Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Latilleon

Sox next local TV deal

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Oct 25, 2017 -> 07:09 PM)
I believe the sox are in the 50 million range with nbc sports. about 500k per game. the sox actually make more money on nbc sports than the cubs, since the sox air about 100 games on nbc sports. the cubs get the same amount, but air much less games on nbc sports.

 

wgn I was told was about 125k per game.

 

So if we do end up at $100 million its really a $50 million increase? Thats good, but doesn't seem like it game-changing money that will make us change our spending habits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (GenericUserName @ Oct 25, 2017 -> 10:31 PM)
So if we do end up at $100 million its really a $50 million increase? Thats good, but doesn't seem like it game-changing money that will make us change our spending habits.

 

It stands to reason that a $50 million increase in TV money per year would mean that the team could afford a max payroll that is $50 million higher than anything they've done before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would just appreciate a legal way to watch White Sox games from inside their blackout territory. I would pay $120 a year to get MLB.TV; sadly, I still cannot watch Sox games, legally.

 

 

get a cable provider that carries nbc sports Chicago. I know directv will let you buy access.

 

 

Not a choice in an apartment. I suppose I could buy DirecTV without having it installed, but that's a bridge too far. Regardless, I don't want to have to buy an additional service when I really just want to buy MLB.TV.

 

 

Nobody that is located in the 'White Sox / Cubs Zone' (all of Iowa, most of Illinois, most of Indiana, small part of Wisconsin) can watch live White Sox games on MLB.tv.

 

 

Is 'PlayStation Vue' available in your area? 'PlayStation Vue' is an internet streaming service which connects to your TV, similar to Sling. But unlike Sling, which does not offer NBC Sports Chicago (formerly Comcast SportsNet Chicago), PlayStation Vue does provide NBCSC on it's lineup. I heard that the price is alot cheaper than cable or using a dish. Furthermore, any paying customers of NBC Sports Chicago should be eligible to watch White Sox games live on the NBC Sports App.

 

Regarding the WGN telecasts, I can give you some insight but where in Iowa are you located?

 

 

 

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (GenericUserName @ Oct 25, 2017 -> 06:15 PM)
Does anyone know how much we make from our TV deal right now? Like saying we'll get $100 million is nice, but if we currently get $75 million its not really that much of an increase and actually might just be matching inflation or new expenses with the better cameras or something.

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/estimated-t...l-30-mlb-teams/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (InTheDriversSeat @ Oct 26, 2017 -> 02:18 PM)
Nobody that is located in the 'White Sox / Cubs Zone' (all of Iowa, most of Illinois, most of Indiana, small part of Wisconsin) can watch live White Sox games on MLB.tv.

 

 

Is 'PlayStation Vue' available in your area? 'PlayStation Vue' is an internet streaming service which connects to your TV, similar to Sling. But unlike Sling, which does not offer NBC Sports Chicago (formerly Comcast SportsNet Chicago), PlayStation Vue does provide NBCSC on it's lineup. I heard that the price is alot cheaper than cable or using a dish. Furthermore, any paying customers of NBC Sports Chicago should be eligible to watch White Sox games live on the NBC Sports App.

 

Regarding the WGN telecasts, I can give you some insight but where in Iowa are you located?

 

 

 

.

I have PS Vue and will vouch for it, very good service. $45 a month gets me NBC Sports Chicago and any channel I'd ever be interested in watching with the exception of WGN which blows. Plus an extra $10 a month for RedZone. Also no contract.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Kalapse @ Oct 26, 2017 -> 02:33 PM)
I have PS Vue and will vouch for it, very good service. $45 a month gets me NBC Sports Chicago and any channel I'd ever be interested in watching with the exception of WGN which blows. Plus an extra $10 a month for RedZone. Also no contract.

