CSS Button No Image Css3Menu.com

Baseball Prospectus home
Click here to log in Click here for forgotten password Click here to subscribe

<< Previous Article
Fantasy Article Team Health Reports: T... (03/26)
Next Article >>
Premium Article Wait 'Til Next Year: C... (03/26)

March 26, 2009

Changing Channels

Could MLB Network Go Commercial-Free?

by Shawn Hoffman

the archives are now free.

All Baseball Prospectus Premium and Fantasy articles more than a year old are now free as a thank you to the entire Internet for making our work possible.

Not a subscriber? Get exclusive content like this delivered hot to your inbox every weekday. Click here for more information on Baseball Prospectus subscriptions or use the buttons to the right to subscribe and get instant access to the best baseball content on the web.

Subscribe for $4.95 per month
Recurring subscription - cancel anytime.

a 33% savings over the monthly price!

Purchase a $39.95 gift subscription
a 33% savings over the monthly price!

Already a subscriber? Click here and use the blue login bar to log in.

According to the New York Times, advertisers are falling in love with the MLB Network. Despite the bad economy and a nationwide ad slump that is killing one old media company after another, MLBN is expected to hit its sales goals for the first quarter. That's not entirely surprising; big companies swear by sports marketing, citing desirable audiences and huge ROIs. But what the Times article doesn't mention is that advertising is only a small piece of MLBN's business, accounting for about one-quarter of the network's $200 million in projected revenue. In fact, it's entirely possible that MLB Advanced Media will do twice as much in ad sales this year, which seems like a very backwards split (analog dollars are supposed to turn into digital pennies, after all).

Subscriber fees have made cable stations the new gold standard in big media. Unlike broadcast networks, cable stations are paid a fee for every subscriber that has access to that channel. With the ad market getting pummeled, media companies are increasingly relying on these sub fees for incoming cash flow. NBC Universal, for one, makes far more money from its cable stations, which include USA, Bravo, and a bunch of others that you rarely watch, than it does from its flagship NBC network. Advertising is a solid secondary business for NBCU's cable properties, but it is the primary focus only for established networks that have already maxed out their distribution potential.

Despite having the biggest cable launch in history this past January, MLB Network is nowhere near being maxed out. It's currently in about 50 million homes, all in the United States, charging $0.24 per subscriber per month. ESPN is in hundreds of millions of homes worldwide, charging $3.65 per subscriber in the US. That may be an apples-to-bowling-balls comparison, but it's clear that MLBN still has an enormous amount of room for growth.

It also seems rather clear that this is where MLBN's focus should be, and the key is simply creating a product that cable subscribers will want (they can't threaten to pull other stations off the air, like ESPN or Viacom could). As is, MLBN has decent enough content, sort of, but it hasn't truly differentiated itself. But what if, in a bold stroke, the network decided that it was going to become a 'premium' channel on basic cable, cutting the great majority of its commercial inventory, and focusing solely on the quality of its product? This could create some serious buzz among casual and hardcore fans alike, and give nine-hour-a-night MLB Tonight a major leg up on Baseball Tonight. Even more importantly, it could distinguish MLBN's brand from that of the NFL Network, NBA TV, and all of the other sports stations that are constantly fighting for expanded distribution.

Could this actually be economically feasible? MLBN is making about $50 million from ads this year. Let's say it cut 80 percent of its ad space, leaving one short commercial break for every half-hour of airtime. They'd be able to raise their commercial rates a bit due to the sparse supply, and they could leave in-show sponsorships untouched. Being very conservative, this would probably leave them with about $15-20 million in revenue, and if they were to create all-inclusive sponsorship deals with a small number of big-spending advertisers, this figure could actually be much higher.

That's a near-term shortfall of $30 million, which is certainly significant, but MLB would make up for it very quickly if they could make any headway distribution-wise. At $0.24 per subscriber per month, MLBN would need to be added to about 12 million marginal homes, or closer to 10 million if we assume ad rates go up based on the audience numbers. In some cases, that could actually be done with just one deal (ahem, Dish Network).

