[HN Gopher] Apple and MLS to present all MLS matches for 10 year...
___________________________________________________________________
Apple and MLS to present all MLS matches for 10 years, beginning in
2023
Author : todsacerdoti
Score : 171 points
Date : 2022-06-14 16:05 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.apple.com)
| avgDev wrote:
| This is probably one of the best decision by any TV provider.
|
| MLS is going to blow up in the coming years. There is a lot of
| talk about US national team being very competitive in 2026 World
| Cup. MLS has produced stars already, like Alphonso Davies.
|
| Once the hype gets higher and more money start being spent on
| soccer in the US, it will become a power house.
| kernal wrote:
| >MLS is going to blow up in the coming years.
|
| MLS is a distant 4th or 5th sport in the North America and I
| don't see that ever changing. European soccer (Premier League,
| La Liga, Serie A) will always be the pinnacle of soccer in the
| world. People want to watch the best teams and best players and
| MLS doesn't compare to the caliber of European soccer and never
| will.
| throwaway12245 wrote:
| U.S. Soccer is a joke : that goes for international and MLS.
| Top U.S. club is ranked 122 in the world :
| https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/soccer-predictions/glob...
| U.S. got beat by some central american club and did not qualify
| for world cup last time. MLS is a rigged league. Purported
| local "ownership" is a ruse. MLS management decides who wins
| championship. Real U.S. soccer fans follow top European leagues
| and UEAFA champions league.
| true_religion wrote:
| > U.S. Soccer is a joke
|
| So what? People seem to enjoy the comedy club that is US
| soccer. That's all that matters for Apple which is trying to
| serve its home country and largest market: the US.
|
| I'm sure after some time, if this is successful, they would
| expand to leagues from Latin America, then finally Europe.
| clairity wrote:
| the problem with soccer and rankings is that it suffers from
| wholly inadequate sample sizes, or alternatively, goals are
| too "big", encompassing and compacting too much information,
| to be used for dissecting quality. soccer rankings can't give
| you much indication of relative ability, as chance overwhelms
| quality in rankings.
|
| that's one of the strengths of basketball (and other sports
| to varying degrees), both as a sport and as entertainment.
| games are won and lost on many samples that each count a
| small fraction toward the outcome. any single game's outcome
| can still be swayed by chance, but that's very unlikely for a
| series of games, upon which rankings are based.
| dismantlethesun wrote:
| > U.S. Soccer is a joke
|
| So what? People seem to enjoy the comedy club that is US
| soccer. That's all that matters for Apple which is trying to
| serve its home country and largest market: the US.
|
| I'm sure after some time, if this is successful, they would
| expand to leagues from Latin America, then finally Europe.
| jdminhbg wrote:
| Is there a reason you posted this from two different
| accounts?
| Apocryphon wrote:
| What the heck happened to Man U in those rankings? Did they
| fall precipitously in the last few years or what
| thrill wrote:
| Sir Alex knew "when to fold 'em".
| jl6 wrote:
| Fergexit.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Yes. It has been glorius to watch! YNWA!!!
| jdminhbg wrote:
| Ah yes, the old "oi m8 I watch proper footy down the pub"
| archetype. MLS is "rigged," top Euro leagues like the one
| Bayern has won nine consecutive times are "not."
| HidyBush wrote:
| >U.S. Soccer is a joke
|
| U.S. male Soccer is a joke*
|
| I urge anyone curious about this topic to go and look how the
| US female soccer team performs globally, it truly speaks
| about how the US has a bad soccer team simply because all the
| talent is funneled elsewhere
| herbstein wrote:
| The top Danish team is 102nd, and we barely lost our
| semifinal at the Euros in 2021. National league quality is
| not the same as talent pool quality. Especially not when
| cohesion is what truly matters in national teams. Just take a
| look at how France has performed in the last 4 Nations League
| games, even with their top-class players.
| piffey wrote:
| I'd consider myself a "real" soccer fan in the U.S. I watch
| and support my local club, attend USL games when I travel to
| cities with teams in the US, and any time I'm internationally
| traveling I always attend a local match whether that's EPL
| West Ham/Crystal Palace, Union Berlin/St. Pauli in Bundesliga
| II, or FK Zalgiris/Kaunus in Lithuania -- yes I've been to
| all of those.
|
| The loyalty is to the game and the beauty that can flash no
| matter the league play. I sat down to watch a couple minutes
| of Sunday league last month, kid scored a banger off the post
| with good team buildup, was fun to watch if slower than
| watching Real Madrid/Liverpool the week before. This tiering
| is silly and entertainment can be found wherever you look --
| hell people watch college sports religiously and the quality
| difference is massive from their pro equivalents.
|
| That said, MLS grows in quality every year, exponentially
| over the last 5. If that growth continues and develops young
| players, coupled with 320million person pool of potential
| athletes, MLS will be awash with money to grow itself. Even
| if it just reaches Championship level play that's a
| wonderfully entertaining level of football.
| bitsoda wrote:
| MLS will steadily grow over the next decade, of that I have no
| doubt. I think soccer in America has a ceiling, though. NFL and
| NBA will be #1 and #2 for a long, long time, but MLS could
| surpass NHL, and maybe MLB by the end of the decade if its
| momentum continues.
|
| In any case, I'm so geeked over this deal. MLS is the only
| league I enjoy anymore. I dig parity and salary-capped leagues,
| and soccer has this suspense about it where every minute
| matters unlike most other sports. Great pickup for Apple.
| asdff wrote:
| MLS doesn't yet have a good farm system like in Europe or
| other leagues here in the U.S. like MLB. Seems to be why you
| get a lot of older talent coming from elsewhere.
| dylan604 wrote:
| This will happen right after the year of Linux desktops.
|
| The US National team being competitive in international is way
| too high of an expection from anyone that follows international
| soccer. The US is stuck geographically playing Mexico all. the.
| damn. time. They rarely play any European teams. They also
| rarely play good South American teams.
|
| Until they regularly play good teams, they will stagnate going
| back and forth with Mexico. The same applies to Mexico too. The
| only way to get better is to keep playing better teams.
| bwing wrote:
| This overestimates the role of international soccer in
| predicting future international soccer success. Players get
| 99% of their development with their club teams. While it is
| crucial for Americans to regularly play good teams, this
| experience is mostly going to happen in top European leagues
| and the Champions League.
|
| And we're in the midst of a huge boom period for Americans in
| Europe, with young Americans playing regularly for perennial
| Champions League teams Dortmund, Barcelona, Chelsea,
| Juventus, and Leipzig, a handful of starters on quality teams
| behind them, and major European teams spending more and more
| resources scouting American prospects.
