Why do they make this so difficult?

[SaintLouHaintBlue]

Is there any incentive for them to try and enforce this? The local blackouts are a stupid obsolete approach in the era of global telecommunications. I would think NHL.tv would be happy to have a subscriber and not examine too closely.

What's funny is that commissioners/people at the top will continue to defend it.
I remember reading about this in baseball, too, with Chairman Manfred defending blackouts in baseball.

Apparrntly, the prevailing thought is that by blacking out the home team, it becomes cheaper to broadcast a larger quantity of games, but with home games excluded (on top of the kind of old fashioned "force people to go to the game" incentive.

It sounded to me like the mindset is to focus on what maximizes the number of games, while basically dismissing that people have a home team that they have a particular interest in.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

I plan to be in Finland tomorrow watching the Blues.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Ort hell ya preach it brotha I totally agree.

I'm going to try the $100 dollar nhl.tv package for the first time ever. I'm really looking forward to it makes me think I should have done it sooner, I like that I'm giving money more directly to the NHL. Also going to be awesome to have access to all teams games during the season including the Blues.
The blackouts won't bother me too much during the regular season but I'll have to find a way around it once the playoffs get going.

Yes...the best thing about NHLtv is that you can quickly dial into other games. There's always a decent game on. I have my teams that I watch besides the Blues. VGK are always interesting. There are several other interesting teams. Actually, I can't think of a franchise that I wouldn't watch. I'm usually doing something else when I tune into those games.

 

[RobR]

I've gone in circles with this problem, my solution was to buy a roku and add the FOX SPORTS GO app.

 

[ort]

What's funny is that commissioners/people at the top will continue to defend it.
I remember reading about this in baseball, too, with Chairman Manfred defending blackouts in baseball.

Apparrntly, the prevailing thought is that by blacking out the home team, it becomes cheaper to broadcast a larger quantity of games, but with home games excluded (on top of the kind of old fashioned "force people to go to the game" incentive.

It sounded to me like the mindset is to focus on what maximizes the number of games, while basically dismissing that people have a home team that they have a particular interest in.

I think it all is 100% about cable broadcasters like Fox Sports drawing a hard line in the sand.

They want us locked in and negotiate these years longs mega million dollar deals and they won't budge on the blackout stuff, because they know it would be the beginning of the end. The teams and the league all play ball because I think it still makes financial sense for them to do so, they don't want a big ugly standoff, they want all the money and it just doesn't make financial sense to fight that one aspect of the deal.

It's very short sighted.

 

[Celtic Note]

I've gone in circles with this problem, my solution was to buy a roku and add the FOX SPORTS GO app.

That works in the STL area?

 

[joe galiba]

the problem is that cable and satellite providers get forced into providing channels that not everyone is interested in as part of packages from content providers, such as NBC, ABC etc..
they have to charge for all of these and not provide a la carte, as they are getting charged for all of them
this drives costs to the end user up, so they lose customers
they then try to hold the line against increases to them, so they lose channels and consequentially lose customers
dying business

 

[Em etah Eh]

I've gone in circles with this problem, my solution was to buy a roku and add the FOX SPORTS GO app.

Yeah, but the fox sports go app doesn't work on it's own. You still have to have a provider (ATT or Charter or ???) already.

 

[Cheeaa]

Signed up for NordVPN.

Will buy a monthly NHLtv subscription to see if it works. I figure this is $30/month.

If it doesn't work, I'm back to ATTs streaming service which is priced at $80/month.

I'm willing to pay people for their internet and entertainment services, I just don't like being robbed.

Yeah this is the route I'm going as well.

 

[RandallRitchey]

My mom has charter. I refuse to spend money on cable. I just use her Fox Sports Go login to watch the games.

 

[mike1320]

My mom has charter. I refuse to spend money on cable. I just use her Fox Sports Go login to watch the games.

Can we all use your mom's login?

 

[AVictoryDive]

I will probably be watching the game either while my gf is in labor or after our baby girl is born.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I will probably be watching the game either while my gf is in labor or after our baby girl is born.

You should name her after whomever scores our first goal!

 

[stlbluz]

There are other steaming options though I don't believe the policies here allow for those type of options to be discussed.

 

[MissouriMook]

There are other steaming options though I don't believe the policies here allow for those type of options to be discussed.

Given the discussion, this was probably the most appropriate typo in the history of typos.

 

[Em etah Eh]

My mom has charter. I refuse to spend money on cable. I just use her Fox Sports Go login to watch the games.

Spectrum has its own app too. I never hooked up their stupid box and just put the spectrum app on my TV's. I still have to pay a monthly fee for the box though, haha.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Spectrum has its own app too. I never hooked up their stupid box and just put the spectrum app on my TV's. I still have to pay a monthly fee for the box though, haha.

Yes...AT&T wants to send me a device if I sign up for their $80/month plan. I don't want their damn device, I don't need their damn device, but there's no option to not get it on their website.

Bring forth VPN and NHL tv

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

You should name her after whomever scores our first goal!

I tried to name our dog Oshie, but my wife vetoed it. She was instead named Dot.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I tried to name our dog Oshie, but my wide vetoed it. She was instead named Dot.

I’ve seen people get divorced for less.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

I’ve seen people get divorced for less.

She tolerated me watching every game and traveling to multiple road games most year without any complaint. It would be foolish for me to not let her win that one.

 

[joe galiba]

I tried to name our dog Oshie, but my wife vetoed it. She was instead named Dot.

in 29 years of marriage we have had 5 dogs
I was allowed name the second one, because it was for me
he was a German shepherd mix so I named him Bismark
I haven't got to name one since, I haven't even had my opinion asked

 

[ort]

I think FSMW and the NHL are who to blame.

 

[Joshuar56]

I think FSMW and the NHL are who to blame.

Sinclair broadcasting is who to blame... they paid too much for fox sports and now they have to try and get their money back through providers. It’s dumb.

 

[Brian39]

Blackouts are inherently anti-consumer, but I get frustrated by people that wholly dismiss/ignore why the NHL enforces them.

The NHL and the 31 teams gets way more than $1B of revenue from TV networks every year and the bulk of those contracts' values is that they give the network the exclusive right to broadcast games. NBC, Sportsnet, Fox, etc wouldn't be willing to pay anything close to what they are currently paying if it was cheap and easy to stream in-market games. The reason NBC is willing to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to broadcast hockey is because that license is exclusive. They use that exclusivity to give their channels value and drive up the cost they charge cable/streaming companies.

Again, blackouts hurt the consumer, but the NHL isn't just blindly supporting them without a benefit. They are protecting their revenue streams. If NHL.TV came without blackouts, the NHL would have to recover about $1B in lost revenue annually. You can guarantee that the price for NHL.TV would go way, way up. I think there are avenues for the NHL to keep revenues chugging and better embrace how people watch content. I also think that the NHL and teams need to add/enforce clauses that condition exclusive rights on the network being able to demonstrate that they service a minimum percentage of the local population.

Assuming the NHL is going to keep enforcing a blackout policy in order to keep the value of their TV deals, they need to do a better job ensuring that the networks they partner with are accessible on multiple cable/streaming services and in packages that aren't cost prohibitive to the consumer. The NHL is going to struggle to compete with other sports if those sports are all on the cheapest cable/streaming tiers and the NHL is on that service's gold tier package. The teams have a tangible interest in their product seeing as many eyes as possible and Sinclair is not doing that. The Blues/NHL need to do a better job preventing these situations.

 

[Celtic Note]

Blackouts are inherently anti-consumer, but I get frustrated by people that wholly dismiss/ignore why the NHL enforces them.

The NHL and the 31 teams gets way more than $1B of revenue from TV networks every year and the bulk of those contracts' values is that they give the network the exclusive right to broadcast games. NBC, Sportsnet, Fox, etc wouldn't be willing to pay anything close to what they are currently paying if it was cheap and easy to stream in-market games. The reason NBC is willing to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to broadcast hockey is because that license is exclusive. They use that exclusivity to give their channels value and drive up the cost they charge cable/streaming companies.

Again, blackouts hurt the consumer, but the NHL isn't just blindly supporting them without a benefit. They are protecting their revenue streams. If NHL.TV came without blackouts, the NHL would have to recover about $1B in lost revenue annually. You can guarantee that the price for NHL.TV would go way, way up. I think there are avenues for the NHL to keep revenues chugging and better embrace how people watch content. I also think that the NHL and teams need to add/enforce clauses that condition exclusive rights on the network being able to demonstrate that they service a minimum percentage of the local population.

Assuming the NHL is going to keep enforcing a blackout policy in order to keep the value of their TV deals, they need to do a better job ensuring that the networks they partner with are accessible on multiple cable/streaming services and in packages that aren't cost prohibitive to the consumer. The NHL is going to struggle to compete with other sports if they are all on the cheapest cable/streaming tiers and the NHL is on that service's gold tier package. The teams have a tangible interest in their product seeing as many eyes as possible and Sinclair is not doing that. The Blues/NHL need to do a better job preventing these situations.

A good negotiation or scenario considers the other party. I think you have done a nice job laying out the other side of the coin.