Diamond Sports Group said in court today that it plans to broadcast just one MLB club next year, the Braves, per reporting from Evan Drellich of The Athletic. The company, which owns the Bally Sports Networks, also had deals with the Reds, Tigers, Royals, Angels, Marlins, Cardinals, Rays but plans on walking away from those. As Drellich notes, as part of the company’s ongoing Chapter 11 bankruptcy process, they can accept and reject contracts though the measures have to be approved by the court. The Brewers Guardians, Twins and Rangers had one-year deals with Diamond for 2024. Those 11 clubs will now have to renegotiate new deals with Diamond or find other broadcasting arrangements. Drellich provides some more specifics on X, noting that it’s more complicated than Diamond simply abandoning these 11 clubs, but that seems to be the company’s goal regardless. Alden González of ESPN adds some more details, noting that a confirmation hearing has been set for November 14 and 15 in Houston. The Marlins and Diamond have mutual interest in working out a new deal, per a report from Barry Jackson and Craig Mish of the Miami Herald. The Angels are working on a new deal with Diamond, per Jeff Fletcher of the Orange County Register.
Per Drellich, league representatives said they were “sandbagged” by the news. “We have no information about what is being done,” said Jim Bromley, lawyer for MLB. “We’ve had no opportunity to review and now we’re in front of the court and being asked to make our comments.”
The ongoing financial situation of Diamond Sports Group has been a significant part of baseball’s economic landscape for a long time and this could prove to be a major development as part of that narrative. Largely due to cord cutting, the regional sports network model has been gradually collapsing in recent history. In the 2022-23 offseason, reports emerged that Diamond was in rough shape financially and the company filed for bankruptcy before the 2023 MLB season began.
They dropped their contracts with the Padres and Diamondbacks during that 2023 campaign. It threatened to do the same with the Guardians, Twins and Rangers for 2024 but ultimately renegotiated lower fees with those clubs and continued those broadcasts through this year. Now it seems like the company is continuing down this path but with an even more aggressive severing of their existing ties to Major League Baseball.
This is bound to have short-term effects on clubs and players. These contracts have been sources of significant revenue for clubs, as MLBTR covered earlier this year. The 11 teams that Diamond plans to cut ties with were previously receiving between $33MM (Brewers) and $125MM (Angels) on an annual basis. Per reporting in April, the Padres were set to receive about $60MM in 2023 before their deal with Diamond collapsed. The league reportedly covered about 80% of those fees last year but didn’t plan to do so in 2024 and beyond.
Uncertainty around broadcast revenue seemingly played a major role in the 2023-24 offseason, which was disappointing for players. Teams like the Padres, Rangers, Twins and others were either cutting payroll or not increasing it as much as had previously been expected, with the TV situation often being used as justification. This appeared to play a role in various free agents not finding markets as strong as they had anticipated and many of them lingered unsigned into the early months of 2024 and/or signed for deals well below projections. It seems fair to expect that similar narratives could emerge in the coming winter.
Per González, a company source says that Diamond is still hoping to sign new deals with the 11 clubs being cut out today. However, that would presumably involve reduce fee payments, such as those received by the Guardians, Twins and Rangers this year. As mentioned up top, the Marlins and Angels seem to expect to continue their relationship with Diamond/Bally in 2025, though negotiating new deals may take some time.
In the long-term picture, MLB might be happy to be further cutting ties with Diamond. They have continually expressed skepticism about the company’s plans to stay afloat. Diamond has tried various methods of refinancing, including signing a streaming deal with Amazon, but the league hasn’t seemed convinced that any of the company’s plans would lead to long-term stability.
As mentioned, the league has already started selling some games to fans in direct-to-customer fashion. Commissioner Rob Manfred has aspirations of marketing a digital streaming package consisting of several MLB teams, which fans could watch without blackout restrictions. MLB.TV already exists and allows fans to watch most games, but the RSN deals lead to certain teams being blacked out in the areas covered by those deals.
Having less commitment with Diamond going forward will increase the viability of that streaming plan over the years to come. However, as mentioned, less TV revenue figures to have a sizeable impact on the short-term economics of the game. This will lead to ripple effects throughout the upcoming offseason and will likely be worrisome for certain players hitting the open market in the coming weeks. New deals could be negotiated between now and the 2025 season, which could put some money back on the table, though likely less than in previous years.
