OT: More RSN troubles; Bally's loses rights to broadcast Padres after missed payment

me, pretending to be mgrow old:

2. it would seem that the more they restrict the viewing of these sports, the less viewers, leading to less fans, leading to less money, leading to less players coming up through the system all the way down to little leagues, etc.    risking pricing themselves out of business.  i have to think that the NHL model of the last few years on some whack network hurt them badly in terms of viewship.  nice to see them on normal networks, but i'd say that's not an outlier about pricing and subscriptions for specific teams or even sports. 

I remember the days of PASS sports (which my parents wouldn't purchase) and being able to watch more Chicago Bulls games living in Detroit than Pistons games.  I'm not sure what percentage of Pistons/Tigers/Wings games were actually available on free network TV.  I do know that in order to watch the Lions we had to occasionally find bars that had the games due to the leagues local blackout rules for non sell out games.  The more things change...

I don't really, because my parents wouldn't pay for PASS Sports when I was a kid. I had to listen to the Red Wings on the radio.

'member when the Tigers would win lots of games?

I remember warm summer evenings listening to the Tigers on the radio with my grandpa.  Windows open on his farm.  Crickets and frogs chiping outside, while Ernie Harwell called the game.

You’re goddamn right 

Based on that, shouldn’t they also be free to attend then, too?

Why? ESPN broadcasts games from stadiums all over that you can't watch unless you have ESPN. The content inside a stadium or arena has licensing rights with very different rules. Would you say the same for every concert, trade show, and ice capades that comes through? Also, publicly-funded is very broad. Sometimes it will be a county, sometimes hotel taxes, sometimes land grants, sometimes it will be a public-private partnership. TV/internet broadcasting is very different from building and maintaining a multipurpose stadium and I don't think you can link the two as they both continue to evolve beyond what they were 20-30 years ago. 

You have to remember - we are heading into the time when stadiums will get smaller and more exclusive (higher ticket prices) but anyone will be able to "watch" virtually from any seat in the building through a VR. Very different demands technologically and commercially.

Yep, Padres fans will now be able to stream Padres games no matter where they live.  Tigers fans should be wishing for this same deal to come to them.

A VPN doesn't get you around that?

Normally I'd agree with you, but when they're in bankruptcy you cut your losses before they mount and get paid out pennies on the dollar.

Years ago we made the decision to not pay for Tigers TV. Instead we had the radio on every night. Robins chirping good night, cicadas humming and the voices of Dan and Jim wafting through the air like lilac blossoms - that's the sound of summer. Two of my kids are older and have moved away. The 2 still at home know when game time is and will turn on the radio before I can get to it.

BTW - now that Jim Price isn't able to go anymore, the Tigers have tried out a few different color guys. Andy Dirks is, hands down, the best. I thoroughly enjoy the banter between him and Dan. Cameron Maybin and Bobby Scales (a Michigan guy) also had a shot. The problem I had with them was they kept bringing in this baseball-insider dugout lingo, things like "he's a quick 90." You need a decoder ring to understand that means he's real fast from home to first. It makes you feel like an outsider to their exclusive club. Dirks is so unassuming while painting a relatable picture.

Excellent, insightful article. Thanks.

This tweet from the article is crazy. If this becomes the norm, following your local team as a  casual fan will be non-existent unless they are having a really good year. Maybe it forces a few more fans to plan a trip to the ballpark to see the local team, but I think the long term scenario is you won't be developing the next generation of fans. 

I have three boys, one of which cares about the local MLB team. I have their games on a couple times a week for a few innings because more times than not, I turn the TV on and it's on the channel that carries almost all of their games. He asked to get a jersey of his favorite player who is not a nationally known player. Moving to a model where I have to subscribe to a, or multiple, service(s) just to watch the local team will not happen. Net result, my one son who used his own money to buy a little known player's jersey, will not know who anyone on the team is. 

Bally's tried the streaming subscription model(https://www.ballysports.com/packages/), and it failed miserably. Bally Sports+ offers you streaming access for $19.99/month. But there are not enough subscribers to make the model work. Your target audience is tiny (obsessive Detroit sports fans for Bally Sports Detroit for example). I am a big Detroit sports fan compared to the general public, and I haven't missed Bally Sports one iota. Maybe that is partly due to the fact that Detroit teams have been terrible during the last decade, but I don't think that is it.

The problem is I don't think the RSN model is going to win out. Will teams or a league get more revenue from trying to sell 2-3 local baseball, basketball, and/or hockey teams to a very small local audience or would they be better off packaging all their own league games together like the NFL or MLS? There are some differences as the NFL and MLS inventory is different from MLB, but I think there are only a couple MLB teams with fan bases or cities large enough to sell a model like YES network subscriptions.