Is Anybody Watching? Twins See Sharp Decline In TV Viewers

[Mike Sixel]

Starting the games earlier is a great idea. Live music really needs to learn this lesson......badly.

Charging me to listen to a free radio broadcast when I live out of state is really stupid. It's free in market, but not out of market? They can't make much money in that.....I might have it as background of it was free. I used to in Minnesota some....

[GV14218]

21 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

The problem is that "increased performance" doesn't have a strong correlation to "entertainment" in a spectator sport.

Exactly right, Brock.  Some other American pro sports - NHL, NBA, NFL - have updated their products to provide more customer appeal.  MLB players, OTOH, seem proud of trotting out cliches about “playing the game the right way.”  And the league has been too slow to respond to three true outcomes dominating games.  To MLB: Good luck attracting a new generation of customers.

[Whitey333]

I totally agree with the perception baseball has become too political.  Been watching baseball for over 50 years but not too much any more.  The game is a shell of what it used to be.  The new rules and forced analytics have made watching it impossible.  I turn on sports in part to avoid the national problems and politics.  We need a diversion from the problems not adding to it.  And lastly, Manfred has to go.  He is destroying the game.  Btw does anyone care that most of us can't watch the games anyway?  No access to games because you have been cut off by the greedy cable/ streamline service and Sinclair sports.  They sure make it hard to be a fan.

[Unwinder]

44 minutes ago, Sconnie said:

I think it depends on price and scope. Bally bought many of the RSNs, and the rumored price point is not obscene. We’ve gotten used to having multiple streaming services and could be ok. If Bally gets too greedy on price/access, as they did w/ cable providers, then Sinclair will be forced to get out of their contract and this whole ordeal will start over again.

For those of us who already want to watch baseball, that would be very helpful!

I've had some modest success online as a cartoonist, and while I'm not sure how much of that is applicable to promoting an entire sport, I've noticed a few things about how people choose what they consume:

1. If you put your comics behind a paywall, people will overwhelmingly ignore them in favor of the overwhelming amount of free stuff that's out there.

2. If you put your comics on your OWN SITE, people will overwhelmingly ignore them in favor of the stuff that's posted directly to social media, which they're already committed to browsing every day.

3. When people see your stuff regularly, they start to get attached to it.

In order for new viewers to check baseball out, it doesn't just have to be available, it needs to be so convenient that they can slouch into watching it because they're looking for something to watch and it's right there. It's better for Bally to charge for their own streaming service, which we fans might find reasonable, but it'd be better for baseball if they could figure out some sort of a deal with some sort of existing streaming service.

[dan sullivan]

I have watched, or listened to every Twins game since 1962.  I live in Iowa, and pay a lot for Direct TV, just so I can receive the Twins telecasts.  I will usually DVR the games, so I can replay, and fast forward over the commercials.  Before I got cable tv, I'd sit out in the driveway in my car, trying to pull in Twins games from weak radio signals in Minneapolis, or Yankton.  I am 72 years old, retired, and think that baseball has it's faults, for is still the best game ever invented.  Besides watching the Twins, I will also watch teams that I dislike, like the Yankees, Cubs, White Sox, and cheer for them to lose.

[Dennesey55347]

Honestly, all the reasons mentioned in this article play a role in my lack of live Twins coverage this year. I would also add that I wasn't optimistic of the Twins 2021 season before it began and even predicted with confidence in a reply to a Twins Youtube vid (about 20 games into the season) that Chicago would win the division and beat the Twins by at least 8 games. Pretty much everything I felt was going to hold this team back happened: Buck on IL again, over-reliance on the HR, lack of individual development, no #1 pitcher, etc. Too many weaknesses to compete in this league and zero prospect callups that I felt could singlehandedly vie for team MVP. Not even a member of the coaching staff or front office stands out. Twins have been my #1 team for over 35 years but the state of this current org. gives me nothing to latch on to. I still review game-by-game stats religiously and follow almost every game via ESPN statcast, but that's about it. 

[Richie the Rally Goat]

54 minutes ago, Unwinder said:

For those of us who already want to watch baseball, that would be very helpful!

I've had some modest success online as a cartoonist, and while I'm not sure how much of that is applicable to promoting an entire sport, I've noticed a few things about how people choose what they consume:

1. If you put your comics behind a paywall, people will overwhelmingly ignore them in favor of the overwhelming amount of free stuff that's out there.