Thinking further down the line, MLBN will likely end up broadcasting many live games at some point in the future-it has 26 Thursday night games this year-and possibly even playoff games. If it can gain greater distribution in the US by then, and hopefully Canada as well, it would probably be able to raise its monthly subscriber-fee rate to a more competitive figure (the NFL Network charges $0.88). Adding more games would also help on the advertising front, since there will always be commercials during inning breaks.

On the cost side, MLBN could either cut staff outright, or restructure so that resources are shifted out of the ad sales department. This wouldn't save all that much cash, but it could help the company boost efficiency. With less inventory, the network could focus on selling bigger packages to fewer customers. The network could then put more money into content production, or any other area it sees fit.

No doubt, this would be a very risky short-term play. In the midst of a bad recession, cash is generally king, and advertising is a dependable source of short-term cash for MLBN. But in the long-term, MLBN's limited distribution, not to mention its suboptimal locations on the providers that it is on, could severely stunt its growth. SNL Kagan expects the network to have 67 million subscribers in 2012, resulting in $300 million in revenue; about $200 million from subscriber fees, and $100 million from advertising. That's a drop in the bucket for MLB-less than five percent of its current business, and about half of what MLBAM will be making this year or next-and nowhere near what major cable networks bring in.

Cutting out ads might be a way to help boost distribution past any current projections. Shifting away from a previously unquestioned business model would be very bold, but the economics of media (and the rules that dictate them) are changing very quickly. In the grand scheme of things, $30 million is a small investment for MLB, which did $6.5 billion in sales last year. With a potential nine-figure upside and possibly even more, this could actually be a risk worth taking.

Shawn Hoffman is an author of Baseball Prospectus. 
Click here to see Shawn's other articles. You can contact Shawn by clicking here

Related Content:  MLB Network

17 comments have been left for this article. (Click to hide comments)

BP Comment Quick Links


Shawn, I've thoroughly enjoyed pretty much everything you've written here.

Keep up the good work

Mar 26, 2009 08:45 AM
rating: 1

It's interesting because in so many ways baseball is vociferously opposed to change. However, their willingness to do so with MLBAM has paid huge dividends. While I'm intrigued by the possibility of going "ad-free", I do appreciate the accessibility MLBN provides and see it as a reflection of the nations interest in it's pastime. I'm not sure how that translates into dollars and cents, but in difficult economic times, it's nice to see that MLBN is providing their services to the widest audience possible, even if they're doing so at a home town discount.

Mar 26, 2009 09:14 AM
rating: 0
BP staff member Will Carroll
BP staff

Great stuff, SH. I'm wondering though if the format makes it tougher to not have breaks. What would you do in the between inning breaks? For a show like MLB Tonight, it wouldn't be quite as bad since you could switch between studios and setups to give the personnel a break, but you'd be adding ... I'm guessing they use a standard clock, so 22 minutes an hour of content or more than a minute per game. I like the idea, unsure of the execution.

Mar 26, 2009 09:44 AM
BP staff member Shawn Hoffman
BP staff

Inning breaks will always have commercials (which is why sports programming is so incredibly valuable, even in the age of Tivo, and eventually IPTV). As for MLB Tonight, I'd personally rather see cut-ins than commercials.

More important than just cutting commercials altogether, I think this is about changing a tired format, and possibly giving a huge boost to the brand.

Mar 26, 2009 09:57 AM
Richard Bergstrom

I don't really see it happening with MLBN. If you reduce the commercials in the broadcast of the game, what do you do with that time instead? I mean, it still takes about 10 minutes for the players on the field to switch up between innings, for the groundscrew to work, etc. and having a commentator yap away wouldn't earn as much money as an ad. Also, MLBN is a fledgling network and if it cut staff this early in the game, it may make potential advertisers fear that MLBN is failing.

Mar 26, 2009 09:59 AM
rating: -2

I just want to piggyback on the above comment that I'm really enjoying Shawn's stuff.

Mar 26, 2009 10:39 AM
rating: 0

i think MLB Tonight needs to drop the matching sweatsuits for Reynolds/Larkin/Casey. Either that or complete the ensemble with some Nikes and phenobarbitol.

