone to pay for it from May-October.
This whole model of "ala carte" is never going to work. It's closer to Pay-Per-View than anything else.

No one is going to be willing to pay the price that they'd have to charge, if only sports fans are footing the bill.


It only works because you can force all subscribers to a channel bundle to essentially subsidize the sports content.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
15,471
Reaction score
3,882
Points
113
I believe they work for the Twins. That used to be the case anyway.When Victory Sports folded, Dick and Bert were on FSN the next day. The Twins are the ones that shoved Bert aside a couple years ago. Not sure about the camera crew etc. though.
I could see all the physical equipment belonging to the Twins and/or the stadium itself. Technicians employed by the stadium to run it.

That way, whichever channel is showing the game (ESPN, FOX, ____ Sports North, etc.) can just provide the graphics guys in the control room with the overlays, and everything else stays the same.
 





Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
15,471
Reaction score
3,882
Points
113
I don't know how it would all work to be honest. Just noticed it talked about MLB Network.

The easiest solution to me would be to make these 3 teams games available through MLB TV for free without blackouts until they figure out the long term solution.
Yep, Google and MLBN could not agree on carriage fees, dropped them March 30.

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/mlb/news/youtube-tv-drop-mlb-network-stream/dfjboobi0ydaywlpsrlnwj5v


Yeah that would be great. Maybe they would be willing to do that. Meaning you'd need to load the MLBTV app for your system (eg Roku) and use that, but at least it would be available.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
15,471
Reaction score
3,882
Points
113
Presumably they would offer an alternate channel feed just as Bally sports extra is.
No it would not work that way. There simply is no MLB channel on YTTV anymore.

Going through a separate app though, would work.
 


howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
73,900
Reaction score
30,015
Points
113

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
15,471
Reaction score
3,882
Points
113
YANK THE F'ING FEED CABLE OUT OF THE WALL AT THE STADIUM.

You don't pay? No signal.

Come try to get it, jagoffs
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
15,471
Reaction score
3,882
Points
113
$73/month. No Bally. No MLB Network. What makes YouTube TV so beloved by some?
It started out at $45.

And it has simply reverted to what cable was.


Because ... of course it has.


There's no money in skinny bundles.



The money is in forcing everyone to pay for everything. That's the only model that ever made money. That's why it was always like that way with cable.

They knew that if people actually saw how much you'd have to pay per month to have ala carte, people would just say F it and find something else to do than watch TV.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
36,316
Reaction score
15,472
Points
113
$73/month. No Bally. No MLB Network. What makes YouTube TV so beloved by some?
We've had it for years. It was much cheaper then and did have those things until recently. At this point it's mainly laziness to be honest. We have so many shows saved so would have to go through and change all that. And just about every streaming service has something missing that we would want.

But we're probably close to looking elsewhere. The initial appeal of streaming was to keep costs down by being able to pick and choose many of the channels you wanted instead of getting so many you never watch. Now they've become just like cable.
 


Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
15,471
Reaction score
3,882
Points
113
Myself ... I honestly spend about as much time watching YouTube (regular, not "TV") videos on my Roku app on my main TV, as I spend watching actual (paid) TV programming.

I still split YTTV three ways with two other households. So far this arrangement is holding.

No chance in hell we'd be forking over $73/mo. I just don't watch near enough TV to justify it.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
16,723
Reaction score
9,608
Points
113
Found a little more info on what's happening - in a financial article from Bloomberg. Diamond - as I read it - is asking the court for permission to reduce the amount it pays to 3 teams.

Major League Baseball’s largest local broadcaster is seeking discounts on contracts to air three teams’ games in a move the league has vowed to oppose.

In a bankruptcy court hearing Thursday, Diamond Sports Group LLC’s lawyer Ross Firsenbaum told Judge Christopher Lopez that its contracts with the Minnesota Twins, Cleveland Guardians and Arizona Diamondbacks are unreasonable and worth “materially” less than what the company was paying to exclusively broadcast games in those markets through its Bally Sports brand.

Lawyers for the MLB and the three teams said company is violating its contractual obligations that require periodic payments to continue broadcasting games. The company hasn’t paid the teams since it filed for bankruptcy last month.

James Bromley, a lawyer representing the MLB Commissioner’s Office, said Diamond’s financial problems are its own doing and that if the broadcaster can’t pay, the league is prepared to broadcast games itself. The teams need the broadcast fees to pay their employees and other expenses, he said.

Lopez denied the MLB’s request to rule on the dispute on an expedited basis and instead scheduled a hearing at the end of May that could determine the value of the contracts with the three clubs.

Bankruptcy rules give companies in Chapter 11 wide latitude to reject burdensome contracts, but Bromley said bankruptcy doesn’t give Diamond the right to keep the broadcast deals at a reduced price.

“The only content they have, they must pay for,” Bromley said. “If this was a company that made corn bread, they’d have to pay for the corn.”

Diamond is gathering evidence to support its contention that the deals are overvalued, Firsenbaum said. Diamond may seek to get documents from MLB concerning how much the league believes broadcast rights for the Twins, Guardians and Diamondbacks are worth.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
15,471
Reaction score
3,882
Points
113
Paid off the judge. Cheaper than having to take the loss on the contracts, why not?

Ahole.

They know the Twins won't sign a new contract with them going forward, so let's try to F them, why not?
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
73,900
Reaction score
30,015
Points
113
We've had it for years. It was much cheaper then and did have those things until recently. At this point it's mainly laziness to be honest. We have so many shows saved so would have to go through and change all that. And just about every streaming service has something missing that we would want.

But we're probably close to looking elsewhere. The initial appeal of streaming was to keep costs down by being able to pick and choose many of the channels you wanted instead of getting so many you never watch. Now they've become just like cable.
I get it. I'm kind of at the same point with DirecTV. Mostly have it because they have Sunday Ticket, BTN and Bally's and are generally the best for sports. But they no longer have Sunday Ticket, and Bally's is about to be irrelevant. I think YouTube is going to sell Sunday Ticket as a stand alone though. At least I hope so.
 

Gophers_4life

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
15,471
Reaction score
3,882
Points
113
I get it. I'm kind of at the same point with DirecTV. Mostly have it because they have Sunday Ticket, BTN and Bally's and are generally the best for sports. But they no longer have Sunday Ticket, and Bally's is about to be irrelevant. I think YouTube is going to sell Sunday Ticket as a stand alone though. At least I hope so.
They will, but they'll make it painful enough for you to reconsider (will be cheaper for subscribers).
 

#2Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
8,752
Reaction score
2,714
Points
113
I believe they work for the Twins. That used to be the case anyway.When Victory Sports folded, Dick and Bert were on FSN the next day. The Twins are the ones that shoved Bert aside a couple years ago. Not sure about the camera crew etc. though.
I was at a funeral a couple months ago. Someone supposedly had inside information regarding the situation with Bert. According to this guy, Bert had issues with Bert from time to time and finally thought enough was enough. From reading Dick's book, pranks were pulled. Apparently some cross the line to the point Bert almost lost his wedding ring due to Dick's pranks.
 

Gopherguy0723

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
4,472
Reaction score
521
Points
113
I was at a funeral a couple months ago. Someone supposedly had inside information regarding the situation with Bert. According to this guy, Bert had issues with Bert from time to time and finally thought enough was enough. From reading Dick's book, pranks were pulled. Apparently some cross the line to the point Bert almost lost his wedding ring due to Dick's pranks.
Huh?
 




Top Bottom