|
| Player quality is the main driver of international success:
| Belgium went from 57th-ranked in 2010 to 1st-ranked in 2015
| (yes, FIFA rankings are bad, but they point to something
| real) not because of some change in scheduling philosophy but
| because they had a bunch of great players in 2015.
| vehemenz wrote:
| I don't think the situation is that dire. For the USMNT,
| maybe--a lot of that is competition and coaching--but not for
| MLS and American players overall.
|
| The US has way more European pros now, playing on good,
| Champions League caliber teams. MLS has attracted higher
| quality talent, and the farm teams are producing better
| talent domestically.
| JamesSwift wrote:
| I just dont see MLS "blowing up". Will it be more popular than
| today? Possibly, though I feel like its been given several
| chances to catch on and never has. Will it challenge NFL / NBA
| popularity in any way? IMO, absolutely not.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Engagement with MLS is somewhere close to zero.
|
| Back when I was involved in coaching youth soccer I found the
| other coaches had never heard of the New England Revolution,
| New York Red Bulls, L.A. Galaxy, etc.
|
| These folks were fans of man united but had no interest at
| all in US soccer.
|
| Who knows? Maybe not having lockouts will mean that if some
| team starts playing well people will be able to watch it. MLS
| definitely needs something to happen to get people interested
| but it seems to me they should relegate the whole league.
| elpool2 wrote:
| Depends on where you are I think. At my kids soccer games I
| see lots of coaches and dads wearing Sounders gear.
| Kon-Peki wrote:
| Our local small-town youth soccer league hosted a
| tournament over Memorial Day weekend. The nearest MLS team
| sent a big box truck with their logo painted on it, and set
| up a bunch of activities and a merchandise tent.
|
| They are definitely working on improving engagement - but
| perhaps each team is at a different level ;)
| PaulHoule wrote:
| Good for them.
| MrFantastic wrote:
| My local MLS has youth development teams.
|
| Soccer will only benefit from the decline in youth American
| Football participation.
| noirbot wrote:
| My guess is that those are actually the teams you're least
| likely to have a lot of fans of. LA, NYC, and Boston all
| already have massive and influential sports teams. The
| folks likely to want to watch/know about MLS are in the
| cities that don't - Kansas City, Austin, to a lesser extent
| Atlanta or Portland.
|
| MLS is being fairly smart with its expansion and focusing
| on cities where they're not trying to pull fans away from
| the NY Yankees or the LA Lakers or whatever. Sure, they
| still have teams there as well, but the die-hard fans are
| going to be in the towns where folks are happy to have any
| team to be excited for.
| syntaxfree wrote:
| > not trying to pull fans away from the NY Yankees
|
| In this thread we've learned there's a New York Red Bulls
| and a New York Football Club.
| syntaxfree wrote:
| As a South American futbol fan: the <City> <Random GRR
| word> is very annoying.
|
| Just say "New York Futbol Club". See, it breathes already.
|
| Also make way for teams that are just called "Sports
| Association Firebug" for historically cogent but difficult
| to parse at first.
| throw0101a wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_FC
| noirbot wrote:
| A lot of the MLS teams are like this - Atlanta United,
| Austin FC, Sporting Kansas City, Toronto FC... It feels a
| bit clunky and "we wanna look more european" in my mind,
| but MLS is at least split between US and EU style for
| names.
|
| There's literally "New York City Football Club" in the
| MLS.
| [deleted]
| JamesSwift wrote:
| I'm near Orlando and it was a big deal when Orlando City
| came to town. That excitement has mostly subsided outside
| of Orlando proper and people are generally back to the
| Magic / NCAAF / NFL now.
| NonNefarious wrote:
| Yep. Soccer's breakthrough in the USA has been "just around
| the corner" since the '80s. No matter how many PLAYSOCCER
| bumper stickers you shove in people's faces, they still don't
| care.
| mbg721 wrote:
| As a sport in grade-school, especially for girls, it _has_
| blown up. It 's just more fun to play than it is to watch.
| Tiktaalik wrote:
| It doesn't need to challenge NFL or NBA for there to be a lot
| of success and money made all around. The potential room for
| growth for MLS is massive in comparison with the other
| established big leagues that already have reached a
| saturation point have have less room to grow.
|
| This is why the NHL has spent the last few decades starting
| up hockey teams in the American South where there's few fans
| instead of say, Saskatoon, where there'd be a legion of fans.
| In Saskatoon it's a small market and you'd already be top dog
| with no growth. In Phoenix you may never reach the other
| leagues, but even if you can move viewership by a few
| percentage points, the size of the market ensures massive
| gains.
| eschulz wrote:
| MLS is also a good place to see some of Europe's biggest stars
| play in the final years of their careers. I've always thought a
| league full of almost-retired legends was a good way to get
| some publicity.
| jandrewrogers wrote:
| The best teams in MLS typically don't have any retired
| legends. This is a gimmick more commonly associated with not-
| so-good teams. Most good MLS teams are heavy with South
| American talent in their prime and, increasingly, products of
| their own academies.
| hermitdev wrote:
| I was a season ticket holder of a club that kept bringing in
| the older stars. Frankly, it was frustrating as a fan that
| wanted to see their team do well in the MLS Cup & US Open
| Cup. I was a ticket holder during one US Open Cup win and
| elimination in the semi finals of an MLS Cup run. The team
| did both without retiring international stars.
|
| My perspective on the big money stars coming in is that it's
| a huge financial drain on the team for around 1/2-3 years of
| performance by the star. Yes, MLS has designated players
| (DPs), but last I looked, the first $500k in salary still
| counts towards the team's salary cap. I'm not sure what the
| salary cap is this year, but even if they've doubled it from
| the last time I paid attention, it'd only be $5M... It's a
| huge chunk of change relative to the rest of the team for not
| a lot of performance. Teams would largely be better off
| finding and growing youth talent than brining in another DP.
|
| I finally gave up on my tickets after nearly 15 years because
| it was apparent the team wasn't interested in winning cups
| anymore. Ownership just wanted to fill the stadium with
| whatever retiring star they could get their hands on.
| relaxatorium wrote:
| It's a gamble, because as of now they're not even the most
| popular soccer league in America let alone the world.
|
| Liga MX (Mexican soccer) ratings destroy them for the obvious
| reasons (the league the US's largest most passionate soccer
| fanbase is most passionate about), EPL ratings beat them pretty
| handily as well (English Premier League, the highest profile
| and probably best of the European leagues).
|
| Given the money and momentum behind MLS though, there is at
| least a chance by the end of this deal that they have become
| one of the top soccer leagues in the world and Apple looks
| extremely clever, which is not something you can really say for
| a lot of leagues with actual better soccer than MLS has right
| now.
