Cubs TV broadcast rights

[Tim]

If someone wants to write an article, I'll post it on the front page.

 

horsefeathers this.

[Cubswin11]

This seems like a pretty specific thing to have on the deal for it not to be essentially done. Hopefully the Sinclair thing isn’t true and some other not entirely horrible and evil company (because whoever gets it will still suck, just not as much) actually is the one who gets it.

 

[Derwood]

This seems like a pretty specific thing to have on the deal for it not to be essentially done. Hopefully the Sinclair thing isn’t true and some other not entirely horrible and evil company (because whoever gets it will still suck, just not as much) actually is the one who gets it.

 

 

This is exactly what I was afraid of

[Transmogrified Tiger]

you were afraid of the Cubs making more money with their new tv deal?

[Derwood]

you were afraid of the Cubs making more money with their new tv deal?

 

Yes, you nailed it.

 

No, obviously worried that there could be cable/satellite carriers who don't carry the network

[jersey cubs fan]

This seems like a pretty specific thing to have on the deal for it not to be essentially done. Hopefully the Sinclair thing isn’t true and some other not entirely horrible and evil company (because whoever gets it will still suck, just not as much) actually is the one who gets it.

 

Isn't this just talking abou t the new NBC network with the other 3 teams? That is the one being talked about as pretty much done. The Cubs one is not being talked about in nearly the same way.

Also LOL about paying more for NBCCH minus CHC

[Cubswin11]

This seems like a pretty specific thing to have on the deal for it not to be essentially done. Hopefully the Sinclair thing isn’t true and some other not entirely horrible and evil company (because whoever gets it will still suck, just not as much) actually is the one who gets it.

 

Isn't this just talking abou t the new NBC network with the other 3 teams? That is the one being talked about as pretty much done. The Cubs one is not being talked about in nearly the same way.

Also LOL about paying more for NBCCH minus CHC

Oh yeah. You are right. That’s for the new White Sox/Bulls/Blackhawks. I just completely misread the tweet. And yeah lol at charging more while taking the Cubs out and seeing those 3 teams ratings numbers in the Athletic article.

[Derwood]

This seems like a pretty specific thing to have on the deal for it not to be essentially done. Hopefully the Sinclair thing isn’t true and some other not entirely horrible and evil company (because whoever gets it will still suck, just not as much) actually is the one who gets it.

 

Isn't this just talking abou t the new NBC network with the other 3 teams? That is the one being talked about as pretty much done. The Cubs one is not being talked about in nearly the same way.

Also LOL about paying more for NBCCH minus CHC

 

Good call, totally missed that

[Ding Dong Johnson]

he says networks (plural) but also 10/19 when the new flavor of nbc starts so who the horsefeathers knows what he means, including him

[jersey cubs fan]

he says networks (plural) but also 10/19 when the new flavor of nbc starts so who the horsefeathers knows what he means, including him

I believe that's supposed to say "network's end users"

[David]

he says networks (plural) but also 10/19 when the new flavor of nbc starts so who the horsefeathers knows what he means, including him

I believe that's supposed to say "network's end users"

 

To me it reads much more like there should be a comma after networks...but reporting that wouldn't make much sense.

 

If networks is supposed to have an apostrophe, that sentence is an even bigger disaster lol

 

Either way, I'm leaning strongly toward that Tweet just being about the new nbc network

[Transmogrified Tiger]

A Cubs-Sinclair Partnership May be Cause for Concern

 

tl;dr Sinclair owns a ton of local over-the-air networks(and also the Tennis Channel for some reason), and has a history of yanking them off the air in disputes over retransmission fees. In a scenario where Sinclair owns the Cubs Network(they also bid on those Fox RSNs), they could leverage those OTAs to screw over cable subscribers further, and make local blackouts like the Dodgers more likely.

[Thed Hoyerstein]

A Cubs-Sinclair Partnership May be Cause for Concern

 

tl;dr Sinclair owns a ton of local over-the-air networks(and also the Tennis Channel for some reason), and has a history of yanking them off the air in disputes over retransmission fees. In a scenario where Sinclair owns the Cubs Network(they also bid on those Fox RSNs), they could leverage those OTAs to screw over cable subscribers further, and make local blackouts like the Dodgers more likely.

