Twins REVEAL Subscribers & TV Revenue Losses

25 comments

1. They never spent anyways so it’s pretty irrelevant.

2. The whole deal of the Dodgers' bankruptcy agreement has to change or baseball will not be watchable.

3. some actual numbers: in 2019 the angels were making $120k/game in sponsorship sales (ads/logos/gameflows). in 1998, fox sports west was making $90M per month in subscriber fees. in 2025 the padres spent $10M on production costs at the start of the season – the subscriptions were to get them to zero before they could start getting profits (they took loans out, now they’re selling the team). in 2025 the mariners/mlb spent more on spring training and the first two months of the season then all of 2024.

4. I wish I they would offer a Midwest streaming package with all games from the Cubs, White Sox, Brewers, Cardinals, Royals, Twins, Pittsburg, Cincinnati and Detroit. Plus a Nashville team if they become reality.

5. I see an NL West package considering that the Padres, D-Backs, and Rockies all function like this.

6. I could have swore the Twins' broadcast was produced/distributed by MLB (with streaming sublet to ESPN starting this season), just like the Padres/D-Backs/Rockies have since 2024, a few other ex-Diamond refugees since 2025, and most of the ex-Main Street refugees (plus the Mariners, which ended their owned/operated RSN 2 years after WBDiscovery pulled out of their minority stake) starting this year. The teams that handle their own production/distribution are the Rangers (since last season, with streaming through a third party) and Braves (starting this season, with MLB/ESPN handling streaming), while the Angels' situation is still in flux (outside streaming, which MLB/ESPN will handle).

   With that said, we don't know how much of the $50/$100 (depending on whether it is or isn't bundled with the out-of-market version of MLB.TV) the individual teams get, or how much MLB is paying for linear rights. That the Braves and Rangers went their own way, and the Angels are still undecided, tells me that MLB is still paying a fraction of what Diamond/Main Street had been paying.

7. It amazes me how slow MLB/individual teams were to react to the shift, and many don't seem like they are adjusting much yet. I know there is likely a labor stoppage coming, but in my local market we haven't even got a ton of information, just that there will be an announcement in the near future and games will be available on linear TV.

   I'd love to see the PA move faster than the owners if there is a lockout and something outside the box that could have benefits in the longrun (because you are going to lose fans for a while if there is a cancelled season). Not sure how well it could be done with their contracts during a lockout (insurance, potentially canceling contracts), but start a league, have a draft, play in some of the better or historical independent stadiums, stream the games. The revenue wouldn't be nearly as big and attendance would be limited, but it would save some of a backlash from fans and spread the game. I'd like the players to have a bit more of the hammer, and just fear we are going to have a lost season.

8. To paraphrase a well-known James Carville quote: "It's the paywall, stupid!"… 🤬…The absolute inability for MLB and its owners to apply any level of common sense to their product distribution is a flaming red flag…I ran the numbers on a previous post for putting on an OTA broadcast via digital subchannel. Free. No paywalls. I'm not going to do it again. Suffice it to say that TV and radio advertising still rule. Car dealers for instance, will use their allotment of ad time heavily on TV during sporting events, not on streaming ads. Streaming ad revenues are pathetic by comparison. Not even considering ad blockers. I also think this is a bit of selective accounting on the part of Pohlad in order to garner sympathy. (If the scenario was really this bleak they would be desperate to sell the team to the point of giving it away.) The OTA model worked perfectly well for a half century (because it had to) until the league started juicing with guaranteed cable money. Now they are stuck with inflated costs, inflated payrolls, inflated everything, all based on gouging fans for double and triple charges to watch games that are tweaked to the blueblood teams, excessive licensing fees for merch, and forget about paying for an actual game if you're in the middle class, much less eating or drinking anything while you're there…One last thing. Brodie. I think your $100k per game figure for production costs is a WEE bit high… 😃…Gone are the days when you had to roll a production truck around the country game-to-game-to-game. Yeah. That was expensive. These days, and correct me if I'm wrong please, but the camera setups are co-opted through the stadia, correct? And with current technology, a five-person production staff can haul around the switchers, mixers, and audio in about 10 suitcases. And push come to shove, MLB "could" standardize all of this as well, and have it all permanently placed in the various booths for visiting crews. Why this hasn't been done yet is bewildering to me. Statisticians, graphics people, all of that stays in-studio…I would love to be wrong about all of this, for if I were, I would have more empathy for Baseball and its current perils. Because if an insignificant little d-bag in a New Mexico apartment like myself can see a far more streamlined and efficient operation than can hordes of people paid $100k a year to figure all of this out, we're all screwed…

