MLS Season Pass has been reduced to $10 for the rest of the season and free if you have AppleTV+. https://worldsoccertalk.com/news/apple-drops-mls-season-pass-to-lowest-price-this-year/ You do have to give your card info and either cancel or pay for next year's service. The conspiracy theorist in me says "the remainder of this year plus all of next year" means a price increase.
Hahaha. "You still have to give them your credit card info and remember to cancel. People have kids and other things preventing them from having the time to cancel." (I'm sure someone can cancel immediately upon signing up.) "MLS is a Ponzi Scheme." "EPL is better AND they have pro/rel." "Jimmy Haslam's politics." "The lack of ability to hang out with the players after the games makes them unknowns, unrecognizable and hard to cheer for. They're just not accessible." "It's only free because MLS can't get the ratings. The women's league is growing and is on CBS, Ion and other TV channels. MLS is stuck on Apple Plus where you need yet another plus app to get their games. There's too many apps and it's too hard to keep track of what's where. I just have Netflix and Hulu." (What? These people with Hulu would rather the games be on Bally Sports Ohio?)
Not reasonable reason then. The Crew have 9 games left plus at least 1 playoff game, plus Campeons Cup. For $10, that’s literally less than $1 per game for the business end of the season. If people aren’t willing to pay that, then they never will and clearly they have zero interest in actually watching the games. This of course ignores the fact that you get to watch all teams’ games, not just the Crew. The value is incredible.
Putting this here: https://www.nexttv.com/news/us-pay-...-of-double-digit-percentage-losses-for-linear
Meanwhile, a lot of the content owners are starting to include basic versions of their apps with carriage agreements. Disney has been including Disney+, ESPN+ and Hulu with their renewals with Charter, DirecTV and I'd imagine more to come. Peacock Premium will be added to Spectrum TV Select packages in the near future. Spectrum internet customers will be able to buy Peacock directly through Spectrum. DirecTV is about to go through a renewal with NBC in the next month or two and it doesn't take a genius to guess what'll come of that. I was mildly surprised when DirecTV customers didn't lose any Disney-owned channels the way Spectrum customers did. Paramount+ is starting to be included in some traditional TV packages as well, IIRC. If someone didn't care much for live TV (specifically sports and news), wanted to be cutting-edge and was happy with local channels, they could just subscribe to each app individually. Heck, perhaps even live TV streaming providers are on borrowed time, especially if they continue to raise their prices for channels people don't necessarily watch.
Yes, they're doing this (in reverse: cable providers are including the streaming services, rather than the way you stated it) because people are leaving cable. It's a last ditch effort by the cable companies to stay relevant as their service becomes more and more antiquated. And as the streaming services add things that people want - like channels Streams - it's only gonna get worse for the cable monopoly. If I never have to pay CharterSpectrumTimeWarner another dime in my life I'll die a happy man.
People keep talking about how awesome FAST is, but all I ever see on that stuff is reruns of old shows without the ability to pause or skip through commercials. Maybe I'm missing something. Then again, quality entertainment is in the eye of the beholder. It'll definitely be interesting to see what happens to services like Hulu+Live, DirecTV Stream and Fubo in the next 10-15 years. If Spectrum is your only option for internet, oof. AT&T fiber is expanding and there's definitely other options. In my experience, nothing beats fiber, as limited as it is.
Not the best place for this perhaps but didn't want to start a new thread. MLS has several "Director" level positions open and I must say the pay for hybrid work that includes living in the New York area is very low. The Director of Apple Partnership is paying 115k-130k. This is for someone who will directly lead work internal and with the team at Apple. No shame in anyone making that money but in New York and for this level of a role it really is limiting in the quality of talent.
All the dudes on podcasts and whatnot that have always lived in NY seem to live with roommates so I’m not shocked.
Yeah, my intern got offered $110k after graduating this year. She works 70 hours a week and has to live in an apartment with three roommates to afford rent, with almost no discretionary income or ability to save. It sounds like a miserable existence. Inflation and the ban on Airbnbs have made everything worse.
