Mac the Knife

MLB Relocation? Naw...

Recommended Posts

On 7/30/2018 at 2:03 PM, infrared41 said:

 

Yup. Apparently, where you live in a county can make the difference on which teams are blacked out on MLB.TV and MLB Extra Innings. How they come up with it is just as weird as it is inexplicable. When I lived further south in the county in which I currently live, Cincinnati and Detroit were considered part of my local market - despite the fact that Detroit was over 150 miles away and in a different state. I moved exactly 18 miles north (and closer to Detroit) in the same county and now I can watch both the Reds and Tigers on both MLB.TV and Extra Innings. Despite calls to Direct TV and to MLB.TV, I've never been able to get an answer for why North Central Ohio was considered part of the Detroit market. I sort of understand Cincinnati, but Detroit has always baffled me.

 

ohio.gif

 

This is ostensibly a map of Ohio's TV markets. (I don't get the Zanesville island either.) Knowing that Toledo is kind of a satellite of Detroit, it makes sense that the Tigers would claim them. I wouldn't have guessed that the Toledo market extends as far east as Sandusky. I wasn't even sure Toledo was its own market at all; I thought maybe they just got Detroit stations.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, the admiral said:

 

ohio.gif

 

This is ostensibly a map of Ohio's TV markets. (I don't get the Zanesville island either.) Knowing that Toledo is kind of a satellite of Detroit, it makes sense that the Tigers would claim them. I wouldn't have guessed that the Toledo market extends as far east as Sandusky. I wasn't even sure Toledo was its own market at all; I thought maybe they just got Detroit stations.

 

Toledo is the #73 TV market. It's a decent sized city - I think the population of the "metro area" is around 600,000. Anyway, the Tigers are easily the number one MLB team in Toledo with the Indians coming in second. I'd guess it breaks down at about 65-35 - maybe even 75-25 - in favor of the Tigers. Based solely on my experience in the area, the line of demarcation between where it switches from Toledo to Cleveland (and team loyalties) seems about right. With regard to TV stations; Toledo has at least 5 local stations and the cable system carries the Detroit stations too. Where I live, we get both the Toledo and Cleveland TV stations. 

 

After taking a close look at the map, I think I know why things were so weird with the Tigers and Reds at my old place. We lived right near the intersection of counties in the Toledo, Cleveland, and Columbus markets. That would explain why the Reds and Tigers were considered "local." A mile south of my house, you could do an Ohio county version of the 4 corners thing - walk in a circle and bounce around three counties. 

 

FWIW, Sandusky is in Erie County not Sandusky county. Sandusky is firmly in the Indians market. Then we have "Upper Sandusky" which is about 60 miles south of Sandusky. Point being, we're kinda willy-nilly with our Sandusky stuff. 

 

Zanesville is an actual TV market. A very small one, but they have local affiliates for all the networks, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i never understood the need now for blackouts (maybe in days of old but not now).  try to go to a game and you spend time getting there, about 3 hours at a game plus time getting home (if a game is at 7pm you dont get home until pass 11pm or even midnight).  some people just can't do that (and can't get tickets because of the cost)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, goalieboy82 said:

i never understood the need now for blackouts (maybe in days of old but not now).  try to go to a game and you spend time getting there, about 3 hours at a game plus time getting home (if a game is at 7pm you dont get home until pass 11pm or even midnight).  some people just can't do that (and can't get tickets because of the cost)  

The blackouts exist to protect the regional sports networks, not attendance. They're supposed to make sure that you watch the local team's games on a cable subscription instead of MLB.tv. It breaks down when places like Iowa and Nevada are blacked out of 5 teams and maybe receive 1 or 2 of the necessary RSNs on their cable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, we're talking about two kinds of blackouts here. Blackouts made sense for the NFL because the ticket inventory is limited and the television is free. Think of it as not going up for seconds until everyone's had their first serving. RSN-based blackouts are foolish when they extend well beyond where you can reasonably expect RSN carriage. Those channels cost money and cable customers in Des Moines can't be expected to pay for four or five of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DrAwesomeberry said:

The blackouts exist to protect the regional sports networks, not attendance. They're supposed to make sure that you watch the local team's games on a cable subscription instead of MLB.tv. It breaks down when places like Iowa and Nevada are blacked out of 5 teams and maybe receive 1 or 2 of the necessary RSNs on their cable.

i understand that, but for those who don't want to watch the local team broadcast (say someone wants to watch the Red Sox or Yankees broadcast).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It always seemed so painfully obvious to me to have a portion of revenue generated from streaming in-market games be apportioned to those teams' RSNs. So, for instance, MASN would hold broadcast rights for the Orioles within the Baltimore area, and if a person in Baltimore streams an Orioles game through MLB.tv, MASN would receive a percentage of the revenue generated from that. Basically, make up for the revenue "lost" by not having that person watch on cable, rather than online.