 

I think all of the providers have NBC sport networks now, not sure if the stupid blackout rules still apply though. Sling, Hulu, YoutubeTV, DirectTV, Vue, Fubo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I have PS Vue and will vouch for it, very good service. $45 a month gets me NBC Sports Chicago and any channel I'd ever be interested in watching with the exception of WGN which blows. Plus an extra $10 a month for RedZone. Also no contract.

 

 

The monthly cost would go up if PlayStation Vue were to provide more local TV stations because the stations would want compensation. Of course you could easily watch WGN-TV for free in HD in the Chicago area by connecting an antenna to your TV. Rabbit ears will work nicely if you are in the city or nearby suburbs.

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think all of the providers have NBC sport networks now, not sure if the stupid blackout rules still apply though. Sling, Hulu, YoutubeTV, DirectTV, Vue, Fubo

 

 

I believe PlayStation Vue is the only internet streaming service that provides 'NBC Sports Chicago' (the Regional Sports Network formerly known as 'Comcast SportsNet Chicago'). Not to be confused with 'NBC SN' (formerly Versus, and 'Outdoor Life Network' before that), the national cable sports network that is available on most streaming services.

 

If you are getting 'NBC Sports Chicago', I believe no White Sox or Cubs games are ever blacked out but Bulls and Blackhawks telecasts can be for viewers outside the Chicago area.

 

 

 

.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Heads22 @ Oct 24, 2017 -> 08:52 PM)
I would just appreciate a legal way to watch White Sox games from inside their blackout territory. I would pay $120 a year to get MLB.TV; sadly, I still cannot watch Sox games, legally.

 

If you're willing to pay for MLB.TV, go ahead and purchase a VPN. This is the one that I use. It's reliable, reasonably priced, gives you access to blacked out games via any of the major sports' streaming packages, and, if you download torrents of movies and such, it will protect you from your ISP. Highly recommend for anyone, especially for those wirecutters who still want to watch their teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (InTheDriversSeat @ Oct 26, 2017 -> 04:17 PM)
I believe PlayStation Vue is the only internet streaming service that provides 'NBC Sports Chicago' (the Regional Sports Network formerly known as 'Comcast SportsNet Chicago'). Not to be confused with 'NBC SN' (formerly Versus, and 'Outdoor Life Network' before that), the national cable sports network that is available on most streaming services.

.

 

I really just lurk around here, but I use Hulu for TV and it has the former CSN Chicago, as does Youtube TV, so Vue is not the only service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I really just lurk around here, but I use Hulu for TV and it has the former CSN Chicago, as does Youtube TV, so Vue is not the only service.

 

 

You are right, so I stand corrected. But Sling, the service that gets mentioned often doesn't. It would be nice if the website for 'NBC Sports Chicago' (formerly 'CSN Comcast SportsNet Chicago') would list the over-the-top internet services that include 'NBC Sports Chicago' in their lineups, but they don't. I suspect the reason is that the internet services compete with regular Comcast / xfinity cable, which is the same company as 'NBC Sports Chicago'.

 

http://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/channel-finder

 

 

I did some checking of the various over-the-top internet services to find out which ones have 'NBC Sports Chicago' in their lineups, and here is what I found:

 

 

DirecTV Now - No?

fubo TV - Yes

hulu - Yes

philo - ?

PlayStation Vue - Yes

sling - No

Spectrum TV Stream - ?

xfinity Instant TV - Yes?

YouTube TV - Yes

 

 

 

These services are way to save money compared to regular cable TV or a dish. Plus, in some locations outside of the Chicago area where the cable company may not provide 'NBC Sports Chicago', and where DirecTV and Dish Network do provide 'NBC Sports Chicago', but the viewer is not allowed to install a dish or can not receive a signal using a dish.

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (InTheDriversSeat @ Oct 27, 2017 -> 07:29 PM)
You are right, so I stand corrected. But Sling, the service that gets mentioned often doesn't.

 

Let me correct you once more. SlingTV DOES HAVE NBC Sports Chicago, and yes, Bulls and White Sox games are broadcasted. And it's only $25 along with a bunch of other channels. I know because I have it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Let me correct you once more. SlingTV DOES HAVE NBC Sports Chicago, and yes, Bulls and White Sox games are broadcasted. And it's only $25 along with a bunch of other channels. I know because I have it.

