Bally Sports exploring stand-alone app

[Otto von Ballpark]

5 minutes ago, howeda7 said:

Maybe for now. But if they launch this app, they lose most leverage with the few cable companies and DirecTV that still carry them. So I would expect most of them to drop BSN when their next contract is up.

But I'm told by others that $23/mo is too high.

There are definitely a lot of factors around this. I wouldn't be surprised to see the whole thing scuttled before next spring. But it's interesting to think about.

[Otto von Ballpark]

For those that think $23/mo is too high, you should look up north.

Canada's two major sports networks, Sportsnet and TSN, have each had a standalone streaming service for the past 3-5 years. They both advertise plans at $20/mo (or ~$17/mo billed annually), BUT due to split coverage and blackouts, hockey fans may actually need to subscribe to both to get their local team's games. (MLB and the USA aren't the only league and country with complicated blackout situations!)

There are other factors at play too, but $23/mo for a standalone BSN streaming service, with all regional Twins, Wild, and Wolves games (plus Lynx and Loons), seems roughly comparable.

TSN also has a "day pass" for $8, and Sportsnet a "7-day pass" for $10, to cater to more casual fans.

[howeda7]

Does anyone know when the Twins contract with BSN is up? I see this ending up with them streaming games on their own app and going back to having some games on local TV on Sundays etc. Possibly a joint venture with the Wild and/or Wolves as they tried to do with Victory Sports One until the Wolves demanded 50/50 sharing.

[TheLeviathan]

14 minutes ago, howeda7 said:

Does anyone know when the Twins contract with BSN is up? I see this ending up with them streaming games on their own app and going back to having some games on local TV on Sundays etc. Possibly a joint venture with the Wild and/or Wolves as they tried to do with Victory Sports One until the Wolves demanded 50/50 sharing.

It looks like 2023:  https://www.twincities.com/2016/02/12/local-tv-deal-doesnt-hamper-twins-payroll-team-president-says/  but I couldn't find anything written in stone in that.

I agree a Victory Sports One scenario could happen and likely with the same results.  Streamers compete with the option to pay $0 so any option that doesn't immediately catch you as a reasonable price point is bound to fail and push people to piracy.  Of course, there is a moral dilemma with that, but so is giving any money to this company.  

Searching Bally Sports on Reddit will tell you a lot of people share your sentiments howeda and are generally aghast at the move.  (That's relevant because reddit is a bastion of cord cutting and streaming users.  In other words: your most likely potential customers)

[nicksaviking]

MLB needs to buy back the rights to their product, clean it up, nurse it back to health and then showcase it affordably and to the masses on any and every platform they can.

I mean, that's what they should do if the owners want the game to be around for more than another decade. If they'd rather make as much money as they possibly can for the next few years until the game is dead, I guess they should just keep turning a blind eye.

Casual baseball fans are not going to pay more than a nominal fee to watch baseball on TV. When only the diehard fans watch your sport, you become lacrosse.

[lecroy24fan]

3 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

MLB needs to buy back the rights to their product, clean it up, nurse it back to health and then showcase it affordably and to the masses on any and every platform they can.

I mean, that's what they should do if the owners want the game to be around for more than another decade. If they'd rather make as much money as they possibly can for the next few years until the game is dead, I guess they should just keep turning a blind eye.

Casual baseball fans are not going to pay more than a nominal fee to watch baseball on TV. When only the diehard fans watch your sport, you become lacrosse.

Considering MLB can't quit making decisions that are ruining the game I can't trust them to fix a tv situation.

[Brock Beauchamp]

15 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

MLB needs to buy back the rights to their product, clean it up, nurse it back to health and then showcase it affordably and to the masses on any and every platform they can.

I mean, that's what they should do if the owners want the game to be around for more than another decade. If they'd rather make as much money as they possibly can for the next few years until the game is dead, I guess they should just keep turning a blind eye.

Casual baseball fans are not going to pay more than a nominal fee to watch baseball on TV. When only the diehard fans watch your sport, you become lacrosse.

Never mind that television rights are the largest source of the sport’s inequity, too. 

[Mike Sixel]

I'm between casual and serious fandom....and there is zero chance I'd pay to watch MLB if I couldn't get EVERY GAME. No blackouts. No exclusions. EVERY GAME. Even then, probably not (I'm cheap, and checking gamecast is enough for me). I'm not sure how sports succeed long term if people can't watch them and become fans.....but I think people have been typing that forever. Is boxing dead, or just enough people pay for it to last, even if the public largely doesn't care anymore like in the Ali or Tyson days?