|
| It is weird that Apple, one of the biggest companies in the
| world, now has a vested interest in globally promoting a
| specific soccer league. MLS is probably thrilled with this
| compared to their current situation where ESPN+ does dump
| pretty much all the games onto streaming as content, but is
| generally disinterested in promoting it too heavily because of
| their vast prtfolio of already more popular sports.
| trynewideas wrote:
| MLS also lost linear TV ratings and viewership battles a few
| times this season to the women's league (NWSL), which a few
| MLS teams also own teams in. NWSL's media deals with CBS and
| Twitch are worth $4.5M/year, or less than 2% this deal from
| Apple.
|
| Most of those NWSL matches where MLS lost in viewership were
| also just preseason tournament matches for the women's
| league. The season hadn't even started yet.
| alostpuppy wrote:
| From a value prospective it might work out well. I don't
| watch soccer and I'll probably watch a few matches. I suppose
| it all comes down to the price they paid.
| remarkEon wrote:
| I would love to go back in time and tell my grandfather in the
| 1980s, who despite his age was pretty enamored with technology,
| that all of this newfangled stuff would actually make it more
| difficult for him to watch sports. You get cool and sleek looking
| "set top" devices, but oh sorry there's a labyrinth of
| "streaming" subscriptions you have to navigate to figure out how
| to watch your games. At some point, this kind of thing isn't
| helpful. I can steelman an argument that Apple and MLS doing this
| on a 10-year timeline at least gives us some consistency for
| where to go to watch MLS games (I'm not an MLS fan, I don't know
| how you'd watch it today), but more and more I give up on trying
| to figure out how to watch a NHL or MLB game without setting up
| some VPN to get around the blackout restrictions, and just pull
| out an old radio and listen on AM. I figure eventually that will
| go away too.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| None of your complaints have to do with technology. No one is
| stopping NFL/NBA/MLB/NHL/MLS/US Tennis/etc from adding a button
| on their website or app that lets you pay and watch a game.
|
| The thing stopping you from watching it easily is those
| organizations preferring to outsource broadcasting and ad sales
| to other media sellers who demand exclusivity terms that make
| it harder for you to watch.
| nonameiguess wrote:
| I was pretty young, but from what I remember of the 80s, other
| than Monday Night Football and playoffs, it was not possible to
| watch anything but local games at all, and many of the local
| games required add-on cable packages. Also, MLS didn't yet
| exist, so it wasn't possible to watch any MLS games at all.
|
| The blackout restrictions suck where they apply, but at the
| same time, as a person who doesn't live in his hometown,
| without satellite or streaming packages, I wouldn't be able to
| watch the teams I care about at all except when they visit the
| teams that play where I live.
| jdminhbg wrote:
| > more and more I give up on trying to figure out how to watch
| a NHL or MLB game without setting up some VPN to get around the
| blackout restrictions
|
| The point of this deal is that there are no blackout
| restrictions. Every game is on the service, regardless of where
| you are worldwide. If you want to watch MLS games, you
| subscribe to this Apple service, and whether you are in the
| parking lot outside the stadium or in Indonesia, the game is on
| it.
| trollied wrote:
| I agree. Each entity pulling its material so it can launch it
| on its own platform (recent example: Paramount Plus), is
| ridiculous. 10 different streaming services, a good PS80+ a
| month. Each with its own app that has a different look & feel
| and navigation.
|
| May as well just go back to the 1 provider model (cable/sat).
| At least you've only got 1 EPG etc to deal with.
|
| I'll add that this fragmentation also encourages piracy.
|
| There's a great business opportunity for a startup of they can
| strike deals with all streaming services & offer a single
| view/epg/site that presents all of the services you're
| subscribed to in a single consistent way.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| > May as well just go back to the 1 provider model
| (cable/sat). At least you've only got 1 EPG etc to deal with.
|
| It is like that on the TV app for apple devices. You search
| what you want, you get the option to pay or subscribe, and
| you watch. The only hangup is when other content providers,
| like Netflix or sports organizations, choose not to allow
| Apple to search their content.
| patrickk wrote:
| It definitely encourages piracy. IPTV is booming, at least
| among European sports fans.
| jdminhbg wrote:
| An additional detail for those wondering about Apple's sports
| plans, is that all MLS games will be on Wednesday and Saturday
| nights[0]. Those are not coincidentally two nights that the NFL
| does not play on.
|
| 0: https://twitter.com/pkedit/status/1536751488420065280
| scottrogers86 wrote:
| Can Apple tackle Tennis next? Thanks.
| porcoda wrote:
| Finally! I don't care if it's apple or someone else, but the "no
| blackouts" thing is big. Nothing drives me more crazy than being
| unable to stream a game because I happen to live in the same
| geographic region as the team home field. This would finally
| motivate me to cancel the cable TV subscription - the only sport
| I watch is soccer, and the only reason I keep the cable TV is so
| I can dig out the remote whenever the dumb blackout rules prevent
| me from watching it via streaming.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| > This would finally motivate me to cancel the cable TV
| subscription
|
| Which is exactly why blackouts exist. Live tv is pretty much
| solely about sports and 24 hour news channels now. The big four
| sports leagues all make billions a year off their TV deals.
| Giving up blackouts would absolutely hamstring them.
|
| Hard to believe the other leagues will give up blackouts until
| they are confident they can run their own streaming service and
| cash in on that micro gambling revenue. Can you imagine how
| much money the NFL would make if people were gambling $.10-1 on
| every play?
| rwc wrote:
| As I understand it, blackouts primarily exist to ensure local
| ticket sales for full stadiums.
|
| "In most cases, the blackout results when a sports league
| prohibits an event from being televised locally if the event
| did not sell out all its tickets."
|
| https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/sports-
| blackouts#:~:tex....)
| trynewideas wrote:
| So of course, part of the deal is to give away the
| subscription to MLS season ticket holders.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| So I think we're referring to different blackouts. I
| believe OP was complaining that streaming services such as
| NBA league pass never show your local team. If you want to
| watch your team you need a cable subscription. That's
| different than your local TV station not showing the game
| because it didn't sell out.
| porcoda wrote:
| Correct: I was complaining about the rules that prevent
| streaming and force you to watch the game on live TV. Has
| nothing to do with ticket sales.
| heystefan wrote:
| Wait, what? Why does this exist again?
| oplav wrote:
| Leagues, like the NBA and MLB, sell in-market broadcast
| rights to regional sports networks (an RSN), which gives
| the RSN exclusive rights to broadcast that game to in-
| market users. These RSNs typically only show their
| broadcast through cable packages, which is why local
| users would need to subscribe to cable packages that
| carry the RSN that holds the rights to their local team.
| However, some RSNs (at least in baseball) are starting to
| build direct to consumer streaming products. NESN, the
| RSN that carries the Boston Red Sox, has come out with
| NESN 360 which allows users to stream Red Sox games
| without a cable package at a price point of $30/month
| [1].
|
| Leagues retain out-of-market broadcast rights and serve
| those to out of market users through their streaming
| platforms like MLB.tv and NBA League Pass.
|
| [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/01/red-sox-broadcaster-
| to-offer...
