DRaysBay mention on BP
by Top Gun Numba 1 on Apr 16, 2009 12:52 PM EDT
19 comments
Shawn Hoffman once again banging the drum for MLBAM to loosen its grip on content.
(Subscription Only)
This one will take even more convincing. If embedding press conferences and highlight videos makes the suits nervous, you can imagine what kind of response syndicating actual games would receive. It actually makes almost too much sense, though, because to watch MLB.tv, you'll need to subscribe to the service, regardless of whether it's on MLB.com, nytimes.com, or freecreditreport.com. So MLB should be doing whatever it can to increase its distribution, just like HBO does on cable. Why not let DRaysBay "broadcast" Rays games, if it will draw more attention to the product?
0 recs |
19 comments
Email
Print
Comments
I've always been a fan of Squawking Baseball and his work.
Definitely appreciate the mention as well.
by R.J. Anderson on Apr 16, 2009 1:02 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
? for anybody who has mlb.tv
Do they run advertising during the games, such as commercials or sponsorships of things that are appearing outside of the broadcast?
Check out my blog on web development at kericr.wordpress.com
by kericr on Apr 16, 2009 1:06 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
During designated commercial breaks they run advertising, yes.
by R.J. Anderson on Apr 16, 2009 1:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's like MLB.TV commercials
Swav or Die.
by SRQman on Apr 16, 2009 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which makes no sense
If you’re watching, you’re obviously aware of the product. Oh wait, they say ‘keep watching’
I think it might have something to do with the possibility of a local affiliate revolt. From what I remember the locals aren’t/weren’t too happy with MLB.TV as they pay none of the production costs but get to sell the finished product at a nearly 100% profit, and MLB.TV’s right to do so falls into a gray area that may or may not be covered by local distribution contracts.
by GomesSweetGomes on Apr 16, 2009 1:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought that was only during the free preview.
If they’re showing them during every broadcast then apparently nobody wants to advertise with them. That or they’re stupidly leaving money on the table.
by R.J. Anderson on Apr 16, 2009 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or they're trying to avoid lawsuits from FSN/NESN/YES etc.
by GomesSweetGomes on Apr 16, 2009 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do think it will eventually happen
But probably piecemeal at first, and not completely until they either contract for (or litigate) precisely who has the rights to the commercial time for MLB.TV broadcasts (or better put, whether MLB putting different commercials on MLBTV so would deprive the locals of a benefit they bargained for).
It seems for the time being MLB is content to wait it out until some of the current contracts expire, and deal with the issue when its time to renegotiate their future media deals, so as not to threaten many of their long-term relationships with these companies.
by GomesSweetGomes on Apr 16, 2009 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, the idea is that customers aren't paying to watch commercials.
This was a common criticism amongst movie theaters a few years ago and still exists to some extent today. Early in the decade, movie theaters almost universally started running anywhere between 5 and 15 minutes of advertising starting at a movie’s scheduled showtime, only to be met with rather outstanding backlash. When people would show up for a 7PM movie, they expected to either see the movie or preview trailers at 7PM, not 10 minutes of commercials beforehand.
One of the ideas the movie industry tried to help revive revenues from a few years ago when they recorded record decreases in ticket sales was to either forego this advertising, or running it earlier than the scheduled showtime so that if a movie started at their scheduled times, so the only ‘advertising’ one would see would be preview trailers. Most theaters still do this now but some of them went back to running the ads later so it depends more on where you go now to watch movies.
Running what is essentially filler during normally scheduled commercial breaks makes sense if someone is paying a fee in order to obtain web content; not running the advertisements is the right thing to do. That being said, what is being suggested in the article only makes sense if MLB can make more money from running advertising and broadcasting for free while not affecting a local market’s ability to attract an audience for games. Considering the rediculous number of transplants in this area, I would think the RFO would object rather loudly to this idea since they’re still in the process of trying to convert fans. The last thing they need is to make it any easier for people to watch Yankees or Red Sox games.
Check out my blog on web development at kericr.wordpress.com
by kericr on Apr 16, 2009 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Apparently, they can't even sell ads for MLB Network
Which was the largest startup for a cable channel ever. Seems like half the commercials on there are actually for MLB, and I have to imagine that’s just because they need to fill the airtime. XM/Sirius has had major problems selling ad time as well. It’s a really tough time on people running ads at the moment. I wouldn’t be shocked if they just are having trouble selling the ads, and rather than devaluing them by selling them at a discount, they’re waiting the year to ride out the recession until people are willing to pay full price.
As GSG mentioned, there may be a legal aspect to this as well, though I doubt that the local networks would have much of a case.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Apr 16, 2009 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have MLB.TV and I get MLB.TV commercials....
Swav or Die.
by SRQman on Apr 16, 2009 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No
The screen doesn’t just go black anymore like it used to though. A few years ago, sometimes it would actually stay on the field camera and you’d still hear the sound booth between innings if the announcers forgot to turn off their mics. That’s how you ended up with clips of Joe Magrane talking about women’s racks and stuff like that.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Apr 16, 2009 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can't link MLBTV stuff
They are the DRM Gestapo. And he’s right, you could often hear what the announcers were saying during the breaks. Usually it was nothing, but sometimes you’d hear something funny.
by GomesSweetGomes on Apr 16, 2009 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
proof (though not of a particular incident)
by GomesSweetGomes on Apr 16, 2009 2:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, that makes sense.
"Where we all wait in earnest with pudding in hand for the Upton comet to sail through the roofed skies, so that we may meet Him."
by kericr on Apr 16, 2009 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shoot
I had it for about 2 weeks in college before I got fed up with the little screen and just bought EI.
by PlayOnWords on Apr 16, 2009 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No link
But I distinctly remember during one of the breaks one time, Magrane was saying something to the effect of “Hey, check out the rack on that lady in the orange over there.” I believe someone captured it and posted it on Youtube for about a day before MLB took it down.
Vogt early, Vogt often.
by Brickhaus on Apr 16, 2009 3:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
