OT: Ballys Sports group files for Chapter 11
We knew it was probably coming soon, but here it is. The dominoes are probably about to fall...
March 14th, 2023 at 10:15 PM ^
Good
March 14th, 2023 at 10:16 PM ^
Anybody paying $20/month to watch the Detroit teams is getting bamboozled.
March 14th, 2023 at 10:21 PM ^
That is what the cost is going to be unless cable bundles become a thing again and sports get subsidized by people who don't watch it.
People arguing against cable bundling were very short sighted
March 14th, 2023 at 10:27 PM ^
Screw cable
March 14th, 2023 at 10:36 PM ^
"People arguing against cable bundling were very short sighted"
Right... no way it could be that some teams have priced their fans out of the market.
March 14th, 2023 at 10:45 PM ^
Sports fans arguing against bundles were short sighted. Because non-sports fans were subsidizing us sports fans.
Most of us sports fans have been paying extra to watch our favorite teams for decades (started paying for Center Ice in 2001 because I don’t live in Detroit or the Wings viewing area). I hope cable dies a swift death so I can subscribe to ad free streaming options more readily without the cable companies muscling in and forcing the stuff I want o watch into exclusive deals that require me to have cable to watch it.
March 15th, 2023 at 10:23 AM ^
I'm sure there is some slack in the price but this is mostly a false statement. Putting out a high quality broadcast is expensive. Doing it for every game for every team is unsustainable if you are charging $5 a month per person willing to pay solely for sports. Your choices are having every game on tv at something like $20 a month or not having every game on tv.
Your other option is bundling, in which a collective price for everyone allows for sustainable pricing models across the board resulting in overall more value for consumers even as you somewhat subsidize the creation of something you don't watch. You as a Michigan fan might not care about watching top chef on Bravo and the top chef fan might not care about Michigan football but you both paying for both along with the third person wanting to watch what we do in the shadows on fx keeps all those things viable. Instead we get a fractured system with a 15 different streaming services all charging high amounts so that consumers are paying the same or more per month for less overall choice. What a sweet outcome.
March 15th, 2023 at 11:11 AM ^
Everything is a premium channel now. Theoretically you could pay $15 a month andwatch all the shows you want and then cycle to the next service, and save money, but what happens is people subscribe to 3 to 5 services and end up paying more. Sports is on top of that and the rights are split up so it is hard to subscribe to just one service for that. At some point I'm going to run out of free trials to watch that one Michigan game that isn't on broadcast TV.
(I'm a cord cutter and have an OTA DVR, but then I have Netflix, Hulu/Disney, Amazon Prime and then will get Showtime or HBO Max from time to time. )
Yeah, but I can turn those on and off without having to call and negotiate with some schlep at the cable company who also wants me to have a landline for "reasons". I got YouTube TV, a few streaming services, and have no complaints compared to my cable days. I turn off YouTube TV after March Madness and turn it back on for CFB. And telling me there's not enough money in sports media and tv is about as hollow of an argument as the NCAA saying there isn't enough money to pay players. Let me guess, you were shocked to see oil companies had record profits last year because you thought their costs had gone up because of inflation?
Also, streaming is cheap. $15 a month for most services versus people who were paying $150 a month for "bundled" cable crap. If you want to watch obscure stuff that isn't mainstream, then you should expect to pay more for it. That's supply and demand. But subsidizing this crap so everyone but the fan is making out great is dumb.
March 14th, 2023 at 11:12 PM ^
Ak47
So it is the consumers who refused to buy the product that were short-sighted? Not the rights holders who overplayed their hand, made a shit app, and had only shit teams to show?
The Pistons are not watchable. Again. The Tigers are most likely going to be terrible. Again. I guess the Red Wings are relatively better.
And as a cord cutter I am doing great. YouTube TV for wolverines football and basketball. I'm willing to miss some bball games. There's usually a month where the Wolverines are on the antenna for a month straight, usually October. I'm a 4-5 month a year streamer.
March 14th, 2023 at 11:27 PM ^
Facts.
