How Much Would You Pay For Blackout-Free MLB.tv?

An interesting comment from the post below leads me to this simple question – how much more would you be willing to pay for a version of MLB.tv that did not include blackout restrictions? Essentially, would the market justify an additional product whose revenues could be used to buy the team owners out of their arcane use of “local market” demarcations? The totals listed below would essentially be premiums on top of the base fee, so you can just add $100 or $120 (depending on which version you would purchase) to get the total price you’d be willing to pay for a truly blackout free MLB.tv product.




Print This Post



Dave is a co-founder of USSMariner.com and contributes to the Wall Street Journal.


97 Responses to “How Much Would You Pay For Blackout-Free MLB.tv?”

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
  1. Patrick Pearson says:

    This is already offered in CT/NY/NJ I believe for an extra fee if you’re a cablevision subscriber I think? Or is it through a different cable provider? Either way I want to say it’s somewhere in the $60 range?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  2. Kevin says:

    Would have voted $0 had it been an option. As a Reds fan in Florida, every game is available other than games against the Marlins or Rays, which are on TV. Perhaps I’m just lucky that the blackouts rarely affect me.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Daniel says:

      You’re very lucky. I live in KC and if not for watching the Royals I would have no reason to purchase cable, as my family watches everything we want on Netflix or Hulu.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • TK says:

      What about games where Fox has the rights to the game, but they don’t play it in your area? These games are not viewable on any service, MLB.com or Direct TV, etc.

      This is what royally pisses me off. MLB is lying when they say “every out of market game.” The Fox game could be out of market, and you don’t get it. The worst example of this for me was when the Braves and Phillies were playing a crucial game the second to last day of the season, and I couldn’t watch it (without driving to Atlanta or Philly) while the Red Sox and Yankees played a meaningless game on Fox. I will always hate Fox for this, and I hate MLB, too. I also hate the Yankees and Red Sox, though that part is illogical.

      As a Braves fan in DC, the only games I’d want are the 9 games the Braves play against the Nats in Atlanta. I’d pay 10-20 bucks for those to avoid having to go to a friend’s house that has cable.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Paul F. says:

        I can’t tell you how many times something like this has happened to me. As a Rockies fan, those Saturday afternoon games are almost never broadcast nationally, but are always blacked out anyway thanks to Fox’s bizarre absolutist policy.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Newcomer says:

        And as a White Sox fan in North-Central Illinois, I really don’t understand why Fox decides to cover the White Sox and the Cardinals on the same weekend, almost every time. And we get the Cardinals, even though we’re closer to Chicago.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • miguel says:

        obama’s fault

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • B N says:

      I donno. I’d pay $30+ just to be able to avoid the blackouts on the Saturday games. I prefer to watch the games on TV, but sometimes for whatever reason a local game doesn’t get broadcast or I want to see an out-of-market matchup (i.e. the SF/Padres and SF/Atlanta matchups last season) that is happening during Sat afternoon.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  3. philosofool says:

    I went with the lowest total, but there’s only one blacked out team in my area, and they’re not in the same league as my team. I only really lose when the Mariners play the D-Backs, and that hardly every happens. If I lived in the mid-west and the entire AL Central was blocked, I’d pay about $100 for this.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  4. Brad Johnson says:

    More than $30 and I’m just incentivized to use one of the only slightly inconvenient ways to work around the blackout or otherwise pirate the game. I’d part with $30 or less to cut the 5 minute set up time, occasional dropped coverage, bad quality, and slight worry about legal issues.

    I’d probably be willing to pay much more if $30 wasn’t a significant amount of my monthly budget.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Bigmouth says:

      Exactly my feeling, too, Brad.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Trenchtown says:

      I don’t see the legal issues, you are not a party to the contracts between Major League Baseball teams and the broadcasting companies. And after reading through the terms and conditions, it just says that blackouts will occur, it does not say that you are not allowed to attempt to circumvent the blackouts.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  5. joe says:

    crap I read it wrong.

    I put 100+ but I would pay 0 more. I would just pay full price. As of now I choose not to buy it at all, so that would be a large profit increase from this n=1.