9. Cleveland was one of the first teams to try this 20 years ago. The one thing you're missing is they have to come up with content for the rest of the channel. Cleveland found after about 12 years they were spending far more on the upkeep of owning the channel then they made – and back then, it was the sweet sweet cable money that was likely higher than what Fanduel was paying lately. If Fox couldn't make money off of this, how are teams that aren't designed to be media companies?

10. Don't cry for the Twins. The team sucks.

11. it's like here ny mets done same thing choud not watch all most hole season

12. Does anything EVER go right in Minnesota?! BTW, I ran into Sam Darnold, he says hello…

13. I’ve been saying this for years, the big money for TV in major league sports is drying up fast. Current adults 20-35 really don’t care about watching full games on TV. With the exception of the NFL, every other major league sport is going to lose huge dollars over the next 10 years and it’s already starting with the disappearing act of some regional sports networks. Will owners expect fans to pay even more money for tickets and food/beverage to offset some of these revenue losses?

14. Welcome to Mostly Minor League Baseball the MMLB

15. You left off a huge revenue stream above the $100 subscription. Million generated off of advertising during the broadcast. Figures you used are quite low for advertisements.

16. That is actually the Twins old logo too.

17. Small market teams can’t even afford one of Brodie’s metaphorical raffle ticket

18. I just stream games on some shady website to see my team play and I don’t plan on changing anything until I don’t have to pay 3 different subscriptions just to watch the teams in my area play. Do better, MLB

19. I heard the cubs are making 1/3 of what they used to make. I hate the sub model. I refuse to pay extra. This is just bad business. How do you expect to get new generations of fans

20. I think teams need to work on TV deals with local OTA stations and their digital subchannels, and yes Disney ducked everything up with the purchase of Fox, $99.99 for a season isn't that bad of a price if you can watch every game and your team is decent or good but I would do monthly pricing and have classic games including playoff runs and world series if doing team specific streaming.

21. The disparity between the richer and poorer MLB franchises gets wider and wider. I think that is detrimental to the game.

22. Teams that have owned or have majority control / joint venture interest in their own broadcast network for quite some time and didn't deal with Diamond Sports Group/Main Street Sports: Yankees (YES Network – majority stake), Mets (SNY – majority stake), Cubs (Marquee Sports Network – JV partner), White Sox (Chicago Sports Network – JV partner), Red Sox (NESN – majority stake), Jays (Sportsnet – own 100%). Dodgers (Sportsnet LA – own 50%).

23. The problem with the Regional Sports Networks on cable is that everyone paid for them even if they never watched the channel. The newer model is better for fans since only the fans of the teams will subscribe. However since not everyone is a fan of the teams the teams can no longer rely on non fans paying for a channel they will never watch like the cable model. There are some good & bad advantages to the new streaming model.

24. My feeling is that podcasters/broadcasters/writers covering MLB have underplayed the impact of the failure of RSNs. It's a bubble mentality. It isn't happening to me, or I can still watch my team, etc. When there is no over-the-air presence or cable presence or satellite dish presence, you will lose fans. The Twins have had incredibly stable long-term ownership are pilloried for it by passive-aggressive MN fans. They are merely trying to keep their head above water until there is some stability and a path forward.

25. I saw that the atanta braves made they own network with gray media..