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Live sports is the only reason tons of people pay $80+ a
| month for cable. The majority of my close friends have a
| cable subscription solely to watch basketball and monday
| night football. If those people could switch to streaming
| services to see their team cable would be even more
| fucked than they already are, so broadcast rights with
| blackouts are worth billions. The leagues don't think
| they'd be able to make that up with increased streaming
| revenue.
| mbreese wrote:
| _> the dumb blackout rules prevent me from watching it via
| streaming_
|
| The blackout MLS rules are really dumb. For example, I het my
| normal TV through DirecTV stream. My local MLS club (FC
| Cincinnati) airs their local broadcast on a local over the air
| channel. This channel is also on my DirecTV subscription.
|
| However, because I get my "TV" streamed over the internet and
| not through a satellite dish or cable, all local MLS games were
| blacked out for me. I pay for local TV access, but even when
| the game was broadcast over the air, I would get blacked out
| because of how I got the TV access.
|
| This was just dumb.
|
| I specifically got a network OTA tuner just for this purpose,
| but getting rid of blackout rules entirely would be fantastic.
| foogazi wrote:
| > but the "no blackouts" thing is big
|
| Wow missed that - very big deal
|
| I have the MLB package and blackouts drive me nuts - I'm not
| even in the Bay Area, but close enough to not be able to watch
| Giants or A's home games,
|
| Than it's already starting to fragment: some Friday games on
| AppleTV, some weekend games on Peacock
|
| And MLB.tv doesn't carry playoff games
| MrMetlHed wrote:
| It is really annoying that MLB.TV has gone the route with
| games on other providers. I don't want to create another
| account or install some other app on my TV or phone for a few
| games a season. At least the radio broadcasts still work on
| mlb.com when it happens.
| Bud wrote:
| MLB.tv is way way too expensive for any blackouts to even be
| legal. Kind of an outrage.
| al_borland wrote:
| I always thought that was silly. Games sell out, that doesn't
| mean local fans still don't want to watch.
| tablespoon wrote:
| > I always thought that was silly. Games sell out, that
| doesn't mean local fans still don't want to watch.
|
| Do they still do blackouts if the game sells out? I'm not a
| sports fan, but I thought games would only get blacked out if
| they didn't sell enough in-person tickets.
| al_borland wrote:
| Not sure on that. I just remember living about a mile from
| a large college stadium that always sells out. I tried to
| watch the game on TV and got denied. This was a while back,
| I'm not a huge sports fan, but that stuck with me and made
| me not want to bother trying to watch any future games.
| olyjohn wrote:
| The fact that the game is local, makes it more
| interesting to me to watch on TV. I'm not a big sports
| fan, I am highly unlikely to ever go to a game... but
| they might get my viewership on a live stream, just to
| see what's going on near by, or to have a get together at
| my house and have a game on.
|
| But my experience pretty much mirrors yours. Any time I
| might be interested in seeing a game, it's been blacked
| out on TV. So I never bothered to watch anything else.
| Why would I give a shit about a team not even near me if
| I'm not a huge fan to begin with?
| thakoppno wrote:
| The NFL stopped that in 2014. I'm unaware of any league
| that still does blackouts like this.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_te
| l...
| manquer wrote:
| The local/in-market rights are sold independent of out of
| market rights. The local rights are held by channels
| typically part of Cable TV, that is why there is blackouts
| the streaming app usually won't have rights to show you the
| game in that region, the cable channels do, those
| channels(RSNs) pay more because they focus more on 1-2
| regions and also this is primary reason those packages sell
| so they cannot afford not to loose the deal, the streaming
| apps have a lot of regions to cover nationally and other
| usage drivers so will not be able to pay same price.
|
| The kind of blackouts you describe is still common in U.K.
| to encourage you to go and support the local team rather
| than the big regional team because that is on TV. Think
| Wigan Athletic or Bolton Wanderers instead of Manchester
| United
|
| English football has 11-21 tiers and strong grassroots.
| Those blackouts are not designed for big teams to sell
| tickets they will anyway sell out, but to help the smaller
| teams which are rarely featured on TV, not in the top
| premier league but play instead in Championship, league
| 1,2, or non conference leagues etc.
| jayknight wrote:
| MLB next, please. I don't have cable, which means I just don't
| watch baseball right now. I would 100% sign up for MLB.tv if I
| could watch my two favorite teams play.
| wollsmoth wrote:
| It's so dumb. Since I live in a different market from my
| favorite team, I can watch every game they play, unless it
| involves a local team. :-|
| Petersipoi wrote:
| Yep. Fortunately I don't live in the same state as my
| baseball team anymore. So I watch just about all their games
| through MLB.tv. Would be so frustrating if I lived near my
| team though.
| mhinton wrote:
| I live a good 3 hour drive from my team and I am blacked
| out all the time. It's infuriating.
| jayknight wrote:
| The teams I want to watch are 6 and 4 hours (3 and 2
| states) away.
|
| Edit: Here is a blackout map to see what teams are
| blacked out where:
| https://library.sportingnews.com/2021-08/mlb-blackout-
| map-em...
| interestica wrote:
| For the Blue Jays, the blackout applies to the entire
| country. And there are certain geographic badluck regions
| in the US where one can get blacked out from several teams
| despite not being close to them. Especially when it's a
| national broadcast [1]
|
| Also, the marketing at MLB used to be really bad a few
| years ago -- it seemed to be deliberately targeting home
| team fans and leaving out the fact that they would not be
| able to watch their home team.
|
| [1] https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/sports/baseball
| /2021...
|
| "Currently, six MLB teams are blacked out all across Iowa:
| the Chicago Cubs, St. Louis Cardinals, Chicago White Sox,
| Minnesota Twins, Kansas City Royals and Milwaukee Brewers.
| Those teams are not available to watch with an MLB.tv
| subscription or when they are often aired on national
| broadcasts. Some of those clubs are not available on Iowa's
| main cable packages either."
|
| "Additionally, some parts of Iowa are more than 500 miles
| from several of those blacked-out MLB teams."
| dvtrn wrote:
| Things get pretty hilarious when you live in a city with
| two sports teams and they happen to be playing _each
| other_. Every year, Cubs /Sox Crosstown Classic for
| example.
| oluwie wrote:
| It's s bit annoying and prob some extra money but i get around
| this with a VPN service.
| jonahhorowitz wrote:
| Not sure about MLS, but the MLB is extremely aggressive at
| blocking most VPN providers.