[wsnydes]

12 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

I'm between casual and serious fandom....and there is zero chance I'd pay to watch MLB if I couldn't get EVERY GAME. No blackouts. No exclusions. EVERY GAME. Even then, probably not (I'm cheap, and checking gamecast is enough for me). I'm not sure how sports succeed long term if people can't watch them and become fans.....but I think people have been typing that forever. Is boxing dead, or just enough people pay for it to last, even if the public largely doesn't care anymore like in the Ali or Tyson days?

This.  I've never understood the sports mantra of making it more difficult to consume their product.  I just don't get it.

[TheLeviathan]

6 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

I'm between casual and serious fandom....and there is zero chance I'd pay to watch MLB if I couldn't get EVERY GAME. No blackouts. No exclusions. EVERY GAME. Even then, probably not (I'm cheap, and checking gamecast is enough for me). I'm not sure how sports succeed long term if people can't watch them and become fans.....but I think people have been typing that forever. Is boxing dead, or just enough people pay for it to last, even if the public largely doesn't care anymore like in the Ali or Tyson days?

It doesn't kill you, but you enter firmly into the "niche" category.  Baseball has hit the gas on that track the last two years.  I thought I was doom and gloom predicting it would take 20 years!

[TheLeviathan]

A podcast concerning this.  Comment section weighs in too:

 

https://www.startribune.com/bally-sports-north-fans-adjusting-twins-timberwolves-wild-lynx-minnesota-united/600071521/

[Otto von Ballpark]

Sounds like Bally/Sinclair may not be able to do this (direct to consumer streaming)?

Manfred critical of Sinclair

Quote

Asked about Sinclair’s claim that it is close to obtaining the necessary rights to launch a direct-to-consumer RSN service, Manfred said the accurate statement would be that Sinclair does not have enough digital rights from enough clubs in order to have a viable direct-to-consumer product. Manfred: "The other set of rights they've talked a lot about is gambling rights, they don't have those either. We have been clear with Diamond from the very beginning, this was not a late starting issue. We've been very clear with them from the beginning that we see both those sets of rights as extraordinarily valuable to baseball, and we're not just going to throw them in to help Sinclair out.”

Note that "Diamond" is Diamond Sports Group, the Sinclair subsidiary that actually operates the 21 Bally Sports networks including Bally Sports North. A recent report suggested that "Diamond Sports Group... could be headed into bankruptcy."

[TheLeviathan]

Where's that shocked face gif.....

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

Baseball

[Otto von Ballpark]

Well, Bally Sports networks may be circling the drain of bankruptcy, but they do seem to making progress on this front:

Sinclair Reaches Deal for Direct-To-Consumer Rights to 12 NHL Teams For Bally Sports App

Includes the Wild. No word yet on price, or when it would launch -- they're probably trying to leverage this to help get MLB and/or NBA streaming rights too.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Looks like Bally is about to get local NBA streaming rights too:

Sinclair Lines Up NBA and $600 Million for New Streaming App

Like their NHL deal, presumably this just covers the 16 teams Bally already carries on their RSNs (including the Timberwolves).

Probably too late to include the current NBA/NHL regular seasons -- my guess is that it would roll out before the start of the 2022-2023 NBA/NHL seasons, unless they can quickly line up similar rights for MLB this spring, although that seems doubtful given the overall MLB situation right now.

[Dave The Dastardly]

I look at this whole thing a little differently. I want to watch a Twins game when I feel like watching a game. In other words, maybe a game or two a week. And I don't want to just sit and watch for 3+ straight hours. My mind doesn't have a 3 hour passive mode switch. And I don't want to be bombarded with commercials while I'm supposedly watching baseball. Already got that crap showing up constantly everywhere else and I'm not going to buy whatever they're selling anyway. And I cut the cord ten years ago when my $38 DirectTV grew to $99 a month and I hadn't added anything to the package. So, until they come up with a single game rate/access, I'm listening on the radio (so I can do other stuff at the same time) and/or checking in via Gameday and TD Game Threads while I'm supposedly working on the computer.

So BallyWho.

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

1 hour ago, Dave The Dastardly said:

So, until they come up with a single game rate/access, I'm listening on the radio (so I can do other stuff at the same time) and/or checking in via Gameday and TD Game Threads while I'm supposedly working on the computer.