    I am a penny pincher though and I’ve learned to love the radio. I am a subscriber to mlb audio for 20 with no blackouts.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  6. Dave says:

    Blackouts don’t bother me when they are reasonable. But right now, they’re not. I live two hours outside of Toronto, and can’t watch the Jays on MLB.tv. I guess that’s not terribly bad. I COULD make the trip for a big game, and do. But, if I go and visit my family in Vancouver, some two thousand miles away, I still can’t watch a Jays game. That’s pretty ridiculous.

    Honestly, I think for the $120 premium package, you shouldn’t have to deal with blackouts. I guess I might be willing to pay more if MLB.tv wasn’t so all-around terrible. (Seriously, WORST customer support I’ve ever seen.)

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  7. Remis says:

    Being in Canada the only team that is blacked out is the Blue Jays, even though they are nowhere near my area. However, all of their games are on TV here, but when the game isn’t on TV, it is still blacked out. The blackout rules make no sense at all.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  8. Teej says:

    I feel for those who are screwed over by the blackout policy (Las Vegans get hosed, for example), but I wouldn’t pay much more. I’m thousands of miles from the team I follow, and the local team is on TV anyway, so the only games that I don’t have access to are the Saturday afternoon games. But I would pay a little extra to see that Saturday policy die a fiery death.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  9. Denny says:

    I put 49-50. As a Jays fan blackout restrictions are across Canada. I would love to be able to catch a Jays game on the road if no TV with Sportsnet…or even worse Sportsnet 1 is available. I would have to check the budget, but if it were actually an option this could persuade me to go higher.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  10. Evan says:

    I spent two years trying to get MLB.tv to work properly and I never watched a full game from beginning to end without having to completely restart the browser in the hopes of getting it running again. I’m not computer illiterate, its just the worst piece of software I have ever used.

    I will stick to the MLB at Bat application from my android phone and just listen to all the games (without blackout restrictions).

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  11. Greg says:

    if the game is on local tv, i don’t mind too much. it’s the saturday fox bullshit that kills me. i’m in dc, want to watch the phillies, not the yankees vs. redsox. i have no options.

    show me the fox commercials, i don’t care.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  12. Matty Brown says:

    Another Jays fan here; I live right above Maine, so I am close to as far East as you can get and the Jays are still blacked out. A nation-wide blackout is pure nonsense.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  13. Ree says:

    I’d pay around $50 or so, just for the fact that I’m rarely around a TV. They would only black out the A’s and Giant’s games, but that really doesn’t help if I want to watch them yet also get rid of my TV/cable bills.

    Might still go for it and make do with radio.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  14. Greg says:

    mlb.tv is WAY better than it used to be (don’t know what this year’s version will be yet), and the combo with the iphone app is incredible. watching games on my phone is awesome and surprisingly clear. i used it way more than i though i would.

    the only problems i have with mlb.tv now is that my internet connection can’t handle the top speeds anywhere but on my superfast connection at work. so i have to watch a step down at home. still awesome though.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  15. Can’t a proxy server fix any blackout issues one has? I’m thinking of getting MLB.tv for the first time this season and that’s been my plan. I’ve never tried it though, so I don’t know if it works. I hope it works.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Jason says:

      Yep, it works. At least, it has the past couple seasons for me.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Patrick says:

        Could you explain how to use a proxy server to me?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Me says:

        @Patrick. The simplest way is to go to free proxy websites, where you’ll find a list of IP addresses that are used as proxy servers. I still use explorer, so on my browser I’d go to Tools>Internet Options>Connections>LAN Settings>Use a Proxy. Its probably something similar in most browsers. Make sure you enter both the IP and Port #. Make sure the server is geographically out of the blackout area, often foreign countries work fine. Switch to the proxy before you log in. It may take you a while to find one that works. Essentially what this does is make it look like you’re logging in from wherever the server is located by loggin in with server’s IP address.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Brad Johnson says:

      You have to get the right proxy though, I’ve read horror stories of people losing their MLB.TV and their money for violating the terms and conditions. Not quite sure if I believe them though…

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Me says:

      I used to use a proxy, but when they switched over the new flash format last year it stopped working for me. It required too much bandwidth even for the lowest setting. It still works in theory, just have to find an awesome proxy.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Paul F. says:

        Yeah, going the proxy route can be very hit-or-miss, especially when you’re trying to find an international IP address. You may be able to fool MLB.tv, but lose the bandwidth necessary to actually stream games.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  16. suicide squeeze says:

    I put nothing because Madison only has the Brewers blacked out, and I can see all of their games on TV.