There is also the matter of the fan experience, as there were times in 2024 where the Braves were not available on TV to some customers during a dispute between Bally’s and Comcast. For fans of these 11 clubs today, they will have to keep an eye on the proceedings to determine if their favorite club will still be accessed in the ways they are accustomed to or if they will have to switch to some new broadcast model.
tigers182
Good riddance. What a mess Diamond made
rondon
What does it say about MLB and the owners, that a fly by night group of shysters was able to finagle their way in this deep??
johnsilver
Selling out to apple tv is any different? it’s going to get quite comical to me pretty soon when a TON of fans on this site just cannot comprehend how salaries can come down and STILL blame it on “greedy” corporate interests.
The minds of today, Instructed from a young age in economics was indeed poorly done in it’s entirety and left a pretty much lost generation plus.
Non Roster Invitee
Everybody’s greedy.
MWeller77
John Silver: It’s rich that you are critiquing other people’s thinking when you write sentences as poorly-constructed as that last sentence. (It’s not so much that you made “mistakes” like “it’s entirely” instead of “its entirety”; it’s just a badly-written, difficult-to-follow sentence.)
You’re right that someone in education has failed, but the failure appears not to have been in the education of the “young minds” you are so consistently and needlessly condescending toward.
CujoMarlin
Toward is not a word you are supposed to use at the end of a sentence.
rememberthecoop
Zing!
Samuel
“The minds of today, Instructed from a young age in economics was indeed poorly done in it’s entirety and left a pretty much lost generation plus.”
johnsilver;
Most of their their parents and even grandparents didn’t understand basic economics.
Henny Youngman’s’ line fits for most Americans:
“How can I be overdrawn? I still have blank checks left!”
–
I responded to your comment on the broadcasters in the Brewers article.
I don’t have a TV hooked up. Everything I watch
is streaming. Am a computer person. Unhooked
my TV sometime in the early 90’s. Had to go over
to my girlfriends house to follow the developments
of 9/11.
Pads Fans
langeek.co/en/grammar/course/1018/towards
If used as an adjective, it can be used grammatically correctly at the end of a sentence.
Very Barry
They were NOT “fly by night”. They got into trouble because the cable television model is falling apart. A huge part of the revenue to pay for Media Sports rights comes from the cable model. Cable television model pays based on the total number of ALL cable subscribers. ESPN gets $9.25 every month for EVERY subscriber to the cable television system. It doesn’t matter if you watch or not, it is part of your bill. Every time somebody cuts the cord …. No money to ESPN, or the RSN who was showing games on that cable system.
Streaming don’t pay like that. Folks cancel their subscription during the offseason. You only get paid from folks who want and subscribe to your product. You get paid from EVERY subscriber to the cable system under the current cable television model.
Diamond went bankrupt because the money they were taking in from the cable companies was no longer enough to service the debt they took on to get the deals. Too many people cut the cord to cable for them to continue to make money.
At some point, MOST of the media rights holders will end up in bankruptcy just like Diamond. Everybody is OVERPAYING for sports media rights. It will ultimately end badly for everybody except the NFL.
JoeBrady
In my amateur perspective, Diamond was trying to buy its way into a growing industry. Companies do this all the time. Ofttimes, the difference between success and failure is having enough cash to sustain the losses.
It’s like a version of AI. Most companies will lose money, and a few will succeed spectacularly.
el_chapo_
^^^^^THIS GUY GETS IT^^^^
refereemn77
I think the criticism I have is this: how did MLB and/or the Clubs not see this coming? How did they think it could continue? And, what’s going to happen with the other Clubs that aren’t in NYC, LA, or Chicago?
If Diamond couldn’t make this go as they were, how will the other regional networks do it? Outside of the “Big 3” cities, the downturn in cable system carriage fees has to be a problem for the other RSNs.
Pads Fans
They got in trouble because Sinclair sold the broadcast rights to a subsidiary at an inflated price to get them off their books when they spun off that subsidiary after buying them for more than market value in the first place.