One of the two live sports streaming services in Canada, TSN Direct, has a "Day Pass" but it's $8, compared to $20 for a month (or ~$16 per month if you pay for a year all at once). So if you're watching at least 2-3 days a month, you are better off getting a monthly/annual plan anyway. The other service, Sportsnet Now, had a "7-day pass" but it appears to have been discontinued now -- minimum is a month at $15.

If Bally is more aggressive than those services about courting single-game viewers, I suspect it could be part of a gambling push -- for example, "bet $5 on this game and watch it for free!"

[DJL44]

On 6/11/2021 at 3:00 PM, Otto von Ballpark said:

a baseball-only fan would never subscribe to this service for at least 5 months out of the year.

That's where I'm at. I'd probably subscribe April to June, then see if the team was worth my time the rest of the summer.

[Dave The Dastardly]

2 hours ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

One of the two live sports streaming services in Canada, TSN Direct, has a "Day Pass" but it's $8, compared to $20 for a month (or ~$16 per month if you pay for a year all at once). So if you're watching at least 2-3 days a month, you are better off getting a monthly/annual plan anyway. The other service, Sportsnet Now, had a "7-day pass" but it appears to have been discontinued now -- minimum is a month at $15.

If Bally is more aggressive than those services about courting single-game viewers, I suspect it could be part of a gambling push -- for example, "bet $5 on this game and watch it for free!"

I'll take that bet! I usually lose on sports wagers anyway but if I can watch the game for free I'm still a winner!!

[Otto von Ballpark]

Update: the Bally direct-to-consumer service will be called "Bally Sports+" and will be priced at $19.99 per month, or $189.99 annually.

The Streamable: Sinclair Announces Initial Pricing for ‘Bally Sports+’ DTC Streaming App

Should launch in a few markets this summer, but they still don't have direct streaming rights for the Twins. So it may not be relevant to anyone here until the fall when the Wolves and Wild start up again, or maybe 2023 if they are able to secure the Twins by then?

[baul0010]

On 6/12/2021 at 10:07 PM, Brock Beauchamp said:

Actually, it's going to work so very well. This is what's going to kill cable.

Is it overpriced? Yes, almost definitely. Will I pay it? Yes, without hesitation.

AT&T Online is $92/mo so I can watch baseball for six months. I literally watch zero things other than sports, ever.

$23/mo? Hell, I'll probably stick around for Wolves and Wild now, too.

Yep, yep, and yep.  I watch nothing but the Twins, Wolves, and Wild.  Get it done, I'll start paying right now!

[nicksaviking]

1 hour ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

Update: the Bally direct-to-consumer service will be called "Bally Sports+" and will be priced at $19.99 per month, or $189.99 annually.

The Streamable: Sinclair Announces Initial Pricing for ‘Bally Sports+’ DTC Streaming App

Should launch in a few markets this summer, but they still don't have direct streaming rights for the Twins. So it may not be relevant to anyone here until the fall when the Wolves and Wild start up again, or maybe 2023 if they are able to secure the Twins by then?

Good bye grandma and grandpa. Good bye junior picking up an interest in the sport.

Doesn't matter if it's a good deal or not, the only people paying $20 a month to watch their team are the diehard fans. It needs to be part of Hulu, Amazon Prime AND Apple TVs basic packages. I'm sure there are other platforms it should be included on but I can't keep up with all this information. This streaming revolution everyone promised me was going to be easier and cheaper was a hot load of garbage.

[wsnydes]

57 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

Good bye grandma and grandpa. Good bye junior picking up an interest in the sport.

Doesn't matter if it's a good deal or not, the only people paying $20 a month to watch their team are the diehard fans. It needs to be part of Hulu, Amazon Prime AND Apple TVs basic packages. I'm sure there are other platforms it should be included on but I can't keep up with all this information. This streaming revolution everyone promised me was going to be easier and cheaper was a hot load of garbage.

Agreed.  I feel that I'm still paying for it on Hulu since my subscription price didn't drop when they dropped it, so $20/mth is a non-starter for me.  I've found other ways to get my Twins fix and I don't watch the NBA or enough Wild games to justify that price.

[Vanimal46]

1 hour ago, nicksaviking said:

Good bye grandma and grandpa. Good bye junior picking up an interest in the sport.