    Although, when I move, it’s goodbye to Tigers and White Sox. Luckily that’s only 18 A’s games a year. And they show the Sox on CSN sometimes.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  17. Mark says:

    I like MLB.TV, but it’s expensive. it shouldn’t have blackouts at that price. nevertheless, my bigger concern is playoff ball. the multiple camera angle thing is interesting, but i’d rather have the tv broadcast as an mlb.tv option. if you don’t have cable, you can’t really watch the playoffs.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  18. Central PA blackout says:

    I no longer buy the mlb.com product due to blackouts. I live in Lancaster, PA which is 1.5 hours west of Philly, 1.5-2 hours north of Baltimore/Washington DC area and 4 hours east of Pittsburgh. For some inexplicable reason, I am blacked out of Phillies, Orioles, Nats, and Pirates games. It would be very nice to have an option to watch local games…$20 more would be fine.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • AJS says:

      Are those games available on cable where you live? I totally get the idea of blackouts in places where you can watch the games on actual TV. Most teams sell their TV rights, and MLB worries teams will get less money if the stations that buy the games have less viewership.

      What is ridiculous is that the blackouts apply for multiple teams in places where none of those teams’ games are even possible to watch on TV.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Paul F. says:

        I’m guessing those games are not on cable. For example, I went to college in New Mexico, and am a Rockies fan. I almost never got to watch the Rockies in college because they were blacked out, and were only on TV for Sunday games. During the week the local cable company owned the rights to broadcast the Rockies, but didn’t actually broadcast them, leaving me SOL.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  19. Fergie348 says:

    This is the price you would pay per season, not per month right Dave?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  20. Stephen says:

    The only reason why I pay for cable television is to watch Jays’ games. I would cancel my television if I could get MLB.tv w/o blackouts. Considering I spend somewhere in the range of $600 annually on cable, $200 for MLB.tv is a steal (for me).

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Alex K. says:

      Same here. Which is why it will never happen, and Rogers will continue adding additional Sportsnet channels that aren’t part of the basic package.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  21. Joncarlos says:

    I assume that this means both the local blackout issues (can’t watch your hometown team online) and the FOX blackout issues (can’t watch anything when FOX is broadcasting a Saturday game).

    I would only pay about $10-$15 to avoid the local blackout issues but I would pay a lot more to work around the stupid FOX rules.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  22. Monroe says:

    MLB.TV is truly an awful product. As mentioned earlier in this thread, they have incompetent customer support. After getting MLB Extra Innings via Directv for many years, I used Roku (mlb.tv) last year. Despite a 20-25 mpbs connection – which gets a crystal clear picture for Netflix – the picture was frequently pixelated and streaky, especially when the camera moved with the action. Again and again, I asked for help, but nothing … in short before MLB.TV offers any new services, they should try making their current level of service not completely suck. That is all.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • cobradc23 says:

      I was thinking about ordering the MLB.TV package for my Roku, which I just recently bought. Have you had any other problems with the Roku player? When mine works it’s great but it is wildly inconsistent. Some nights every program I try to watch either freezes (Hulu) or keeps trying to reload (Netflix). I have no such problems watching Netflix through my XBox.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Me says:

        Mostly it all comes down to bandwidth. It works very well on the Roku, assuming you have the bandwidth for it. I pay for 25M, and I live in a smaller neighborhood so bandwidth usually isn’t an issue for me. There are occasionally some streaming issues with MLB.TV, but its definitely worth it in my opinion. I would say 8 out of 10 games I watch have no issues at all, which is good enough for me. It takes a lot of bandwidth to run the HD properly, and even if you pay for the highest speed, you’ll still encounter some issues during peak traffic hours if you live in a heavily populated area, because you’re not guaranteed to get all 25M or whatever, you can just get up to that, you’re sharing that pipe with everybody else. So if 20 people on your block are streaming Netflix, good luck. For me, the drawbacks of using MLB.tv at $120 are deal-with-able considering it’s less that half the cost of extra innings. So yeah, don’t expect a perfect product, but its certainly good enough.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Monroe says:

        That seems weird that the streaming works better with the Xbox than with the Roku. I’d ask Roku for a new box, it could just be the hardware, I understand they’re pretty good about sending new ones out. While I’ve had many issues with the quality of the MLB picture on Roku, all other services (netflix, amazon, etc) work better than advertised. If MLB.TV on Roku performed like it should, it would be a great product. The options on it are far superior to Extra Innings in that you go to any game at anytime and the ads are replaced by an mlb logo placard. Like “Me” says, there are certainly nights when it comes in clearer than others (despite the fact I have a strong connection and, also, live in the styx). Unless you have a 20 plus connection, I wouldn’t even consider it. I have a friend who has an 8 (which works for netflix) but MLB.TV sputters and buffers constantly, making it essentially pointless to use. So connection speed is indeed the major issue, but mine’s pretty fast and still apparently can’t quite do the job. It would be great if MLB had some customer service to deal with such issues, but once they get your money they simply don’t care ….

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  23. Aaron says:

    I was going to put 50 or 60 but if they actually made this product I would probably pay a lot more. The cheapest cable that includes local games costs 60 a month and all I want to watch. A one time fee of even a couple hundred dollars to get all the games would be perfect in my case.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  24. My echo and bunnymen says:

    I live in LA, my beloved Dodgers I lose, and I lose the White Sox when they play the Angels. If I wasn’t such a diehard baseball fan before being a White Sox/Dodger fan than I wouldn’t have purchased MLB.tv at all.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  25. dhbooty83 says:

    Astros games are blacked out on mlb.tv in Dallas. There are plenty of Astros fans in the Dallas/Ft. Worth area that would subscribe if the blackout restrictions were just more reasonable.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  26. Mr Punch says:

    I went high because I could drop cable and get everything I want off the web (and I’d pay $100+ not to have to use an illegal workaround). At what point does it make sense for a team to sell local access directly to fans as opposed to going through the cable companies? (The answer is obviously different depending on whether you own, e.g., NESN or YES.)

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  27. Ronnie Saint says:

    No blackouts for me as I live in England :) but I do have to watch games in the early hours of the morning 7.05 ET games start at midnight for me :( but I think the blackouts for you guys is stupid when you pay all that money and having to pay even more for At Bat to watch on my iPad is a rip off

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  28. wax_eagle says:

    I live in Braves country (2 hours north of ATL). I subscribe to cable, but would love the convenience of MLB.tv, but I don’t subscribe for two reasons. 1 I am a Cubs fan and I can get my fix with games that are already broadcast on WGN. 2. My second favorite team is the Orioles and they just aren’t worth paying money to watch right now. 3 its expensive and it wouldn’t let me watch the Saturday blacked out Cubs games on Fox which are the ones that I really get frustrated when I can’t see.

    Based on the games not included in my area on MLB.tv (162 Braves games). And the Saturday and Sunday Fox games (I figured about 5 a weekend for 20 weeks or 100 games). There are 262 out of 2430 games that are blacked out in my area. If am willing to pay $120 for the 2168 games that are broadcast then I figure its worth about 15 dollars to have the 262 games I am missing played on my computer.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  29. MisterZoomer says:

    I am re-subscribing to cable ONLY for my local 9. Otherwise, a powered antenna, Hulu and Netflix give me all I need at a great price. I would pay $100+ to avoid an addtional $30+/month for cable.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  30. PhillR says:

    MLBTV blackout restrictions are totally unreasonable, at least they were when I subscribed. I travelled frequently for work, so I just wanted to able to watch the Mets when I was out of town. Of course MLBTV used my CC info to determine blackout restrictions so I was technically always in the black out area.

    A year later they had added geo ip lookups to the CC lookup, so using a relatives address wouldn’t work.

    Canceling was a nightmare for a while too, as their online forms wouldn’t work. Naturally CS representatives were never available without excessive hold times.

    Did I mention I hate MLB TV and will never give them another dime?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  31. PhillR says:

    The sad thing is that MLB TV is really the only way MLB will get money from me aside from an occasional ticket. I don’t watch television except live baseball, so for a few years I maintained a cable TV plan just for that. However blackout restrictions combined with impossible customer service from RCN led me to cancel that. I would have used MLB TV to watch games, but see my earlier post.