2. If you put your comics on your OWN SITE, people will overwhelmingly ignore them in favor of the stuff that's posted directly to social media, which they're already committed to browsing every day.

3. When people see your stuff regularly, they start to get attached to it.

In order for new viewers to check baseball out, it doesn't just have to be available, it needs to be so convenient that they can slouch into watching it because they're looking for something to watch and it's right there. It's better for Bally to charge for their own streaming service, which we fans might find reasonable, but it'd be better for baseball if they could figure out some sort of a deal with some sort of existing streaming service.

MLB has already made that decision no? When Disney had to sell the RSNs, MLB (or NBA/NHL) could have purchased them, but let Sinclair buy them for a paltry $10 bil.

MLB frequently chooses not to make decisions for more money over best for the sport or the fans.

Bally having a partnership with YouTube, Hulu, or Amazon would indeed be more convenient for fans, but Sinclair would not bring in much revenue as the big players would need a very large cut

[Brock Beauchamp]

29 minutes ago, Sconnie said:

MLB has already made that decision no? When Disney had to sell the RSNs, MLB (or NBA/NHL) could have purchased them, but let Sinclair buy them for a paltry $10 bil.

MLB frequently chooses not to make decisions for more money over best for the sport or the fans.

Bally having a partnership with YouTube, Hulu, or Amazon would indeed be more convenient for fans, but Sinclair would not bring in much revenue as the big players would need a very large cut

Wow, that's a REALLY GOOD point. I never even considered that MLB should have purchased those RSNs, which would have opened a variety of opportunities to change how MLB delivers content.

Also, IT'S A SCONNIE APPEARANCE!!!!!!

[TheLeviathan]

2 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Starting the games earlier is a great idea. Live music really needs to learn this lesson......badly.

Charging me to listen to a free radio broadcast when I live out of state is really stupid. It's free in market, but not out of market? They can't make much money in that.....I might have it as background of it was free. I used to in Minnesota some....

I listen to a lot of Wild games via radio as an out-state fan.  Charging for radio is pure greed.

[Captain18s]

I lost interest when they took a knee. Started watching fewer games and found other interests. The George Floyd sign in RF hasn’t helped. 
When I watch sports, I need no lectures or reminders about any politics, especially from players and announcers. Does every activity on TV have to have a message?

[Otto von Ballpark]

FWIW, the local ratings decline may be entirely due to the Bally situation: “Collectively, the 16 teams on Bally Sports are down 19% vs. 2019. Teams not on Bally Sports are up.”

 

[Dev]

I’ve heard a lot of people turned away from sports is because it’s way too political, and I can definitely see why they think that. And I think it would be a really good idea if you guys had your games live on social media platforms for free or .99¢ and I think you would see a huge incline in viewers! Not a lot of people watch regular tv anymore they are usually on there phones or watching Netflix,hulu, etc…

[Craig Arko]

I think I watched part of one game this year on TV, and went physically to one with some friends I needed to catch up with. Otherwise I’ve little interest in lining the greedy pockets of all parties involved in professional (and a lot of so-called amateur) sports.

[Otto von Ballpark]

2 hours ago, Sconnie said:

MLB has already made that decision no? When Disney had to sell the RSNs, MLB (or NBA/NHL) could have purchased them, but let Sinclair buy them for a paltry $10 bil.

MLB frequently chooses not to make decisions for more money over best for the sport or the fans.

Keep in mind, the stable of RSNs that Sinclair bought mostly includes the least valuable:

Arizona, Atlanta, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Detroit, Kansas City, LA Angels, Miami, Milwaukee, Minnesota, St. Louis, San Diego, Tampa Bay, Texas

Note no NY (Yankees or Mets), Chicago (Cubs or White Sox), Boston, Dodgers, Houston, Canada, San Fran, Philly, etc. Mostly the same story with the NBA and NHL properties attached to those networks too (Timberwolves!). And even though MLB would have some unique opportunities, owning the RSNs of their teams, the fact that these networks represent only 16 of 30 MLB teams would have limited the speed and scope of those opportunities anyway.

I really doubt those networks were worth $10 bil. I think it is telling that no one else outbid Sinclair either -- not Fox, not Amazon, etc. Before the ink was even dry, it was apparent that Sinclair was losing big money on the deal. Can't blame MLB for sitting out that round, for those properties and at that price.

As it is, if Sinclair doesn't get its act together in the next year, MLB could have a chance to buy them again for significantly less. Or they may have an opportunity to negotiate the streaming side with a better partner, after the old cable/RSN bubble has naturally contracted a bit. Although the trend of expanded gambling may make them a bedfellow of Bally anyway...

