Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, January 27, 2023

A radical remodel of local sports TV may come sooner than expected | theScore.com

Travis Sawchik with some more info on the broadcasting situation.

jimfurtado Posted: January 27, 2023 at 03:19 PM | 8 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: broadcasts

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Starring Bradley Scotchman as RMc Posted: January 28, 2023 at 09:34 AM (#6114860)
"It's been a golden goose. You remove cable TV from the scenario, and franchises are worth a fraction of what they are today, players make a fraction of their salaries," Greg Bouris, a sports management professor at Adelphi University and a longtime observer of the sports cable space, told theScore last year. "This boom has been going on for almost 30 years. But the vast majority of people that pay never watch. That's been the model."


The Reckoning is coming, folks.
   2. Cris E Posted: January 28, 2023 at 12:53 PM (#6114871)
There's a link to a Sports Business Journal article in that story that's a very interesting read as well.
This hire is the clearest sign that MLB has decided that it needs to take a more active role in producing and distributing its games. Baseball execs believe that it will gain control over many of those rights controlled by Diamond Sports, which has been mired in financial troubles and last month installed former ESPN and NBC Sports exec David Preschlack as CEO. MLB expects it will get control of other rights -- ones held by Comcast and Warner Bros. Discovery -- soon after. MLB already has started looking into creating a national product that would combine its local rights with its out-of-market Extra Innings package -- an effort that would do away with blackouts.

One idea that’s been considered has MLB producing and distributing games directly for distribution companies, like Xfinity, DirecTV, Charter and Dish Network, while at the same time launching a direct-to-consumer service that would combine the out-of-market package with local telecasts.


That sounds cool, but looking at the sheer volume of money that's at stake with all the local and national broadcasts, there's a huge potential for disaster here. MLB only hired this guy to start working on this problem in January, so there's not a lot of time to do anything in 2023. If the RSNs fail to come up with cash in the next six months there could be some serious liquidity problems for some of the big spending clubs (San Diego, I'm looking at you.)
   3. Walt Davis Posted: January 28, 2023 at 03:03 PM (#6114887)
You remove cable TV from the scenario, and franchises are worth a fraction of what they are today, players make a fraction of their salaries,"

Not true. Well true in that 95/100 is fraction but not what the colloquial meaning is here. Local broadcast rights are certainly a big deal but most of these deals are not franchise-defining. Here are fangraphs estimates from 2020. You've got the teams you'd expect (and Padres) around $50 M. Then there's a tier around $70 M (Cards, Phils, Nats, etc.) and then you start getting towards $100 topping out at about $140 then you get the Dodgers at $240.

But teams also only get to keep half of that money, the rest goes into the pool that then gets doled out to every team. Is the Padres missing out on $25 M revenue every year going to make a huge difference to the team they put on the field or the revenue that they produce? And of course that's only if they lose local broadcast revenue and don't replace it with anything. Even if their local TV revenue ends up only half of what it was, that's an overall loss of only $12-13 M. They would have had to non-tender Josh Hader maybe.

From that 2020 article: Four years ago, I estimated local television revenues of roughly $1.5 billion. Despite a somewhat uncertain landscape, that number has risen to $2.1 billion, an increase of around one-third and 8% annually.

So suppose that whole increase was a mirage and it falls back to $1.5 B -- that's a drop of 30%. That $600 M loss would come out to $20 per team. Not good obviously, troubling for the future but not reducing $1.5 B franchises to a "fraction" of their current value. That loss would be approximatel $10 M to each team due to the drop in shared revenue then the remaining $300 M spread across the specific teams affected. Now if there's a similar drop in national contracts ...

The Angels were #2 in that table at $140 M. Uncertainty about that revenue is enough to throw a wrinkle into any sales negotiations.
   4. Misirlou cut his hair and moved to Rome Posted: January 28, 2023 at 03:10 PM (#6114889)
Even if their local TV revenue ends up only half of what it was, that's an overall loss of only $12-13 M


That's only true if only San Diego is affected. If everyone is cut by 50%, they lose 50% of their share of the shared pool as well.
   5. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 28, 2023 at 05:21 PM (#6114912)
Here are fangraphs estimates from 2020.
Some teams have done even better than shown there, by establishing their own cable channel, then selling it or a significant portion for a tidy profit, while continuing to collect the large local rights fees shown in the FanGraphs estimates.
   6. Walt Davis Posted: January 29, 2023 at 12:10 AM (#6114939)
That's only true if only San Diego is affected. If everyone is cut by 50%, they lose 50% of their share of the shared pool as well.

Addressed in the next-to-last paragraph of #3 where I discuss if the overall pool is cut by 30%.

Some teams have done even better than shown there, by establishing their own cable channel, then selling it or a significant portion for a tidy profit, while continuing to collect the large local rights fees shown in the FanGraphs estimates.

Perhaps. I came across a similar table elsewhere that mentioned that parts of Marquee and Yes had been sold off ... to Sinclair. Unless the teams received that money upfront, they're in the same boat.