DIRECTV just won in their negotiations against Disney, who owns ABC and ESPN, so there will be DIRECTV packages soon that ESPN is NOT part of, where you can purchase a package by your interest, not the entire Disney catalog. You can blame that BS on the fact that there are only 5 corporations that control all of the video content we see in the US. We may not have ala carte TV options yet, but something close is coming and at a lower price point than cable and satellite providers have had to charge because of Disney, Discovery, et al.
stymeedone
@rondon
Fly by night? Hardly! This is the Sinclair Broadcasting Company. They purchased the Fox Sports Network from Disney to facilitate the Disney/Fox merger and paid $10 Billion. Like most large companies, Sinclair has many subsidiaries, just as Fox Sports was a subsidiary of Fox. Unfortunately, cable cutting occurred more rapidly than expected, dropping revenues, and putting them in Bankruptcy.
rememberthecoop
The Cubs Marquee network is part of Sinclair. So, will this also filter down to them?
TheMan 3
Sinclair are themselves shysters
Pads Fans
Those shysters are in bankruptcy court, where a judge will decide what they get to do or not do. This is not close to being decided. As creditors, those teams and MLB have a huge say in whether or not they accept this BS. Right now MLB is arguing against DSG being allowed to do this in the bankruptcy hearing.
Samuel
tigers182;
Maybe so.
But the good news is that according to MLBTR only the Minnesota Twins were affected enough by the “mess” to have to cut back on payroll. So…..
What’s the problem?
UncleJesse
Have mercy!
Jabronie23
Good. Now these clubs can launch their own streaming platforms or sign deals with more financially viable companies.
johnsilver
jabronie– That, my belief is the issue. Some (like a lot) of teams just don’t have much of a fan base, which can allow them to charge enough to have a platform of their own. I’m no media exec, but how many support personel, cameramen, not to mention just the equipment itself?
Some teams have massive fan bases spread out all over the country.. LAD, NYY, Cubbies, Red Sox, SFG, Atlanta and maybe even the NYM somewhat, but everyone else? it’s mostly regional, which is why and how some teams have had their own networks (succesfully) for decades and Diamond/bally folded at the 1st hint at trouble.
I’ll give you an example of a small, regional sports network.. Seattle and Root.. Every team has now left it from the Seattle market, leaving the mariners as the sole sports team, will it still be around come ’25 season? who knows. Not a huge market team, which had banked previously on the MISL and i believe it was nhl team.. don’t hammer me on that, but think it was those 2 which just left it.. 1 was the kraken, but not positive on soccer.. Anyway.. mid-small market are at major disadvantage and i don’t see the major market powerhouses relinquishing their cash cows in order to bale out the Tampa bays of the league.
refereemn77
Yeah. I was saying in another comment that the model outside of the “Big 3” cities has to be on the edge as well.
The problem MLB has is that MLB is really more of an association. The individual Clubs maintain a high amount of autonomy. The biggest mistake was not pooling all local broadcast revenue, but the owners wouldn’t do it without a salary cap. Now the owners are in a bind.
mlb fan
It was only a matter of time until the millions upon millions of cord cutters disrupted the outdated Comcast/Xfinity communications and distribution business model.
el_chapo_
Is everyone else blacked out from watching the games today and yesterday on mlb.tv or just me?
mlb fan
“Everyone else blacked out..or just me”…I’ve been using MlB.TV for over 10 yrs now and if I remember correctly, you’ve never been able to watch the MLB playoffs on MLB.TV.
I watched yesterday’s games on ESPN. ESPN pays a lot for their exclusive rights to certain MLB playoff games.
Samuel
mlb fan;
Yes.
But I listen to the radio broadcast of my choice the day of the game, and 2 hours after the game ends I can replay the video with my choice of audio.
Sort of like 30 years ago when I – and others I knew – set VCR’s on timers to tape the games when we were at work. Then played them back when we got home. But choice of
the audio is better.
johnsilver
elchappo- espn/abc
refereemn77
Unless you’re a paying TV subscriber of a partner Cable, Satellite, or Live TV streaming service, you could never watch on MLB.TV.
The networks (ESPN, Fox) have exclusive rights to the broadcasts in the postseason.
Garywally57
It’s just a matter of time, that if you want to watch any MLB game, you will have to pay for a streaming service. More revenue for the billionaire owners and millionaire players.
bkouchnerkavich
I’d more than willing to pay extra for a service with all the games and no blackouts.