[lecroy24fan]

The sports leagues that are having their games distribution limited should file a class action lawsuit against Sinclair gased on them limiting the audience.

[Major League Ready]

7 minutes ago, lecroy24fan said:

The sports leagues that are having their games distribution limited should file a class action lawsuit against Sinclair gased on them limiting the audience.

It is Sinclair's right to distribute in any manner they chose provided the contractual rights to air MLB defined those parameters.  Based on what is going on .... I highly doubt that contractual obligation exists.  Don't get me wrong.  It's a cluster but I doubt there is any basis for a lawsuit.  

[Parker Hageman]

1 hour ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

FWIW, the local ratings decline may be entirely due to the Bally situation: “Collectively, the 16 teams on Bally Sports are down 19% vs. 2019. Teams not on Bally Sports are up.”

 

Not sure how Aaron made his calculations but all non-Bally teams are down 3.6% since 2019. 

That's not a terrible number

One of the team's doing the most heavy lifting is the Los Angeles Dodgers. They are up almost 50% since 2019. The biggest factor is that they had what amounted to a multi-year blackout of broadcasts end in 2020, giving more residents of the market access to watch their games locally. 

I suppose if you are looking for a case study of whether Bally's limiting the access will effect a team's viewership, the answer is it doesn't have to. It only takes building a competitive team that wins a World Series and the eyeballs come flooding back. Not hard at all. 

 

[Thegrin]

I watch on MLB because I live in California now.  I watch every night and for large portions, my wife watches with me.  She is perturbed by the number of runners we have stranded, "Here we go again." She often says when the bases are loaded.  I gripe about the pitching and the number of balls we throw. 

1. Bring in the automatic strike zone, Let computers call the pitching.  Since TV shows the strike-zone box we can see how bad the umps are.  It makes a mockery of the game. 

2. Put the pitchers on a clock.  I know I've watched Big Mike pitch too many games, but all the relievers seem to be stuck in molasses.

And finally, my viewing habits have changed.  I don't watch many non-Twins baseball games. When the starters leave, the game slows to a crawl.

I can't stand the current brand of NFL. I don't watch it, don't follow it, don't care.

I've lost my taste for NBA Basketball last year, perhaps because the Warriors were so bad.  I wonder about next year  I haven't watched the Olympics at all but I do enjoy Ninja Warrior...go figure.

[Otto von Ballpark]

1 hour ago, Parker Hageman said:

Not sure how Aaron made his calculations but all non-Bally teams are down 3.6% since 2019. 

That's not a terrible number

One of the team's doing the most heavy lifting is the Los Angeles Dodgers. They are up almost 50% since 2019. The biggest factor is that they had what amounted to a multi-year blackout of broadcasts end in 2020, giving more residents of the market access to watch their games locally. 

I suppose if you are looking for a case study of whether Bally's limiting the access will effect a team's viewership, the answer is it doesn't have to. It only takes building a competitive team that wins a World Series and the eyeballs come flooding back. Not hard at all. 

I suspect Aaron may have averaged the percentage changes among non-Bally teams. You're right that if you add up the raw numbers for each, they had a slight collective drop too. Although FWIW, this report excludes the Blue Jays, since it is just US teams.

Dodgers have a big gain, but they're hardly alone. From the Forbes article, here are the teams with gains relative to 2019: Tigers (+40%), Padres (+71%), A’s (+24%), Giants (+54%), Dodgers (+49%), and Chicago White Sox (+123%).

Interesting that Tigers, Padres, Giants and White Sox represent 4 of the 5 biggest winning percentage jumps from 2019 to 2021. And the other team in the top 5 is the Blue Jays, which isn't included in this report. Two of those are even Bally networks!

[Nine of twelve]

To those who feel "politics" should not be a part of sports:

First, I'm sure pretty much everyone agrees that individuals do have and should have the right to express themselves as they see fit, within the law. Barring players from taking a knee or raising a fist is infringing on that right, isn't it?

Second, I'm sure pretty much everyone agrees that those in charge of teams and leagues and so forth do have and should have the right to decide what to promote or not to promote, whether it's a commercial product or service, or a charitable organization, or a cause of some kind. Barring teams from doing that is infringing on that right, isn't it?

