DBSTalk Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Thought I read somewhere that Bally was supposed to start having a bunch of sports wagering information on their sports channels during games at some point. Anyone know when these are supposed to begin? I know a lot of folks have criticized their score bug taking up the entire bottom of the screen. If they start cluttering up the screen with a bunch of wagering info numbers I believe that will even make game watching worse.
 

·
Icon
Joined
·
3,493 Posts
I'm not sure about ballys

But I think there is a Nexstar owned station for sports betting ...

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 

·
Icon
Joined
·
3,493 Posts


Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
53,878 Posts
Ballys / Sinclair seems to be delayed on delivering on their promised offerings. Some day.
 

·
Legend
Joined
·
616 Posts
Thought I read somewhere that Bally was supposed to start having a bunch of sports wagering information on their sports channels during games at some point. Anyone know when these are supposed to begin? I know a lot of folks have criticized their score bug taking up the entire bottom of the screen. If they start cluttering up the screen with a bunch of wagering info numbers I believe that will even make game watching worse.
I’m assuming it’s going to be on the right side as just another page of info with the scores from other sporting events
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
2,524 Posts
IMHO, there seem to be two full-time players in the sports gambling "space". One is VSIN, which used to be on SXM radio and which shows several hours of its video on several of the RSNs. It is a solid gambling network. Las Vegas based, staffed by gambling people, including Brent Musburger on occasion. The other is this Sports Grid deal, which replaced VSIN on SXM radio and with is going to be (might already be???) a Nexstar "diginet". It just isn't any good. It, before the Supreme Court's ruling, was just a small time sports talk radio network, with an emphasis on scores. They just added in gambling talk. Problem is nobody there knows the first thing about sports gambling. Just the typical sports radio ho-ha about this or that guy being "the man" and other such NBA foolishness.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
53,878 Posts
That could work ... and combined with the out of market rights those leagues retain the streaming offering would be easier to offer. Only RSNs they don't own would need to be protected.
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
2,524 Posts
Sinclair is just an awful company, good to see them lose money.

That aside, the RSN model is breaking, if not broken. As with ESPN, et al, the model of “everybody” paying, for the RSNs because “everybody” had cable or DBS has been challenged by DISH and by the linear streamers. If you don’t like sports, you can opt out by settling for one of those services.

However, the big issues that I see, are the interplay between the MLB and the NBA/NHL over who is worth what, and the interplay between the MLB teams in this and those that are not.

Also, remember that OOM packages are also broken. In the cable/DBS model these were a supplement. “Everybody” had already bought their home team first. Now it is easier and cheaper to follow any team, except your own. Not good. IMHO, the price of MLB.TV needs to go way up, and include the local team(s).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,256 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
RSN’s aren’t really going anywhere anytime soon. Many teams have contracts for many many years to come with RSN’s. Think about the Cubs who just started their Marquee Network & other teams like the Dodgers, Lakers, & Yankees who all have started their own RSN Channel. Many other teams have contracts in place with RSN’s for long terms.
 

·
Beware the Attack Basset
Joined
·
25,412 Posts
Think about the Cubs who just started their Marquee Network & other teams like the Dodgers, Lakers, & Yankees who all have started their own RSN Channel.
Just because someone has a product doesn't mean that the product will be commercially successful.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
53,878 Posts
Existing contracts won't stop the Bally RSN's from being sold if they want to.
Nor will contracts prevent the RSN from going bankrupt. Turning a $10 billion investment into a $3 billion sale is not the path most companies want to follow. Did they at least make $7 billion over the last few years so they can "break even" on their investment.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,345 Posts
Nor will contracts prevent the RSN from going bankrupt. Turning a $10 billion investment into a $3 billion sale is not the path most companies want to follow. Did they at least make $7 billion over the last few years so they can "break even" on their investment.
My guess is no.
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
2,524 Posts
That is the point. The model is broken and Sinclair can bankrupt Diamond Sports, which is the corporate name for Bally’s, without bankrupting Sinclair. Diamond has no real assets beyond some TV equipment and money losing contracts with sports teams.

MLB knows this, and knows there are no buyers for those rights out there, and that the material it sells on mlb.tv is produced in the first place by the RSNs.

They have to figure out a way to get local games to local fans in a profitable manner. It simply cannot be easier for a kid in Northern California to follow the Yankees than the Giants.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,345 Posts
They have to figure out a way to get local games to local fans in a profitable manner. It simply cannot be easier for a kid in Northern California to follow the Yankees than the Giants.
It is that way becuase MLB owners don't want that kid watching TV in their living room. They want the kid, mom, dad, bothers and sisters buying tickets to the game and spending money on concessions and merchandise.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top