Simm
It’s actually been less revenue with the collapse of diamond.
99socalfrc
Maybe it has been less revenue for MLB, but their broadcast partner literally went broke trying to pay them. So what does that tell us?
The answer for all major sports leagues is their own streaming service, why anyone debates this is beyond me.
joeflaccosunibrow
Stick to the service line you know. If a sports league knows sports, stick with that. You can have a streaming service do all the technical and management stuff and just collect the service fee of carrying your sport. That’s straight profit without the added headache. Create out clauses as necessary.
rememberthecoop
Except the NFL. They are so popular that anything works for them.
stymeedone
The sports leagues would rather be overpaid for the rights, than only make what ad revenue and subscriptions can generate.
For Love of the Game
Cheaper than being forced to subscribe to an entire cable bundle just to watch baseball.
Sue F.
I agree. I would be willing to pay for a streaming service. I belong to 2 Cardinal fan groups on Facebook and most of the members only have cable to watch the games. So now that Bally won’t be broadcasting them they will be dropping their cable.
rememberthecoop
But who does that? The reason some people stick with cable is because they like other offerings and don’t want to have to find 4 or 5 different services to get what they want. And after you pay for all that, you really aren’t saving any money anyway.
rct
@Garywally57: I would be more than happy to pay for my team a la carte or even with a non-blackout general subscription to MLB.TV. MLB seems to make it as hard as possible to watch in-market games. Until it’s easier, the high seas are your friend. Finding a stream for any game of any sport has never been easier.
Fallguy820
Not me !!! I grew up listening to the ball game on radio. I have no problem doing that again.
quonset point
True. Even though I subscribe to the Marquee Network for Cubs content, Pat & Ron on the radio is the way to go.
refereemn77
It won’t be though. They can’t make even close to the same revenue via a streaming model.
Joe says...
I would think the Cardinals could start their own network. Seems like they have the fanbase to pull it off.
Fallguy820
They should just buy a station like Chanel 11 and be done with all of the nonsense.
rememberthecoop
And yet they get revenue sharing money. What an outrage!
rememberthecoop
Their fanbase isn’t bigger than the Cubs and yet Marquee isn’t doing that well.
Millk18
Don’t let the door hit you in the a## on the way out. What’s next, Cardinals?
bpskelly
If done right, this is a good thing.
Of course it’s MLB… so the odds of them getting right aren’t so high.
refereemn77
Ot will be impossible to “do right“ because of how MLB is structured. MLB doesn’t centrally control the broadcast or streaming rights. The individual Clubs do.
etex211
When will Fubo figure out that the Diamond/Bally regional sports channels are no longer worth the 15 bucks per month they charge? They already lost me as a customer because of this.
Old York
I always enjoyed listening to the ball game on the radio anyway.
FemboySportsFan!
old-school :3
Old York
@FemboySportsFan
I find that you can use your imagination more, especially with good radio broadcasters.
Joe says...
@Old York that’s problem. Not enough good radio announcers. I’m one of the Yankees fans not sorry to see Sterling retire. No more hearing “That ball is high, it is far, it is… caught by the second baseman.”
Clofreesz
Hearing my broadcaster (Eric Nadel) feels much more iconic than the Bally broadcasters.
FemboySportsFan!
@OldYork
Agreed! so much more fun.
NoSaint
@Joe says…
Hawk Harrelson just asked me to hold his beer?
Clofreesz
Hawk and Duane Kuiper are good. Vin, Jack Buck, Russ Hodges, Red Barber, Harry Caray, and Ernie Harwell were better.
I just think radio feels more baseball-like than television and corporization.
Old York
@Clofreesz
Yeah, I though Ernie Harwell had a great voice for presenting and creating the image that you’re actually there watching the game.
Slider_withcheese
Torres does have range though
rememberthecoop
Yeah but the main reason why is because it’s radio. In other words, no video so they are forced to create the scenery.
Captain Dunsel
I concur. MLB.com’s At Bat app is the best bargain around. You can listen to any team’s radio feed from spring training through the postseason with archived broadcasts for $30 a year.
SweetBabyRayKingsThickThighs
MLB will create their own streaming service for all the teams and you’ll be able to watch your favorite team whenever you want, wherever you are in the world.* Starting at 29.99 a month for basic or 49.99 for commercial free.
