Bally Sports Possibly Declaring Bankruptcy - Latest (Amazon's Pending Streaming Impact)

[DoubleSwitch]

Is there a chance in the long term that this really helps the Brewers? If local broadcasting is folded into MLB.tv it could mean a more equal cut of the money.

[wallus]

I am in favor of doing a league wide model and offering better options for streamers.

Here is the issue: streamers will not want to pay what it will be to see their teams under what the current revenue models. These billions of dollars have to come from somewhere.

[nate82]

Short term Bally's going bankrupt would hurt the Brewers a lot but in the long term it would be a huge help.  I don't think all of MLB would go into one package but the teams on the RSN deals would all become MLB owned broadcast rights.  So instead of paying for a regional network you would pay for all teams kind of like MLB.TV but without the blackout restrictions. 

I think you would see a MLB, NBA and NHL network put up so you are able to watch all three sports through one subscription.  The pricing on that I am not sure but I am thinking somewhere between $20-30 a month and that would be if you wanted MLB, NBA and the NHL all in one.  Maybe they do a one team option for something like $14.99 a month.  I think the $14.99 a month subscription at least digitally would be the most popular.  I am not sure how this would work for cable maybe they lock cable into a more regional format where you only get teams in your region. 

The cable part is the more complicated situation to work out.  The streaming or digital version is far easier as you have less restrictions.  Though the way cable companies are starting to roll out their cable instead of having a dedicated channel they could just put the application on their boxes and you subscribe that way.  Actually that is how I see cable moving forward in the future.  You get a cable box and you can rent or buy it from the cable company and your TV shows come in through your internet connection which is what it is doing now really with the new cable boxes. 

[MrTPlush]

The problem with the per month subscription is the fact is is brutally dependent on the team being good. If the team fire sales in July, half the people aren’t going to waste a dollar watching the Brewers. A lot of people probably would just buy September, some just in the summer, etc.

I just don’t know that model is really sustainable in the small markets. Cash flow would be all over the place. 
 

 

[nate82]

13 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

The problem with the per month subscription is the fact is is brutally dependent on the team being good. If the team fire sales in July, half the people aren’t going to waste a dollar watching the Brewers. A lot of people probably would just buy September, some just in the summer, etc.

I just don’t know that model is really sustainable in the small markets. Cash flow would be all over the place. 
 

 

That is why I think it would be you are paying for all of the teams that are currently on RSN deals.  This would also include NHL and NBA teams along with the MLB teams.  I think that makes more sense as a service than just doing it team by team.  Though this basically kills any cable deal so it would be streaming or you don't get the teams other than when they are on ESPN, FOX, etc. but this is what cable is basically going to anyways.  So you would have to get the app on the cable box and pay for it to get the team you want. 

[patrickgpe]

Ballys is a horrible company who has made it very difficult for fans to watch their teams games, so obviously them going bankrupt is a good thing. As others said, if MLB expanded their at bat to include in market games, would be excellent. It would take some times for the brewers to do it on their own, plus then the bucks would have to do the same. I just miss the days of the Midwest Sports Channel, it was so much easier. 

[MrTPlush]

It wasn’t difficult to watch the games. Cable is easily accessible to 99% of the population and they even did a streaming service subscription that was reasonable. If you lived in a tree house with no electricity, then yah, I suppose it was hard to access the games.

Were non Bally teams just readily carrying their games on streaming services? I checked the Yankees channel, nope, same way. That’s just one other channel…but something tells me most teams probably aren’t on the streaming services.

[Vgmastr]

28 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

It wasn’t difficult to watch the games. Cable is easily accessible to 99% of the population and they even did a streaming service subscription that was reasonable. If you lived in a tree house with no electricity, then yah, I suppose it was hard to access the games.

Were non Bally teams just readily carrying their games on streaming services? I checked the Yankees channel, nope, same way. That’s just one other channel…but something tells me most teams probably aren’t on the streaming services.

Youtube TV is half the price of cable and a much better product, why would I ever pay for cable?  Cable is dinosaur that's slowly dying.  As of March 2021, only 56% of Americans have cable or satellite, the majority of which are people over 50.  Only 34% of people ages 18-29 and 46% of people ages 30-49 have it, and I'm sure those numbers have gone down in the last two years.  A sure fire way of not expanding your fan base to the younger generation is to only have it available on a platform few young people use.  Once the kids and teens of today who've only grown up with streaming become adults those numbers are going to drop even further.

[Austin Tatious]

6 minutes ago, Vgmastr said:

Youtube TV is half the price of cable and a much better product, why would I ever pay for cable?  Cable is dinosaur that's slowly dying.  As of March 2021, only 56% of Americans have cable or satellite, the majority of which are people over 50.  Only 34% of people ages 18-29 and 46% of people ages 30-49 have it, and I'm sure those numbers have gone down in the last two years.  A sure fire way of not expanding your fan base to the younger generation is to only have it available on a platform few young people use.  Once the kids and teens of today who've only grown up with streaming become adults those numbers are going to drop even further.

If you’re out of market, can you subscribe to all of the Brewer games on YouTube?  How much does it cost and how does if work?  

I think YouTube has the NFL package so it might be an interesting option.  

[Vgmastr]

9 minutes ago, Austin Tatious said:

If you’re out of market, can you subscribe to all of the Brewer games on YouTube?  How much does it cost and how does if work?  

I think YouTube has the NFL package so it might be an interesting option.  

No, you can't.  If you're out of market you can do MLB.TV.  In market you could get the games on Youtube TV back when it was FS Wisconsin, but once greedy Sinclair bought it and rebranded to Bally's they jacked the prices up and all the streaming services dropped them, Youtube included.  Youtube did get NFL Sunday Ticket starting this year, so that'll cause another small uptick in cord cutting of people who only had DirecTV for that.

[MrTPlush]

On 1/28/2023 at 2:00 PM, Vgmastr said:

Youtube TV is half the price of cable and a much better product, why would I ever pay for cable?  Cable is dinosaur that's slowly dying.  As of March 2021, only 56% of Americans have cable or satellite, the majority of which are people over 50.  Only 34% of people ages 18-29 and 46% of people ages 30-49 have it, and I'm sure those numbers have gone down in the last two years.  A sure fire way of not expanding your fan base to the younger generation is to only have it available on a platform few young people use.  Once the kids and teens of today who've only grown up with streaming become adults those numbers are going to drop even further.

I don’t own cable and never will. I didn’t watch any games last year, but doesn’t mean I didn’t have the opportunity. There was a streaming option. Bally Sports had a subscription option. It was $20, which over the season is similar to the cost of MLB.TV that everyone in market wishes they could have. If you liked the Bucks, then it was only $15 a month to watch both. I know when it first launched in season the devices you could use were limited, but pretty sure that was fixed by tue end of the season…I wouldn’t know for sure though as the Brewers weren’t worth spending money to watch in my opinion.

I am curious, for teams not controlled by Bally…they were all readily gotten on streaming services, right? I assume so, because everyone acts like Bally is some kind of crime to baseball. I don’t care enough to check every team, but the Yankees network was only on cable. The Cubs were only on Fubo it appears. One article said half the teams are on YouTube TV and that article was old enough it still had all the Bally controlled teams on it. So what, less than 10 teams?

[bjkrautk]

At least until a bankruptcy filing occurs, there is another streaming option to get Brewers games.

 

I also assume the BK Court would look to operate the RSNs as a going concern (operating business) until they can be sold by the Court, rather than liquidating the assets....but I only practice in the bankruptcy courts on occasion (Disclaimer: I am not your attorney). 

What I do not know is how the contract between Bally & the Brewers (or any other team) would be affected in the event of the bankruptcy.  If the bankruptcy itself constitutes a default under the contract, the Brewers could potentially opt out of the contract with New Buyer.

[SeaBass]

Bankruptcy date potentially set for this Friday, possibly as early as Thursday.

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Journal/Issues/2023/03/13/Insiders/sports-media.aspx

Diamondbacks, Guardians, Padres and Reds are initial teams in danger of dropping off of Bally Sports telecasts. Reportedly MLB will pick up streaming coverage if this happens. Brewers look to be ok for now, guess that lower price they negotiated is saving their bacon as the other teams have higher payouts and thus make it harder for Diamond Sports to pay the bills.

NBA/Bucks coverage looks like it will be set through the end of the season and through the first round of the playoffs.

