Poll: Extra Innings Consumers

[Bo Hart]

John Ourand and Eric Fisher of the Sports Business Journal are reporting via the Sports Business Daily that negotiations at the 11th hour between MLB and iN Demand to keep Extra Innings on cable are ongoing and “both sides are now characterizing the talks as extremely serious.”

Reportedly, MLB gives the odds of the deal occurring at 50-50 while cable representatives seem more pessimistic.

One of the key sticking points prior was matching the same number of households that DirecTV has signed on to do. iN Demand has said it will meet that provision via 80% of their digital households.

The sticking point now is the ownership equity component of The Baseball Channel. Recall that MLB has offered DirecTV a 20% ownership stake, but that is based on exclusivity. If iN Demand becomes a player, DirecTV's equity in ownership would need to be diluted.

[jim]

John Ourand and Eric Fisher of the Sports Business Journal are reporting via the Sports Business Daily that negotiations at the 11th hour between MLB and iN Demand to keep Extra Innings on cable are ongoing and “both sides are now characterizing the talks as extremely serious.”

Reportedly, MLB gives the odds of the deal occurring at 50-50 while cable representatives seem more pessimistic.

One of the key sticking points prior was matching the same number of households that DirecTV has signed on to do. iN Demand has said it will meet that provision via 80% of their digital households.

The sticking point now is the ownership equity component of The Baseball Channel. Recall that MLB has offered DirecTV a 20% ownership stake, but that is based on exclusivity. If iN Demand becomes a player, DirecTV's equity in ownership would need to be diluted.

Shoot, I would have given odds at 5/95. This is great news as far as I'm concerned.

[Bo Hart]

I kind of think something will get done. It's kind of like what you're saying, jim... I was feeling a lot more pessimistic than this.

To me, the key is that MLB.tv offers that 10-day cancellation grace period; in case something does go down, I'll be able to get rid of it. Woo hoo!

[Bo Hart]

On a side note, this kind of reminds me in 2002 or whatever when there was that impending strike in baseball, and it went down to not only the last day, but within hours of the deadline...

[Bo Hart]

MLB has argued that the games will still be available to cable customers via an online subscription package, but Committee members “agreed that MLB’s argument ... isn’t going to fly.” Committee member Claire McCaskill (D-MO): “The computer monitor will never make it in my household” (CABLEFAX DAILY, 3/28). Penn State Univ. law professor Stephen Ross added that a “‘variety of reasons,’ such as obstructed reception, would prevent some fans from getting the games even if they did switch to DirecTV” (DAILY VARIETY, 3/28).

So maybe MLB really doesn't have any leverage in saying that MLB.tv is a viable alternative?

[Fan_In_NY]

MLB has argued that the games will still be available to cable customers via an online subscription package, but Committee members “agreed that MLB’s argument ... isn’t going to fly.” Committee member Claire McCaskill (D-MO): “The computer monitor will never make it in my household” (CABLEFAX DAILY, 3/28). Penn State Univ. law professor Stephen Ross added that a “‘variety of reasons,’ such as obstructed reception, would prevent some fans from getting the games even if they did switch to DirecTV” (DAILY VARIETY, 3/28).

So maybe MLB really doesn't have any leverage in saying that MLB.tv is a viable alternative?

Well i dont understand why MLB even needs to provide a viable alternative. I mean i know they are providing something, but I dont think that they are legally obligated to do so.

[Bo Hart]

The defense they have been using is, "watching baseball is not exclusive to DirecTV. You get local market games, and our online subscription service is also available, too."

So they definitely address this point, and try and justify it with MLB.tv (which Congress apparently disagrees with).

Buy no, they don't have to provide an alternative.

[fanforever]

John Ourand and Eric Fisher of the Sports Business Journal are reporting via the Sports Business Daily that negotiations at the 11th hour between MLB and iN Demand to keep Extra Innings on cable are ongoing and “both sides are now characterizing the talks as extremely serious.”

Reportedly, MLB gives the odds of the deal occurring at 50-50 while cable representatives seem more pessimistic.

One of the key sticking points prior was matching the same number of households that DirecTV has signed on to do. iN Demand has said it will meet that provision via 80% of their digital households.

The sticking point now is the ownership equity component of The Baseball Channel. Recall that MLB has offered DirecTV a 20% ownership stake, but that is based on exclusivity. If iN Demand becomes a player, DirecTV's equity in ownership would need to be diluted.

Shoot, I would have given odds at 5/95. This is great news as far as I'm concerned.

Agreed. MLB needs Cable IMO.

[ghostrunner]

Got a $50 credit coupon from Comcast in the mail today. Goes toward either regular or premium MLB.tv.

Some interesting wording on the accompanying letter:

"We regret to inform you that, due to a recent decision by MLB, it has become impossible for any cable company to distribute MLB Extra Innings beginning with the 2007 season."

Not sure if this means anything with regard to late negotiations, but it looks like I may buy this. It's hard to pass up $50 off. This would change my vote from not buying anything. It's a nice move by Comcast to follow suit along with Cox, etc.... I certainly don't think it's their fault, even if I think using the word "impossible" in the letter is a bit much.

I'll definitely wait and see how this goes before signing up though. The Cards have a decent national TV schedule in April, so I won't be too deprived.

[stlmark]

I'm starting to believe that something will get done and I will get my EI on my comcast.