Hulu + Live TV will no longer have RSNs

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by epokopac, Oct 22, 2020.

  1. epokopac

    epokopac Godfather

    377
    7
    Aug 8, 2007
    Lawrencevill...
    Starting on October 23, 2020 Hulu will no longer have the rights to distribute certain Regional Sports Networks (RSNs) that are currently included with your Hulu + Live TV plan.

    While we were unable to reach an agreement with Sinclair Broadcast Group to continue offering channels like your Fox Sports RSN, YES Network, and Marquee Network, the good news is that you will continue to have access to a wide variety of sports from other popular channels including ESPN, TNT, and TBS, as well as FS1 and FS2.
     
  2. scooper

    scooper Hall Of Fame

    7,198
    189
    Apr 22, 2002
    Kansas City KS
    Anybody else get the feeling that Sinclair is the problem here ?
     
    Poorsha likes this.
  3. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,746
    281
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    The problem is any carrier that caves to what Sinclair is demanding.
     
    dennispap likes this.
  4. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame

    5,523
    639
    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    Correct. And it should be noted that this means that only ATT TV and ATT TV Now are the only streaming service with RSN’s at any level.

    Only one satellite provider has them. Probably all the cable companies do. But both of those entities are shedding subscribers by the droves.
     
  5. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,746
    281
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    I'm pretty sure there are some non-Sinclair RSN options that are still available and not all of them are marginal. I recall that Fubo offers Pac-12.
     
  6. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame

    5,523
    639
    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    Yeah, I guess I should have specified Sinclair RSNs
     
    crodrules likes this.
  7. mwdxer

    mwdxer Well-Known Member

    1,931
    204
    Oct 30, 2013
    Seaside Oregon
    It is like all Sports....They want $$$$$$. The price is nothing but going up up up....
     
  8. harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,746
    281
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    When there are obvious exceptions, one should always employ "sufficient specificity" to exclude those exceptions.
     
  9. Tiny

    Tiny Mentor

    112
    12
    Feb 1, 2009
    I’m ok with no RSNs don’t miss sitting through 3 hours more of marathon baseball games with mediocre play by play analyst endless chitchat about nothing.
     
    Dishdude714 likes this.
  10. crodrules

    crodrules Active Member

    246
    35
    Nov 21, 2016
    North...
    To be fair, the thread title also simply says "RSNs" yet the topic of discussion is clearly the Sinclair (Fox Sports, et al) RSNs that are being dropped by Hulu. Nobody brought any other RSNs into the discussion until you chose to correct lparsons21's statement.
     
  11. Abe12

    Abe12 New Member

    10
    3
    Jun 11, 2020
    Here is an article from the WSJ. Sorry about just the first paragraph: quote
    Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc.’s regional sports business and its creditors are preparing for a possible restructuring of its roughly $8 billion debt load, a sign of the pressure on the sports industry from Covid-19, according to people familiar with the matter.

    Diamond Sports Group LLC’s bondholders have hired legal and financial advisers as the Sinclair subsidiary deals with the dearth of live sports during the coronavirus pandemic and the loss of some carriage deals with pay-TV distributors, people familiar with the matter... Unquote {Source: WSJ Oct 20th 2020}
     
  12. the2130

    the2130 Active Member

    736
    88
    Dec 17, 2014
    I like watching the games, but I agree with your comments about the announcers and commentary. What really gets on my nerves is all the in-game interviews. The network telecasts on Fox and ESPN are especially bad. They go back and forth between someone talking from the dugout and a split-screen view, and they quit calling the play-by-play while the interview goes on. At least on the regional feeds I can switch to the other team's telecast to bypass the interview.
     
  13. Chihuahua

    Chihuahua Legend

    272
    11
    Sep 8, 2007
    Anyone wanna bet that the RSNs business model isn't broken?
     
  14. crodrules

    crodrules Active Member

    246
    35
    Nov 21, 2016
    North...
    Wait, which RSNs exactly? Remember, we need to be sufficiently specific. ;)
     
    Tiny likes this.
  15. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame

    5,523
    639
    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    The only possible solution for the RSN’s going forward is for all the sports to become available again. Currently the pushbacks to the RSN owners is as much about why bother when there really isn’t enough new content as it is anything else. The current business model requires that the true cost of the RSN be scattered among not only the approximately 30% that want them, but also to the other 70% that don’t. I don’t think that’s going to hold up much longer.

