Collapse of Regional Sports Networks (Diamond Sports Group files bankruptcy, Warner-Discovery looking to leave business, Xfinity drops Bally)

[jkrdevil]

Fox had leverage because of properties Sinclair doesn’t have that reach

That is part of it too.

 

[joelef]

That is part of it too.

Basically anytime there was an rsn dispute fox would threaten to take off there two most successful properties ,Fox News and main fox , and the company’s would cave in. Sinclair doesn’t have that reach

 

[IU Hawks fan]

I don't get people saying streaming services aren't monetizing ads. They absolutely are!

An ad my team bought aired in the game I watched last night! It's part of the package we have with Hulu.

 

[PCSPounder]

I’ll present this because I’m seeing this chatter: what if MLB goes direct to customer?
The theory is that BAM can develop the capability. That puts further pressure on other current RSNs… which seem to be the ones in the larger metros, and I can see that issue getting way too interesting.

 

[jkrdevil]

I’ll present this because I’m seeing this chatter: what if MLB goes direct to customer?
The theory is that BAM can develop the capability. That puts further pressure on other current RSNs… which seem to be the ones in the larger metros, and I can see that issue getting way too interesting.

Well MLB is going to do a competitor to those RSN’s, because all those big market RSNs all have large ownership stakes by MLB teams.

 

[joelef]

It's not just Bally, it's all the RSNs and even all channels. Are you expecting an RSN management to say, "Well, we'll have fewer subscribers on streaming, but we'll keep charging each one the same price as we charged when we were in every cable package in the city"?
Streaming was cheap when not many people were doing it. The more it replaces cable, the more different services you'll end up paying for and the more they'll cost. They'll get you one way or the other.

It’s naive to thing you can get everything for just 5 dollars a month.

 

[rsteen]

Didn't MLB and NHL sell BAM to Disney?

 

[KevFu]

It is not about ad sales. None of this has anything to do with ad sales. It is about the subscriber fees. If in market viewers were able to watch the broadcast (or another broadcast of the same game) another way the cable/video provider would drop the RSN’s in a heart beat to get out of paying the high subscriber fees they carry. A lot of the cable alternative providers that don’t cater to sports fans have already done this. This is why even’t broadcast on ESPN or ESPN2 aren’t available on ESPN+ (without a cable login)

I think we're close to the same page here. There's multiple dynamics with multiple parties.

The RSNs are against LEAGUE streaming services offering the stream in-market without blackout because THAT cuts into their ad sales revenue, and NOW subscriptions for streaming as well. They've combated cord-cutters by offering in-market streaming subscriptions themselves. THAT is a battle of "league" vs "RSN" ad sales I was talking about.

The cable companies' fees are totally passed on to the consumer. They charge you for ALL channels in your service whether you watch them or not. That's why cord-cutting is a thing. I'd say the cable companies need the RSNs more than the other way around. The RSNs selling streaming subscriptions right to consumers means more cord-cutters, which hurts cable companies period.

Networks and providers fight over rights fees all the time, because cable companies know from the calls they get to customer service just how close people are to saying "Screw cable" every time their bill goes up. The cable companies actually have the least power here (But that's why almost all of them offer internet. No matter what you're gonna be paying the same 17 companies no matter how you watch media).

As it pertains to US, the FANS... the leagues wanting to cut out the middle men of cable providers and charge us directly for all streaming is GREAT. The issue they have is every team has a separate contact and they can't have EVERYONE in the league join in a black-out free, we own all streams program until their NEXT contracts. As it stands, it's all out of market only because the teams sold the local streaming rights to RSNs.

 

[jkrdevil]

Didn't MLB and NHL sell BAM to Disney?

Yes and I believe Disney at this point has bought out all of their stakes, so neither has minority interest anymore.

But MLB still has MLB Advanced Media, which they can use to start a new streaming service if they need.

 

[Llama19]

Didn't MLB and NHL sell BAM to Disney?

Disney to Buy NHL’s Stake in BAMTech for $350 Million

To quote:

"The Hollywood Reporter reports that the Walt Disney Co. will pay the National Hockey League $350 million to buy the league’s 10 percent stake in Disney Streaming Services, the Disney subsidiary that manages the technology platforms that power the company’s streaming services, like Disney+ and ESPN+. Disney Streaming Services was previously known as BAMTech.