| corderop wrote:
| I hope companies start doing this in European leagues. It's going
| to be difficult but I don't want to be forced to use an ISP and
| pay EUR150 per month to watch 4 matches of my team. I hope stream
| reduces these costs. DAZN is doing some improvements on this
| path, but it's still not enough.
| Animats wrote:
| Oh. Major League Soccer, not Multiple Listing Service for real
| estate.
|
| Back in 2008, Google Maps had an overlay for foreclosures, so you
| could look at all the foreclosures in an area at once. The real
| estate industry hated that.
| NonNefarious wrote:
| Yep. MLS = Multiple Listing Service.
|
| I'll bet that holds true for the vast majority of U.S. citizens
| who've even heard of anything called "MLS."
| mbg721 wrote:
| "My Little Sony"???
| darknavi wrote:
| I doubt for the younger generation. "Redfin" and "Zillow" are
| much more "in-the-know" names.
|
| Side note: Long ago Major League Soccer was not the first hit
| for "MLS" on youtube. Now they have the vanity URL which is
| nice:
|
| http://youtube.com/mls
| dionidium wrote:
| I stream my hometown's hockey and baseball games, because I don't
| have a choice (I no longer live in the region), but it's a
| second-rate experience for one fundamental reason: buffering
| delays.
|
| I _routinely_ get messages in my group chat that are a reaction
| to something that hasn 't yet happened on my screen. The group
| chat makes for fun communal viewing, so I don't want to leave it,
| but these messages undermine the experience.
|
| I watch sports OTA whenever I can and if I lived in my hometown
| there's no doubt I'd choose to watch my local teams on cable.
| Live sports moving to streaming services is an unfortunate trend.
| CubsFan1060 wrote:
| https://support.apple.com/guide/iphone/use-shareplay-to-watc...
|
| Can use SharePlay to synchronize things.
| bombcar wrote:
| The buffering has always been a problem, I remember my friend
| would come running into the room because he'd heard on live
| radio what was about to happen on the screen we were watching.
| rsweeney21 wrote:
| "From early 2023 through 2032, fans can get every live MLS match
| by subscribing to a new MLS streaming service, available
| exclusively through the Apple TV app."
|
| So the only way to watch MLS games is by subscribing to the MLS
| streaming service? Am I reading this right?
|
| What do I get for my subscription during the off-season?
|
| How do you attract new MLS fans?
| at-fates-hands wrote:
| ESPN had a more in depth article outlining the deal:
|
| _Speaking to Sports Illustrated on Tuesday, MLS commissioner
| Don Garber emphasized that the commitment isn't a traditional
| broadcast arrangement, wherein a league exchanges the rights to
| its games and content for a negotiated rate. Rather, MLS and
| Apple have entered a partnership where each is incentivized to
| grow the business. Garber declined to reveal the economics (MLS
| reportedly was seeking up to $300 million annually), but he
| said the league will receive a base fee along with a percentage
| of subscription sales. Sports Business Journal reported that
| Apple's guarantee to MLS will be $250 million per year. MLS and
| Apple will create a production studio, hire presenters and
| English-, Spanish- and French-speaking announcers, develop
| shoulder programming and produce a live whip-around show on
| Saturday nights._
|
| This might answer your question:
|
| _Although the days of club-specific, regional broadcasts will
| end following the 2022 season, linear networks like ESPN, Fox
| or Univision are still in frame to negotiate a broadcast deal.
| Those games will be simulcast, however, by Apple. Local
| blackouts also will become a relic from the past._
|
| More details:
|
| _-- The dedicated digital platform will allow MLS to schedule
| matches at more regular and predictable times. Garber said
| there are 60 different start times across the 2022 season. From
| next year, MLS will schedule as many games as possible on
| Saturday nights, with occasional mid-week games on Wednesdays._
|
| _-- Standard broadcast windows will include a 30-minute
| pregame show and postgame content. Club radio feeds will be
| available in addition to league broadcasters._
|
| _-- MLS full-season ticket holders will receive a
| complementary subscription, and select games will be available
| to Apple TV+ subscribers at no additional cost._
|
| _-- Content will be available on the Apple TV app on all Apple
| devices; Samsung, LG, Panasonic, Sony, TCL, VIZIO, and other
| smart TVs; Amazon Fire TV and Roku devices; PlayStation and
| Xbox gaming consoles; Chromecast with Google TV; Comcast
| Xfinity and on tv.apple.com._
|
| _-- All broadcasts will be in 1080p._
|
| https://www.si.com/soccer/2022/06/14/mls-apple-partner-broad...
| thaway2839 wrote:
| I hope the Apple production isn't like the MLB one.
|
| The MLB production is crap. They really need to stop making
| it look like an Apple product.
| culturestate wrote:
| _> The MLB production is crap. They really need to stop
| making it look like an Apple product._
|
| There are a few things I would change (the odds gotta go,
| and I wouldn't mind a more compact scorebug) but on balance
| I really like their choices. Give me Apple's gfx package
| over Bally or TBS any day of the week.
| realslimjd wrote:
| Making this available for free to all season ticket holders which
| is a really nice benefit. Right almost Austin FC games are
| broadcast locally over the air, but I'm really excited about
| being able to watch easily when I travel.
| lamontcg wrote:
| This tiny detail buried in the middle of the article is
| amazing.
| lamontcg wrote:
| So as far as I can tell:
|
| - Streamed over AppleTV so presumably very high quality
|
| - No need for an AppleTV subscription
|
| - No blackouts for local since local no longer exists
|
| - Simulcast with linear Fox/ESPN/UDN without blackouts so no need
| for cable/YTTV
|
| - Free with an MLS season ticket
|
| This seems like the best thing ever. This seems better than the
| old MLSLive back in the early days of (unpirated) soccer
| streaming when NBC Sports Gold was free.
|
| If they let you stream old games and don't remove them after a
| week or two that would be perfection.
|
| If AppleTV brings quality to it, that could wind up being a major
| selling point, right now just the quality of the stream is often
| pretty poor and looks very second-class with MLS (and don't get
| me started on the twitter simulcasts with the UDN games).
| darknavi wrote:
| Free with a season ticket is a really cool spin.
| Empact wrote:
| MLS = Major League Soccer was not a given for me. E.g. Multiple
| Listing Service. Update title?
| gmd63 wrote:
| Wonder if this is why they produced Ted Lasso and not some other-
| sport-related series
| logicalmonster wrote:
| Assuming there's no super-fine print that somehow says otherwise
| and can be enacted on a whim, making sure there's no broadcast
| restrictions is very smart.
|
| I've wanted to use NBA league pass in the past to follow my team,
| and the crazy broadcast restrictions meant that on the rare
| occasion I had the time to watch a game, it was a shot in the
| dark as to whether or not I'd actually be able to. On many
| occasions it was very upsetting to have an evening to myself
| wanting to simply watch a game I felt I paid for and to find out
| my game wasn't actually available after all.