Obviously losing $20 M a year in reveue per team is bad (a drop from $2.1 B in 2020 to $1.5 B in 2020 $), it hurts the value of the franchise, it reduces payroll. But we're talking about an $11 B industry (end 2019 as I recall) with total local broadcast revenue of $2.1 B. They're not losing all 20% of the revenue, even if it's halved then MLB revenue is down about 9-10%. But there's no reason to think it will be halved.

As I said, if there's a corresponding drop in national TV revenue (which would make sense, at least for regular season) then we could be talking about big trouble. Wasn't my idea to hand out all those 12/$300 contracts. :-)
   7. Walt Davis Posted: January 29, 2023 at 12:35 AM (#6114944)
FWIW, implementing a long-term solution is easy ... as in I'm not sure it would take more than 2 weeks to set up. It might take you 20 years to negotiate the money bits (trivial) but change the MLBtv package to $120/year (or whatever) to stream any single team (non-national games) and an extra $30/year to stream all the rest. Teams get the vast majority of the $120 for every subscription to their team (well, have to put half of it into shared revenue). You could offer half-season, monthly and even $5/game too if you want. Teams can still sell the remaining cable and over-air (is any left?) rights to cater to whoever prefers that delivery method. Anyway, the infrastructure exists -- you just need to write a few lines of code to turn off the blackouts.

It's not like this snuck up on anybody. They should have been doing the grunt work on this a long time ago. Yes, it would have required buying out portions of the cable deals (i.e. clearly contractually securing streaming rights). The trouble with doing it now is that MLBtv doesn't really have that many subscribers because the out-of-market package only caters to carpetbaggers and obsessives. MLBtv is really a pretty awesome product except for that minor little hassle that it doesn't have the content that 95% of the baseball "TV" audience wants -- local games and playoffs. If it had been available to fans at the time of cord-cutting, it would have much higher takeup -- and surely a lot of folks stuck with cable just for the games. But now folks who cut the cable more than a year ago did so knowing they were giving up baseball -- they're used to it now. Now you've got to win them back and that's not easy.

It is interesting that even lockdowns didn't create enough demand for the empty content of cable to delay its demise. Oh well, I look forward to watching World Pickleball on Tik Tok in my golden years.
   8. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 29, 2023 at 01:49 AM (#6114945)
I came across a similar table elsewhere that mentioned that parts of Marquee and Yes had been sold off ... to Sinclair. Unless the teams received that money upfront, they're in the same boat.
Sinclair only owns 20% of the YES Network, which has had a lot of ownership turnover after the Yankees sold a big chunk of the network. No specific knowledge of how the deal was structured, but it seems more likely that Sinclair borrowed the money to finance its purchase of YES (and other RSNs), so that risk is likely on its lenders, which is why Sinclair seems headed to bankruptcy. The other YES owners - Yankee Global Enterprises (26%), Amazon (15%), The Blackstone Group (13%), RedBird Capital (13%), Mubadala Investment Company (13%) - are all solvent, and the network is reportedly profitable, so it wouldn’t appear that the Yankees are actually in the same boat as the teams where Sinclair owns all or most of the RSN and can no longer pay the rights fees. The Yankees will get their local media rights payments, while Sinclair will presumably be squeezed out by its lenders.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Infinite Yost (Voxter)
for his generous support.

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogRed Sox trade Alex Verdugo to Yankees for three pitchers
(26 - 6:34pm, Dec 06)
Last: sunday silence (again)

NewsblogUpdate on Yankees’ Juan Soto trade talks: Teams talking players, but not close on agreement
(35 - 6:13pm, Dec 06)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogReds, RHP Nick Martinez agree to $26M deal, sources say
(10 - 5:53pm, Dec 06)
Last: Walt Davis

Hall of Merit2024 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(177 - 5:48pm, Dec 06)
Last: kcgard2

NewsblogOT Soccer - World Cup Final/European Leagues Start
(319 - 5:37pm, Dec 06)
Last: AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale

Sox TherapyInterviewing For POBO
(29 - 5:35pm, Dec 06)
Last: Darren

NewsblogGuardians win Draft Lottery, securing next year's top pick
(4 - 5:32pm, Dec 06)
Last: Zach

NewsblogHot Stove Omnichatter
(101 - 5:24pm, Dec 06)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogReports: Astros, Victor Caratini agree to 2-year, $12M deal
(1 - 5:08pm, Dec 06)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogWho is on the 2024 Baseball Hall of Fame ballot and what’s the induction process?
(379 - 5:04pm, Dec 06)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogShohei Ohtani's secretive free agency is a missed opportunity for him and MLB
(16 - 5:01pm, Dec 06)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogThese prospects could be taken in the Rule 5 Draft
(20 - 4:29pm, Dec 06)
Last: Der-K's no Kliph Nesteroff.

NewsblogOT - November* 2023 College Football thread
(324 - 3:41pm, Dec 06)
Last: Mike A

NewsblogBraves trade Marco Gonzales and cash to the Pirates for a player to be named later
(6 - 1:42pm, Dec 06)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogMookie Betts will be 'every-day second baseman' for Dodgers
(37 - 1:21pm, Dec 06)
Last: Booey

Page rendered in 0.2826 seconds
48 querie(s) executed