Doesn't matter if it's a good deal or not, the only people paying $20 a month to watch their team are the diehard fans. It needs to be part of Hulu, Amazon Prime AND Apple TVs basic packages. I'm sure there are other platforms it should be included on but I can't keep up with all this information. This streaming revolution everyone promised me was going to be easier and cheaper was a hot load of garbage.

Grandma and grandpa are the ones that still have cable… and Junior is introduced to it if mom and dad or their friends are into it. I would also assume a bundle will be made down the road with the platforms you mentioned. 

Do you think $20 a month, or $15 a month if you pay annual upfront is too expensive for live sports? It’s right on par with Netflix ($20), Hulu bundle of Disney+ and ESPN+ ($18) and HBO Max ($15).

I agree that streaming can be more expensive than cable these days if you don’t watch your expenses. If I were still a cord cutter, I’d do this app upfront payment, over the air TV, and 1-2 streaming services on a rotating basis. 

[nicksaviking]

6 minutes ago, Vanimal46 said:

Grandma and grandpa are the ones that still have cable… and Junior is introduced to it if mom and dad or their friends are into it. I would also assume a bundle will be made down the road with the platforms you mentioned. 

Do you think $20 a month, or $15 a month if you pay annual upfront is too expensive for live sports? It’s right on par with Netflix ($20), Hulu bundle of Disney+ and ESPN+ ($18) and HBO Max ($15).

I agree that streaming can be more expensive than cable these days if you don’t watch your expenses. If I were still a cord cutter, I’d do this app upfront payment, over the air TV, and 1-2 streaming services on a rotating basis. 

Yes, that's too much. I will watch zero other content on Bally Sports. We were promised our $100 cable bill would be cheaper if we cut the cord and went to streaming. Now we have to subscribe to a half dozen streaming services which amount to more than what we used to pay and even worse, we have zero stability. Any sports or shows we plan to watch can get yanked from the platform at a moments notice. Good luck to Grandma and Grandpa once Spectrum washes their hands of Bally Sports.

Too expensive, too complicated, too unreliable. This is not working like we were promised. Your local baseball team on TV shouldn't cost any more than the few bucks a month the old providers increased the cable bill to broadcast the games. 

[purplesoldier4u]

1 hour ago, baul0010 said:

Yep, yep, and yep.  I watch nothing but the Twins, Wolves, and Wild.  Get it done, I'll start paying right now!

A la carte programming is what everybody wanted and it's what we are all gonna get!

[Otto von Ballpark]

3 hours ago, nicksaviking said:

Your local baseball team on TV shouldn't cost any more than the few bucks a month the old providers increased the cable bill to broadcast the games. 

The reason the RSNs only charged a few bucks a month from cable/satellite providers was because they were getting those few bucks a month for every subscriber, whether they cared about sports or not.

Just using some numbers for illustrative purposes, say you have a million cable/satellite subscribers, and each one brings a $5 carriage fee to the RSN. That's $5 million in revenue.

But now say half of those cable/satellite subscribers have cut the cord. At the same carriage fee, they're down to half the revenue, or $2.5 mi.

And of the 500k cordcutters, maybe only 125k care about sports enough to subscribe directly like this (and that's probably generous). Those 125k would have to pay $20 each to match the lost carriage fee revenue.

[TheLeviathan]

3 hours ago, Vanimal46 said:

Grandma and grandpa are the ones that still have cable… and Junior is introduced to it if mom and dad or their friends are into it. I would also assume a bundle will be made down the road with the platforms you mentioned. 

Do you think $20 a month, or $15 a month if you pay annual upfront is too expensive for live sports? It’s right on par with Netflix ($20), Hulu bundle of Disney+ and ESPN+ ($18) and HBO Max ($15).

I agree that streaming can be more expensive than cable these days if you don’t watch your expenses. If I were still a cord cutter, I’d do this app upfront payment, over the air TV, and 1-2 streaming services on a rotating basis. 

For $20 Netflix offers me a boatload of content.  And, I'll point out, they may have priced themselves out of the market at that price point despite having about eleventy billion more things to watch than Bally.  Hulu and Disney and ESPN is actually cheaper than this.  Cheaper!!!!  And they offer the most desired content available. HBO Max is the prestige channel with the least in quantity but most in quality to offer and it's STILL CHEAPER  

This is Sinclair hoping desperate diehards help them save their bad business model.  It won't.  The market for this is so, so minimal.  It'll be an abject failure in less than five years.  Book it.

[Shaitan]

$20 seems fair to me.

Too bad Sinclair owns them.