YouTube TV Inks Deal for 19 Fox Regional Sports Nets With Sinclair, Drops YES and Two Others

Discussion in 'Internet Streaming Services' started by glrush, Feb 27, 2020.

  1. glrush

    glrush Cool Member/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    217
    100
    Jun 29, 2002
    Shellsburg, IA
  2. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Gold Club DBSTalk Club

    52,664
    2,811
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Hmmm .. issues with Sinclair?
     
  3. lparsons21

    lparsons21 Hall Of Fame

    6,001
    767
    Mar 4, 2006
    Herrin, IL
    Yep, it is Sinclair yet again. This will make the 4th carrier to drop Sinclair’s RSNs. Fubo, Dish, Sling and now YTTV.

    Tough times ahead for Sinclair I hope!
     
    Dishdude714 likes this.
  4. tsmacro

    tsmacro Hall Of Fame

    2,427
    73
    Apr 28, 2005
    East...
    Lets see as an Indiana Pacers fan I ended up subscribing to fubo at the beginning of the season to watch the games because Sinclair pulled their channels from Dish, then they pulled it from fubo, so I try YTTV and guess what? As much as I enjoy watching my basketball team at what point is enough, enough? I don't even know how I'm watching any game after Feb 29th or hard I'm even going to try. I mean basically every month a half or so I have to find a new way to watch the games. Pretty much my experience seems to indicate that any service I subscribe to will be the next to lose the Fox Sports Channels. I've complained to Sinclair as well as informed the Pacers that they need to find a new broadcast partner as Fox Sports seems to failing at an epic level. It's hard to imagine how Sinclair is making any money this way, maybe it's better that they do fail and just go out of business. Either that or just start their own streaming service.
     
  5. TheRatPatrol

    TheRatPatrol Hall Of Fame

    8,628
    721
    Oct 1, 2003
    Phoenix, AZ
    I see a lot of new VPN subscriptions coming soon.
     
    Dishdude714 and espaeth like this.
  6. garn9173

    garn9173 Icon

    568
    5
    Apr 4, 2005
    Ankeny, IA...
    Looks like I'll be going back to HuluLive, too bad as it's great to be able to watch MLB Network, but my Royals take precedence.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2020
  7. gio12

    gio12 Icon

    1,232
    86
    Jul 31, 2006
    Miami, Fl
    Well guess I will be quitting YTTV now.
    Might try Hulu again. Prefer YTTV. Worse case, Comcast.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2020
  8. NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    1,821
    447
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Sports are expensive. YTTV at $50 was not, I've repeatedly said, sustainable. Now, if they keep those RSNs out of the package, then maybe it is. Although given that YTTV was structured from the get-go to appeal to sports and news fans, it suddenly becomes less attractive without offering those RSNs.
     
  9. evotz

    evotz Active Member

    240
    58
    Jan 23, 2014
    I'm a sports fan (well... baseball and college basketball), but I've been saying it for years, they've been over valuing these sports TV contracts for years, and now it's coming back to bite them in the ass.

    The majority of people do not want sports and so it doesn't make a lot of sense to constantly raise their price for content that they are never going to watch, just so a select few don't have to pay the brunt of the cost for those sports.

    The bottom line really is... DirecTV, Youtube, and all of these other providers shouldn't be paying these RSNs these exuberant prices for the sports content. And those RSNs shouldn't be paying the team exuberant prices for access to their events. The amount of money changing hands in all of this is just incredibly too much.

    A sports pack offering for Youtube TV, even if it's $20 or $30 (I'd really like to hope it's less than $20) is probably the way to go - if that means that the standard Youtube TV can stay at $50/mo.

    Teams, leagues, RSNs, everyone involved is going to have to stop looking at raw subscribers numbers and instead look at numbers the indicate exactly how many people are watching their content.
     
    MrMars likes this.
  10. NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    1,821
    447
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Totally agree. And it looks like Sinclair may be the one caught holding the bomb when it explodes. They didn't get carriage on DISH, YTTV is balking, they've yet to get Comcast to carry their Cubs RSN (Marquee). Some are speculating that we could see Sinclair's RSN-owning subsidiary Diamond Sports declare bankruptcy this year if they don't get more deals lined up.

    Lack of Rebrand Indication that Diamond Sports’ RSNs are in Trouble?

    Which is why an increasing number of us just pay for Netflix + HBO + Hulu, etc. rather than the cable bundle.

    Yeah, I just posted elsewhere that I could see YTTV moving to a 2-tier package structure similar to what AT&T TV has done with their new Plus and Max packages. They'd shift the RSNs plus whatever other less-popular sports channels they could (e.g. MLB Network, NBA TV, FS2, etc.) up to the upper tier. Meanwhile, they'll eventually be forced to accept some of those Viacom channels if they continue to carry CBS, now that Viacom and CBS have merged. They'll probably also need to add those few nets from Hallmark and A&E (including History and Lifetime) if they want to become a real substitute for traditional cable TV. So I can see some of those new channels going into the base package and others going into the upper package, with the two priced this year at maybe $50 and $65, respectively.
     
    Dishdude714 likes this.
  11. Tiny

    Tiny Mentor

    123
    15
    Feb 1, 2009
    1AA0CAE0-5B20-439B-AD74-3973D8AFAE3F.jpeg
     
    Dishdude714 and 242424 like this.
  12. evotz

    evotz Active Member

    240
    58
    Jan 23, 2014
    I would also figure that Youtube TV (and Hulu Live TV, and any other streaming live tv, probably digital cable as well ... is analog cable still around?) has ways to know what channels people are watching and how much air time those channels are getting.