[Oxy]

On 1/28/2023 at 1:17 PM, MrTPlush said:

It wasn’t difficult to watch the games. Cable is easily accessible to 99% of the population and they even did a streaming service subscription that was reasonable. If you lived in a tree house with no electricity, then yah, I suppose it was hard to access the games.

Were non Bally teams just readily carrying their games on streaming services? I checked the Yankees channel, nope, same way. That’s just one other channel…but something tells me most teams probably aren’t on the streaming services.

Wrong.  There are MANY cable companies in WI that dropped the RSNs years ago.  Cable is basically a monopoly as people only have one choice, thus the streaming companies should have been a godsend, but nobody carried it except for DirectTV Stream. Again, one option--in addition to DirectTV satellite.  If Fubo is getting it, I'll likely be dropping DTV.

Also, cable and satellite are long term contracts, so if somebody signed up when the RSN was carried and then it was dropped they were screwed.  The month-to-month streaming options again are WAYYY better for the consumer.

[MrTPlush]

1 hour ago, Oxy said:

Wrong.  There are MANY cable companies in WI that dropped the RSNs years ago.  Cable is basically a monopoly as people only have one choice, thus the streaming companies should have been a godsend, but nobody carried it except for DirectTV Stream. Again, one option--in addition to DirectTV satellite.  If Fubo is getting it, I'll likely be dropping DTV.

Also, cable and satellite are long term contracts, so if somebody signed up when the RSN was carried and then it was dropped they were screwed.  The month-to-month streaming options again are WAYYY better for the consumer.

There are plenty of ways to watch the Brewers. It literally isn't that hard if you want the games. Cable is an option, which again, almost anyone can get. If that doesn't work there is indeed Direct TV. If you wanted streaming there was ATT. Though their entire concept felt like cable. This is still ignoring the fact that there is a subscription service to watch the Brewers for $15 or $20. That you could pair with anything your heart desires and was month to month.

You could have had FuboTV last year plus the Bally subscription for the same price as FuboTV with the price hike and RSN fee.

Streaming options are better for the consumer. However, even better for streaming services is to keep their prices $20 cheaper by not carrying non football sports. Thats why they all dropped them. It wasn't worth the $20 price hike that FuboTV is doing. Most households do not care about RSNs.

[owbc]

It will be interesting to see if the new MLS model catches on. I'm not a big MLS fan but I wanted to check in on the Sounders' home opener but it's only available through that new Apple TV subscription. As a casual (at best) MLS fan, I'm obviously not going to pay $15/month for the MLS package on Apple TV and some of the bigger games are on Fox anyway. So it kind of splits the fans into two groups -- the serious ones who can afford it are going to pony up the monthly fee without complaint. The casual ones are simply not going to watch, but the idea (I think) is that they will catch the occasional national broadcast and get interested enough to eventually pay the monthly fee. 

My feeling is that the subscription numbers for the MLS are going to be pretty brutal and that they would be better off giving all of their games away for free to try and build a bigger audience.

I can't imagine an MLB market like Milwaukee will be much better. I know we've run this math before, but let's be generous and say that 50,000 people in the Brewers' blackout zone will subscribe to get all Brewers games and pay $20/month for 6 months of the season. That's a measly $6 million in revenue. The actual number would likely be half of that, especially since you're probably going have discounts and give it away for free to all of your season ticket holders. IMO there's no point in even offering a subscription option if they can't get at least $10 million/year in subscription revenue. Anything less than that and they are better off making it free, collecting the ad revenue, and calling it an investment in growing the popularity of the franchise. 

 

 

 

[MrTPlush]

2 hours ago, owbc said:

 

I can't imagine an MLB market like Milwaukee will be much better. I know we've run this math before, but let's be generous and say that 50,000 people in the Brewers' blackout zone will subscribe to get all Brewers games and pay $20/month for 6 months of the season. That's a measly $6 million in revenue. The actual number would likely be half of that, especially since you're probably going have discounts and give it away for free to all of your season ticket holders. IMO there's no point in even offering a subscription option if they can't get at least $10 million/year in subscription revenue. Anything less than that and they are better off making it free, collecting the ad revenue, and calling it an investment in growing the popularity of the franchise. 

 

 

 

They wouldn't make it free unless you honestly believed it would cause that many more people to watch and spend money. Additionally, I don't see any reason to only have a subscription plan. 

