Would it be better for us if Orioles sold rights and closed MASN

[DrungoHazewood]

58 minutes ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

Looks like I was too conservative in my estimate of cable-subscribing TV HH.

I wouldn't guarantee my numbers are completely right, but I think you may have undershot the number of MASN subscribers.  One thing I'm not sure of is what percentage of TV households in the greater area have MASN.  I think most have it as a standard, and have to pay the MASN fee.  But I don't know that for sure.

[Can_of_corn]

https://deadline.com/2019/03/yes-network-sold-for-3-5b-to-yankees-amazon-sinclair-private-equity-reports-1202572010/

3.5B for an 80% share.

[Tony-OH]

On 3/7/2019 at 2:30 PM, atomic said:

 You would  think if someone is willing to pay for VPN on top of MLBTv cost to stream games MLB would figure out how to get all that money instead of trying to stop you.  I would willingly pay for MLB TV as well if they showed Orioles games to me. 

Watch out though if you plan to watch archived games. MLB TV have made that option almost unwatchable due to the amount of ads you must watch when you jump around the game.

[MurphDogg]

I didn't think this topic would need 60+ responses when a simple "no" would have sufficed.

 

In related news, as posted above, the Yankees are reclaiming control of YES, because teams should own their own network if they can swing it.

 

https://mlb.nbcsports.com/2019/03/08/yankees-buy-back-yes-control-with-amazon-sinclair-help/

[Frobby]

5 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

According to Neilsen there are about 1M TV households in the Baltimore area.  2.5M in the DC area.  Richmond has about 500k, Salisbury 150k.  I think MASN is standard in Norfolk, which has another 675k TV households. I'm sure there are some other outliers like York or Charlottesville and parts of North Carolina* that will add up to a few hundred thousand more.  In total that might be about 5M people.  If 75% of them have cable or satellite you're still over 4M.  Each paying $29 a year, that's over $100M.  Even it it's only 3M, that's still almost $90M a year.

Plus advertising.  I have no idea how to guess that total.

Per the arbitration decision that was made public during the MASN litigation, MASN gross revenue was $164 mm in 2012 and projected to be $205 mm by 2016. I’ve been led by others to understand that the subscription fees are a far bigger source of revenue than the advertising.   

[weams]

3 hours ago, MurphDogg said:

I didn't think this topic would need 60+ responses when a simple "no" would have sufficed.

 

In related news, as posted above, the Yankees are reclaiming control of YES, because teams should own their own network if they can swing it.

 

https://mlb.nbcsports.com/2019/03/08/yankees-buy-back-yes-control-with-amazon-sinclair-help/

No. 

[BohKnowsBmore]

15 hours ago, Frobby said:

Per the arbitration decision that was made public during the MASN litigation, MASN gross revenue was $164 mm in 2012 and projected to be $205 mm by 2016. I’ve been led by others to understand that the subscription fees are a far bigger source of revenue than the advertising.   

My numbers were wrong earlier I think. Unless it’s inclusive of something else, the RSN charge on my Fios bill is more like $6 per month. 

[TonySoprano]

Cautionary tale

 

[allquixotic]

On 3/7/2019 at 12:49 PM, DrungoHazewood said:

What is the legality of using a VPN to circumvent MASN and MLB's local blackout restrictions?

I think the MLB.TV terms and conditions say anyone accessing via a VPN to circumvent restrictions may not only forfeit their subscription, but also be subject to legal action.  That may be somewhat unlikely, but...

I certainly wouldn't advise admitting to it in public as a couple folks here have. Actual litigation is unlikely, but talking about specific VPN providers may increase the likelihood that those VPN providers might get blocked by MLB.TV in the future. And on the litigation side, a forum post (if it could be traced back to an individual) could serve as admission of guilt.

MLB is probably just focusing all their offensive litigation efforts on shutting down the limitless number of sites that illegally broadcast their streams to hundreds or thousands of people for free. If they figure out how to permanently shut all of those down one day, their cadre of lawyers might start suing individuals skirting the blackout restrictions out of sheer boredom. Until that day, individuals who don't share/broadcast the stream are probably off the hook - but I wouldn't risk it, personally.

-------------------------

Unrelated to Drungo's post, just a reply to the OP: It's interesting how my feelings towards this have changed over the years. I still hate blackout restrictions, but they are much less of a nuisance for me since -- luckily -- we got Verizon FiOS in 2017. Gigabit Internet and TV through a single fiber optic cable; super reliable, and cheaper than the workarounds I used to use with cellular data.

I think, financially, there's no way MASN will shut down or sell when it's so immensely profitable for them. I also think the cable companies and MASN will together take an extremely long time to eventually (if ever) lift the blackout restrictions, because of contracts, legalese, bureaucracy, etc. It's very frustrating, but it's just unlikely to happen.

Also agree with some folks on page 1 who pointed out that the next generation (and an increasing number of older folks as well) are cutting out cable TV, demanding to watch live games on their smartphones, etc. The organization is missing out on a lot of potential fans by not offering live service through the mediums people want (Sling, Roku, Apple TV, etc.)

Unfortunately, The Man often doesn't realize what's good for it until it's way too late. They see guaranteed dollar signs (cable subscriptions) and will prefer to cling to that as long as they can, instead of pursuing uncertain but possible dollar signs (revenue from streaming services). And they don't have the mindset to be able to do both because of corporate tunnel vision.

[Tx Oriole]

On 3/7/2019 at 10:35 AM, atomic said:

Right now I can watch the Capitals/Wizards on Sling-TV with a basic package of channels ($25 a month).  I can stream wherever I want and I don't need to get cable installed.  For the Ravens they are on free TV.  So without being a cable subscriber there is no way for me to get MASN and watch the Orioles.   And likewise I can't watch the Nationals if I so desired.  I think it is time for the Orioles to sell MASN to Fox sports or NBC sports so we can enter the modern age of being able to stream the games and watch the games without being tied to a cable provider. 

Oh I don't know.