    Now I follow baseball exclusively through online.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  32. Tim says:

    This poll needs to have some sort of modifier based on a person’s geographic location. I used to live in the broadcast zone for three different teams, so I was facing a minimum of 2 games getting blacked out every day (and usually three). That makes a big difference. Now that I’m down to two, I pulled the trigger and will just have to live without hearing Rob Dibble’s moronic screeds.

    To get the remaining games, I’d probably pay $30 extra. When it was three teams, I’d have paid $50 or more.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  33. JW says:

    I live in North Carolina, where the nearest teams, Washington and Baltimore, are both five hours away, and both blacked out for being “local.” Further, Time Warner has been in an endless legal dispute (5 season and counting) with the networks that carry these games, and we are totally unable to watch these blacked out games in any way. I fear I will never see Stephen Strasburg pitch, ever.

    Anyway, all that comes around to my poll answer of $0. I feel like NC residents are completely burned by the blackout policy, and paying additional to get around it just lends validity to an outmoded concept.

    I am perfectly happy to pay reasonable prices to watch pro sports online. I do not want to support piracy or illegal streams. I wish the leagues would get with the times and make this a real option.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  34. jrdo410 says:

    I am (slowly) moving over to internet only TV. Hopefully they will have this blackout thing fixed by the time the Mariners are good again, thats the only reason to hold on to cable for me.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  35. short says:

    So far, I’ve been unwilling to part with a single penny due to the ridiculous restrictions. The main reason I want MLB.TV is to watch my local team from work, when I can’t be near a TV. I put $21-$30 to be fair, but realistically, it’s that plus the base fee since now I won’t buy it.

    My solution will probably be a Slingbox. Then I can watch any games that are on my local cable channels for no extra cost beyond that of the device. Does anyone have any experience with the Slingbox?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • RangerDanger says:

      Slingbox is awesome. It works great as long as you have a strong connection. I use it outside on my patio all the time during the summer. Didn’t want to buy an extra satellite box for the TV outside, so just hook the laptop up and run Slingbox thru it. It’s great.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  36. Desert Rat says:

    I agree with those above who are less annoyed by the local team’s blackout than the Saturday Fox blackout. It makes no sense to me — here in Arizona, I can’t watch the Red Sox game at 10am on Saturday via the package because, apparently, doing so would somehow mean I won’t watch the 1pm Fox game. Are they serious? I subscribe to the MLB package because I’m a baseball junkie — trust me, Fox, I will probably watch your broadcast too, and I’ll even be happier when I do so.

    Football seems to understand that football fans like watching football – there are early games AND late games on Saturday and Sunday, and people seem to like watching both. Why does baseball go so far out of its way to deprive consumers of the chance to consume their product?!? In particular, in the fall, if I could watch the early MLB game I would. But I can’t, so I end up watching college football on Saturday mornings. Is that really what MLB wants — to drive more fans to football?!

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  37. Steven says:

    I put $100 because I am an Iowan blacked out of Milwaukee, KC, St Louis and Minnesota, whom CANNOT be viewed on any of the television options (also blacked out for Chicago but that can be viewed).

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • AJS says:

      See, it’s people like this who are rightfully outraged.

      While I think the policy is largely silly, why don’t people complain about NFL blackouts and/or NFL games not being available for streaming legally (i.e. you have to watch them on TV).

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  38. Carter says:

    The following teams are blacked-out where I live: Chicago White Sox, Chicago Cubs, Cincy Reds, St. Louis Cardinals. As a Cubs fan who doesn’t have ComcastSN-Chicago on his Comcast Cable, I can never watch any of my Cubs play, unless they are on WGN, and then I don’t have WGN-HD on my cable. I would pay $100 easily to watch the Cubs play, their division rivals play, and the chi-sox.

    But if I lived somewhere where only 1 team was blacked-out instead of FOUR? Probably nothing.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  39. colin says:

    the blackouts suck in Canada. anyone use a ps3 to stream?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  40. kwklwwagk says:

    I’d pay $100 more in a second. Cheapest way for me to get Mariners games on FoxSportsNW is premium cable or dish at at least $40 a month. $100 to keep crap channels and advertising out of my house and still get M’s games? Easy choice.

    The way a la carte TV is being held back by communications and media companies is completely messed up. Sports is really one of the last things that ties people into their outdated model. Blow that sucker up.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  41. Omar Little says:

    I really really hope a proxy server works for me as I’m a Canadian who ditched my cable and do not want to every have to deal with Rogers or Bell again.

