MLB TV

[DodgerKing]

I've been house-sitting/dog-sitting for a friend for about a week now, and I gotta say, MLBN isn't that impressive to me. I can get just about the same thing from ESPN and there are a ton of re-runs of stuff, ironically about like ESPN.
As much of a baseball fan as I am, and as excited as I was to see what all the hub-bub was about, I am finding that I am spending less and less time paying attention to the channel as the week went along. Maybe it will get better, but at this point if Dish carried it and it was in the package about what I had, personally I wouldn't shell out the cash for the upgrade... but that's just me.

I would have to dissagree. I too am a baseball fan and this station, since it was added, is the most watched station in my household. From WBC games, that are not shown on ESPN, to Ken Burns specials, to Hot Stove, to Baseball Tonight, to 30 clubs in 30 days, to Prime 9, to live game broadcasts, to classic games, ex, this station is worth the watch for any baseball fan. Keep in mind, the season hasn't even started yet. Once the season starts there will be more live games, live events, news reports, and specials.

 

[Slamminc11]

Which is your opinion and that's all well and good. As was it my opinion in my post.
All I'm saying is that at this point, from what I have observed, I wouldn't go out of my way to upgrade my programming nor would I switch my provider for this specific channel.

 

[david_jr]

and how so....

please explain.

Please explain how E* could cough up the cabbage, offer EI tomorrow just to get MLB-network, and NOT incur a loss in the interim UNLESS it raises the rates of current subs.

The argument that:

1) The "D* doe it" argument is invalid because D* already has a subscriber base that supports big ticket sports packs, whereas E* does not.

2) the "cable does it" argument is invalid because cable has much deeper pockets and a much wider subscriber base in general, and much more 'captive audience' subs. Cable just plain has a more stable basis for taking chances on a product offering than E* does.

E*'s current balance sheet, nor their current subscriber base support hte possiblity of adding EI any time soon.

How is that statement wrong?

Considering that the apparent price of admission for EI is 100 million dollars per year, I understand your argument that E* won't pull the trigger due to lack of subscriber base for sports packs. Anyone know how many D* customers subscribe to EI to justify that 100 million dollar a year outlay? $200 per customer would require 500,000 subscribers to break even.

 

[DodgerKing]

Considering that the apparent price of admission for EI is 100 million dollars per year, I understand your argument that E* won't pull the trigger due to lack of subscriber base for sports packs. Anyone know how many D* customers subscribe to EI to justify that 100 million dollar a year outlay? $200 per customer would require 500,000 subscribers to break even.

In 2007 they had about 300k EI subs. I would think it would be closer to to 500k this year. Like I said in a previous post, even though they may lose money directly on the sports packages, they actually profit from each additional sub that switches because of the fact that Direct profits off of the total amount the sub pays (base package price + plus equipment fees + additional package add-on + sports package = a net profit.)

 

[vampz26]

Considering that the apparent price of admission for EI is 100 million dollars per year, I understand your argument that E* won't pull the trigger due to lack of subscriber base for sports packs. Anyone know how many D* customers subscribe to EI to justify that 100 million dollar a year outlay? $200 per customer would require 500,000 subscribers to break even.

Not impossible. D* already has 2MM subs willing to shell out for ST. Attracting a quarter of that market shouldn't be too difficult, all things considered.

And if you didn't have that possibilty of marketing to 25 percent of your existing subscriber base to break even, you'd be looking at taking a 100MM/year loss until you build one.

 

[Fiachra]

Considering that the apparent price of admission for EI is 100 million dollars per year, I understand your argument that E* won't pull the trigger due to lack of subscriber base for sports packs. Anyone know how many D* customers subscribe to EI to justify that 100 million dollar a year outlay? $200 per customer would require 500,000 subscribers to break even.

100 Million!?!? Holy crap that is some serious cabbage. Too bad it is not priced at a percentage per subscriber.

 

[david_jr]

100 Million!?!? Holy crap that is some serious cabbage. Too bad it is not priced at a percentage per subscriber.

According to several sources (google you'll find several) D* paid 100 million and was going to be exclusive. Many people balked and congress threatened action. The offer was then made to allow others in for the same 100 mil. E* apparently decided no way.

If D* has 500K subs after all this time of being the only DBS with EI, I would think the prospects of E* building a subscriber base like that would be very poor. 500K subs is about 3% of D* subscribers while the same # would be about 4% of E* subscribers. I don't think the numbers are there. It would be nice if E* could get EI on a per subscriber basis, but that's not the way the big leagues play anymore. After all athletes and teams must be millionaires and billionaires these days and where do you think they get the dough from? Big ticket sports packages.

 

[stuckingoo]

Note that these providers also have minority ownership in the venture.

 

[STEELERSRULE]

I think MLB Network will be showing games too(True or False. Sorry of that is incorrect info), and since the season has not started yet, no one knows of it's real value yet.

After a season or two, we will know. Looks promising.

 

[commodore_dude]

I think MLB Network will be showing games too(True or False. Sorry of that is incorrect info), and since the season has not started yet, no one knows of it's real value yet.

After a season or two, we will know. Looks promising.

They will be showing games, but I believe it's like the TBS broadcasts now where they're not exclusive, so unless you follow an out of market team and want to get more games without paying for MLB TV or EI, you'd just be watching on your local channel anyway.

 

[DodgerKing]

Yes, MLBNet will be showing games every week. They will also have something similar to DirecTV's former Strike Zone channel, where they break into live games to show small clips of live game action.