The NHL had an option to trigger the buyout this year, and according to Disney’s quarterly report, the league exercised its option on Aug. 3. The deal is expected to close by the end of fiscal 2021. When the deal is complete, Disney will own 85 percent of BAMTech/Disney Streaming Services, with Major League Baseball holding the remaining 15 percent."

Source: www.sportico.com/business/media/2021/disney-to-buy-nhls-stake-in-bamtech-for-350-million-1234637019/

 

[KevFu]

Didn't MLB and NHL sell BAM to Disney?

Yes, but it's complicated. There were multiple sales of stakes after a company split. MLBAM developed MLBTV, the back-end infrastructure for streaming. So good that other companies wanted to use their tech. So MLBAM made tons of money providing engines for things like WWE Network, HBO Go/Max, ESPN3.

So much so that they split MLBAM into baseball and non-baseball (BAMTech). When Disney launched streaming, they said ESPN's got great streaming already.... Oh. Via BAMTech? Well, let's BUY BAMTech"

They bought a massive stake in BAMTech, and then bought out other investors (like the NHL, around the same time ESPN and NHL struck their new TV deal), and it's now "Disney Streaming Services."


It's HIGHLY probable that MLB retains the rights to using the tech for MLB games. They've had MLBTV running as it always has ever since the split and multiple sales.

 

[jkrdevil]

Disney to Buy NHL’s Stake in BAMTech for $350 Million

To quote:

"The Hollywood Reporter reports that the Walt Disney Co. will pay the National Hockey League $350 million to buy the league’s 10 percent stake in Disney Streaming Services, the Disney subsidiary that manages the technology platforms that power the company’s streaming services, like Disney+ and ESPN+. Disney Streaming Services was previously known as BAMTech.

The NHL had an option to trigger the buyout this year, and according to Disney’s quarterly report, the league exercised its option on Aug. 3. The deal is expected to close by the end of fiscal 2021. When the deal is complete, Disney will own 85 percent of BAMTech/Disney Streaming Services, with Major League Baseball holding the remaining 15 percent."

Source: www.sportico.com/business/media/2021/disney-to-buy-nhls-stake-in-bamtech-for-350-million-1234637019/

I believe MLB subsequently sold their remaining 15%.

But BAMTech was just the technology behind the streaming. MLB still controls the rights.

 

[KevFu]

I’ll present this because I’m seeing this chatter: what if MLB goes direct to customer?
The theory is that BAM can develop the capability. That puts further pressure on other current RSNs… which seem to be the ones in the larger metros, and I can see that issue getting way too interesting.

I mean, YES, that's exactly what they're talking about!

But it's not NOT a "theory." It exists. They HAVE MLBTV right now. They just have to "turn off IP location checking" and they're done.

 

[varsaku]

Disney to Buy NHL’s Stake in BAMTech for $350 Million

To quote:

"The Hollywood Reporter reports that the Walt Disney Co. will pay the National Hockey League $350 million to buy the league’s 10 percent stake in Disney Streaming Services, the Disney subsidiary that manages the technology platforms that power the company’s streaming services, like Disney+ and ESPN+. Disney Streaming Services was previously known as BAMTech.

The NHL had an option to trigger the buyout this year, and according to Disney’s quarterly report, the league exercised its option on Aug. 3. The deal is expected to close by the end of fiscal 2021. When the deal is complete, Disney will own 85 percent of BAMTech/Disney Streaming Services, with Major League Baseball holding the remaining 15 percent."

Source: www.sportico.com/business/media/2021/disney-to-buy-nhls-stake-in-bamtech-for-350-million-1234637019/

That is such a shortsighted move. Why would the NHL sell their stake in an industry that is only going to continue to grow. Do they not see where the industry is heading.

 

[joelef]

That is such a shortsighted move. Why would the NHL sell their stake in an industry that is only going to continue to grow. Do they not see where the industry is heading.

This is typical nhl why are you surprised?

 

[Reaser]

That is such a shortsighted move. Why would the NHL sell their stake in an industry that is only going to continue to grow. Do they not see where the industry is heading.

This is typical nhl why are you surprised?

Disney also acquired MLB's remaining 15 percent stake.

Was part of the deal that they had the option.

 

[IU Hawks fan]

That is such a shortsighted move. Why would the NHL sell their stake in an industry that is only going to continue to grow. Do they not see where the industry is heading.

$350mm in 2021 was probably way more valuable to offsetting COVID losses than, let's say $500mm in 5 years when they've recovered.

That's $11-12MM per team (don't know if VGK & SEA were included, but doesn't move it much), is an extra $4-5MM down the road worth waiting for?