|
| I understand that the sports leagues customers are really the
| cable channels who pay them big cash for the broadcast rights,
| but this kind of thing was a big part of what killed my extreme
| enthusiasm for pro sports.
| tiffanyh wrote:
| I hope this is broadcasted in 4K.
|
| In the USA at least, there's virtually no 4K sports broadcasts of
| any kind (including Apple/MLB is only 1080p).
| trynewideas wrote:
| "All broadcasts will be in 1080p" per Sports Illustrated.
| twoodfin wrote:
| I am 100% sure Apple sees owning these rights and the Apple TV+
| content factory in general as, in part, a way to fuel the
| demand for more sophisticated media consumption and production
| technologies through their devices.
|
| Unless they decide to can the whole effort, it's now obvious
| that the sports experience via Apple TV+ is going to be part of
| the VR headset story.
| NonNefarious wrote:
| What delivery medium (especially in the USA) has the throughput
| to deliver anything worthy of being called "4K?"
| tiffanyh wrote:
| Netflix streams 4k, granted it's compressed.
|
| Why couldn't Apple stream 4k sports content?
| scarface74 wrote:
| I think there is some confusion. Apple is not making MLS games
| available as part of AppleTV+ - the streaming service - it will
| be available as a channel that you pay extra for within the
| AppleTV app.
|
| And the AppleTV app is available on most streaming devices
| including the AppleTV hardware device.
| 30944836 wrote:
| Would be great to put "Major League Soccer" in the headline here.
| MLS also stands for many things.
| ars wrote:
| Thank you, I was wondering what it was. To me MLS is a real
| estate thing.
| NonNefarious wrote:
| TheTrotters wrote:
| "This partnership is a historic first for a major professional
| sports league, and will allow fans around the world to watch all
| MLS, Leagues Cup,1 and select MLS NEXT Pro and MLS NEXT matches
| in one place -- without any local broadcast blackouts or the need
| for a traditional pay TV bundle."
|
| The "around the world" part is huge for the MLS (and to a lesser
| extent for Apple). I'm in Europe and I've never watched an MLS
| game. But it looks like it'll be the first and only football
| league that I'll be able to watch in a civilized way so I'll
| definitely give it a try.
| rdxm wrote:
| The big deal is no blackouts. That's a first for pro sports
| broadcasting I _think_...
| Kon-Peki wrote:
| Agreed that no blackouts is a big deal.
|
| Also interesting is this: > At launch, all MLS and Leagues Cup
| matches will include announcers calling the action in English
| and Spanish, and all matches involving Canadian teams will be
| available in French.
|
| So, are they keeping the door open for additional languages in
| the future? Is this subscription available world-wide?
|
| Let's be honest here: Premier league matches aren't exactly
| cheap to watch. If this is cost-effective and available in a
| lot of languages, it's an opportunity to watch _some_ matches
| that are at least at a certain minimum professional level.
| relaxatorium wrote:
| That these are worldwide rights is also interesting, that almost
| never happens for sports deals because there's usually more money
| to be had chopping up broadcast rights and selling them per
| country.
| r00fus wrote:
| No blackouts or restrictions sounds really interesting.
| remarkEon wrote:
| Yeah, no blackouts is good. I find it hard to be optimistic
| about deals like this but maybe, just maybe, this sets some
| precedent for deals for other sports. Trying to navigate NHL
| and especially MLB blackouts is really obnoxious.
| cokeandpepsi wrote:
| I don't even bother with MLB anymore, the only way to watch
| it is pirate sites which are hit and miss
| permo-w wrote:
| I know people are often sceptical about Apple, but here is yet
| another example of them doing something that makes me go "hmm yes
| that's better than everyone else". They're still not back to
| their Jobs days in terms of uniqueness and innovation, but I am
| glad that Apple and their race-to-the-top philosophy exists in
| this market
| imachine1980_ wrote:
| ???, they made a deal to sport league to increase the market
| share of their services and made people lock in their
| ecosystems, it make sense but I don think is philosphy
| perspective.is simply content that Mach their interests .
| arkades wrote:
| They're addressing a real pain point that real people
| actually have and regularly fork out money for. The fact that
| they didn't do it out of altruism means diddly squat.
| hansword wrote:
| Unfortunately I fail to see how buying broadcasting rights
| could be classed as "uniqueness and innovation"... would you
| care to elaborate?
| permo-w wrote:
| worldwide broadcasting rights
| sjm-lbm wrote:
| It's hard to guess, but based on this press release guessing
| is all that we can do, so..
|
| The UI for sports is currently terrible, by and large. The
| best you can do - despite the fact that everyone has a
| computer attached to and/or in their TV these days - is
| stream a linear broadcast channel. With this deal, Apple can
| show you a dashboard of all the games currently playing so
| you can pick a close and/or intresting one. You could choose
| a different audio channel - say, crowd noise only or a mic
| attempting to pick up what a manager is shouting at their
| players. Picture and picture if a goal is scored in another
| game. Probably way more than all of this.
|
| From this POV, buying content is merely the price of
| admission to using technology to completely change and
| improve the sports viewing experience. Like I said, I'm just
| guessing at what Apple is thinking, but it stands to reason
| they have some technology angle on this if they feel like
| they are the right people to mount an attempt at improving
| this experience.
| jdminhbg wrote:
| Apple obviously does not like to preannounce products, but
| with a ten-year time horizon, some form of AR/VR has to be
| in their plans as well.
| sjm-lbm wrote:
| Funny you mention that - one of the odder parts of this
| press release is the fact that this service is going to
| be included with MLS team season ticket packages. I'd
| been try to figure out how and/or why it's in Apple's
| interest to give away this service to season ticket
| holders; some sort of AR tech being part of the overall
| plans is a decent guess as to why.
| freck wrote:
| I assume this is something MLS wanted out of the deal and
| Apple conceded. It makes the season tickets even more
| valuable for every team in the league. Do you really
| think Apple demanded a subscription give-away?
| culturestate wrote:
| _> Do you really think Apple demanded a subscription
| give-away?_
|
| I don't, but it's really not the most outlandish idea. It
| gives every season ticket holder a reason to either buy
| an Apple TV or, maybe more importantly, _start using the
| Apple TV app on their existing devices._
|
| Imagine you're an Orlando City fan who's happy with Hulu
| and never really cared to open the Apple TV app on your
| Samsung TV. Now that you're using Apple TV to watch
| matches, though, you've started to come across some of
| those other shows you've heard people talk about.
|
| Ted Lasso seems pretty cool, maybe you'll sign up for
| Apple TV+ and give it a try...
| freck wrote:
| But season ticket holders as a group are probably the
| ones most likely to pay for a season of MLS. Why not let
| them pay and get exposed to Ted Lasso on their own dime?
