Brandon Gaudin: The Voice of the Braves

Whatever. I know this is a "do you even 80k" take, but there is no reason it should cost to $85 a month (comcast, DirecTV stream) to watch baseball in the era of cord cutting and streaming. Obviously the current model they are working with isn't working if they are going bankrupt. Big money is being left on the table.

The pricing for cable / sat packages when adjusted for inflation is a pretty good deal today. I think most people were paying around $40 a month for basic cable in the early to mid-80s. Inflation over that time frame is somewhere around 2.5 to 3x. You get a hell of a lot more for $120 a month today than you got for $40 then.
 
The pricing for cable / sat packages when adjusted for inflation is a pretty good deal today. I think most people were paying around $40 a month for basic cable in the early to mid-80s. Inflation over that time frame is somewhere around 2.5 to 3x. You get a hell of a lot more steaming öööö programming for $120 a month today than you got for $40 then.
What a deal
 
Do you want to go back to 1985?
tenor.gif
 
The pricing for cable / sat packages when adjusted for inflation is a pretty good deal today. I think most people were paying around $40 a month for basic cable in the early to mid-80s. Inflation over that time frame is somewhere around 2.5 to 3x. You get a hell of a lot more for $120 a month today than you got for $40 then.
The difference is options. In the 80’s our choice was either cable or rickety antennas that didn’t pick up much. Now with the internet and streaming, cable no longer has a monopoly.
 
The pricing for cable / sat packages when adjusted for inflation is a pretty good deal today. I think most people were paying around $40 a month for basic cable in the early to mid-80s. Inflation over that time frame is somewhere around 2.5 to 3x. You get a hell of a lot more for $120 a month today than you got for $40 then.

Pretty good deal...yet subscriber numbers keep spiraling down. Sure you get a lot more. But in 2023, that doesn't translate to more value for most people. You get a lot more stuff you don't ever use. I'd rather use that money to go to games.
 
Pretty good deal...yet subscriber numbers keep spiraling down. Sure you get a lot more. But in 2023, that doesn't translate to more value for most people. You get a lot more stuff you don't ever use. I'd rather use that money to go to games.
I wonder if the total number of subscribers are really down or if is just the percentage of homes with cable that is down. We have a lot more people now than we did in the eighties.
 
Pretty good deal...yet subscriber numbers keep spiraling down. Sure you get a lot more. But in 2023, that doesn't translate to more value for most people. You get a lot more stuff you don't ever use. I'd rather use that money to go to games.

I wonder if the total number of subscribers are really down or if is just the percentage of homes with cable that is down. We have a lot more people now than we did in the eighties.

You say subscriber numbers are down, and that is true on a provider-by-provider basis. But what if you add them all up? Are numbers really down?

I know of several households that don't have a "traditional" cable/sat package and don't have YTTV or Fubo, or DTVStream, etc. But they do have Netflix, Hulu, Disney, Amazon Prime, HBO Max, Paramount, etc.

I also know of people that will have Netflix for awhile, then Hulu for awhile, and rotate amongst the services to watch a set of shows and then move on.

Are the total number of eyeballs with access to paid content really "spiraling down" or are they just spread over significantly more options?
 
Whatever. I know this is a "do you even 80k" take, but there is no reason it should cost to $85 a month (comcast, DirecTV stream) to watch baseball in the era of cord cutting and streaming. Obviously the current model they are working with isn't working if they are going bankrupt. Big money is being left on the table.
I liked it when advertisers paid for me to watch the Braves.
 
Damn, I didn't realize Bally was this close to bankruptcy. It sounds like MLB wants to move towards something similar to what MLS does, offer all games in one subscription package.

 
Damn, I didn't realize Bally was this close to bankruptcy. It sounds like MLB wants to move towards something similar to what MLS does, offer all games in one subscription package.

Manfred says something I agree with.... the end is coming.

The blackout situation is ridiculous and needs to change. Its also ridiculous how serious MLB.TV takes the blackouts - you have to share GPS location from your device so you can't use a VPN.
 
The pricing for cable / sat packages when adjusted for inflation is a pretty good deal today. I think most people were paying around $40 a month for basic cable in the early to mid-80s. Inflation over that time frame is somewhere around 2.5 to 3x. You get a hell of a lot more for $120 a month today than you got for $40 then.
Back then it was cable or rabbit ears. That was it. There are a lot more choices now.
 
I mean, it begs the question of why the two parties didn't renew...
Not really. You can speculate if you want, but most scenarios are boring (like his contract expired, he shopped around, and found a better deal)
 
Back then it was cable or rabbit ears. That was it. There are a lot more choices now.
and most of them still bite the big one. So we have more crap to choose from which to choose.
 
Did the Braves release a sound bite of Gaudin calling some braves plays? They should have done that.
 
Back
Top