inDemand matches DIRECTV IE's offer

[TheScooter]

Baseball's "Extra Innings" package of out-of-market games might wind up staying on cable television.

IN Demand said Wednesday it will offer to match the terms of DirecTV's $700 million, seven-year deal with Major League Baseball on behalf its owners, who are affiliates of the companies that own Time Warner, Comcast and Cox cable systems.

As part of the offer, iN Demand also said it would carry The Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009 to at least the same number of subscribers who will get the channel on DirecTV.

"As the current home for 'Extra Innings' for more than 200,000 cable subscribers, we have extended ourselves to do our best to be able to continue to provide this package to baseball fans and our customers," iN Demand president Robert Jacobson said.

"This offer meets all the conditions set forth by MLB last week. "

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ra.innings.ap/

[Jasbro]

I think the success of this will depend upon whether or not the offer includes carrying the Baseball Network on basic cable. If it will be carried as part of a premium package, MLB will not accept the offer, IMO.

[Tribefan]

Baseball's "Extra Innings" package of out-of-market games might wind up staying on cable television.

IN Demand said Wednesday it will offer to match the terms of DirecTV's $700 million, seven-year deal with Major League Baseball on behalf its owners, who are affiliates of the companies that own Time Warner, Comcast and Cox cable systems.

As part of the offer, iN Demand also said it would carry The Baseball Channel when it launches in 2009 to at least the same number of subscribers who will get the channel on DirecTV.

"As the current home for 'Extra Innings' for more than 200,000 cable subscribers, we have extended ourselves to do our best to be able to continue to provide this package to baseball fans and our customers," iN Demand president Robert Jacobson said.

"This offer meets all the conditions set forth by MLB last week. "

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ra.innings.ap/

This is outstanding news. Gotta believe MLB didn't think the cable companies would agree to their offer. If this works out, hopefully my cable company will offer the package and I'll be a happy baseball fan again (a tad poorer but happy).

[gold23]

MLB is going to try to wiggle out of this. DTV cannot be very happy right now. We'll see...but let's hope the consumer wins this one, and are "allowed" to spend their $159 to see MLB.

[Tribefan]

MLB is going to try to wiggle out of this. DTV cannot be very happy right now. We'll see...but let's hope the consumer wins this one, and are "allowed" to spend their $159 to see MLB.

I hear ya. I can't believe I'm that happy about forking over $159 (or whatever the cost will be) to MLB's pockets...but I will...

[Yankeeah]

How does this affect those with iO Cablevision?

[knickfan23]

How does this affect those with iO Cablevision?

In Demand works with them too. You will get the games as long as MLB approves of cable matching the deal that MLB has with DTV.

--

If MLB chooses to accept, they would have made out like bandits. They would have gotten around a billion dollars out of the cable and satellite companies. Gotten their MLB network broad distribution. And still kept most. if not all of their current subscribers. Tremendous work by those guys. That's one of the best shakedowns I've seen since the NFL took the networks to the cleaners after the 05 season.

[ojo]

it'll be interesting to see how many people will be stuck paying $$ to see the baseball network on digital cable, since there are probably at least twice as many digital cable subscribers as there are satellite owners. them announcing they'll 'match' the # of satellite's subscribers seems to allow them to screw some areas over completely.

[Tribefan]

I just read on ESPN.com that MLB rejected the INdemand offer, saying it falls short of what is needed for a deal...I think MLB never had any intention of having the Extra Innings package shown on cable and they are trying wiggle out of inDemand's offer. I'm back to hating baseball again...

[whalers]

I just read on ESPN.com that MLB rejected the INdemand offer, saying it falls short of what is needed for a deal...I think MLB never had any intention of having the Extra Innings package shown on cable and they are trying wiggle out of inDemand's offer. I'm back to hating baseball again...

same here. WTF

[gold23]

same here. WTF

Directv exploded at MLB today. There are going to be some issues, and apparently IN Demand did fall short of the proposal sent out by MLB. However, they fell short in legal terms, but from a fair business practive standpoint it apparently worked.

Essentially, this was a Congress play. By the law, MLB is on solid ground in terms of what they asked for and how they turned it down. However....it MAY give the government an opening if they decide to take it. A big IF....but at least a sliver of hope for baseball fans.

[Workhorse]

Directv exploded at MLB today. There are going to be some issues, and apparently IN Demand did fall short of the proposal sent out by MLB. However, they fell short in legal terms, but from a fair business practive standpoint it apparently worked.

Essentially, this was a Congress play. By the law, MLB is on solid ground in terms of what they asked for and how they turned it down. However....it MAY give the government an opening if they decide to take it. A big IF....but at least a sliver of hope for baseball fans.

MLB gets a HUGE black eye if a bunch of legalese prevents EI from being on cable as a result of all this. They are being penny wise and pound foolish here.

[DontHateOnNumber2]

I think the success of this will depend upon whether or not the offer includes carrying the Baseball Network on basic cable. If it will be carried as part of a premium package, MLB will not accept the offer, IMO.

NBA TV isn't part of the premium package with the cable companies over here so maybe the same will be done for the MLB channel. So this also might mean I'm getting Extra Innings this season and possibly in the future? I'm trying not to get my hopes up for this, but this is certainly better than the stuff I was reading about MLB EI last week.