 

OK, you're right. But Sling did not have 'CSN Comcast SportsNet Chicago' when the service started. Apparently the channel was added to the lineup on April 2nd, 2017. The change was made after competing services were offering the channel but Sling did not at originally.

 

 

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in Ames.

 

Like I said, I'd just like a way to legally get the Sox games without having to buy another streaming service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Latilleon @ Oct 23, 2017 -> 02:50 PM)
I was reading USA Today where an article says the Philadelphia Phillies are in the 2nd year of a 25 year, $2.5 billion TV deal. The Sox will be up for renewal after 2019 season. How much money can the Sox realistically fetch? If the Cubs go off and start their own thing, will it help or hamper the Sox?

 

Will the Sox make over $100 million annually?

 

The Sox continually have some of the lowest rated regional telecasts in baseball, which will impair them from getting the type of deal that other people are pointing out here. The Sox will likely see a modest bump to their current $50M/season to around $60M.

 

 

 

QUOTE (BrianAnderson @ Oct 24, 2017 -> 09:00 AM)
Speaking from total ignorance on how these Tv deals are structured, I wouldn't mind the Sox somehow being ahead of the curve and pulling off some deal that makes sense not just for today, but the future landscape..

 

Meaning - is it possible to work a deal with the Netflix, Hulu, Facebook's of the world along with a TV deal?? I mean, I know absolutely nothing when it comes to this ... just seems that with all the cord cutting and drop in sports ratings that it would be refreshing to be the team that leads some kind of digital charge. Think about how the Cubs grew their fan base through WGN back in the day... they grew it through cable and everybody across the US being able to watch them.. essentially they became America's team this way for people without a market. Is there a way to team up w "new cable" aka digital world?

 

Teams do not own their national streaming rights, those are maintained by MLB and the digital arm of the MLB is printing money right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Oct 30, 2017 -> 04:04 PM)
The Sox continually have some of the lowest rated regional telecasts in baseball, which will impair them from getting the type of deal that other people are pointing out here. The Sox will likely see a modest bump to their current $50M/season to around $60M.

 

 

 

 

 

Teams do not own their national streaming rights, those are maintained by MLB and the digital arm of the MLB is printing money right now.

the angels have horrible ratings and they still got a 2 billion dollar tv deal.

 

this misconception that the ratings matter in tv deals like this is laughable. it's the ACCESS to live sports that is the issue. this Is why the dodgers haven't caved to local cable providers in their la sportsnet negotiations. And this world series run is making their case stronger, as LA has been starving for dodgers baseball and the local ratings on tbs and fox are massive.

 

the cubs are leaving. no doubt about that. nbs sportsnet will NOT lose both the cubs and sox, all the while buying out both clubs stakes in a channel that could only have hawks or bulls games in 2020.

 

I will bet real American money that not only will the sox stay with csn/nbc (with a substantial raise in rights fees), but so will the bulls AND hawks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Heads22 @ Oct 29, 2017 -> 07:41 PM)
I live in Ames.

 

Like I said, I'd just like a way to legally get the Sox games without having to buy another streaming service.

sorry. doing this legally means you will have to buy another service. this is 2017.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Oct 30, 2017 -> 04:04 PM)
The Sox continually have some of the lowest rated regional telecasts in baseball, which will impair them from getting the type of deal that other people are pointing out here. The Sox will likely see a modest bump to their current $50M/season to around $60M.

 

 

 

 

 

Teams do not own their national streaming rights, those are maintained by MLB and the digital arm of the MLB is printing money right now.

 

I am curious what deals that have happened would give you that number?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Oct 31, 2017 -> 06:38 PM)
the angels have horrible ratings and they still got a 2 billion dollar tv deal.