Living in Texas, I only have to pay or travel to watch a Wolverine game I'd guess 3 or 4 times a season.
Almost every game is on Antenna.
March 15th, 2023 at 10:36 AM ^
Its not just about bally sports. That was a response to the comment that paying $20 per month means being someone being ripped off. In an unbundled world that is what sports cost to watch.
Your example of YTTV is exactly the argument in favor of bundling. YTTV is a bundled cable service delivered over the internet as opposed to a cable wire. Its functionally no different from cable. And it works great for you because as a bundled product your sports watching is subsidized by millions of people who don't care about sports. When you sign up for YTTV you aren't just paying for channels Michigan is on, you are paying for Bravo, FX, AMC, etc. Just like someone else is signing up for 5 months so they can watch a show on FX and during that time they are also paying ESPN, FS1, etc. Because of the bundling you are each subsidizing the other persons interest by paying for something you would not pay for as a standalone product, allowing the producers of content to maintain lower costs per customer and keeping production viable. In a true unbundled world where you solely paid for Michigan sports content, it would go the way of Bally sports.
I think its funny that people talk so glowingly of things like YTTV like its not just the equivalent of a basic cable package. YTTV is $65 per month, an internet service capable of streaming is going to be $40 per month. So you are paying $100 per month for tv and internet. An internet and cable package from xfinity right now with no contract that provides you 125 channels (more than YTTV) and 400 mbps internet is $90 a month. People conflated hating comcast and verizon (which is fair) with the concept of bundling. YTTV is a bundled service.
March 15th, 2023 at 10:54 AM ^
I get what you're saying, but before streaming services, there was no such thing as a "no contract" cable service. Also before streaming, how many cable options did you actually have? At most 2. Competition was needed. Regardless of bundling or not, streaming services have made things better for everyone, even people who stuck with cable.
And also we're looking at it from a sports view, but any non sports fan is much better off in a world without bundling.
March 15th, 2023 at 11:43 AM ^
All this is true. I would only note, as someone who:
- Cut the cord in favor of YTTV (and Hulu basic), but using Xfinity internet
- Watched YTTV drop FSD (later Bally) and then raise their price $15/month
- Bundled Xfinity Stream with the internet to get Bally (mainly for my kid to watch the Pistons)
- Watched YTTV drop MLB Network for 2023
...Xfinity Stream is not as capable as YTTV. Specifically, you can't pause or rewind live TV, which seems minor but I do it all the time. For that reason alone, I probably won't drop YTTV in favor of Xfinity Stream when my bundle promo ends next month. In fact, I'll probably drop Xfinity Stream and try to find another way. I don't watch the Pistons or Wings, so I'll really only miss watching the Tigers when I'm bored.
Not that they'll be enjoyable to watch.
Maybe by 2024, Bally will restructure/rebrand and realize that overplaying their hand with the streaming services contributed to their bankruptcy.
March 15th, 2023 at 11:51 AM ^
Ak47
The $40 or whatever for an internet connection is a red herring. It is 2023. I have had a high speed internet connection since at least 2007. During that time I have had MULTIPLE go rounds with each of cable, Dish network, Direct TV and every streaming service under the sun. The one constant is high speed internet.
I don't have access to whatever xfinity package you are talking about. But I find your reasoning to be suspect. The reason is that I do not feel like all of the non sports cable viewers are subsidizing sports viewers. In fact, it is quite the opposite.
I am a HULU subscriber (although I get it for free). I have also at times subscribed to Peacock, Paramount, everything. These services cost peanuts next to YTTV, even if you are subscribing to all of them. Philo+ HULU+ Peacock +Paramount is still less than YTTV. My point here is that if you watch regular TV programming and not sports you can get by for cheap.
But sports is where they have you by the balls. So YTTV has everything a sports guy could want (apart from Bally). So they are the most expensive service. The bundling doesn't make sports more viable. It squeezes you for everything they're worth and then forces you to subsidize other garbage programming.
Anybody subscribing to YTTV that does not do so primarily to watch sports is either rich (and therefore the cost doesn't matter) or not too smart about this stuff.
I'm with you on bundling itself. In our (rightful) anger towards the shady practices of cable and satellite companies, I think a lot of us missed how beneficial that concept is. But for me personally, with YouTubeTV, the big game changers were no cable/satellite boxes, the service aspect, and unlimited DVR. Logistically in my house, to just be able to plug a TV in and go was huge. And cost wise, the local cable company here stuck you on additional charges for every box. For me at least, YTTV and internet service still puts me ahead of what a combined cable package would be. For service, being able to add and subtract subscriptions (i.e. RedZone) with the click of a button as opposed to a 12 round fight on the phone every time was a very welcome change. And it's hard to overstate how huge the unlimited DVR is. You can have every single episode of every series you like and a lot of movies you like available whenever as long as they air regularly on cable, which most of them do. And other than the garbage with our local teams (Cavs and Guardians), YTTV has just about every sports channel.
As for Bally, good freaking riddance. They had the worst app I've ever seen. I had to delete it, re-download it, and log in literally every single time I wanted to use it. I think in the cord cutting debate, people focus too much on the cost of it and underestimate the convenience aspect. I'd be willing to pay a good amount for the local teams to be on YTTV (or another streaming cable service) again. But as much of a diehard fan of those teams that I am, my viewing habits changed with how awful that app is.
March 15th, 2023 at 10:26 AM ^
You are 100% correct - most people here are too cranky to realize it.
Get ready to start paying $20 or $30/month, per league. This will lead to the eventual collapse and contraction of TV deals for leagues. The only league that has earned its advertising money to date is the NFL.
NHL, NBA, and MLB are far distant #2-4 place.
The NHL, NBA, and MLB and their players unions are about to be hit with reality in a year or two.
When you think about it, for local teams, hopefully it wouldn't be that expensive. But isn't that probably the most fair type of arrangement ? With local sports channels, it's almost purely for games and there isn't too much middle ground for viewers compared to other channels. Fans are watching regularly, and others don't care at all. But for other cable channels, there are probably 25 of them that I watch in varying amounts, which is a lot more conducive to bundling. It makes sense to separate out local teams and charge people accordingly. But like you said, the leagues won't like that result and it may cause a big shift in the revenue model.
March 14th, 2023 at 11:12 PM ^
They should be paying me $20/month!
At minimum, I just wish I had the choice to pay whatever because I am not switching streaming services for it. Someday one of these teams will get hot and I'd consider the add-on, and when they're not I can just cancel. Am thankful the NFL chose YouTube TV though.
March 15th, 2023 at 10:40 AM ^
But that model doesn't work economically. Yes its great for you but the costs of producing a viable streaming service are the same year to year. The infrastructure, staffing costs, etc. all exist whether the team is performing or not and you want to pay. So either you and others have to pay even when you aren't interested in watching or the streaming isn't available. There isn't some magical other option.
listening on the radio is actually a pretty good option
yes it is. I listen to tons of sports on Satellite radio. I can do it my car, in the home, walking the dog or anywhere.
March 14th, 2023 at 10:16 PM ^
could this somehow result in releasing the tigers and red wings for actual watching on TV in this state?
March 14th, 2023 at 10:57 PM ^
The days of watching the Tigers on channel 4 and the Wings on channel 50 are long gone.
March 14th, 2023 at 11:14 PM ^
Those were the days, Stig
March 14th, 2023 at 11:20 PM ^
Great comment, made me stop a think about those time/
que the 'memories' song.
earnie harwell was the greatest. george kell, too. bruce martin and bud lynch spoiled us with the red wings. ray lane did a very nice job for the lions. detroit had the best group of announcers anywhere during that time.
March 15th, 2023 at 12:19 PM ^
Does anyone remember Al Foulline and Sid DIsabled on WRIF?
No disrespect. Imitation was definitely meant as a fine form of flattery.