[DontHateOnNumber2]

Directv exploded at MLB today. There are going to be some issues, and apparently IN Demand did fall short of the proposal sent out by MLB. However, they fell short in legal terms, but from a fair business practive standpoint it apparently worked.

Essentially, this was a Congress play. By the law, MLB is on solid ground in terms of what they asked for and how they turned it down. However....it MAY give the government an opening if they decide to take it. A big IF....but at least a sliver of hope for baseball fans.

As seen from a post down there, I didn't get this far. I now am pissed at Selig and Co. again and am greatly hoping that the Congress (even if it's not that big of a deal) is able to coax MLB into allowing digital cable companies to carry Extra Innings. They'd make crazy cash if they did it, it's just right for them to do.

[Octoberbaby]

I just read on ESPN.com that MLB rejected the INdemand offer, saying it falls short of what is needed for a deal...I think MLB never had any intention of having the Extra Innings package shown on cable and they are trying wiggle out of inDemand's offer. I'm back to hating baseball again...

It didn't take long to start hating them again did it? I got my hopes up again for about 5 minutes. Something is rotton in this deal!

[Stupid Flanders]

Pretty soon this package is going to cost $300 (my bad, $299) per year. It just keeps going up

[Tribefan]

It didn't take long to start hating them again did it? I got my hopes up again for about 5 minutes. Something is rotton in this deal!

Not long at all. I did too--I had about 5 friends e-mail me the "good news" yesterday in a span of about a half hour. You'd think MLB would want as many people as possible to have access to their games...instead they expect people to drop their cable, sign a contract for DirecTV (which I don't have access to anyway) and pay more money...

[ojo]

anybody care to venture why cable is unwilling to truly match directv's offer of placing the baseball channel on the basic tier for all subscribers?

[YankeePride1967]

anybody care to venture why cable is unwilling to truly match directv's offer of placing the baseball channel on the basic tier for all subscribers?

A good guess is that it isn't economically desirable for them.

[Chuck_IV]

MLB gets a HUGE black eye if a bunch of legalese prevents EI from being on cable as a result of all this. They are being penny wise and pound foolish here.

Which is exactly(IMO) what In-Demand was trying to do. This was nothing more than a spin by In-Demand. They "say" they are gonna match, but in reality, they didn't and they knew it. However, by MLB rejecting a "close" offer, they(MLB) look even more like an evil empire and will probably garner even more wrath from the government.

For those saying MLB doesn't want this on cable, I say, to the contrary. MLB is looking to get MORE coverage of their product(and more money) and they have found a carrier(Directv) that will do it. This gives MLB more leverage in trying to squeeze thier MLB channel and other things onto other carrier's systems.

[Octoberbaby]

Not long at all. I did too--I had about 5 friends e-mail me the "good news" yesterday in a span of about a half hour. You'd think MLB would want as many people as possible to have access to their games...instead they expect people to drop their cable, sign a contract for DirecTV (which I don't have access to anyway) and pay more money...

There just is no logic to it. They do not realize how many people they are p*ssing off. Nor do they care. How stupid is it of them to think that people can just switch over to DirectTV. I can't either because I live in an apartment and have no terrace. I am sure there are a lot who are in the same boat as me but they are just discounting these people outright.

[Octoberbaby]

Which is exactly(IMO) what In-Demand was trying to do. This was nothing more than a spin by In-Demand. They "say" they are gonna match, but in reality, they didn't and they knew it. However, by MLB rejecting a "close" offer, they(MLB) look even more like an evil empire and will probably garner even more wrath from the government.

For those saying MLB doesn't want this on cable, I say, to the contrary. MLB is looking to get MORE coverage of their product(and more money) and they have found a carrier(Directv) that will do it. This gives MLB more leverage in trying to squeeze thier MLB channel and other things onto other carrier's systems.

The cable companies are making money hand over fist. They couldn't do this if they cared about their customers. There is blame on both sides IMO. Nobody cares anymore about their customers except how to squeeze more money out of them.

[Jerkface]

If any of you read the article, Cable agreed to match the number of subscribers who get the Baseball Channel on directtv. MLB would be doubling their profits and viewership, why turn down the deal?

I am not gonna look it up, but we all know that direct tv has WAY less customers, and I believe for the most part its more expensive already. They can put the baseball channel onto their packages because it already comes with a bunch of channels. Cable on the other hand would have to get 3 providers to find a spot on the basic cable roster(that has like 72 channels) for more than 10 million people.

It is much harder for cable to agree than for directtv, but I still think Cable just cowboy up and get on the bus.

[guyfriday]

Did anyone really think MLB would accept INDemand's offer?

They structured it intentionally so that it would be "unmatchable" by anyone, once again proven that MLB could give a crap about its most loyal fans. It's not the casual fan who cares where the Extra Innings Package is.

I'm pissed because I'm a displaced Yannkee fan. I haven't decided what to do yet.

This site gives a good options rundown: www.screwedbybaseball.com

(Anyone feel like "hosting" a Slingbox for me??)

[RhodeyYankee2638]

Pretty soon this package is going to cost $300 (my bad, $299) per year. It just keeps going up

I got it the first year it came out, and they froze the price for me at $99, been paying that ever since. Too bad we can't get it now