| sjm-lbm wrote:
| I'm not assuming Apple demanded it, I'm just wondering
| aloud why Apple conceded.
|
| This deal is 8x the 2022 MLS TV deal annually, and the
| current deal doesn't have anything like this. It seems
| insane to me to imagine MLS telling Apple "8x our current
| deal and you have to give it to our biggest fans for
| free."
|
| Who knows, maybe that's what happened, though.
| freck wrote:
| Fair enough. But MLS viewership has risen since the last
| deal. Before this announcement, it was speculated MLS was
| looking for a $300M/year deal. So it doesn't seem so
| insane to me.
| bitsoda wrote:
| This is such an intelligent move, and one I've been secretly
| hoping Apple would make: get the streaming rights to a league
| that's "up and coming" and very popular with a younger
| demographic for what I assume is a bargain compared to most other
| top leagues. Sure, it's not the NFL or NBA, but it's a great
| addition nonetheless. This is an insta-subscribe for me.
| secretsatan wrote:
| Okay, i think i'm missing something because i'm not american.
|
| Just the fact that MLS includes the word soccer, rather than
| football explains it.
|
| And the the blurb mentioned 29 teams!
|
| This is not a big deal outside of soccer(ugh) fans in the
| northern americas
| tamersalama wrote:
| Every soccer league is on a different provider. I'm in Canada.
| The Premier League is on DAZN. MLS is on Apple TV. La Liga is on
| fuboTV (or Amazon Prime). It's all the same sport. Multiply that
| by X if another family member is interested another sport. I
| don't know what the future holds, but the sports entertainment
| fragmentation might be hurting more than helping. Perhaps Apple
| is on their way to consolidate.
| Shank wrote:
| > The MLS live and on-demand content on the Apple TV app will be
| available to anyone with internet access across all devices where
| the app can be found, including iPhone, iPad, Mac, Apple TV 4K,
| and Apple TV HD; Samsung, LG, Panasonic, Sony, TCL, VIZIO, and
| other smart TVs; Amazon Fire TV and Roku devices; PlayStation and
| Xbox gaming consoles; Chromecast with Google TV; and Comcast
| Xfinity. Fans can also watch on tv.apple.com.
|
| The wide platform availability is an absolute win. Are there any
| big streaming dongles / systems that aren't covered here?
| afavour wrote:
| I think "Chromecast with Google TV" excludes older Chromecast
| devices. Not that I really blame Apple here, I've played around
| with Chromecasts a few times and they're wildly underpowered
| even if they are ubiquitous.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| The appleTV remote couldn't change the volume on my tv for
| whatever reason. Since I bought a dumb monitor style TV the
| only option was to walk up to it and use the buttons.
| Switched to chromecast and the volume controls worked. Hard
| for me to imagine going back to apple, even if the chromecast
| is a tad slower.
| babypuncher wrote:
| The Apple TV remote can be configured to control volume via
| IR or through HDMI CEC. When plugged into a new display,
| the Apple TV tries to auto configure this based on what
| devices it detects. It's possible it messed up with IR and
| you just needed to manually set it to use CEC.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| > The appleTV remote couldn't change the volume on my tv
| for whatever reason
|
| Because your TV did not support HDMI CEC.
| anderber wrote:
| It excludes Android TV and Android phones, from what I can
| tell.
| dgritsko wrote:
| I'm really curious as to what Apple's broader strategy is with
| live sports, since that's typically been one of the last big
| reasons to keep a cable subscription. However, given that Apple
| TV Plus is going to have at least some MLB games[1] and is
| rumored to possibly be the new home for the NFL Sunday Ticket[2],
| they could be seeking to make it the must-have subscription for
| fans of live sports.
|
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022/03/apple-and-mlb-announc...
|
| https://www.tomsguide.com/news/apple-tv-plus-could-become-ho...
| Seanambers wrote:
| There is a lot i don't understand about how they view things in
| Cupertino.
|
| I mean, there must be a lot of people at Apple thinking about
| the future - what it will look like, how media is consumed and
| then again how Apple can own that pipeline and ecosystem.
|
| Both on the media side, hardware side and software side the
| offering is lacking in ways i find very strange coming from
| Apple.
|
| For instance why haven't Apple just gotten the internet
| broadcast rights to a lot of sports to build a moat around it -
| not because it is popular but because they can. With Apples
| finances they could also get alot of popular sports on Apple TV
| as well.
|
| Why didn't Apple buy any movie studios to kickstart Apple TV
| and get a big catalogue from the get go - seems like a no
| brainer.
|
| Apple does a lot of stuff right, but there are more than a few
| areas where they fail to really provide value.
| Bud wrote:
| A lot of those rights are already bought up, in some sports.
| I suspect Apple will need to wait til those contracts expire,
| no matter how much they are willing to spend.
|
| As for Apple TV+, no, it's not a no-brainer. The approach
| they took was to sign up a lot of creative talent, instead,
| and make their own content. That's already been a proven
| success, so it's hard to say that a diametrically-opposed
| approach (which is kind of lame and would not even result in
| any new content) was a "no-brainer".
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| >For instance why haven't Apple just gotten the internet
| broadcast right to a lot of sports to build a moat around it
| -
|
| It is possible that they want all or nothing rights. There
| are a ton of complicated rules by NHL/MLB/NFL/NBA on blackout
| games, parceling out different games to different
| broadcasters in different areas, and then of course,
| different broadcasters by country. All with different
| contract expiry dates.
|
| I will not pay for sports until the sports organizations make
| it easy to find everything (within their sports org) in one
| place.
| bombcar wrote:
| I think this is the key - Apple is painfully famous for "it
| may be expensive, but it's really simple" - iTunes music
| was the same way. They want you to not have to think about
| it at all, so they want all or nothing (the all, of course,
| being available for a Price).
| etempleton wrote:
| Yes, I think blackouts are sticking point for Apple because
| it is a terrible user experience. Their MLB Friday games
| are not subject to blackout rules, which is different from
| the MLB app experience.
|
| Sports are an interesting approach for Apple, but in a way
| it makes sense as it is an area that has the opportunity to
| be disrupted. People loves sports but the consumption of
| sports can be a frustrating experience. Many leagues still
| do not have a good streaming experience and the leagues
| that do, such as MLB, are subject to blackout rules. If
| Apple can cut through the red tape to eliminate blackout
| rules and create a white-labeled app experience for sports
| leagues it might be lucrative for Apple and beneficial to
| the league and their fans.
| MisterBastahrd wrote:
| > For instance why haven't Apple just gotten the internet
| broadcast rights to a lot of sports to build a moat around it
| - not because it is popular but because they can. With Apples
| finances they could also get alot of popular sports on Apple
| TV as well
|
| Because it's not in the interest of those sports leagues to
| kill off their viewing audiences. The average person who has
| cable has ESPN channels as part of their basic cable package.
