Blackouts Frustrate Online Sports Viewing

[umfan]

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20...eview-online_sports_blackouts-c9c453eaea.html

The article uses the blackout restrictions of MLB.TV to illustrate the point.

With the exception of easing the balckouts for cable subscribers, I don't see much changing. The business model is too reliant on big payouts from cable and broadcast television to allow online viewing to erode that revenue stream.

 

[newsmark]

You're right. It won't change much anytime soon. On TV, most of the cable channels rely on subscriber fees--which come from EVERY cable subscriber, whether they watch their programming or not.

The only way, currently, to make online viewing equally attractive to the leagues would be to somehow charge every internet subscriber in the market.

 

[joebtsflk1]

Bingo...and that's why I've always hated the current subscription TV model: paying for a bunch of crap I don't watch.

Slowly, as the erosion to the cable/satellite business model continues with young kids never signing up for those services, and others cutting back or going without, we might see changes. But it still can't happen fast enough to suit me.

 

[ansky212]

If you want to watch Yankees games online you have to pay $50/year (might be more now) for that extra service from the YES Network, and I believe that is only if you are in the home NY market. I'm not sure if that also requires a TV package.

 

[Avid Listener]

Bingo...and that's why I've always hated the current subscription TV model: paying for a bunch of crap I don't watch.

Slowly, as the erosion to the cable/satellite business model continues with young kids never signing up for those services, and others cutting back or going without, we might see changes. But it still can't happen fast enough to suit me.

Would you prefer it if you only had to pay for what you wanted to watch, but priced at a level that would cover the cost of infrastructure and profit margin for the cable company? I guarantee you, if cable networks were all available a la carte, we'd soon be down to maybe a few dozen networks. And chances are, some of the ones you like personally might not be among them.

 

[landtuna]

Would you prefer it if you only had to pay for what you wanted to watch, but priced at a level that would cover the cost of infrastructure and profit margin for the cable company? I guarantee you, if cable networks were all available a la carte, we'd soon be down to maybe a few dozen networks. And chances are, some of the ones you like personally might not be among them.

Strongly disagree with your statement. Back in the 80's we did have ala carte and it did work just fine. The problem was the switch from big dishes to pizza pans and the lack of competition among programmers. People who were too dumb or too cheap to build and operate big dishes (think C and Ku-band) opted for DISH or DirecTV and thereby lost control of their costs.

 

[joebtsflk1]

Would you prefer it if you only had to pay for what you wanted to watch, but priced at a level that would cover the cost of infrastructure and profit margin for the cable company? I guarantee you, if cable networks were all available a la carte, we'd soon be down to maybe a few dozen networks. And chances are, some of the ones you like personally might not be among them.

A few dozen...why, that's still more than plenty. Some channel consolidation would be a good thing. I like DIY, but honestly is the concept big enough to fill 18 hours a day (given they're infomercials overnight). I should say 9 hours a day since I don't think they have a separate West Coast feed, so some of the schedule repeats every three hours. DIY and HGTV could easily be rolled into one channel, and I don't think that many people would object.

 

[Morgan Wick]

A few dozen...why, that's still more than plenty. Some channel consolidation would be a good thing. I like DIY, but honestly is the concept big enough to fill 18 hours a day (given they're infomercials overnight). I should say 9 hours a day since I don't think they have a separate West Coast feed, so some of the schedule repeats every three hours. DIY and HGTV could easily be rolled into one channel, and I don't think that many people would object.

I'd go further. I'm not sure the number of channels we really need even extends to the double digits. Hell, it's entirely possible going back to the three-network days would work just fine. There are people who would argue that the Internet obviates the need for linear television entirely.