WGN-TV about to lose Cubs games

[dickallen15]

Originally Posted by Hitmen77

I'm guessing that the Cubs will still have games on WGN-TV after 2014. All they did hear was exercise their option on their contract. They'll probably be back at a higher fee for WGN.

The Cubs have a deal with CSN until 2019, but I wouldn't be surprised if they end their partnership with CSN and the other Chicago teams after that to start their own cable network.



MLB.TV isn't just for computers. If you have a streaming device like a Roku, you can stream games to your TV in HD quality. The last two years, I got MLB.TV starting around mid-June through the rest of the season for $50 for the remainder of those seasons.

I agree. This is like threatening to move out of Wrigleyville. Where else are they going to go? They will get more money, but I can't see them leaving WGN. They could create their own station, but that requires a ton of money and they would have a ridiculous amount of programming to fill. Ask Oprah about starting your own network.

[doublem23]

Originally Posted by Moses_Scurry

For me, the solution is not putting more games on WGN. It's removing or at least revising the blackout restrictions so that I can get the games on EI or MLB.TV if I want. It pisses me off every season. I don't care as much when the team sucks, but in 2005, 2006, 2008, etc, I was forced to listen to games on my XM radio setup. It sucked.

I agree 100% but that's more of an MLB-level decision, I don't know whether or not the Sox support the blackout, but I do know they don't have the power to change their blackout market.

[Steelrod]

The current Cubs management is 100% about profit. In the Epstein regime, they are among the most profitable in baseball. They continue to reduce payroll and invest in income producing projects in Chicago and Mesa. Selling their tv rights and taking them off the air, will be the next step. The Sox did this 30 years ago and were crucified for it! They have dismantled the Cubs look and image in just 3 years!

[doublem23]

Originally Posted by Steelrod

They have dismantled the Cubs look and image in just 3 years!

FWIW, we are talking about a team whose look and image for the past century has been one of "Lovable Losers." It's not like the Ricketts walked into the Bronx and tried to rebrand the Yankees.

[SephClone89]

Originally Posted by Steelrod

The current Cubs management is 100% about profit. In the Epstein regime, they are among the most profitable in baseball. They continue to reduce payroll and invest in income producing projects in Chicago and Mesa. Selling their tv rights and taking them off the air, will be the next step. The Sox did this 30 years ago and were crucified for it! They have dismantled the Cubs look and image in just 3 years!

Slightly different situation.

[SoxandtheCityTee]

To anyone who knows, how do these team-owned networks like YES fill up their content when they don't have ball games to air? Is it all re-runs of sports events they own the rights to, or what? I've wondered that. If you have to go buy or license or create content beyond the ball games, that would seem to eat into the profits, yet you always hear that these networks are hugely profitable to the team.

[asindc]

Originally Posted by SoxandtheCityTee

To anyone who knows, how do these team-owned networks like YES fill up their content when they don't have ball games to air? Is it all re-runs of sports events they own the rights to, or what? I've wondered that. If you have to go buy or license or create content beyond the ball games, that would seem to eat into the profits, yet you always hear that these networks are hugely profitable to the team.

In this area, MASN airs almost all the local teams aside from the 'skins. They also air college sports, both local and national, and have local sports talk shows. I know YES does the same, and adds the Italian Serie A to their lineup as well.

[Steelrod]

Originally Posted by doublem23

FWIW, we are talking about a team whose look and image for the past century has been one of "Lovable Losers." It's not like the Ricketts walked into the Bronx and tried to rebrand the Yankees.

You are right. They are changing from lovable to profit before anything. I think their model is the Padres!

[Noneck]

Originally Posted by Steelrod

The current Cubs management is 100% about profit.

That holds true for the vast majority of Mlb franchises including the Sox.

[DSpivack]

Originally Posted by Noneck

That holds true for the vast majority of Mlb franchises including the Sox.

I don't even know if it's true, either.

It definitely seemed true about Sam Zell, but the Ricketts family strikes me more as fans who are in over their head and think they have more business sense than they actually do.

[TDog]

Originally Posted by Noneck

That holds true for the vast majority of Mlb franchises including the Sox.

If you believe that, I believe you're missing Steelrod's point.

Obviously, most owners of sports franchises, investors in sports franchises hope to make a profit, but I'm sure there are years without dividends. The White Sox haven't placed profit above efforts to field a completive team, as the Cubs could be accused of doing. Maybe you build a winner by trading for young talent. Maybe you get fans excited about the future that young talent promises, which most often goes unfulfilled when teams trade for young talent. But I don't know that the motivation is building a winner so much as maximizing profit, which also happens when you trade for young talent.

If the White Sox were all about profit, they wouldn't have signed Dunn. It didn't increase ticket sales, even before fans came to think of him as a bust. I don't know that signing Abreu has been a profitable move, although if he fulfills his promise, the team will be more profitable. There have been some bad baseball decisions, but every team that tries to be competitive makes some bad business decisions.

You can be cynical about White Sox management and about the lack of a competitive team on the field, but if the White Sox were only about profit, they could have lost 99 games with a much smaller payroll.

[DickAllen72]

Originally Posted by doublem23

While we're at it, maybe the team can drop the price of tickets to $1 for every seat, force every other team to trade us their best players, and have Free Beer Night 7 days a week.

Hmmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

[DSpivack]

Originally Posted by TDog

If you believe that, I believe you're missing Steelrod's point.

Obviously, most owners of sports franchises, investors in sports franchises hope to make a profit, but I'm sure there are years without dividends. The White Sox haven't placed profit above efforts to field a completive team, as the Cubs could be accused of doing. Maybe you build a winner by trading for young talent. Maybe you get fans excited about the future that young talent promises, which most often goes unfulfilled when teams trade for young talent. But I don't know that the motivation is building a winner so much as maximizing profit, which also happens when you trade for young talent.

If the White Sox were all about profit, they wouldn't have signed Dunn. It didn't increase ticket sales, even before fans came to think of him as a bust. I don't know that signing Abreu has been a profitable move, although if he fulfills his promise, the team will be more profitable. There have been some bad baseball decisions, but every team that tries to be competitive makes some bad business decisions.

You can be cynical about White Sox management and about the lack of a competitive team on the field, but if the White Sox were only about profit, they could have lost 99 games with a much smaller payroll.

If anything, I think White Sox management has been rather penny wise and dollar foolish in the last decade or so by not spending money on the draft and amateur talent. Trading for established veterans and signing free agents seems a more expensive tactic in the end.

[TDog]

Originally Posted by DSpivack

If anything, I think White Sox management has been rather penny wise and dollar foolish in the last decade or so by not spending money on the draft and amateur talent. Trading for established veterans and signing free agents seems a more expensive tactic in the end.

You could certainly make that argument and likely defend it. But finding fault with the White Sox for bad baseball decisions that turned out to be bad business decisions would be inconsistent with finding them "100 percent about profit."

[WhiteSox5187]

Originally Posted by DSpivack

If anything, I think White Sox management has been rather penny wise and dollar foolish in the last decade or so by not spending money on the draft and amateur talent. Trading for established veterans and signing free agents seems a more expensive tactic in the end.

That has been a hallmark of the White Sox for pretty much the entirety of JR's tenure.