Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
11 hours ago, tokamak said:

MLB.tv single team is $120/year I think, so it'll be something in that ballpark. Hopefully not blacked out in Houston.

How is this better than Bally? At least with DirecTV, Bally came with it, along with every one of my other channels. Now I have to pay separately for this when the same app shows Stars games for free??

  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, BigDHornfan said:

$100 for the season

In. Please don't be blacked out in Austin.

1 hour ago, Saint Austin said:

How is this better than Bally? At least with DirecTV, Bally came with it, along with every one of my other channels. Now I have to pay separately for this when the same app shows Stars games for free??

DTV costs that much per month. 

Posted

DTV gets hundreds of other channels. This sucks for all the fans that watched the games for years & years on their preferred carrier. Anyone that thinks watching on an app is better than a network, especially baseball with commercials every half inning, is just trying to be argumentative. 

It’s great for the YouTube crowd though. 

  • Like 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, shadow_operative2.0 said:

DTV gets hundreds of other channels. This sucks for all the fans that watched the games for years & years on their preferred carrier. Anyone that thinks watching on an app is better than a network, especially baseball with commercials every half inning, is just trying to be argumentative. 

It’s great for the YouTube crowd though. 

Supposedly they're still working on deals with cable/satellite providers.

Posted

Making this a paid service is an interesting strategy that I don't think will go well.   Obviously the Stars don't have the same following (or the same level of TV revenue to replace) but I remember when Victory + was announced the stars rep talked about how they discussed and thought it was important to keep it free vs. even a nominal amount in order to build/keep the fanbase engaged.  I'll probably end up paying it but I bet a lot of people won't on principle and I don't blame them.   Unfortunately for the Rangers and everyone else that were locked into Bally's, a shit ton of fanbases got used to dealing with just watching national games over the past few years.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, Skipper said:

Making this a paid service is an interesting strategy that I don't think will go well.   Obviously the Stars don't have the same following (or the same level of TV revenue to replace) but I remember when Victory + was announced the stars rep talked about how they discussed and thought it was important to keep it free vs. even a nominal amount in order to build/keep the fanbase engaged.  I'll probably end up paying it but I bet a lot of people won't on principle and I don't blame them.   Unfortunately for the Rangers and everyone else that were locked into Bally's, a shit ton of fanbases got used to dealing with just watching national games over the past few years.

Agreed. I think it will do fine with people who are used to paying for subscription content for sports such as Peacock or ESPN+ like me. I may pony up the $100 for a season to try it out since it would be better than the streams I've been using. For long time Rangers fans who are older and are used to turning on their cable or satellite receiver on and just watching games, it's going to be a tough adjustment and will make some just not bother. I wish this new deal would include a local OTA option for at least a portion of the games so people who already get games through their TV package would still get some of them similar to what the Mavs have done. Maybe I'm misremembering but when I was a kid I remember watching some games on 21 or 27 and the rest were on FSN or FSSW. It's so odd that MLB can't streamline this for fans so people can just watch their content. 

Edited by mdmost
Posted

$100 for the season is a pretty big premium to pay for local access. MLB.tv works out to $180 for the season and you get all the games less the blackout restricted ones.   Maybe some spoofed IP address or vpn or whatever tech sleight of hand could work to deliver Texas games in market, and you would get all the other games as well for less than double the price point.  
 

I guess that’s assuming this streaming feed will be available for mlb.tv.

Posted

I watched probably 75-80 Stars games last season, I'm on maybe 6 this one. The broadcast is fine, sometimes I have to back out of the app & restart to get live. They have all the pre & postgame shit. 

The biggest problem with V+, unless something has changed real recently, is you can't download it on mobile. So I can't fire up the iPad for Stars & have my TV still free. 

Posted (edited)

I have it on my iPhone and Apple TV. I haven't tried to watch a game on it. The app reminds me of the LHN app. Not designed for the Apple TV specifically and more of a mobile app so it's not as clean and the interface can be clunky. I'm not sure how many providers and Smart TVs they've made the app available for.  

Edited by mdmost
Posted
5 hours ago, gofuckyourself said:

For Stars fans that have watched on the app is it a good broadcast?

 Is there other content? Game previews, recaps, game replays, interviews?

Watching the Montreal game live right now on my Apple TV. Looks like the Bally's broadcast from last year. They did a 30 minute pregame show with some commercial breaks thrown in. You can watch full replays, 5 minute condensed games, pre and post game interviews, and classic games. They also have small featurettes, podcasts, and shorts. It's not bad as far as content and a whole lot more than LHN. For some reason, you also get the same for the Anaheim Ducks. I guess they have the same deal as the Stars. 

It's free to sign up and you can use a web browser to get the content if you want to check it out. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
On 1/16/2025 at 5:01 PM, Herbie Hancock said:

Did I miss the post where Bubba Thompson retired from baseball to get his Chris Weinke on at some shitbox community college in Gump-land??

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
On 1/16/2025 at 10:23 AM, mdmost said:

Agreed. I think it will do fine with people who are used to paying for subscription content for sports such as Peacock or ESPN+ like me. I may pony up the $100 for a season to try it out since it would be better than the streams I've been using. For long time Rangers fans who are older and are used to turning on their cable or satellite receiver on and just watching games, it's going to be a tough adjustment and will make some just not bother. I wish this new deal would include a local OTA option for at least a portion of the games so people who already get games through their TV package would still get some of them similar to what the Mavs have done. Maybe I'm misremembering but when I was a kid I remember watching some games on 21 or 27 and the rest were on FSN or FSSW. It's so odd that MLB can't streamline this for fans so people can just watch their content. 

Yep, I lost Rangers games when FSSW went off Dish, sucks. 

Posted

Worse time of the year. I've never really be able to get into hockey or basketball. I'm not anti-them or anything. I'll watch the playoffs and March Madness, but a typical regular season game just doesn't do much for me.

 

  • Like 1
Posted

Tepid 

Quote

Rocker is ridiculous. Closest thing Texas has had to a legit, front-line starter in as many years as I've been on this post (nearly 20?! 😬). I still like the 2-seamer more than the 4, and the death ball? Forget about it. Amazing pitch. But his health concerns remain terrifying. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
On 1/23/2025 at 2:25 PM, Jameslaw121 said:

Worse time of the year. I've never really be able to get into hockey or basketball. I'm not anti-them or anything. I'll watch the playoffs and March Madness, but a typical regular season game just doesn't do much for me.

 

Well let me ask you this... how do you feel about Rodney Terry?

Posted

If we can get OTA, satellite, and cable coverage along with Victory+ for streaming folks like me then that's a great outcome for everyone. I'm not sure how you'd replicate the revenue of even a shitty Bally's deal with just a $100 a season app. 

Posted

Upside for that app is what, 200 thousand subscribers? Anyone out of market can just buy MLB TV. That's like 20 million a year max in TV money. Big dropoff in revenue 

  • Like 1
Posted

I'd be shocked if OTA is more that just a handful (8?) games. My research also indicates that YouTube TV does not have any RSN a la carte add ons, so I would be really surprised if they get that worked out

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...