    If I could get every game, in clear HD just like I could with cable/satellite or OTA I would pay $200, maybe even $300.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  42. ElJimador says:

    Getting Giants games is the only reason I have cable now, otherwise everything else I watch I can get streaming over the internet, via Netflix etc. So for me the math works out this way: 6 mos of cable @ $90/mo (for HD DVR, so I can start the games when I want and FF through the commercials) = $540. Which means that even if MLB.TV charged $150 for a blackout free package on top of the $120 for Premium I’d still only be paying half as much as I am now.

    $100 extra? No problem. Sign me up.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  43. pft says:

    I think most fans are in the following situation. 1) If they are local, the games are available on TV, and they don’t need mlb.tv, unless they travel. 2) If they are not local, and want to follow their favorite team, there is no blackout, so mlb/tv is fine as is.

    Obviously, there are a few exceptions, either they live in Canada far from Toronto or have trouble with the Fox blackouts once a week or less, or are local where there are no TV options available. Probably not enough to make a difference in mlb’s blackout policy

    Of course, there are the fans who only get cable for the local games and would prefer to watch on mlb.tv to save money, since cable is way overpriced in the US. However, if all local games were on mlb.tv w/o blackout, the price for mlb.tv would not be close to what it is now. Not even close. Closer to 50 dollars a month more I would think, since they will have to kickback money to YES, NESN, etc, all of whom would lose revenues from sponsors. So while they may be willing to pay more, they will find it will cost more than they think and the savings won’t offset the convenience of watching on TV.

    There are others who want blackout restrictions lifted so they can watch while at work. They must be government employees (LOL), or work for a company w/o an IT department. Sooner or later watching from work will not be an option. MLB should keep the blackout option to improve government efficiency and help smaller companies who can not afford an IT department to keep from getting ripped off by their employees. LOL

    There are a small minority of course who want to watch more than their favorite team, and for them, even if they could get the game on their regular cable, they would prefer to watch on mlb.tv so they can watch multiple games more conveniently on their TV which is set up to work with mlb.tv. These are probably the folks who have no problem with cable costs and will continue to keep their cable for other reasons, but would prefer to pay whatever it costs to eliminate blackouts to better feed their addiction. Not enough of these guys to make MLB interested enough to change anything, so they can spend their savings on therapy.

    I live in China, and no blackout restrictions apply, so I like the status quo. As a Red Sox fan I was inconvenienced by the blackout a couple of years ago when travelling to Boston during a Yankee series only to find out that my hotel did not carry NESN. A pub near the hotel carried the games though, for only the cost of a few beers.

    For this having quality problems with mlb/tv, I suggest you just dump or dispense with nexdef and it should work much better.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  44. Daven says:

    Pro-tip: All you have to do is, in your browser settings, set to route your connection through some free proxy server in japan or china or the like, then load the game you want to watch that is normally blacked out for you. This tends to make it really crappy quality, but then all you have to do is turn off the proxy. MLB.com doesn’t check after the initial load. After the proxy is turned off, the quality goes back to what your full internet speed can handle. I use this to watch the Mariner games which are blacked out in my area.

    I can only assume MLB is completley aware of this flaw in their system because it’s pretty widely talked about and known, but don’t really care because they want more subscribers (they could easily just continually check location with a very minor software update, but they chose not too).

    Their affiliates are happy because MLB appears to have the requested black outs, and MLB is happy because people can easily get around the blackout restriction so long as MLB’s software doesn’t continually check location throughout the broadcast, which they don’t; so they get more subscribers like me, who otherwise wouldn’t sign up.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  45. BavarianYankee says:

    I live in Germany so I have no blackouts at all. And I’m glad MLB.tv exists, it’s the only chance to see live baseball over here, probably the only chance for most people outside the US and Canada. I wish NASCAR had something like this, it’s impossible to see races live in Germany. I can’t thank MLB enough for having a service like that.

    Some people maybe aren’t happy with the customer support, but hell, where do u get a package of live sports (and over 2000 live games) that cheap? (yes NFL, I’m looking at you)

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  46. Vulgrin says:

    What -I- want to see are single team packages , followed by a playoff package. I should be able to only pay for the team I care about, but see every one of their games.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Seth Samuels says:

      I totally agree with this point. I live in the Bay Area, and I just get MLB.tv so I can watch the Mets. I think there are a lot of people (myself included) who buy the full package because they have no alternative. My guess is that MLB knows this, and thinks they would lose money offering single-team packages because such a high percentage of the full-package customer base would convert to single-team.