*blackout restrictions apply.
griffey_4_prez
They literally already have this
Jerry Hairston Jr's Toupee
Hopefully, MLB.tv won’t have blackouts now….
refereemn77
The individual Clubs control the broadcast and streaming rights. MLB cannot force them into MLB.TV. MLB is largely an association and the Clubs maintain a large amount of autonomy.
JoeBrady
Do they? I have MLB.com, but I cannot get NYY home games. Fortunately, I am a RS fan, so it isn’t much of a loss.
Ferpad
None of those teams should negotiate new deals with Diamond. What guarantee do they have any new deal will be honored?
mlb fan
“Will be honored”…Any business entity can file bankruptcy and essentially break existing contracts.
Ferpad
Of course they can. My point was they’ve already done it once so why sign again with them.
Clofreesz
Nobody will miss them. Sorry, Atlanta.
Skyrider123
I don’t think anybody in Atlanta cares who’s in charge as long as the games are being broadcast
mp2891
For those who don’t understand how bankruptcy works, companies in bankruptcy have the option of accepting or rejecting contracts in whole. They reject contracts that are bad deals for the bankrupt company, which means that the 11 teams that are losing their deal with Diamond were getting paid more money under their deal than was justified. All 11 of these teams will make less money in 2025, and maybe for several years beyond 2025, for broadcasting/streaming their games. If you’re a fan of any of these teams (and I’m a Rays fan), expect cost cutting as a result of this decision, even if the teams sign new deals with Diamond Sports or create their own streaming service. This is also bad news for the players because 1/3 of the league’s teams will now be cutting spending, making this year’s free agency a huge buyer’s market for everyone who isn’t one of the 5-10 top players in free agency this year..
For Love of the Game
Grim prognosis, but I can’t say you’re wrong.
Atloriolesfan
The overlap between “victims” and 2025 committed payrolls is very interesting. Counting Atlanta as stuck with a contract that Diamond likes, you have the following:
ATL 5th largest
TEX 9th
STL 13th
LAA 14th
KC 15
SEA 16
MIN 17
MIL 20
CIN 21
CLE 24
TB 27
MIA 28
Some would not be in the FA market anyway, but some may be pressured into trades or non tenders.
But sitting in the cat birds seat is a team with it’s own network and rights to broadcast ANOTHER TEAM (plus growing local TV rating and the second lowest payroll commitments)–the Baltimore Orioles.
inkstainedscribe
The Braves have enough of a national fan base who still recall the TBS era that Diamond seems to think it can make money from those games. All the other teams are basically regional markets. Even the Cardinals. Wow.
angelsbroncosfan
Hopefully the Angels get something quickly, before the offseason begins. So the payroll will be increased for next season
shortstop
They would probably just give Rendon a contract extension.
This one belongs to the Reds
Robby the robot allowed this to go on too long which affected these teams operations last season.
To hope MLB actually comes up with a solution that is both good for fans and the income disparity for these teams is probably too much to ask.
seamaholic 2
This is good. MLB will take over broadcasting, via streaming. We’ll pay by the month and it will be fine. The era of free entertainment is gradually dying, and that’s generally a good thing.
YankeesBleacherCreature
No, they won’t. They’ll keep doing what they do and sell some game content to the highest bidder like they do with Amazon, Apple, Roku, etc. even though MLB.tv subscribers pay for a “full” season. I expect further fragmentation of games bc of their greed. MLB set game attendance records this season so local TV blackouts are working as intended.
Seamaholic
I don’t think anyone makes a one-or-the-other decision between going to the game and watching it on TV. They’re completely different entertainment options and different audiences. TV watchers are a small group of intense fans who care deeply who wins games. In-person fans are experience-seekers who care very little what the score is.
YankeesBleacherCreature
I dunno. You’ll need to ask season ticket holders whether local blackouts influence which package they decide to buy.
CardsFan57
I think teams who regularly fill their ballpark are missing out on money by blacking out home games.
YankeesBleacherCreature
Valid. There’s no public data on any of this stuff.