 

[jkrdevil]

I think it was Disney’s option

 

[KevFu]

That is such a shortsighted move. Why would the NHL sell their stake in an industry that is only going to continue to grow. Do they not see where the industry is heading.

1. It was in the contract that Disney had the right to buy them out, and they took the option. The right used to belong to MLB, but switched to Disney.

Instead of calling the NHL stupid for cashing out, we need to applaud being in the situation in the first place. They didn't pay to build a streaming service, and hope the revenue from it off-set the cost. (That's what WWE did, and they bolted for Peacock once the contract was up because NBC promised them $200m a year).

The NHL made a six-year partnership deal with MLBAM/BAMTech. BAMTech paid them $600 million for their streaming service powered by BAMTech, $100m per season for the six years.

Plus any other revenue from being part-owners that came via the WWE, HBO, ESPN+ and PGA contracts with BAMTech.

Then the $350m buyout by Disney for their stake in BAMTech(now Disney Streaming)

And now that the partnership is over... NHL out-of-market streams are where? They're getting paid $400m a year for all their out-of-market streaming (and the national TV games)

... from ESPN (aka Disney), on NHLtv and ESPN+ which are powered by the same BAMTech/Disney Streaming Services tech.


The NHL made out like bandits.

 

[Fenway]

The on-air product of the Sinclair RSNs has deteriorated over the last 2 years. Fox worked with all the RSNs to give each the feel of the national FOX channels.

Bally's graphics are universally despised and they have cut numerous staffers.

The only RSNs that are on safe footing are NESN and MSG who don't have to absorb massive debt service. It is an open secret Comcast would love to unload its channels.

But even NESN has been slashing jobs as they cut back on studio shows and is now gearing up for more gambling shows as Massachusetts starts sports betting tomorrow.

 

[joelef]

What’s with this prudish attitude with gambling?

 

[joelef]

The on-air product of the Sinclair RSNs has deteriorated over the last 2 years. Fox worked with all the RSNs to give each the feel of the national FOX channels.

Bally's graphics are universally despised and they have cut numerous staffers.

The only RSNs that are on safe footing are NESN and MSG who don't have to absorb massive debt service. It is an open secret Comcast would love to unload its channels.

But even NESN has been slashing jobs as they cut back on studio shows and is now gearing up for more gambling shows as Massachusetts starts sports betting tomorrow.

Fox also had more leverage then Sinclair . Fox had/ has very profitable properties that brought in lots of national ad revenue and they used that to there advantage . Sinclair doesn’t have that .

 

[Fenway]

What’s with this prudish attitude with gambling?

Prudish attitude?

NESN is going to be swimming in sportsbook commercials for the next few months.

Sinclair partnered with Bally which is a Rhode Island-based gambling company.

Gambling is now a revenue stream for all sports and their media partners.

 

[rojac]

Prudish attitude?

NESN is going to be swimming in sportsbook commercials for the next few months.

Sinclair partnered with Bally which is a Rhode Island-based gambling company.

Gambling is now a revenue stream for all sports and their media partners.

I’m pretty sure that the poster was referring to the prudish attitude towards gambling from some posters in this thread.

 

[KevFu]

The on-air product of the Sinclair RSNs has deteriorated over the last 2 years. Fox worked with all the RSNs to give each the feel of the national FOX channels.

Bally's graphics are universally despised and they have cut numerous staffers.

The only RSNs that are on safe footing are NESN and MSG who don't have to absorb massive debt service. It is an open secret Comcast would love to unload its channels.

But even NESN has been slashing jobs as they cut back on studio shows and is now gearing up for more gambling shows as Massachusetts starts sports betting tomorrow.

SNY is in decent shape. They have a ton of debt, but that debt isn't from rights fees and operations costs; it's from its' owners being Bernie Madoff clients; The owners of SNY took out loans against SNY profits to survive the next decade after their money disappeared in Madoff's Ponzi Scheme.

But SNY is absolutely going to survive the RSN rights fees bubble bursting because they don't have the bubble obligations of the others. SNY pays the Mets a VERY TINY rights fee, because just like the RSNs you mentioned -- NESN and MSG -- SNY was also started by the owners of the teams on the network, and it's done so that revenue from TV isn't subject to MLB revenue sharing like the rights fees are.


However, the clock IS ticking on them because they sold the Mets, and once their Mets deal expires, the Mets new owner will just form his own TV network or enter into whatever form of media distribution takes over for cable TV.