Mar 26, 2009 10:46 AM
rating: 0

Doesn't MLBN's ownership structure with the big three cable companies make it more difficult to benefit from subcriber fees?

Mar 26, 2009 10:59 AM
rating: 0
BP staff member Shawn Hoffman
BP staff

Chico -- if anything, it might actually help. The cable companies will usually fight to the death against networks raising their subscription rates. But since the biggest ones have a piece in MLBN, they might be more amenable.

Mar 26, 2009 11:19 AM

While "cutting commercials" makes a good headline, it isn't really what drives distribution.

Eyeballs and ratings drive distribution, followed by the size of the core market (the group of people who must have the channel).

Until the core market expands, cable companies and Dish Network will not carry MLB TV. Viewers aren't leaving cable and Dish to watch MLB TV (they may be leaving for other reasons however). Until they do, there is no compelling reason to add MLB TV to an Expanded Cable channel lineup.

Cutting commercials will not make MLBTV a must have for consumers. No one have come up with broad reaching, compelling baseball content beyond Baseball Tonight and actual ballgames. And dropping commercials from a Baseball Tonight type of show is not a killer app that will make MLBTV a must have.

Mar 26, 2009 13:37 PM
rating: 0

In Time-Warner LA, MLB Network already is effectively a premium channel; we're paying $5/mo for the privilege.

Mar 26, 2009 14:17 PM
rating: 0

How about cutting their OWN commercials. If I hear that 30-30 song one more time I'm going to launch my Sammy Sosa model corked bat through my TV screen! That makes me channel surf more than anything!!!

Mar 27, 2009 05:58 AM
rating: 0

I agree with sdfdranger.

It seems like 3/4 of the ads currently are either MLB-related or PSAs already. Cutting ads shouldn't cost them much at all.

Mar 27, 2009 20:15 PM
rating: 0

Exactly what has this route (fewer buyers for a product at a premium price) done for boxing? Basically make it irrevelant.

Mar 27, 2009 21:36 PM
rating: 0


Mar 27, 2009 21:40 PM
rating: 0

Why not broadcast its live games without commercials? You talk about creating buzz.

Mar 28, 2009 08:49 AM
rating: 0

Small nit-pick. Viacom can no longer threaten to pull their TV Stations off of the air in order to get higher Cable Sub Fees for their cable nets. That used to be their MO, but in the Viacom/CBS split, the stations went with CBS and the cable went with Viacom.

Mar 28, 2009 15:14 PM
rating: 0
You must be a Premium subscriber to post a comment.
Not a subscriber? Sign up today!
<< Previous Article
Fantasy Article Team Health Reports: T... (03/26)
Next Article >>
Premium Article Wait 'Til Next Year: C... (03/26)

Fantasy Article Free Agent Watch: Week Nine
West Coast By Us: Yo
Premium Article Minor League Update: Games of Thursday, May ...
Premium Article Rubbing Mud: Context is King
Premium Article Daisy Cutter: How the Kipnis Got His TAv
Premium Article What You Need to Know: Another Day, Another ...
Premium Article Release Points: Where Have You Gone, Stephen...

Premium Article Lies, Damned Lies: Stress Tests
Premium Article Under The Knife: Does This Projection Make M...
Premium Article Future Shock: Florida Scouting Notebook
Fantasy Article Fantasy Beat: And It's Gone!
Premium Article Wait 'Til Next Year: College Knowledge
Fantasy Article Team Health Reports: Tampa Bay Rays

2009-04-16 - Premium Article The Biz Beat: Give it Away, Give it Away Now
2009-04-09 - Premium Article The Biz Beat: Exploiting the Down Times
2009-04-02 - Premium Article The Biz Beat: A Look at the Year Ahead
2009-03-26 - Premium Article Changing Channels
2009-03-19 - Premium Article Being Like Bud
2009-03-12 - Premium Article Make the World Go 'Round
2009-03-05 - Premium Article Remodeling the Media