March 15th, 2023 at 12:51 PM ^
In the early 90's in Cleveland even if you HAD cable (which, I lived in an area without it) there weren't any out of market games on regularly (unless they were national games). This meant my formative years are filled with memories of Wings games on WJR and Bruce Martyn. Drilling down even further, many of those games I listened to were on the radio of my Dad's truck, as we were coming back from a mid-week trip to the lake house (to get work done on whatever stage of the renovation we were in at that point).
Little did I know at the time that Dad would be gone by the end of the decade and those memories would live on with me for the rest of my life. Glad there are a few old calls by Bruce on YT, they're great to listen to sometimes
bruce's particular inflection on 'he shoots, he scores!' still rings in my ears and it's been how many decades since i heard it.
Admittedly, there are days where I wish we could tune into WDIV to watch Al and George do just one more game. Alas, as someone said, these days are long gone, as are Al and George sadly.
Boy do I miss the days of Ray Lane!
March 14th, 2023 at 10:18 PM ^
So I guess the next station will be XSD?
March 14th, 2023 at 11:57 PM ^
Considering how drugged up you have to be to watch Detroit sports, LSD is more likely.
March 14th, 2023 at 10:24 PM ^
I just want to watch the Red Wings on the channels I have now, I don’t want to buy anything extra
March 14th, 2023 at 10:50 PM ^
Back to channel 50, like back in the day?
March 14th, 2023 at 10:58 PM ^
This is what you do now: https://reddit-live-tvlinks.blogspot.com/
Fuck these companies that take exorbitant fees from their customers only to fuck them in the end.
I only wish this was ESPN.
Sports surge is another web site. They consolidate streams. Just make sure you have your ad blockers and such updated.
March 14th, 2023 at 11:26 PM ^
Nice to find a fan who remembers Channel 50 and "Dead" Wings hockey era. So many fond memories doing engineering homework in Ann Arbor in the evening watching a bad team (pre Yzerman) get smoked by the Islanders or Flyers. Then hearing Bruce Martyn and Sid Abel (WRIF radio parodied them as Bruce "Martyr" and Sid Dis-Able) how the "Wings just didn't have it tonight" - if it was really bad, Sid would go off on a rant sometimes. Still remember a bad game where the Wings got pushed around, beaten up, and crushed on the scoreboard by a Bobby Clarke-led Flyers team. Sid went so far as complain about how they looked "scared" and then even said something like "the Wings, they played like a bunch of girls out there tonight!" - Bruce tried to get him to backtrack his comment but Sid wasn't having it. The TV station phones rang off the hook with women complaining about being compared to a wimpy, terrible team. Sid did offer an apology on his next broadcast - using his usually verb-tense challenged lingo. As lot of women IS...one gal in particular ARE upset, etc. He would not have survived the night even 25 years ago.
We are in a Dead Wings era right now. The kids know the feeling. Or, they would if they wanted to watch them. Which they can't.
March 15th, 2023 at 11:50 AM ^
I don't watch the Wings currently (bandwagon fan), but they're not the Dead Wings. They're 7 points out of a wildcard spot (which is increasingly unlikely), in a pack of 5 teams between 69-73 points, and have a winning record. They're very young and vying for the playoffs. A far cry from the Dead Wings era.
March 14th, 2023 at 10:33 PM ^
All hail the cable cutters!
March 14th, 2023 at 11:02 PM ^
Are the Red Wings still on fox sports Detroit? I moved out of Michigan ~7 years ago
Fox Sports Detroit PASSed a while ago.
March 14th, 2023 at 11:04 PM ^
This is going to be interesting. Right now I have Direct TV stream because through that I get both the Cavs & the Indians, errr sorry, GUARDIANS, via Bally. I also have YouTube TV because other than local sports I can’t stand Direct TV stream.
Wherever local sports goes I will follow.
March 14th, 2023 at 11:10 PM ^
I still call them the Indians and perhaps always will. I get that the Redskins name was more offensive but Indians, Braves, Chiefs, etc. - sorry but whenever I heard the word chief I think of Maxwell Smart and his boss, the chief!
I'll just take what I can get and would consider a 1 year "intro" deal to watch games but not paying much - this is one time the fans have purchasing power.