| You don't even NEED cable to watch a lot of sports because
| terrestrial television has sports on constantly. The NFL
| realized a long time ago that there is a niche market for
| those who want a sheer firehose of content... but the vast
| majority will not directly pay for it. Sports fans will just
| find something else to occupy their time with.
| asdff wrote:
| There is a lot of latent demand for people who just want to
| simply stream a game without having to pirate it or get worked
| around by the leagues. Most people I know today do it on
| illegal streams or share an mlb/nfl password with everyone they
| possibly know. Imagine if you monetized that market. The
| leagues are clearly too petty and incompetent to do it right,
| but Apple could make it really user friendly.
| twoodfin wrote:
| It also gives them a compelling way to tier their service &
| grow revenue from existing subscribers.
|
| From this perspective, something like Sunday Ticket makes a lot
| of sense even with the hefty price tag, so long as they're
| allowed to parcel out those games as they'd like.
| clairity wrote:
| it's likely a loss leader strategy to get subscription numbers
| up. the long term goal is to replace cable... with cable-like
| appletv+. they're not expanding the pie, but rather fighting to
| capture existing pie, particularly against netflix & amazon,
| who they see as more direct competitors than traditional media
| companies. apple likes lives sports because there's no fan base
| to build up, and they get to just be a distributor (similar to
| music) rather than a content creator (which is a harder and
| riskier business). they don't like giving up editorial control,
| but they need the subscriber base.
|
| frankly, i'm not a fan of this strategy as there's no synergy
| between the computing and content businesses, but apple has
| fallen for the relentless march to grow at all costs, and sees
| content as low-hanging fruit for them (again, i disagree with
| this assessment).
|
| apple home, car, glasses, etc. make much more sense, but those
| are too slow growing for both professional and unprofessional
| investors alike.
| scarface74 wrote:
| Apple isn't paying for rights to MLS to be part of AppleTV+.
| The exclusive deal is for the MLS to have their own "channel"
| that you subscribe to separately that you can only buy
| through the AppleTV app.
| clairity wrote:
| right, they want to draw people to the appletv app and
| entice them to subscribe to appletv+, via, for example, a
| tie-in with "ted lasso". in any case, they'd most certainly
| roll up those mls subscriptions into total subscriber
| numbers in any investor relations as "proof" of their
| strategy.
| pianoben wrote:
| I was _not_ prepared for soccer - I saw MLS and thought, "what on
| Earth is Apple doing with real-estate listings?!"
| unsupp0rted wrote:
| In this article, MLS = "major league sports".
|
| Not "Multiple Listing Service" for Real Estate.
| m8s wrote:
| Major League Soccer*
| konfusinomicon wrote:
| thank all the deities that apple isn't getting into the real
| estate data business!! we've already got enough madness to deal
| with
| ericmay wrote:
| This is a _great_ move for Apple.
|
| The game-changer for them, IMO, is to buy the rights to broadcast
| Pac-12 and Big-10 football (and ideally all sports).
|
| I am an avid college football fan. Trying to find games to watch
| is a pain without some sort of lame ass subscription somewhere. I
| already pay for Apple TV + because it's bundled with other
| services that I use.
|
| With the incoming threat of ESPN + Disney + SEC fracturing the
| college football landscape, Apple could provide the money, reach,
| and power to take some of the sport (and country's) biggest
| brands and put them front and center in front of millions and
| basically compete head-on with Disney. Next step is you broadcast
| all of the NCAA sports - baseball and volleyball championships,
| etc. Take what the Big-10 and Pac-12 channels were supposed to be
| and make them great and unbundled from cable TV.
|
| In the coming years I think they're going to add live news with a
| focus on "quality journalism" as well. The Jon Stewart show and
| documentaries they are producing are the first drip.
| bachmeier wrote:
| At one point we had 12 different channels that carried college
| sports and maybe half the games we wanted to watch weren't
| available.
| ericmay wrote:
| Yea... it's like you can't even pay for it!
| wollsmoth wrote:
| Why would they not even just have them available for PPV. I
| should be able to pay to see whichever football game! It
| doesn't need to be this crazy game of blackouts and
| satellite subscriptions!
| MisterBastahrd wrote:
| I doubt either of those conferences would want to be stuck
| behind a paywall that is neither on terrestrial television or
| cable networks. Dealing with ESPN is dealing with ABC, which is
| a gigantic advantage. The SEC remains the power conference of
| power conferences, and whatever they decide is ultimately the
| way college football will trend. Their recent agreements with
| Oklahoma and the University of Texas are just a start into
| deraveling the top tier athletic institutions from other
| conferences.
| bgorman wrote:
| Even if Apple just carried all Pac-12 network football games,
| that would really move the needle. The Pac-12 network is pretty
| much impossible to get through traditional cable providers
| outside of the west coast.
| retskrad wrote:
| Steve Jobs was a visionary product guy but he's no match for Tim
| Cook when it comes to being the CEO of a big company. Tim Apple
| is just built different.
| [deleted]
| lapcat wrote:
| "The same thing can happen in technology companies that get
| monopolies."
|
| "The people that can make the company more successful are sales
| and marketing people, and they end up running the companies.
| And the product people get driven out of the decision making
| forums, and the companies forget what it means to make great
| products. The product sensibility and the product genius that
| brought them to that monopolistic position gets rotted out."
|
| https://youtu.be/P4VBqTViEx4
| bombcar wrote:
| This is the kind of deliberate, small moves that someone like
| Apple can do to slowly grow into a media empire. Make "big"
| deals with small fish and get people onboard.
|
| >A broad selection of MLS and Leagues Cup matches, including
| some of the biggest matchups, will also be available at no
| additional cost to Apple TV+ subscribers, with a limited number
| of matches available for free. As an added benefit to fans,
| access to the new MLS streaming service will be included as
| part of MLS full-season ticket packages.
|
| And this is a perfect way to do it - those who want it will
| jump right in, those who don't know but are interested have
| ways of experiencing it. And the biggest fans? They get it for
| _free_ since they already have season tickets.
| soSadm4n wrote:
| geogra4 wrote:
| It's certainly a different apple. Having been a Mac user for 30
| years on and off It's definitely more organized than the
| Spindler era and less hopeless than the Amelio era.
|
| Jobs II helped set the stage and Tim is a great execution guy.
| thr0wawayf00 wrote:
| I hope this sets the standard for sports streaming moving
| forward. The way NBC packages the Premier League in the US is an
| absolute joke because of the broadcast restrictions they impose.
| I just want simplicity and access in my streaming service and I'm
| willing to pay for it.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-06-14 23:01 UTC)