 

this misconception that the ratings matter in tv deals like this is laughable. it's the ACCESS to live sports that is the issue. this Is why the dodgers haven't caved to local cable providers in their la sportsnet negotiations. And this world series run is making their case stronger, as LA has been starving for dodgers baseball and the local ratings on tbs and fox are massive.

 

the cubs are leaving. no doubt about that. nbs sportsnet will NOT lose both the cubs and sox, all the while buying out both clubs stakes in a channel that could only have hawks or bulls games in 2020.

 

I will bet real American money that not only will the sox stay with csn/nbc (with a substantial raise in rights fees), but so will the bulls AND hawks.

Is that good or bad for the Sox with their next deal with the now-NBC sports network?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Oct 30, 2017 -> 04:04 PM)
The Sox continually have some of the lowest rated regional telecasts in baseball, which will impair them from getting the type of deal that other people are pointing out here. The Sox will likely see a modest bump to their current $50M/season to around $60M.

 

A low rated telecast in the third biggest market is can still be a larger audience than a high rated telecast in St. Louis, the 21st.

 

And how have existing ratings lead to much bigger bumps for other teams?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Latilleon @ Nov 1, 2017 -> 06:20 AM)
A low rated telecast in the third biggest market is can still be a larger audience than a high rated telecast in St. Louis, the 21st.

 

And how have existing ratings lead to much bigger bumps for other teams?

 

According to this article only San Diego, Florida, and Oakland had fewer households watching.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/201...m/#5f28eb353799

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (FloydBannister1983 @ Nov 1, 2017 -> 08:03 AM)
According to this article only San Diego, Florida, and Oakland had fewer households watching.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/201...m/#5f28eb353799

This is in no small part due to the situation the White Sox management put themselves in - rosters that totally flopped in 2013, 2015, and 2016, and a roster that was rebuilding in 2014 and 2017, 5 straight seasons under .500 and 6 out of 7, at a time when the nearest competition was going to 3 straight postseasons and winning a title. That their ratings were bad now was the downside of their multiple "All-in" campaigns and Rick Hahn's brilliant leadership during that period.

 

If they get somehow a crappy offer with a low yearly guarantee, they could "Star Wars" this thing and say that they'll take a lower guarantee but they would want a higher share of profits if things turned around in exchange. But I don't think that will happen, you could write the "2021 world series White Sox/Braves" script right now and believe it due to Rick Hahn's actual nonsarcastic brilliant moves last year. There are viewers coming and everyone knows that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 1, 2017 -> 09:56 AM)
This is in no small part due to the situation the White Sox management put themselves in - rosters that totally flopped in 2013, 2015, and 2016, and a roster that was rebuilding in 2014 and 2017, 5 straight seasons under .500 and 6 out of 7, at a time when the nearest competition was going to 3 straight postseasons and winning a title. That their ratings were bad now was the downside of their multiple "All-in" campaigns and Rick Hahn's brilliant leadership during that period.

 

If they get somehow a crappy offer with a low yearly guarantee, they could "Star Wars" this thing and say that they'll take a lower guarantee but they would want a higher share of profits if things turned around in exchange. But I don't think that will happen, you could write the "2021 world series White Sox/Braves" script right now and believe it due to Rick Hahn's actual nonsarcastic brilliant moves last year. There are viewers coming and everyone knows that.

 

Nobody can argue with "everyone knows that".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (FloydBannister1983 @ Nov 1, 2017 -> 10:32 AM)
Nobody can argue with "everyone knows that".

If the cable company doesn't believe that viewers are coming then fine, from the White Sox's side, I will accept a lower yearly dollar guarantee if they give me a much larger slice if viewership does spike. I will take that bet and walk to the bank in 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 1, 2017 -> 11:28 AM)
If the cable company doesn't believe that viewers are coming then fine, from the White Sox's side, I will accept a lower yearly dollar guarantee if they give me a much larger slice if viewership does spike. I will take that bet and walk to the bank in 2020.

 

In the cord cutting era, that is a pretty scary bet to make.

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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×