We are all free to decide whether to support or not to support teams and players for any reason. I'm pretty confident that those who think all "politics" should be kept completely out of sports are a pretty small minority, otherwise teams and leagues wouldn't show support for some of the causes and viewpoints that those people disdain.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Also, I wonder how accurate these ratings are. Especially as live TV audiences in general shrink, I think this would be harder to measure.

This snippet from the Forbes article suggests there's more to it than just ratings:

Quote

To bolster the idea that while the numbers are down, advertisers still see exceptional value in showing their products and services on regional sports networks that host Major League Baseball, Sloan said that advertisers are flocking to baseball.

“We are having a record revenue year,” Sloan said. “We are up double-digits across all of baseball with advertisers. And I don’t see any reason we wouldn’t finish the season that way. We are seeing more advertisers. We see larger commitments. There have been no issues on the advertiser front with Major League Baseball as a property for advertisers to line up and get behind.”

 

[Murph]

Bally Sports needs to be on YouTubeTV or Hulu.  That's all.

[Brock Beauchamp]

18 minutes ago, Nancy Murphy said:

Bally Sports needs to be on YouTubeTV or Hulu.  That's all.

More importantly, they need to offer a standalone app. 

[Parker Hageman]

Speaking of trying to attract a younger audience...it would appear that MLB and Barstool Sports are in talks for Barstool to potentially broadcast some games:

 

Quote

 

MLB and Barstool potentially could team up to create a new type of broadcast with a focus on in-game gambling. 

The talks have started recently, and while they have picked up steam, an agreement is not yet a certainty. One source deemed it “50-50.”

{snip}

But Barstool sticks out because it has the connection to a younger audience MLB craves and could possibly create buzz with its alternative delivery approach. Barstool would be expected to deliver the games through its website, Instagram and Twitter accounts, among others.

 

 Love or hate Barstool, you can't argue that they aren't grabbing what MLB sees as prime demographics. From CivicScience.com article in August 2019:

Quote

Where Barstool really earns its advertiser attention, however, is its age cohort. A whopping 67% of daily Barstool users are under the age of 30. 15% of all college-aged kids visit Barstool properties every day and 26% every week. Overall, 27% of Gen Z Americans engage with Barstool content at least monthly. That’s not quite the 38% of Gen Z’s who visit BuzzFeed every month, but it’s within shouting distance for a company only a fraction of BuzzFeed’s size. 

I doubt this development will do anything for our current community members who have commented here but the notion that MLB could broadcast their games on Barstool's multiple platforms (Twitter, YouTube and Instagram) that is dominated by younger consumers must be very appealing. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

8 minutes ago, Parker Hageman said:

Speaking of trying to attract a younger audience...it would appear that MLB and Barstool Sports are in talks for Barstool to potentially broadcast some games

[Mike Sixel]

Barstool is a racist, sexist, pile of steaming offal. Not one owner is going to take a stand? Horrible. If I didn't want to support the owners of this site, I'd do nothing MLB related if this happens. 

[RpR]

On 8/7/2021 at 5:44 PM, Nine of twelve said:

To those who feel "politics" should not be a part of sports:

First, I'm sure pretty much everyone agrees that individuals do have and should have the right to express themselves as they see fit, within the law. Barring players from taking a knee or raising a fist is infringing on that right, isn't it?

NO, they are employees representing or working for some onother and have the same type of restrictions any job can put on its workers.

Same reason you cannot proselytize at work.

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

24 minutes ago, RpR said:

NO, they are employees representing or working for some onother and have the same type of restrictions any job can put on its workers.

Same reason you cannot proselytize at work.

Not really, it's sticky and complex. Employees maintain some rights despite the opinion of their employer. Add in the public aspect of professional athletes and it becomes quite murky because they're not even employees, they're contractors, which have even more freedom than employees because unless something is explicitly stated in the contract, they can probably do it without repercussion. On top of all of that, all MLB players operate under a union and a collective bargaining agreement, which may have even more language protecting their actions/opinions outside playing baseball.

After all, there's a reason why the NFL settled with Kaepernick. It isn't as clearcut as "I'm the boss, you do what I say".

[RpR]

10 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

 

After all, there's a reason why the NFL settled with Kaepernick. It isn't as clearcut as "I'm the boss, you do what I say".

That has nothing to do really with rules and regs.; it is the same reason people settle out of court.

Not because one is right or wrong but because some do not want to spend the time to prove their case.

[Rosterman]

Watching the occasional St. Paul Saints game!

Boy they have baggy uniforms.