Turn Off Ads?
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 51 of 51

Thread: The Monopolizing of MLB's Extra Innings Package

  1. #46
    CELEBRATION TIME RBA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    San Marcos, CA
    Posts
    13,984

    Re: The Monopolizing of MLB's Extra Innings Package

    Alacarte is going nowhere. I like the idea, but the 'money'(media corporations) will never allow it.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #47
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,505

    Re: The Monopolizing of MLB's Extra Innings Package

    Quote Originally Posted by RBA View Post
    Alacarte is going nowhere. I like the idea, but the 'money'(media corporations) will never allow it.
    If the legislators pass this bill, they have no choice.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  4. #48
    Smells Like Teen Spirit jmcclain19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    6,490

    Re: The Monopolizing of MLB's Extra Innings Package

    The market is taking care of the a la carte situation on its on. it'll only take someone - a big power like HBO tipping the cart, and they are already doing that in Europe.

    As far as the baseball extra innings goes - I love Sen. McCain's bill. Say what you want about his politics, his forays into sports legislation seems to push things that otherwise wouldn't have happened.

  5. #49
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,505

    Re: The Monopolizing of MLB's Extra Innings Package

    Quote Originally Posted by jmcclain19 View Post
    The market is taking care of the a la carte situation on its on. it'll only take someone - a big power like HBO tipping the cart, and they are already doing that in Europe.

    As far as the baseball extra innings goes - I love Sen. McCain's bill. Say what you want about his politics, his forays into sports legislation seems to push things that otherwise wouldn't have happened.
    Philosophically speaking, I despise the government getting involved in the markets. Companies should be free to offer the products they want to offer, just as we should have the ability to choose what to purchase. So from that standpoint, I hate this bill, not because I don't like what it would do but I don't care for the government legislating these things.

    That said, the anti-trust exemptions are the only things allowing baseball and football to do some of the things they've been doing, so they should be reigned in a bit if they take advantage of their exemptions at the expense of the consumer. At least, inasmuch as no other company would be able to do so within the context of the law.

    I do love the idea of a la carte in a vacuum, but I also realize the price per channel will skyrocket if that happens. Instead of paying $1 a month per channel as we currently do in a cable package, we'd be likely looking at $5-10 a month (or more in select cases) a la carte. The truth is we'll likely end up paying just as much for 10-20 stations as we do now for 75-100.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  6. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    545

    Re: The Monopolizing of MLB's Extra Innings Package

    With a la carte I would say be very careful what you wish for. People look at it in a vacuum and think if they currently get 100 channels for $100 its only going to $10 for the 10 channels they want. Its not.

    Take something like ESPN. Right now ESPN is the most viewed cable channel and it fetches the highest per subscriber fee at better than $5 a head. If you have a cable company with 10 million subscribers they are forking over 50 million per year to ESPN to broadcast them. If you go a la cart and get an 80% take rate now they are only getting 40 million from the same cable company so they start charging $7 per head to make up the difference. No big deal right, nobody is crying over $2 per month right?

    ESPN2 is normally a package deal with ESPN its not as popular so it does not carry the $5 premium that ESPN costs. Lets say it costs $2, a cable company is paying 20 million. What happens when the take rate is 50% for ESPN2? They need to fill a 10 million dollar gap in revenues. Guess where it comes from? A combination of higher ESPN and ESPN2. Now start running that down the list with ESPN3 or ESPN Desportes. Niche channels like MLB Network or SciFi are going to have to charge a lot more per subscriber to stay afloat.

    The other thing to remember is these guys are in the business to make money and they will figure out a way to make money. ESPN2 isn't very popular, hey guess what, Monday Night football just moved to ESPN 2 and now its $10 per month just like ESPN.

    I hate the current model where I am forced to pay for a host of channels I don't want, but I think with ala carte I will end up paying pretty close to the same amount of money.

  7. #51
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    8,827

    Re: The Monopolizing of MLB's Extra Innings Package

    Quote Originally Posted by krm1580 View Post
    With a la carte I would say be very careful what you wish for. People look at it in a vacuum and think if they currently get 100 channels for $100 its only going to $10 for the 10 channels they want. Its not.

    Take something like ESPN. Right now ESPN is the most viewed cable channel and it fetches the highest per subscriber fee at better than $5 a head. If you have a cable company with 10 million subscribers they are forking over 50 million per year to ESPN to broadcast them. If you go a la cart and get an 80% take rate now they are only getting 40 million from the same cable company so they start charging $7 per head to make up the difference. No big deal right, nobody is crying over $2 per month right?

    ESPN2 is normally a package deal with ESPN its not as popular so it does not carry the $5 premium that ESPN costs. Lets say it costs $2, a cable company is paying 20 million. What happens when the take rate is 50% for ESPN2? They need to fill a 10 million dollar gap in revenues. Guess where it comes from? A combination of higher ESPN and ESPN2. Now start running that down the list with ESPN3 or ESPN Desportes. Niche channels like MLB Network or SciFi are going to have to charge a lot more per subscriber to stay afloat.

    The other thing to remember is these guys are in the business to make money and they will figure out a way to make money. ESPN2 isn't very popular, hey guess what, Monday Night football just moved to ESPN 2 and now its $10 per month just like ESPN.

    I hate the current model where I am forced to pay for a host of channels I don't want, but I think with ala carte I will end up paying pretty close to the same amount of money.
    I think you are mostly right, but ESPN is an extreme example. They by far and away get the highest figure per household. I would agree that those who subscribe to ESPN in an a la carte model would be punished the most.

    Additionally, I think the whole model of cable TV will change soon. More people now than ever are fleeing because the prices have gotten so out of hand and there are other options out there. Everybody wants more money and at some point, something's going to give.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25