Very disappointed with this. It's not because I'm a Red Sox fan living in California (which I am) and therefore have no use for the Dodgers, but because these humongous sums of money take the fun out of a simple game that brings joy to millions. I'm not naive enough to think there will be this massive fan revolt, but sooner or later people will either lose interest or begin to pirate the games (and other channels with them.) Rational pricing begets rational customers.
This is the kind of content provider greed that quite honestly threatens to dismantle the pay-TV model. First, people abandon pay TV for streaming alternatives, then without the cash-cow pay TV deals, streaming costs to the customer shoot through the roof. Next thing you know there is massive piracy and everyone loses.
And let me tell you, if you don't live in Southern California, don't sit back and chuckle because you think this is a CA problem. This is your problem too, any of you who live in markets where there are teams with nationwide appeal. Hey Chicagoans, how would you like to pay for a channels for the Bears, another for the Cubs, another for the White Sox, another for the Bulls, another for the Blackhawks...
And if you live in, I don't know, central Iowa or whatever (no offense intended to Buckeyes, just making an example) you'll pay more to import those team feeds, too.
Major miscalculation on the Dodgers' part, and major miscalculation on TWC's part in not bundling the Dodgers into TWC SportsNet.
I am in Twins territory (just north of central IA ). If they charge me $2/month during the season to see the Twins, not a problem. If they charge me $200/year - so long. I'm kind of nostalgic and don't mind listening to baseball on AM radio.
P.S. Did you mean Hawkeyes? Last I checked the Buckeyes were somewhat NE of central IA.
Edited by Tubaman-Z, 29 January 2013 - 04:21 PM.