JoeBrady
My expectation is that these will all be short-term deals to ensure some cash flow, while allowing for the flexibility to eventually consolidate all broadcasting.
stymeedone
Not every fan who can’t get the game on cable will switch to streaming. Some may keep cable. Some may cut cable but go without. The Pie keeps getting smaller.
jswanny41
Subscribed to a braves only mlbtv package for a few years, getting blacked out of 30-40 games per year due to living in Iowa and having blackout restrictions for 6 different teams. Tried a VPN and no matter which I used, the mlbtv page refused to load. Got a jailbroke firestick, now. Cheaper than the mlbtv package and can watch any game I want.
With the diamond sports news I’m sure the blackouts will no doubt continue.
rememberthecoop
So you are breaking the law and bragging about it?
sffblddt
Good news for Toronto, being owned by Rogers and all games broadcast by Rogers cable giving the Blue Jays steady reliable $. Could position them ahead of those 11 teams for free agents, or even trades if those team look to unload.
stymeedone
They will still have to overpay.
brave from the woods
If I’m not mistaken, I think the Braves deal carried over to Bally and is supposed to end in ‘27 (if Diamond survives that long). Hopefully going forward the Braves can get a better deal that will allow more fans to actually watch. Money wise the deal is garbage anyway compared to other clubs which I guess is why they are the lucky ones.
RunDMC
There have been reports over the years about them restructuring the deal where it’s actually better than many think (i.e. average), but certainly not in the upper echelon of competitive teams. We have an anonymous Time Warner exec to thank for that deal.
SewaldSwansonSwoon
I have an idea.
Maybe focus on putting winning teams on the field so revenue can come primarily from attendance and stadium advertising, rather than TV rights.
Cap salaries, or at least contract length, so the consumer doesn’t get raked over the coals in the aftermath.
Fire Manfred.
Shorten the season.
Whoa! Everyone wins.
Seamaholic
Attendance and win-loss records are mostly uncorrelated, and to the extent they are, they’re both caused by a 3rd factor, market size, instead of each other. That is, in fact, the primary problem with the current incentive structure.
stan lee the manly
Shortening the season makes literally everybody lose
stymeedone
@SSS
Even better, have broadcasters bid based on what ads they could actually sell.
JoeBrady
They do put winning teams on the field. 18 teams at .500 or better. 17 teams last year. 16 the year before.
HalosHeavenJJ
This will ensure the off season moves at a glacial pace
hansel2525
Can anyone explain why Diamond has this kind of power over the teams, to where the teams hope they can renegotiate a contract after being dropped? Are there no other solutions other than sticking with a company that basically sucks?
CardsFan57
The teams can do anything they want once the contract is voided. Sometimes negotiating a cheaper contract with Bally is their best option.
Non Roster Invitee
Luckily I have Metro/T-Mobile and the MLB package is free every year. $199.value!
wjf010
that’s great for you, but there are blackout rules. MLB needs to end that garbage so we can stream who we want, when we want. no wonder younger fans like soccer…. everything is in one place….you can stream from anywhere
lowtalker1
I have been so much happier with my quality of broadcast with padres tv through mlb with no blackouts outside of a few national games.
gojira15
This is an opportunity for these franchises to take control of their broadcasting rights. They might need to tighten their belts for a little while, but crawling back to Diamond is not the way to go. How long before you get dropped again, and they need to renegotiate again? It would be far better to join forces with other local sports franchises and form a new, self-owned network.
refereemn77
The Clubs already control their broadcast rights.
CardsFan57
This will make it more difficult for the Cardinals to move veteran contracts. Too many teams will be slashing payroll. Maybe Gray can be moved at the deadline next year.
Rsox
Another winter of handcuffed spending?
Pads Fans
MLB has already said that DSG would not be broadcasting any MLB games in 2025.
Diamond is actually saying they want to stop paying money owed to the 8 teams, they stopped paying what was owed when they filed the bankruptcy, but want to keep broadcasting Braves games.
MLB has objected to that in the bankruptcy hearings saying that DSG had never mentioned this before. I doubt the judge in the case allows it,
b00giem@n
Bally’s was an included channel on a very basic cable package here in Cincinnati. I’m getting pretty tired of this s**t of chasing games between streaming services. What I will not do is fork over 100+ to fubo or MLB.TV or Steven else gets rights when I can literally find the game free online.
Do I care if it’s unethical? Not at all, it’s a pretty normal response when every possible penny being squeezed out of you.