 

Seems like something anyone who's taken a few classes in economics could figure out, but what do I know? ?‍♂️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The RSNs are getting lumped into some of the paid streaming services like YouTube TV now though, aren't they? So that seems it would solve the RSN revenue problem from cord-cutters. Still an extra expense if you're looking to watch your local team but also want the MLB.tv package for out of market games, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Digby said:

The RSNs are getting lumped into some of the paid streaming services like YouTube TV now though, aren't they? So that seems it would solve the RSN revenue problem from cord-cutters. Still an extra expense if you're looking to watch your local team but also want the MLB.tv package for out of market games, though.

I wish the Dodgers would go with that option.  I'm still one of the 65-70% of the LA market that doesn't get their channel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LMU said:

I wish the Dodgers would go with that option.  I'm still one of the 65-70% of the LA market that doesn't get their channel.

 

Ah, I guess it makes sense it would go channel by channel. I haven't done an extensive dive on this, I just noticed that somewhere along the way, Youtube TV added a bunch of NBCSN local affiliates, plus NESN and YES (but maybe those two get priority given the fanbases, then again I'd put the Dodgers in that category too).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kroywen said:

It always seemed so painfully obvious to me to have a portion of revenue generated from streaming in-market games be apportioned to those teams' RSNs. So, for instance, MASN would hold broadcast rights for the Orioles within the Baltimore area, and if a person in Baltimore streams an Orioles game through MLB.tv, MASN would receive a percentage of the revenue generated from that. Basically, make up for the revenue "lost" by not having that person watch on cable, rather than online.

 

Seems like something anyone who's taken a few classes in economics could figure out, but what do I know? ?‍♂️

1,000,000% this. The numbers aren't even very big here. My numbers are out of date because I haven't paid close attention in a while, but ESPN itself is always one of the most expensive basic cable channels for companies to carry; it was $6 or $7 around five years ago IIRC. RSNs are probably getting a few bucks a month per cable subscriber or less. It's horribly stupid that I can't pay $10 a month to NHL.tv to just get Sabres games and have them split the money with MSG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, infrared41 said:

Point being, we're kinda willy-nilly with our Sandusky stuff. 

Isn't that more of a central Pennsylvania thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything that qualifies as a rumor and a bit of bologna, but a stadium lease that ends after the 2021 season and the whole MASN debacle with the Nationals could make Baltimore Oriole-less.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/blog/bs-sp-schmuck-orioles-relocation-20180622-story,amp.html

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportstalkflorida.com/uncategorized/the-baltimore-orioles-moving-in-2022-thats-a-rumor/amp/

 

 

The new lease should already be signed, sealed, and delivered. No questions. As far as the MASN crap, good lord Angelos need to get off his gold plated high horse and make the revenue sharing 50/50 not the horrendous 90/10 that it currently is. Worse comes to worse, the Nationals could sign a deal with NBC Sports Washington. The network already airs Wizards and Capitals games to go along with Redskins preseason games. Adding the last remaining DC Area big four team certainly wouldn't hurt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, LMU said:

Isn't that more of a central Pennsylvania thing?

that one is between this

The Simpsons Boo GIF

and

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, goalieboy82 said:

that one is between this

The Simpsons Boo GIF

and

 

Actually, I was saying Boo-urns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, LMU said:

Isn't that more of a central Pennsylvania thing?

 

Pennsylvania should have dealt with their Sandusky the way we dealt with ours. Would anyone have had a problem with Pennsylvania's Sandusky being sliced into three or four pieces and distributed throughout the state? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Post of the day, I didn't know where it was going until I got there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, the admiral said:

Post of the day, I didn't know where it was going until I got there.

 

Thanks! A POTD nomination from you is high praise indeed. I'm honored. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Still MIGHTY, is there any news on the Angels desiring a new stadium? I read that they can opt out of their lease at the end of this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, the admiral said:

@Still MIGHTY, is there any news on the Angels desiring a new stadium? I read that they can opt out of their lease at the end of this season.

I can tag in here.

 

The team isn't opting out and is committed until at least 2029.  The Tustin proposal fell on its face and they have nowhere else that they can move into lest they go back to being the Dodgers' tenants.

 

LINK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now