    So if ESPN or a Sinclair operated RSN is getting 10% of the total Youtube TV Viewership... then why should Youtube TV be spending more than 10% of it's carriage fees on ESPN?

    Like I said, I like sports and I'm also frugal. I'd love to be able to spend as little as possible to get the sports that I want to see. But I also know that there's a lot of others that care nothing at all about sports.

    That's something that all of these sports channels need to think about - how much money are they going to lose between lowering their price for carriage vs. lowering their total subscribers if carriage requires a sports pack or second tier to what they can actually operate on. Then they need to quit bidding such extreme prices for access to these sporting events. Then athletes will stop getting paid so much. And Scott Boras will become very angry.
     
  13. 1948GG

    1948GG Icon

    1,258
    52
    Aug 4, 2007
    One can moan for Sinclair, having dropped a load for those fox rsn's, but another bunch on the chopping block are the at&t/directv rsn's, that they've been trying to unload for a couple of years, and have the same problem: Tied into over-priced mlb and other sports contracts that are hitched to (yet again) cable and sat carriers that are getting hammered by cord cutting. So it's a product that is too expensive that nobody wants to pay for any more.

    I just had the mlb AtBat subscription renewed today at $121.99 that (legally) doesn't show the local team live. But as they are semi-pitiful, I don't care, even if they were available, I've lived in many other markets and I follow those teams much closer. This is the future today. If those in market teams want to make anything at all, they need to get their heads out if the sand and sell direct.
     
  14. wmb

    wmb Godfather

    737
    92
    Dec 17, 2008
    I got an email yesterday from T-Mobile that they are giving all subscribers MLB AtBat for free again this year.

    Does anyone know who actually produces the game broadcasts? Is it the team or the RSN?

    The other thing that is interesting/odd about this is that Disney Streaming Services started life as MLB Advanced Media which was spun off as BAMTech in 2015.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    Dishdude714 likes this.
  15. evotz

    evotz Active Member

    240
    58
    Jan 23, 2014
    The issue with teams selling direct (which I do agree, is something they should do) is money.

    Teams are going to take quit a hit if they sell their games OTT.

    If a certain area has 11 million TV (in some capacity) subscribers and they essentially get $3 per subscriber, that's $33 million in revenue.

    If they sell direct, they might be lucky if they get even 1 million subscribers. That means they'd have to charge those 1 million subscribers $33 just to get the same amount of revenue. How many of those 1 million subscribers will balk at that price tag?

    Of course... the real answer is... they shouldn't be expecting $33 million in revenue from TV. But these RSNs have already paid heaps of money (see the Dodgers situation), so the teams don't really care if their games are on TV or not, they're still getting their money.
     
    Dishdude714, NashGuy and lparsons21 like this.
  16. NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    1,821
    447
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    There are typically two different RSNs covering a given game and MLB.tv gives you the option of which one to watch. Also have the option of listening to your team's AM/FM radio coverage if you prefer that.
     
    Dishdude714 likes this.
  17. glrush

    glrush Cool Member/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    217
    100
    Jun 29, 2002
    Shellsburg, IA
  18. espaeth

    espaeth AllStar

    352
    157
    Oct 13, 2003
    Produced by the RSN, who is given exclusive broadcast rights in the market in which they operate. It's a little more quirky than that though -- the on-air talent is paid by the teams, so it is the teams who get to pick their own play-by-play and color analysts. The remaining video rights are property of the respective sports leagues, and the league can sell access to those video feeds outside of the exclusive broadcast markets -- which is how MLB:EI / MLB.tv has worked.

    If you're caught up in losing access to your RSN, but you still subscribe to MLB.tv -- you can always look Yonder to see what DNS options might work for you to leverage MLB.tv to your advantage. Blackouts are done based on where the service thinks you are, and that logic can be exploited to take advantage of a service you're already paying for.

    You might need to Google a bit to find the solution.
     
  19. 1948GG

    1948GG Icon

    1,258
    52
    Aug 4, 2007
    Even though I operate a business class VPN (and have for years) my in-market team is and has been at it near the bottom for almost two decades. But their rsn has been the focus of legal wranglings for those decades, and is a good primer on how the courts rule for the large cablecos even against satellite owned rsn providers. And protect the cableco owned rsn against the satellite distributors; there is no way that will change when dealing with streaming unless and until the losses felt by the rsn become extremely untenable.

    But competition in transmission will rear its head, and will be the cablecos/satcos primary focus by the end of this year.
     
  20. espaeth

    espaeth AllStar

    352
    157
    Oct 13, 2003
    I think the Dish proposal to Altitude is somewhat telling of the current state of the RSN market: Dish pitches a la carte option to Altitude TV | Light Reading

    That’s crazy to me that Dish is saying:

    - We’ll offer your channel ala carte on Dish and Sling
    - You can set the price to whatever you want
    - We’ll cover all of the costs of distribution, and pass 100% of that money through to you

    .. and Altitude is basically saying “Nah. No deal unless everyone pays.”

    One thing these streaming providers have absolutely dialed in is they know exactly what channels people are watching and for exactly how long. If you want to follow your local team(s), your local RSN can be absolutely vital to you — but across the entire subscriber base it’s crazy how low some of the viewership numbers end up being.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements