the future of MLB Extra Innings?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

The Ledger Domain
The Monopolizing of MLB's Extra Innings Package

by Maury Brown

Last summer, I wrote in Blackout Blues how MLB’s arcane territorial television broadcast system restricts consumer options for those that wish to see MLB games out-of-market through MLB.com or MLB Extra Innings. Now, MLB may be creating even more restraints on consumers.
John Orerand and Eric Fisher of the Sports Business Journal have reported that MLB is in advanced talks with DirecTV to make the satellite television company the exclusive provider of MLB Extra Innings. While Extra Innings was initially only offered on DirecTV in 1996, the package has been available on cable since 2001, and on Dish Network since 2004.

If the deal is approved, it is sure to raise the ire of cable interests like Comcast. In fact, the move would seem to be a game of high-stakes poker for MLB, considering that members of Congress and the NFL have been sparring over the latter's decision to use DirecTV as the exclusive provider of the Sunday Ticket package.

In early December, Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) introduced a bill that would repeal the NFL's antitrust exemption under the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961. Currently, the NFL negotiates the broadcast rights for all of its 32 teams. Specter’s bill would repeal that ability and set up a scenario in which teams would negotiate television deals separately. "As I look at what the NFL is doing today with the NFL channel with the DirecTV ... a lot of people, including myself, would like to be able to have that ticket," Specter said. How Specter factors into the MLB deal with DirecTV has more to do with just his interest in protecting consumers. As noted, Specter is a senator from Pennsylvania. Comcast is headquartered in Philadelphia, and owns In Demand, the company that provides MLB Extra Innings on cable.

Specter's ability to strike fear in the NFL or MLB has lessened since November. Specter was the Senate Judiciary Chairman, but with control of Congress shifting to the Democrats this month, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) takes control as chairman of the committee. While Specter is no longer chair, however, he still wields considerable power in Congress, and Leahy hasn't exactly been in MLB’s corner in the past. Leahy helped narrow the scope of baseball's antitrust exemption during the 2002 Congressional hearings on the exemption, saying in his opening statement at the time,

Between the narrowness of the way the Supreme Court had perpetuated baseball’s antitrust exemption-- only as it applied to labor-management relations-- and our work in the Congress, in which we struck the last remaining remnant of the judicially-created exception to the applicability of the antitrust laws, it seems that there is no longer any basis to contend that a general, free-floating baseball antitrust exemption somehow continues to exist.
As for DirecTV itself, the company has other ties to MLB than just a possible exclusive agreement for Extra Innings.

On December 22nd, Rupert Murdoch agreed to sell his control of DirecTV to Liberty Media in exchange for the $11 billion stake that Liberty Media had in News Corp. With that, Liberty gets control of three regional sports networks (RSNs), including Fox SportsNet Pittsburgh, Fox SportsNet Northwest, and Fox SportsNet Rocky Mountain. But the ties to MLB are about to go deeper than that.

As I detailed in late June of last year, the Braves are about to be part of a large and complex stock-swap scheme between Time Warner and Liberty Media. In other words, soon Liberty Media will own the Braves, several RSNs, and DirecTV, the company with which MLB is negotiating the exclusive agreement. (This is on top of DirecTV's deal with the NFL for Sunday Ticket and its deal with NASCAR.)

DirecTV has even approached the NHL about an exclusive deal for out-of-market games. Liberty's influence will soon reach far beyond just MLB: it will suddenly have holdings that stretch across a vast array of professional sports in terms of owning a franchise outright and controlling a large system of broadcasting outlets.

All of this sets up an interesting and possibly volatile situation with Congress, and a new and suddenly powerful force in MLB's ranks. An exclusive DirecTV deal with MLB will place the sport in the sights of Congress yet again. If the deal goes forward, it will be one more example of consumer restriction. There is already ill-will amongst those caught up in the convoluted blackout policy as it pertains to out-of-market broadcasts. There were approximately 750,000 subscribers to MLB Extra Innings last season. How do you think fans will react when they find out that not only are they caught in the "Blackout Blues," but that many will also have to jump from cable to DirecTV for that dubious privilege? One might surmise that there will be fewer subscribers this year than last.

If you've been watching Extra Innings on cable, you'll need to hold off until you see whether this deal goes the DirecTV route. You may have to start finding a nice place to mount that dish on your house.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 16 January 2007 22:32 (nineteen years ago)

this is a terrible idea

― maura (maura), Wednesday, 17 January 2007 04:57 (nineteen years ago)

I would love to see the entire org. of MLB pretty much smashed to smithereens, actually. It's so bizarre that in America, free-marketeer ideologue capital of the world, pro sports are allowed to operate like mafias. Let each team be independent, let the teams rise and fall as they will. Have an overarching org. that sets schedules, makes rules and little else.

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Wednesday, 17 January 2007 18:49 (nineteen years ago)

this seems as good a place to ask as any. tracer, how much baseball do you get to see in the uk? do you use mlb.tv? what about NASN -- is that anything?

― m@p (plosive), Wednesday, 17 January 2007 20:22 (nineteen years ago)

I do have DirecTV (in a TimeWarner-free nabe), but this sucks.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 17 January 2007 21:01 (nineteen years ago)

What Morb said.

― David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 17 January 2007 21:05 (nineteen years ago)

i was planning on resubscribing to extra innings this season, too, but my building doesn't allow satellite dishes. so much for funneling money back to my old company!

honestly, though, this wouldn't be the first terrible business decision they've made in the past couple of years (coughrehearsalsd0tc0mcough).

― maura (maura), Thursday, 18 January 2007 03:38 (nineteen years ago)

any news about that korean pirate satellite feed channel?

― Steve Shasta (Steve Shasta), Thursday, 18 January 2007 04:12 (nineteen years ago)

I think you need a PC for that, no idea if it still exists.

m@p, I use MLB.tv. So no blackout restrictions, happily, for us internationalists.

NASN is good but the only way to get it is through... Sky! (The Murdoch-owned UK grandaddy of DirecTV)

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Thursday, 18 January 2007 13:14 (nineteen years ago)

booooo.

i'm pretty psyched to get mlb.tv actually! i survived this last season w/o cable so it'll probably feel like an upgrade.

― m@p (plosive), Thursday, 18 January 2007 20:01 (nineteen years ago)

Last year, I didn't have Extra Innings, and my fantasy teams suffered as a result. Not this year, tho! OH YEAH

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 18 January 2007 20:05 (nineteen years ago)

Ya, it was Extra Innings' fault!

― Thermo Thinwall (Thermo Thinwall), Thursday, 18 January 2007 20:37 (nineteen years ago)

It sure as hell wasn't mine!

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 18 January 2007 20:42 (nineteen years ago)

mlb.tv = "local" team blacked out = no Braves for me. Fuck an mlb.tv.

― do i have to draw you a diaphragm (Rock Hardy), Thursday, 18 January 2007 21:28 (nineteen years ago)

Why would you want to watch the Braves, anyway, now that they traded away burgeoning superstar Adam LaRoche?

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 18 January 2007 21:42 (nineteen years ago)

To echo Tracer, mlb.tv is a godsend for those of us overseas. Actually one of the things mlb has done right in recent years. Affordable, (pretty) reliable, and the new mosaic thing is fantastic.

― g00blar (gooblar), Thursday, 18 January 2007 21:53 (nineteen years ago)

Dude, Rochey was 5th in slugging! Seriously tho, blackout rules make me bleed with rage from the eyes. I live TWO STATES AWAY, I'm not going to go to the game if you cockblock my internets, MLB!

― do i have to draw you a diaphragm (Rock Hardy), Thursday, 18 January 2007 22:41 (nineteen years ago)

what's mosaic?

― m@p (plosive), Thursday, 18 January 2007 22:51 (nineteen years ago)

you can do split screens to watch 2/4/8(?) games at once.

― Steve Shasta (Steve Shasta), Thursday, 18 January 2007 22:52 (nineteen years ago)

― m@p (plosive), Thursday, 18 January 2007 22:53 (nineteen years ago)

does the whole thing stream in flash, as the site implies?

― m@p (plosive), Thursday, 18 January 2007 22:54 (nineteen years ago)

This is another bad baseball move. DirecTV offered 100 million per year verses InDemand (current company) who tripled what they were paying to 70 million per year.

I already get DirecTV so this actually has no effect, as I will renew again this year.

― Bee OK (boo radley), Sunday, 21 January 2007 13:24 (nineteen years ago)

THis is how Murdoch built his UK TV empire: get exclusive content that you have to sign up with Sky for. It was two things that built Sky: Premiereship football, and the Simpsons.

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 22 January 2007 17:29 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5820

Sheehan basically argues that this is a good business decision for baseball.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 22 January 2007 19:48 (nineteen years ago)

For you non-subscribers, the end of that:

When you break it down, this decision is clearly the right one for MLB. They make more money up front. The people it affects negatively have a series of options, albeit aggravating or inferior ones, and their pursuit of those options is likely to create additional revenue. The far-left-end users who will be hurt by DirecTV’s exclusivity are going to be the most vocal about their unhappiness, but at the same time, they are the ones least likely to be completely turned off of baseball.

Make no mistake: this is a fairly fan-hostile decision. However, MLB has proven that it will alienate a segment of the population in the short term to make more money in any term. This is comparable to the way in which teams have rushed to move their telecasts to new channels that they own. By doing so, they’ve instigated public pressure on cable companies to add that channel to their lineups, even when said channel has just three hours of valuable programming a day.

DirecTV is essentially going to be calling the same play. They will not only get a boost in dish ownership and subscriptions to EI, but there should be some benefit in the resulting demand for dish penetration in areas where regulations have kept the units out, a move likely to be led by…disenfranchised baseball fanatics.

...This is a pretty good move for MLB across the board, with more hidden benefits than hidden costs. I sure hope I get to use channels 734-748 this year, but if I can’t, I’m not going to be able to argue against the deal with anything but self-interest.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 22 January 2007 20:59 (nineteen years ago)

So he's saying that if you like watching baseball but don't feel like changing TV providers and/or petitioning your city council, you're a "far-left-end" weirdo? Huh.

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 22 January 2007 22:05 (nineteen years ago)

He's saying that even offending the small % of EI subscribers is worth the money because really what are those people going to do? Stop watching baseball? No.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 22 January 2007 22:55 (nineteen years ago)

And "far-left-end users" because subscribers to EI are already SUPERFANS. (only the most fanatic and committed of baseball fans will subscribe to EI--this is the segment of your fanbase you have to worry the least about losing)

― g00blar (gooblar), Tuesday, 23 January 2007 11:43 (nineteen years ago)

well i am still not happy with it. apparently mlb wants me to move out of my no-satellites-allowed apartment in order to funnel them more cash. and i know that i'm not the only city-dweller who is in this particular predicament.

― maura (maura), Tuesday, 23 January 2007 14:18 (nineteen years ago)

I'm totally on-the-fence about ordering EI for the first time this year even if I stay in my current apartment, cuz I really don't think I'd watch many games unless I become a virtual shut-in.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 23 January 2007 14:53 (nineteen years ago)

more discussion on Maury Brown's board here:

http://bizofbaseball.17.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=66

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 29 January 2007 19:54 (nineteen years ago)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A proposal to make Major League Baseball's ''Extra Innings'' exclusive to DirecTV has drawn the ire of Sen. John Kerry.

The Massachusetts Democrat said he plans to raise the matter with the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission at a hearing Thursday.

''I am opposed to anything that deprives people of reasonable choices,'' Kerry said in a statement. ''In this day and age, consumers should have more choices -- not fewer. I'd like to know how this serves the public -- a deal that will force fans to subscribe to DirecTV in order to tune in to their favorite players. A Red Sox fan ought to be able to watch their team without having to switch to DirecTV.''

''Extra Innings'' is a service that allows viewers to watch games involving teams not in their local markets. In past years, the service has been available through a range of providers, but a pending deal would make the service only available to DirecTV subscribers.

FCC Chairman Kevin Martin is a scheduled witness at Thursday's hearing of the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 1 February 2007 14:43 (nineteen years ago)

Well, most Red Sox fans in NE already have to pay to see ANY Red Sox games on TV. And I doubt you're going to get any sympathy from non-Massholes by using the Red Sox as an example, Johnny Boy. Never mind the "Manny Ortiz" kerfuffle from his fairy-tale presidential bid.

Can we have Rudy G, or Strom Thurmond, or anyone besides JK speak up against this?

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 1 February 2007 14:53 (nineteen years ago)

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 1 February 2007 14:58 (nineteen years ago)

Once John Kerry speaks up about an injustice it's pretty much assured that nothing will come of it.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Thursday, 1 February 2007 16:22 (nineteen years ago)

... wanna buy some wood?

― David R. (popshots75`), Thursday, 1 February 2007 16:30 (nineteen years ago)

The Office of the Commissioner of Baseball
245 Park Avenue, 31st Floor
New York, NY 10167
(212) 931-7800

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 1 February 2007 21:42 (nineteen years ago)

one month passes...

MLB might actually do something right:

Full CNN story

Baseball could get more money if it drops plan to let DirecTV have exclusive deal to sell out-of-market games to hard-core fans.

A weekly column by Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer

February 27 2007: 6:37 AM EST

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Long-distance relationships may not work for romances. But it's a different story for sports fans.

Professional sports leagues are tapping into the interest that many fans have for their favorite team even after they've moved far from home. It is quickly becoming one of the fastest-growing sources of revenue for the leagues...and one of the more controversial.

While local and national broadcast sports rights fees are showing only solid gains, if that, the leagues are seeing the rights fees for out-of-market games soar. Some fans pay a couple of hundred dollars a year to watch games not available in their home market.

Such packages seem to be a small price to pay for Boston fans far from Red Sox Nation or Packers fans in warmer climates. So it's not surprising that cable and satellite television providers have been fighting for the packages as a way of attracting customers.

Major League Baseball is close to selling the rights to its "Extra Innings" package of out-of-market games for $100 million a year -- or more. That's more than triple the $30 million or so a year that sources said baseball got in its last Extra Innings deal.

When the NFL renewed its exclusive package for Sunday Ticket with DirecTV in late 2002, it got $400 million a year, up from $130 million a year previously, according to trade publication Sports Business Daily. And DirecTV agreed to pay $700 million a year for the Sunday Ticket rights when the contract was renewed again after the 2005 season, according to the publication, according to the publication. More than 2 million fans had that package last year, according to an estimate from Kagan Research.

The controversy comes because DirecTV is trying to get an exclusive contract to carry the MLB package, as it already has with the NFL. That has raised criticism and threats of legislative action by Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., along with a statement by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin that he is also concerned with the expected change.

One source familiar with negotiations said he now believes that the Extra Innings package will remain available to all three services.

"I'd be surprised if the DirecTV deal goes through," he said.

The key isn't likely to revolve around more money, but an agreement by the cable operators to provide broader carriage for a Baseball Network which MLB intends to start operating in 2009.

DirecTV had been willing to let all 15 million of its subscribers have the new Baseball Network right from the start, as well as helping with some of the start-up costs, according to multiple sources. It isn't willing to be as helpful to MLB's upstart network if it doesn't gain the advantage of an exclusive deal on Extra Innings, though.

But after initially rebuffing the MLB demands for carriage of the Baseball Network, the cable operators are now coming around, according to the industry source.

"There will be a commitment to carry the Baseball Network (on cable)," said the industry official. "Where it will be placed, that still needs to be sorted out."

Another source with the league said he was not aware of any shift away from plans to go with an exclusive deal for DirecTV. But talks have lingered for months without an official announcement even as baseball's opening day draws near.

The motivation for the exclusive deal has been reported -- incorrectly -- as baseball's desire to get the top rights fee for the Extra Innings package.

The big cable companies, which collectively own a service called In Demand that airs the Extra Innings games, were reportedly willing to pay $70 million a year for a non-exclusive deal. (Sources familiar with the negotiations said cable reps went back to MLB about a week ago and offered to match the financials of DirecTV’s bid but without the requirement of exclusivity.)

And while DirecTV won't offer $100 million for a non-exclusive deal, it seems safe to say that it and the Dish Network, along with the telephone companies that are making their own push to provide television service, would easily pay more than $30 million combined for non-exclusive deals.

© 2007 Cable News Network

― Bee OK, Thursday, 1 March 2007 09:58 (eighteen years ago)

"As for this deal, what fascinates me is I have spent a lot of time going over it and trying to find out who can't get [DirecTV]. We're down now to such small numbers, that I'm really wondering [about the fuss].
...In a year or two, when people understand the significance of this deal… everybody will understand it."

--MLB commissioner Bud Selig on the Extra Innings deal.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5932

― Dr Morbius, Monday, 5 March 2007 18:09 (eighteen years ago)

bud selig, misunderstood visionary

― maura, Monday, 5 March 2007 18:11 (eighteen years ago)

bud selig, never lived in an apartment or condo

― David R., Monday, 5 March 2007 19:01 (eighteen years ago)

deal is done:

Baseball TV deal goes through, with a twist

League gives DirecTV Extra Innings package and others a chance to match deal. But cable and Dish Network balk at requirements.

By Larry Stewart, Times Staff Writer

March 9, 2007

The long-anticipated announcement by Major League Baseball to shift its Extra Innings pay package to DirecTV came Thursday — but with a twist that one high-ranking cable executive called a "sham."

MLB President Bob DuPuy said the seven-year agreement with DirecTV — first reported in January as an exclusive deal — includes a new provision that would allow the package to remain on cable television and Dish Network if certain criteria are met. But the window to negotiate closes April 1.

It was DirecTV's exclusivity that triggered fan protests and led to an inquiry by the Federal Communications Commission.

While financial terms of the deal were not disclosed Thursday, it was believed that DirecTV, which has 15 million subscribers, had agreed to pay $100 million a year — if it retained exclusivity.

Until now, Extra Innings offered up to 60 regular-season, out-of-market games a week on cable, through the In Demand service, as well as on DirecTV and Dish Network.

"In response to the concerns of our fans," DuPuy said, "baseball has negotiated with DirecTV to offer the package to incumbents In Demand and Dish, through the end of the month, until the start of the season on April 1. If they sign up at the same rates and carriage requirements [as DirecTV], they will get our out-of-market package and they will get the Baseball Channel."

The Baseball Channel, which MLB plans to launch in 2009 with DirecTV as a minority partner, has been the key to the months-long talks. MLB wants cable to agree to carry the channel on a basic tier, not a premium tier.

Industry sources indicated that would never happen.

"Everyone sees this as the sham that it is," the high-ranking source said.

Time Warner, the nation's largest cable provider, has 50 million subscribers. A carriage agreement equal to DirecTV's would require it to distribute the Baseball Channel on a basic tier and, the source said, subscribers could end up paying whether they watched or not.

"You'd be asking 50 million people to pay, say, $2.50 a month so that 200,000 could get Extra Innings," the source said. "That's not going to happen."

EchoStar, which owns Dish Network, echoed that in a statement Thursday: "DirecTV and MLB, as owners of the package, should not be able to line their pockets at the expense of consumers who don't want and won't watch [baseball] content."

In Demand President and Chief Executive Robert Jacobson said: "Major League Baseball has chosen to cut a de facto exclusive deal, which include conditions for carriage that MLB and DirecTV designed to be impossible for cable and Dish to meet," he said. "This decision represents the height of disrespect and disregard for their loyal baseball fans."

It was the protests by fans that drew the attention of Congress and Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), who last month asked the FCC to investigate. He also has asked the Senate Commerce Committee, of which he is a member, to hold a hearing on the matter.

On Thursday, Kerry said, "I will review this deal to ensure it benefits consumers."

Asked whether the provision that gives cable a window to keep negotiating would satisfy federal scrutiny, DuPuy said, "Yes, we hope it will completely alleviate concerns in Washington."

― Bee OK, Friday, 9 March 2007 21:23 (eighteen years ago)

Here is the scoop (posted on another board):

Last year I paid DirecTV $179 for the year ($44.75 in four payments) for MLB Extra Innings.

They are trying to get new people to sign up so they have a special on their web site for $159 per year (good until April 7, 2007). They said that $159 is discounted from their regular price for 2007 at $199 per year.

They have also added some second package called Super Fan for like $39 more per year...

― Bee OK, Sunday, 11 March 2007 04:42 (eighteen years ago)

three weeks pass...

Major League Baseball announced today that iN DEMAND has entered into a seven-year agreement in principle to carry the MLB EXTRA INNINGS subscription package of out-of-market games and will distribute the MLB Channel, which is scheduled to launch in January 2009.

The MLB EXTRA INNINGS subscription package of out-of-market games is currently available to DIRECTV subscribers. iN DEMAND owners Comcast, Cox Communications and Time Warner Cable have agreed to carry the package, effective immediately. iN DEMAND also will offer to make the MLB Extra Innings subscription package available to other cable companies across the U.S. Like all distributors of MLB Extra Innings, these cable operators would also be required to carry the MLB Channel once it is launched.

― maura, Thursday, 5 April 2007 00:58 (eighteen years ago)

40 million means it has more subscribers than the NFL Network. Baseball just hit the jackpot. They knew what they were doing, stood their ground and made the best possible deal (with a lot of luck) for MLB.

