And yet the NBA Finals draws better than the World Series.

Yeah, but the baseball watching crowd is a more desirable demographic. As the head of Bloomingdale's once told Rupert Murdoch, "Your readers are our shoplifters."

Sports programming (and all live events) is more valuable since it is not dvr'ed as much as pre-recorded shows, so people still are forced to watch the commercials. Advertisers are now paying a premium for that.

Yeah, but the baseball watching crowd is a more desirable demographic. As the head of Bloomingdale's once told Rupert Murdoch, "Your readers are our shoplifters."

Not sure that's true. Basketball draws a younger audience, which is more desirable.

But it's also true that the Finals' success is less dependent on which teams make it. 1) The NBA is less of a crapshoot and the teams with the stars are more likely to make it. 2) Baseball is much more regionalized and if a national team doesn't make it, a large amount of viewership is lost.

Not sure that's true. Basketball draws a younger audience, which is more desirable.

I've read the NBA thread here. There are a lot of ways to describe the people who post there. "Desirable" is not the first one to come to mind.

And yet the NBA Finals draws better than the World Series.

It's not up against anything. October is the heart of the new broadcast season.

And yet the NBA Finals draws better than the World Series.

By a tenth of a point on average, and Games 6 and 7 crushed the ratings of any NBA game.

NBA Finals games featuring the Lakers and Celtics will beat up on Texas-St. Louis World Series games...so yay for the NBA, I guess.

Not sure that's true. Basketball draws a younger audience, which is more desirable.

Was more desirable. Advertisers have been rethinking their target audience for a while: People in their 40s and older are practically the only people in this country with any money, and the under-30 crowd that follows the NBA is under a mountain of student loan debt and unemployment. Interest in baseball seems to return when you get older, and that's very favorable for baseball in the long term as wealth is squarely on the side of older Americans.

Baseball's older audience is becoming an advantage, not a hindrance.

The basketball thing is entirely a non sequitur. Baseball and basketball are not locked in a zero-sum struggle. All sports are doing awesome with television money for the same reason - the widespread use of DVRs means advertisers will pay much higher rates for time during live sporting events.

The NBA and the NCAA are also seeing a "pretty picture" in their tv landscape. That doesn't make MLB's picture less pretty in any way.

Not sure that's true. Basketball draws a younger audience, which is more desirable.

But it's also true that the Finals' success is less dependent on which teams make it. 1) The NBA is less of a crapshoot and the teams with the stars are more likely to make it. 2) Baseball is much more regionalized and if a national team doesn't make it, a large amount of viewership is lost.

It's interesting... I can't find 2011 numbers, but it seems that 30-second spots for the World Series cost $450K in 2010 and a 30-second spot for the 2010 NBA finals cost $400K (references here and here).

So just based on those numbers, in 2010 the NBA was valued at about a 12% discount relative to MLB. My guess is that October is a better selling season for TV ads because of what Bhaakon had posted... many people don't like to sit inside and watch television on a June evening (particularly weeknights), whereas they're much more likely to do so in October.

The lede is being buried here under the dumb basketball argument. From the article:

NBC wants to return to baseball, and its cable channel, NBC Sports Network, needs programming that is more powerful than its current marquee properties: the N.H.L. and the Tour de France. Fox is considering turning its Speed channel into an all-sports network, which would need more than motor racing to thrive.

In addition, rights fees for professional and college sports have soared since M.L.B. made its current deals with ESPN, Fox, and Turner. More than ever, big-time live sports are must-have attractions.

Baseball is clearly trying to exploit the networks’ appetites. According to people briefed on the conversations, M.L.B. has been talking with the networks about changing the configurations of the current deal. The strategy could make the three incumbents worried that some of what they have — maybe “Sunday Night Baseball,” an ESPN staple — could be offered elsewhere.

There's a chance that NBC could outbid Fox for the World Series and the Game of the Week. I have no illusions about NBC, but anything to get the game away from Fox is a win.

Say what you will about Costas but he wants to be there, which is more that can be said for Joe Buck since about 2000. I watched some late-90s Fox baseball and he wasn't that bad...because he wanted to be there.