 

and guess who's upset with Fangraphs

 

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[javy knows my name]

A Cubs-Sinclair Partnership May be Cause for Concern

 

tl;dr Sinclair owns a ton of local over-the-air networks(and also the Tennis Channel for some reason), and has a history of yanking them off the air in disputes over retransmission fees. In a scenario where Sinclair owns the Cubs Network(they also bid on those Fox RSNs), they could leverage those OTAs to screw over cable subscribers further, and make local blackouts like the Dodgers more likely.

 

and guess who's upset with Fangraphs

 

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

Whew. I'm not sure what I'd do if rmack was an otherwise smart or informed person

[Sammys Boombox]

The disputes that make it hard/impossible for fans to watch the games are the worst.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

You'll be back. And you. And you. And youuuuu.

[mhuber92211]

So huge media conglomerate buys distribution rights to favorite team sends many fans over the edge, Ironic given years of horrible team ownership of favorite team by huge media conglomerate. All simply because new media conglomerate has biased viewpoints of current events. Certainly old media conglomerate didn't have media bias or is it that their bias was acceptable based on personal political viewpoints?

 

How many people who are throwing their years of fandom away because of the company who is distributing the games care that they watch their favorite TV show on a local channel owned by Sinclair. Because favorite TV show is okay but cubs games aren't? Oh and let us not care to compare the alternatives for distribution. Amazon? Fox? Comcast? Somehow I suspect there are examples of horrible reporting there as well.

 

Face it, there are opposing viewpoints than yours. You are not absolutely correct in what you believe and neither is the other side of the argument. Learn to live in peace and enjoy life, such as your previous favorite baseball team that you have obsessed over for most of your life.

[Tim]

oh boy

[17 Seconds]

i can't believe that there are still so many people who pretend like bigotry is simply a differing view

[jersey cubs fan]

So huge media conglomerate buys distribution rights to favorite team sends many fans over the edge, Ironic given years of horrible team ownership of favorite team by huge media conglomerate. All simply because new media conglomerate has biased viewpoints of current events. Certainly old media conglomerate didn't have media bias or is it that their bias was acceptable based on personal political viewpoints?

 

How many people who are throwing their years of fandom away because of the company who is distributing the games care that they watch their favorite TV show on a local channel owned by Sinclair. Because favorite TV show is okay but cubs games aren't? Oh and let us not care to compare the alternatives for distribution. Amazon? Fox? Comcast? Somehow I suspect there are examples of horrible reporting there as well.

 

Face it, there are opposing viewpoints than yours. You are not absolutely correct in what you believe and neither is the other side of the argument. Learn to live in peace and enjoy life, such as your previous favorite baseball team that you have obsessed over for most of your life.

My favorite part is that you think this is clever.

[SouthSideRyan]

I live in a real city, so there are no Sinclair owned networks.

[mhuber92211]

So huge media conglomerate buys distribution rights to favorite team sends many fans over the edge, Ironic given years of horrible team ownership of favorite team by huge media conglomerate. All simply because new media conglomerate has biased viewpoints of current events. Certainly old media conglomerate didn't have media bias or is it that their bias was acceptable based on personal political viewpoints?

 

How many people who are throwing their years of fandom away because of the company who is distributing the games care that they watch their favorite TV show on a local channel owned by Sinclair. Because favorite TV show is okay but cubs games aren't? Oh and let us not care to compare the alternatives for distribution. Amazon? Fox? Comcast? Somehow I suspect there are examples of horrible reporting there as well.

 

Face it, there are opposing viewpoints than yours. You are not absolutely correct in what you believe and neither is the other side of the argument. Learn to live in peace and enjoy life, such as your previous favorite baseball team that you have obsessed over for most of your life.

My favorite part is that you think this is clever.

 

Nope, simply matter of fact. Nothing clever about it. Educate me in how the simple statements are incorrect. Is the suggestion that Tribune media not biased? Or Comcast? I am keeping things as simple as possible. Perhaps I am naive but how can a giant company be considered "bigotry"?

[squally1313]

Up there with my favorite terrible counter arguments is "well why didn't you speak out against X or Y back when they were doing bad things? lol what a hypocrite". I was 20 when the Tribune sold the Cubs, I'm 30 now...people get older, they get smarter, they learn things. You're essentially arguing against progress.

[SouthSideRyan]

Is the Tribune company known for a particular bias?

[Old Style]

Is the Tribune company known for a particular bias?

Anti-winning