      But I’d bet there would be a lot more people who would buy a single-team package for, say, 50-75% the cost of the full package, and would more than make up the lost profit on people buying the full package. Meanwhile, I would happily forfeit the right to watch the Royals play the Orioles if it saved me some $.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  47. Billy M says:

    MLB blackouts don’t make much sense to me. I live in Marfa,TX and when my Nationals play in Houston I get blacked out from watching on MLBTV though that is over 500 miles away. Like i can just pop over and see a game. No problem right?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  48. MV says:

    Living in Europe and thus having a blackout-free MLB.TV (like I do) sounds very cool until you realise it also means watching most games in night and early morning hours.
    So, US people, cheer up! :

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  49. Gomez says:

    As a consumer in a capitalistic system, we actually do have the ultimate power to regulate at the end of the day. Boycott MLB.tv and let them know why. If enough people do this, change will happen. No change will never be made if you complain, but then still buy the service. Corporations will always listen to the dollar though (or lack thereof).

    Same with ticket prices, just don’t go if you think salaries and ticket prices are out of control.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  50. Eddie says:

    MLB Radio is far cheaper than MLB.tv and has never had blackouts. It’s a better value and I’ll stick with it.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  51. Chris says:

    I live in England. I’d pay more for the damn thing to work properly. And I’d pay more to see the TV commercials; I must hear those awful ad’s for umpire camp, the mlb.com shop and crap on Yahoo! thousands of times a season.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Paul F. says:

      Ooh, those are very avoidable. If you run MLB.tv through Firefox with Ad-Block, they don’t play, for example, and you just have a nice blank screen. Very important to one’s sanity.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  52. ripperlv says:

    I was going to subscribe and happened to notice the black out rules in fine proint. I live in NV, but every home game is blacked out for all teams in CALIF and AZ, Are you kidding me? I shot off an email and told them I refuse to subscribe or Attend any MLB game until they changed there black out policy. I highly encourage wveryone to voice there displeasure with the black out rules at customerservice@website.mlb.com

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  53. @3_2count says:

    Here in New Mexico we have a weird blackout thing going as well. It blacks out all Diamondbacks and Rockies games. Which sucks because I’m a Dodgers fan and they play the Rockies and Dbacks relatively often.

    What is worse is that Rockies games aren’t available on Comcast here and Diamondbacks games aren’t available on the satellite networks.So no matter what you will have one team blacked out.

    That’s only a problem when I’m in Albuquerque, however, as MLB thinks that I’m somewhere in Idaho when I’m at my house in the suburbs.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  54. booj says:

    I live in Canada but loathe the Blue Jays so I’m happily able to watch pretty much any game I want.

    The best, though, was when MLB forgot about the Expos (insert joke here). They didn’t bother to blackout any games for the Expos even though I was in Montreal. Although they didn’t try to give the team a TV deal either, but that’s a whole other story.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  55. Steven says:

    Isn’t this kind of like asking, how much extra would you pay to be able to rip a a copy of the music cd you just purchased at full price so that you could listen to it on your ipad too?

    Uhhhh….not a freakin’ dime more.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Seth Samuels says:

      No, not really. It’s a lot more like asking “if you bought a cd, but three of the tracks were deleted from it, how much more would you pay to get the full cd?” Except also you paid $100 for the CD, and the fact that three tracks would be deleted was in the fine print, and based on logic like “because the band lives 200 miles away from you so you can go to their house and hear them playing.”

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  56. Robert Wayne says:

    The blackout areas are way too big. I live 130 miles east of Houston and 400 miles southeast of Dallas (Arlington) and get blacked out of both the Astros and Rangers. Okay, I can see it with the Astros. But the Rangers finally had a good year last year and with Obama’s no drill in the Gulf oil policy making gasoline less and less affordable, it’s not like the Rangers are going to lose ticket sales from the southwest corner of Louisiana.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  57. SFG Fan says:

    i bought MLB.TV last year and couldn’t see a single SF Giants game, home or road so it was basically worthless to me….i would pay $200/year to be able to see every SFG game but i shouldn’t have to(and won’t) pay a nickel extra for any playoffs or World Series…MLB.TV runs their business like 15 year old punks and their customer service sucks balls….bunch of losers….

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  58. Brian says:

    As others have pointed out, this question doesn’t account for the many people who aren’t even buying the base package due to blackout restrictions. I’m fairly certain that the cost to MLB of streaming the games to each additional subscriber is low enough that MLB could easily buy off the broadcasters using just the base fee (or, alternatively, simply charge broadcasters a lower fee for blackout-free broadcast rights and make up the difference on MLB.tv and Extra Innings).

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  59. victor frankenstein says:

    Last year I once again tried the live MLB – TV playoff broadcast and once again found it insanely and annoyingly restrictive, so I simply waited the “90 minutes after the conclusion of the regularly scheduled broadcast” and had the time of my life with the in – site DVR. Now, I can understand the restrictions of those with real lives that have that “work ” thing to deal with – but hey, sacrifices must be made.

    After all, these sort of things (World Series championships) don’t happen but once every 56 years or so. You can get a job anytime.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  60. philkid3 says:

    In my current situation, not much.

    The only games that get blacked out are the early Saturday games, the Sunday night games, and Mariners games (I am a Rangers fan living in Washington).

    I (sorry, Dave) do not like the Mariners announcers, but I’m not going to pay more than about 10 bucks to avoid having to listen to them 19 times a year when I watch the Rangers. Now, Sunday Night blackouts with the Rangers are more common than with most teams, but still an infrequent issue. Saturday blackouts are also annoying but rare. I’d pay a little more than 10 bucks to see those games, but if I miss a few games a year it’s not a big deal.

    Let’s say about 25 cents for each Mariners game and a buck for each blacked out game (which is higher than I pay per game that I do get to see). That’s probably a little more than 10 bucks, but far less than 20. And I think that’s where I sit.

    Now, if for some reason I lived in an idiotic place where the Rangers were blacked out but not played on local TV, then I’d pay quite a bit more, and it would probably depend on my means at the time. But where I sit right now, if you told me MLB TV was going to cost around 200 bucks to see the Rangers or I have to go illegal stream hunting, I’d consider it. That would be MLB pushing away a fan, though.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  61. Daniel Watkins says:

    I live in the UK, so I don’t get blacked out evar, so $0.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  62. Cass says:

    I’d pay $20, maybe. I live in the same division of one of my favorite teams, but not close enough to get their games on TV. I pay for MLBtv so I can watch their (and one other team’s) games. I don’t pay for cable because the only reason I would do so would be to watch baseball, and they don’t carry my team’s games here (and because Time Warner has a monopoly where I live, and I hate dealing with them with a fiery passion). But multiple times per year I’m blacked out of some great games because my team is relatively nearby. MLBtv’s blackout policy makes absolutely no sense from the standpoint of the consumer–do they honestly consider it reasonable to expect people to pay for cable year-round so they can watch the three series (or in some cases, one) when their team is in town?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  63. SoxandRoxFan says:

    I put $0 and I’ll tell you why: There is no technological reason they can’t do this already. It’s all baloney rules. I have mlb.tv right now and it’s great for watching the Red Sox. But I live in Denver, so, for the Rockies, it’s useless. And the blackout rules are asinine. Less than 2 weeks ago, Root wasn’t broadcasting the game. Could I watch on MLB.tv? No. I’m a local fan who wants to watch the local team, and I can’t. But if I were in Florida, then it would be ok. That makes sense how? And I agree with everyone complaining about the Fox blackouts. Just let me stream it; leave the ads in, I don’t care! I’m going to be ditching cable soon so I’ll still get my Red Sox games, but welcome to the radio, Rockies.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  64. Excellent post however , I was wondering if you could write a litte more on this subject? I’d be very thankful if you could elaborate a little bit further. Bless you!

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  65. The post is written in very a good manner and it entails many useful

    information for me. I am happy to find your distinguished way of

    writing the post. Now you make it easy for me to understand and

    implement the concept.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  66. I can’t believe people would pay so much more for this. I provide a private proxy service specifically designed to get around the mlb.tv blackout issue for only $2.50 per month – less than a cup of coffee.

    MLB Blackout Proxies

    Vote -1 Vote +1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current ye@r *