NBC getting baseball also almost certainly means that McCarver will be put to pasture - I can't imagine they would bring back a 70+ year old in favor of a younger analyst. I could see Ron Darling getting that job (not a spring chicken admittedly, but at least somebody who projects a more youthful image).

Is there any reason MLB can't sell the Saturday 4:00 slot to NBC and the Saturday 7:00 slot to Fox? They wouldn't really be competing with each other.

Costas' work for the MLB network shows that he's mostly interested in complaining about the state of the game today and about how all the bad steroid users should be rounded up and forced to listen him to talk about his Mickey Mantle baseball card.

Bob Costas, pedantic?
I shocked, I say shocked, to find Bob Costas snarkery going on here

NBC getting baseball also almost certainly means that McCarver will be put to pasture - I can't imagine they would bring back a 70+ year old in favor of a younger analyst. I could see Ron Darling getting that job (not a spring chicken admittedly, but at least somebody who projects a more youthful image).

This is the same network that got the Sunday Night Football package and said "GREAT. LET'S PUT JOHN MADDEN ON THE AIR." He was 68-69 at the time. NBC Sports loves old people.

The other interesting thing about sports ads is that they're more visual. The research suggests that a lot of people sometimes gather around one screen to watch a big event, whether it's in a private home or a public place. And in most of those places, the volume is down/drowned out. So watch the ads during a big sports event sometime with the volume off; they are tailored specifically by ad agencies to this "demographic".

Fox is considering turning its Speed channel into an all-sports network....

Which would seem to me to be rather redundant, since Fox already has an all-sports network.

DB

MLB is awash in money and will soon have more. Good time to sell for any owner looking to cash out.

This is the same network that got the Sunday Night Football package and said "GREAT. LET'S PUT JOHN MADDEN ON THE AIR." He was 68-69 at the time. NBC Sports loves old people.

John Madden at 68 was and is a lot more incisive and well-respected than Tim McCarver has ever been.

Which would seem to me to be rather redundant, since Fox already has an all-sports network.

Not really, they're all regional networks, that are piece meal all together.

Just so long as ESPN keeps it. Not so much because I like/dislike ESPN's coverage, so much as we know that ESPN can and will pretend any sport it doesn't have the rights to doesn't exist and in fact could try to actively put down or ridicule said sport (although with baseball it'd be a ton more difficult than with the NHL- a section of Those Guys Have All The Fun is basically is about how important it was for ESPN to get MLB, that it was a step toward their global dominance on par with getting the NFL and World Cup, simply because baseball provides so much day-by-day material and that there are "no fans like baseball fans").

ESPN can and will pretend any sport it doesn't have the rights to doesn't exist and in fact could try to actively put down or ridicule said sport ...

Good. Let 'em. I won't see it because I'll be watching MLB Network where I can get what I want without having sit through endless crap I care nothing about from the NFL, NBA, college football and basketball, soccer, and NASCAR, not to mention all the self-promotion for dreck like the X Games, the ESPY's, and ABC's prime time lineup.

Just so long as ESPN keeps it. Not so much because I like/dislike ESPN's coverage, so much as we know that ESPN can and will pretend any sport it doesn't have the rights to doesn't exist and in fact could try to actively put down or ridicule said sport

Let ESPN put MLB on the backburner. It shouldn't matter to you how much time they devote to it on Sports Center, there are so many options available, and they're better. The MLB, NFL, NBA and NHL all have their own networks. The league sites and team sites provide a wealth of highlights, interviews and other content. There are other places to go for breaking news, analysis, highlights, recaps, stats, you name it. The only reasons to watch ESPN these days are to either watch a live game and, if you want, to watch blowhards yell at each other.

The only time I get highlights from ESPN is during college football. And I watch ESPN News so I don't have to deal with most of the ######## on Sportscenter.

[23] Let ESPN put MLB on the backburner. It shouldn't matter to you how much time they devote to it on Sports Center, there are so many options available, and they're better. The MLB, NFL, NBA and NHL all have their own networks.

IMO MLB Network beats ESPN not only on focus on baseball, but also by having the "live look-ins" all evening long. That beats mere highlights any day. (Does Baseball Tonight show you games live in key moments? I've stopped watching it altogether.)