― Bee OK, Thursday, 5 April 2007 05:35 (eighteen years ago)

I didn't see that coming. Beelzebud, GENIUS!

― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 5 April 2007 14:02 (eighteen years ago)

The DirecTV version of Extra Innings is ridiculous. Through my fancy DTV box, I can call up boxscores UPDATED LIVEish, watch 8 games @ once (in teeny tiny screens), buy overpriced beer, send nasty IMs to Rex Hudler - it's awesome, baby!

― David R., Thursday, 5 April 2007 14:44 (eighteen years ago)

Just called my (local, non-monolithic) cable co. and they're not offering Extra Innings this year. :-((( But I wouldn't be surprised if that changed within the next few days.

― Rock Hardy, Thursday, 5 April 2007 15:11 (eighteen years ago)

wait, DR, you can't select one of those minis to watch fullscreen? What are all those MLB channels doing on my menu? (not that I'm ordering this b4 midseason)

― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 5 April 2007 15:17 (eighteen years ago)

Oh, yeah, you can. That 8-in-1 channel is like a control room - you can select which one you want to listen to (while keeping all 8 mini boxes on the screen), or jump to the game in question to get it all up in yr stuff.

― David R., Thursday, 5 April 2007 15:24 (eighteen years ago)

oh I see -- "ridiculous" the way Stuart Scott uses it.

― Dr Morbius, Thursday, 5 April 2007 15:49 (eighteen years ago)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/05/sports/baseball/05direct.html

M.L.B. and InDemand — a consortium that is owned by the cable operators Comcast, Time Warner and Cox — agreed last night to restore Extra Innings swiftly to their systems as a free preview through sometime next week, after which it will cost a discounted M.L.B. and InDemand — a consortium that is owned by the cable operators Comcast, Time Warner and Cox — agreed last night to restore Extra Innings swiftly to their systems as a free preview through sometime next week, after which it will cost a discounted $159 for a short period.59 for a short period.

forgive my ignorance here, but is there any chance I can watch a "free preview" of today's 2pm Red Sox game? I can't find the MLB channels in the high hundreds (I'm on Time Warner).

― sanskrit, Thursday, 5 April 2007 15:53 (eighteen years ago)

god forbid i'd have to go to the Riviera in the West Village to see this debut..

― sanskrit, Thursday, 5 April 2007 15:54 (eighteen years ago)

Just called my (local, non-monolithic) cable co.

It wasn't Cablevision by any chance, was it?

― mattbot, Thursday, 5 April 2007 16:12 (eighteen years ago)

mlb channels on time warner are shared with the nhl channels. today's games are on channels 437-442, with boston-kc seeming to be on 440

― maura, Thursday, 5 April 2007 16:24 (eighteen years ago)

er, 437-444. sorry

― maura, Thursday, 5 April 2007 16:25 (eighteen years ago)

mattbot -- no it's Vista III Media, super-small, super-local.

― Rock Hardy, Thursday, 5 April 2007 16:28 (eighteen years ago)

it works! maura, i kiss you

― sanskrit, Thursday, 5 April 2007 18:19 (eighteen years ago)

I spent big chunks of Sat night & Sunday watching free EI preview. I'd be in big trouble if I had it all year.

― Dr Morbius, Monday, 9 April 2007 14:38 (eighteen years ago)

I had bouts of withdrawal-related convulsions Sunday morning and this morning, yeah.

― Andy K, Monday, 9 April 2007 14:52 (eighteen years ago)

it was on Sunday here!

― Dr Morbius, Monday, 9 April 2007 15:42 (eighteen years ago)

i watched the San Diego feed of the Giants games for the last three days on DirecTV. apparently Padres and Phillies games are now available through MLB Extra Innings.

― Bee OK, Thursday, 12 April 2007 06:11 (eighteen years ago)

Um, all games are, I thought? Tho I never noticed if certain feeds weren't available.

― David R., Thursday, 12 April 2007 14:06 (eighteen years ago)

phillies games have notoriously not been available on extra innings, which led to some, uh, creative acquisition strategies around the mlb.com offices. (i never really noticed about the padres, i have to say.) but i guess comcast and mlb renegotiated their deal.

― maura, Friday, 13 April 2007 13:12 (eighteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.