re: DAT Spring Training Thread: YWCHA Edition

David Barron with the Chron has an article about the Astros and Rockets planning to jointly purchase AT&T Sportsnet. Based on what he says in the article, it's not entirely clear to me what streaming opportunities will come available in the near term.

I was hopeful that MLB would assume the broadcast rights and with it, bring in-market streaming which seems to be their plan with the Bally networks. Based on what Barron says here, it sounds like the team ownership would look to maintain the status-quo to preserve and maximize RSN carriage fees with TV providers (AT&T, DirecTV and Comcast) locked into contracts through 2032.

As I interpret it, if the teams offered in market streaming, there's no incentive for the TV providers to continue charging those premiums if they're not the exclusive options for Astros and Rockets broadcasts.

quote:

---

Teams and leagues hope to make up for a portion of the drop in pay TV subscribers by beefing up streaming opportunities. However, streaming is not viewed as a cost-effective replacement for the RSN system

While streaming adds eyeballs, analysts say it doesn’t do much for the bottom line.

“Streaming economics are negative margin economics, which is a fancy way of saying that for every dollar you spend, you lose a buck 50,” said Patrick Crakes, a former executive with Fox Sports. “And it keeps getting worse, not better.

The Astros, for example, can’t go direct to consumer (streaming) because they won't ever make as much money as they're making from the current system. Even if you went through bankruptcy and the judge said to the MLB teams, you’ve got to take a 20 percent cut and stay in the system, or you can leave, they wouldn’t leave because they can’t make any money on (streaming) and they need the rights fees or they can’t make payroll

---

I get why they would want to maintain it. Barron notes the Astros are making $72 million a year with the carriage fees from those 3 providers. So they've got that money locked in for another 9 years which in an era of broadcast uncertainty with RSNs is a leg up over other teams. Plus you're cutting out a middle man in AT&T.

But I just can't see any way those carriers don't demand a continuance of blackouts. They're why they exist in the first place. Just a frustrating outcome for the cord cutting fan.

I mean it's possible that we get a streaming option out of it, I just don't see it as a near term offering in this outcome like I was hoping for if MLB took over production.

There's other teams still linked to providers that offer standalone streaming. Bally was offering streaming for $20 a month, NESN which is jointly owned the Red Sox and Bruins respective parent groups offers a NESN streaming package for a whopping $30 a month or $330 annually with a discounted first month. And YES is planning to offer a streaming service this year but no word on price yet.

But see with the Astros-Rockets network in a streaming setup you're going to get lumped into paying for both Astros and Rockets broadcasts. The same multi team setup as Bally and NESN. I don't care about the Rockets, I don't want to pay for access to their broadcasts. The MLB.tv single team package (out of market) is $129 a year. An article I read recently on the Bally bankruptcy said MLB would allow for free in market streaming with any channel disruptions and continue to offer in market streaming for $15 a month once a TV deal was reached. That's the deal I was hoping for. A single team option through MLB.tv

Kennedy Corona sounds like an IG thot

The Unknown Astros walloped a pretty well stocked Braves lineup.

quote:

---

The Unknown Astros walloped a pretty well stocked Braves lineup.

---

Championship!

I think if that were the case it might already be done

Still say they won't go better than the offer to Yed

Would be bad business, but I guess they could use Yed's knees against him

Ronel Blanco is starting today. They're moving forward with Dana Browns plan to make him a starter.