MLS is doing it...but how many people watch MLS? Just too many games to sit there and pay to have them all televised on TV...thus having some cheap subscription makes it possible to actually make them all watchable. MLB doesn't have that problem. Tens of thousands tune in to every single game.

[Pugger]

On 1/25/2023 at 6:37 PM, Jopal78 said:

Probably doesn’t mean anything. Companies declare bankruptcy all the time, investors and debtors come and go and the company emerges with new leadership in the same business. 
 

Sinclair is the parent company; they’re not going anywhere, the probably will start a new subsidiary company for broadcasting  and shirk all Bally’s old debts in the process.
 

 

As long as I can watch the Crew down here with a baseball package I don't care who is broadcasting Brewers and Bucks games.  We order the baseball package thru Comcast.  It costs about as much as going to one game in Milwaukee when you consider tickets, parking and concessions so it so worth it for us.

[Brock Beauchamp]

On 3/14/2023 at 2:10 PM, Oxy said:

Wrong.  There are MANY cable companies in WI that dropped the RSNs years ago.  Cable is basically a monopoly as people only have one choice, thus the streaming companies should have been a godsend, but nobody carried it except for DirectTV Stream. Again, one option--in addition to DirectTV satellite.  If Fubo is getting it, I'll likely be dropping DTV.

Also, cable and satellite are long term contracts, so if somebody signed up when the RSN was carried and then it was dropped they were screwed.  The month-to-month streaming options again are WAYYY better for the consumer.

I just looked up Fubo and they carry Bally. Which is where I'll be headed around Opening Day because DirecTV Stream is such an awful experience that I have to believe Fubo will be better.

https://www.fubo.tv/welcome/channels

[Roderick]

So as of today, you can see the Brewers on DirecTV, Charter/Comcast cable, FUBO, direct Ballysports $20month subscription, and maybe something AT&T?

 Is that correct?

[areacodes]

3 minutes ago, Roderick said:

So as of today, you can see the Brewers on DirecTV, Charter/Comcast cable, FUBO, direct Ballysports $20month subscription, and maybe something AT&T?

 Is that correct?

I have it with TDS.

[Axman59]

32 minutes ago, Roderick said:

So as of today, you can see the Brewers on DirecTV, Charter/Comcast cable, FUBO, direct Ballysports $20month subscription, and maybe something AT&T?

 Is that correct?

It depends on whether you live in or out of market. Out of market fans have the option of MLB.tv, which is a great value even at full price ($150 per season to get every MLB game that is outside your home market).

[bjkrautk]

https://dnyuz.com/2023/05/31/as-cable-model-struggles-m-l-b-takes-over-padres-broadcasts/

Bally (Sinclair) missed their payment to the Padres, so MLB is taking over the broadcast; the on-air talent (including former Brewers prospect Tony Gwynn, Jr.) are being retained by the league.

Quote

Garden said M.L.B. would remove blackouts of local games and expand the reach of Padres games by more than two million homes. The games will be available free through MLB.com, Padres.com and M.L.B.’s streaming app through Sunday and then will be available to in-market fans for $19.99 a month, a discount from the full price of M.L.B.’s streaming services. The games will also be distributed on television through cable services like Spectrum, Cox and DirecTV.

One would have to assume MLB would do likewise if Sinclair defaulted on the Brewers' payments.

[Brock Beauchamp]

15 minutes ago, bjkrautk said:

https://dnyuz.com/2023/05/31/as-cable-model-struggles-m-l-b-takes-over-padres-broadcasts/

Bally (Sinclair) missed their payment to the Padres, so MLB is taking over the broadcast; the on-air talent (including former Brewers prospect Tony Gwynn, Jr.) are being retained by the league.

One would have to assume MLB would do likewise if Sinclair defaulted on the Brewers' payments.

The team to watch right now is the Twins. Their contract expires after the season and they've been pretty hostile to Bally for a few years now. It will be interesting to see what Bally does with a team that is obviously not interested in renewing with them in six months.

[jerichoholicninja]

What I don't understand in all of this is doesn't Bally's or whoever employ all the people and own all the resources and equipment to broadcast the games? Does MLB just take possession of these things so the games stay on? And if so does MLB actually have people who know how to do this stuff? Considering this stuff came down like two weeks before the regular season started and is still going on mid-season it seems amazing to me that there has been no interruptions to the broadcasts.