    And I just read that Sinclair in particular is looking at restructuring options. Gonna be interesting to watch.
     
    crodrules likes this.
  16. evotz

    evotz Active Member

    220
    52
    Jan 23, 2014
    All sports have vastly overestimated their viewership. Instead of looking at numbers that have substance (like how many people actually watch sports) they just looked at subscribers numbers and assumed all subscribers watched sports. I'm a sports guy - well, at least baseball and college basketball... although I didn't watch baseball this summer due to the pandemic and I didn't really miss it - but I can recognize that the prices for these sports is getting to ridiculous levels.

    In terms of RSNs and baseball, this holds especially true. I'm in Cardinals and Reds TV territory, but I'm a Cubs fan. It's easier and cheaper for me to be an out-of-market fan than it is for me to be an in-market fan. I can subscribe to MLB.tv for $120 (I think) for 6 months of baseball and get most of the Cubs games. But, as far as I know, my only choices for getting the Cardinals and Reds games (because there's no cable TV providers where I live) is through AT&T/DirecTV, which would be north of $100/mo for 6 months or $600+ just to watch those games (and cable operators in the area, probably only include one of the teams, so I'd be out of luck with the other team). Now, granted you get a lot more than just the baseball games with AT&T/DirecTV at $100/mo, but if all I'm interested in is baseball and I'm a Cardinals or Reds fan, it's more expensive and more of a hassle than being a Cubs fan. (And as a Cubs fan, my gripe comes into play when the Cubs play the Cardinals - I can't watch those games without AT&T/DirecTV - or with Reds games, which I have no idea why Reds have a stake to this area).

    (I realize this isn't exactly what you were referring to - but I think it's important to underscore how RSNs and TV providers have a stranglehold on in-market sports)

    This is why I've been wanting Sinclair to offer an OTT option for their in-market RSNs. But they would have to price it accordingly and probably would not come out with a profit, but maybe less of a loss.

    People tend to get too caught up in numbers. Bigger numbers look better. But bigger numbers that don't reflect any substances are worthless. People that subscribe to a Sinclair OTT offering are more than likely going to watch it. 5 million people that subscribe to an OTT offering tells you a lot more than 50 million that just happen to have the RSNs included in their TV package. Then instead of paying the Cardinals or Reds or SEC ridiculous amounts of money to broadcast their games, they can point to more accurate numbers that tell the tale.
     
    Dishdude714 likes this.
  17. crodrules

    crodrules Active Member

    246
    35
    Nov 21, 2016
    North...
    As an Indians fan, I hate to agree with a Cubs fan. However, evotz does make some very good points. I would just add (and finally making this thread relevant to the Dish forum where it is located) that I have been wanting the RSNs (all RSNs, not just the Sinclair ones) to be available as an a-la-carte add-on to the lowest-level Dish packages (such as Welcome Pack, Smart Pack, International Basic, Chinese Basic) for a very long time. This would greatly reduce the monthly cost required in order to get these channels, if all you were interested in are the in-market sports channels, but still need to use a traditional TV provider due to not having enough internet bandwidth available. Of course, a Sports-Only package that does not require you to buy any additional programming would be even better for serving this purpose.
     
  18. scooper

    scooper Hall Of Fame

    7,198
    189
    Apr 22, 2002
    Kansas City KS
    I can honestly say that since I became a Dish subscriber in Nov 2000, That I have rarely if ever actually sat down to watch a sportsball game. I haven't watched the Superbowl since I got married in 1987 - and I'm pretty sure i didn't watch it too often before then. So, from my perspective - if the RSNs are there - fine, if they aren't - that's fine too. My sports viewing is usually confined to NASCAR and Big 12 Men's Basketball (particularly KU - my alma mater) - and at least the last couple years - the Big 12 is usually on ESPN channels. ESPN/Disney is probably the next thing that people will have a revolt on because of price.
     
  19. techguy88

    techguy88 Well-Known Member

    1,191
    575
    Mar 19, 2015
    You underestimate the House of Mouse it's viewers/fans are very brand loyal and in their eyes Disney can do no wrong. Hence why providers usually reach agreements with them without blackout. It is also worth pointing out that Amazon was in a dispute with Disney over Disney+ which ended with Amazon reaching an agreement with Disney and supporting Disney+ extremely close to its launch.

    Reason for this... Amazon would have been instantly seen as the bad guy in this scenario as Disney "can't do wrong" in its viewer's eyes and would switch to Roku for their service. Amazon however have an easier time disputing HBO Max and Peacock because Amazon can (and does) target their parent companies AT&T and Comcast which have a worse brand reputation than Amazon does.
     
  20. scooper

    scooper Hall Of Fame

    7,198
    189
    Apr 22, 2002
    Kansas City KS
    I don't doubt it ABOUT DISNEY ITSELF. I'm not so sure that the ESPN complex is as safe if the RSN thing is really anti-sports and not just against Sinclair.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements