Sinclair and RSNs

  • Like
Reactions: Chuck Summers
Sinclair can jump off a cliff. I used to love sports, but so much money is being paid to broadcast sports... so then that money needs to be taken from us (or worse, people that don't even watch sports!). It makes no sense at all! At least ESPN and NBC Sports has programming. RSNs are glorified infomercial stations with games a few times a week (baseball would a handful of games a week). QVC pays for carriage, why in the heck do we need to pay for RSNs?!
 
So Sinclair made their money back by licensing the naming rights.
At least this finally explains why Sinclair did not re-brand the RSN's right away, as soon as they acquired them. Why go through a major re-brand, just to turn around and sell the naming rights so you have to re-brand them again? This way, they wait until the naming rights deal is done, and then get the re-brand over with all at once.
 
Seems to me that the rebranding is only successful if they get eyeballs watching games to advertise Bally. With the asset write down that Sinclair took, and the naming rights revenue, I can see them going back to providers with much more reasonable terms.
 
Seems to me that the rebranding is only successful if they get eyeballs watching games to advertise Bally. With the asset write down that Sinclair took, and the naming rights revenue, I can see them going back to providers with much more reasonable terms.
It's only successful with national legalized gambling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Howard Simmons
Here is where Dish could be winning... Sinclair is going to be selling access to their RSN's WITHOUT needing a cable bundle. Dish could win some subscribers by lowering their rates for 2021 or having a minimal increase - DirecTV just announced a hike plus they renewed their Sinclair RSN's last year .

Makes you also wonder if in Dish's negotiations with Sinclair next year when the locals come up for renewal if the RSN's would be an a-la-carte purchase at the same price whatever RSN's would be without the cable bundle.

But Sinclair president and CEO Chris Ripley said Thursday that what now is known as Fox Sports Midwest, as well as other regional sports networks Sinclair owns nationwide, will be available for customers to purchase independently.

 
I bet the a-la-carte price will be high enough that Directv's bundled price would still be cheaper than the combined cost of the RSN and a comparable Dish basic package subscription, though.
 
Probably still require AT120+ and above.
Sad, but true. Sinclair's direct-to-consumer offering would have no such restriction, possibly allowing subscribers to save money by getting that along with a cheaper offering from Dish such as Welcome Pack. That would not be a "comparable" package to Directv's bundle, though.
 
Sad, but true. Sinclair's direct-to-consumer offering would have no such restriction, possibly allowing subscribers to save money by getting that along with a cheaper offering from Dish such as Welcome Pack. That would not be a "comparable" package to Directv's bundle, though.
That would be dependent on who is looking. Some people would consider it. Others, especially rural, not so much.
 
Looks like they are going to be rebranded "Ballys Sports Network" or something like that, named after Ballys Casinos.

really don't care what they are called, would like them available
with covid........watching tv is about the only thing left
 
  • Like
Reactions: Howard Simmons

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts

Top