And when people live an hour or so away, there's the cost of commuting which might not even be an advantage in the end. Connecticut, Hoboken, Jersey City and other places all have lower costs of living, but is it worth the commute?
My brother was living in North Jersey and was "temporarily" assigned to Stamford, CT. Two hours or more, one way. "Temporary" turned out to be two years. Eek!
I currently have Spectrum internet and traditional cable (actually, never really had issues with them, though yes $$$). We are moving to a new house, and most of the houses in the new development have AT&T. Though, I would then have to choose a new streaming service for my TV viewing. Spectrum is also available, and their top tier speed is basically the same as AT&T (per the spec sheet), and the prices are within $10 of each other. And I would go to Spectrum streaming TV (same channel lineup, with a wireless 'dvr box') and at 24 months introductory pricing, basically reducing my current bill by $80 per month.
If I was absolutely starting from scratch, I'd give DirecTV Stream and AT&T fiber internet a good consideration, assuming AT&T fiber was available. Ya gotta have internet. If symmetrical uploads are available for a comparable price, those upload speeds may not be used, but at least you have them. As long as pro sports are on RSNs, they're nice to have. Sure, I won't watch every moment of every CBJ game, but an occasional period here and there is definitely nice to drop in on. The Guards and Reds got booted, but they're also free to negotiate with Bally (could be FanDuel) for 2025. I'm not a big enough fan to pay $20/mo for a "Guardians app" so let's see what happens there. I don't really care about the NBA, so whatever there. There's also the completely wacked-out Pittsburgh situation. Again, if I'm paying that same price or very similar... we're actually in Pittsburgh RSN territory. DirecTV Stream and DirecTV with Internet are, IIRC, the only two providers in the area that have those channels. DirecTV satellite might, but ehhh... DirecTV Stream doesn't include a streaming device, but they do have two devices that can convert that into more of a traditional system with channel numbers. These devices can be purchased via eBay and replace the previous streaming device. Why not take the easy road? The endless scrolling definitely has, not a learning curve, but a "comfort curve" for lack of a better term. AFAIK, no streaming provider has an app where the user can type in the channel/stream name and be transported to that. Say you're watching NBC and want to go to ESPN. You'd think they'd make a remote app where the user could type in "ESPN" and get a list like "ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU" and so forth. Select the appropriate option, hit the "go" button and then go right away. Another nice option is picture-in-picture. See what's on another channel (commercial or show) before going to that channel. More providers need this.
Definitely, thank for you for the info and advice. I was initially looking at AT&T Fiber and DirecTV Stream. (AT&T fiber is available in the development, hence why most of the people there chose AT&T.) The only thing is, I am so familiar with my current channels, and I really like the Spectrum TV app, which I do use. And you know, change is hard! And when Spectrum was offering 24 months discounted for their top tier internet and streaming cable (with a Xumo box) I signed up for that. Though, I still have a week before the scheduled install, and can change my mind and go with AT&T Fiber, etc.
MLB's been pretty good with getting the prior teams they've taken over broadcasts of on DirecTV and cable.
Interesting stuff from Don: MLS casts doubt on its future with Apple TV for the first time (worldsoccertalk.com) “If [the MLS-Apple relationship] continues to grow, we’re very much in the revenue share mode with Apple, and it will turn out to be one of the greatest deals in sports history,” Garber said. “If we’re wrong and the world doesn’t go into the streaming environment the way we think it is, then you’ve just got to be smart, make a decision and if it’s not the right decision, you figure out what you need to do to go forward. But I am really bullish on Apple.” Speaking in London at the Leaders Week conference, Garber’s conversation was littered with ifs. “If this works, we share in the revenue.” “If we’re sharing the revenue, we’re making lots of money.” However, the fact is that after almost two years since the partnership began with Apple, even with the addition of the world’s greatest player (Lionel Messi) to the league, Major League Soccer has been unable to surpass the minimum guarantee to trigger the revenue share part of the deal with Apple.
Giving the pass to season ticket holders was a mistake. Should have been a $99 add on to the invoice. Or even $49, as a STH discount. I would pay it, just like it's another "service fee." The T Mobile deal was a mistake as well, establishing a vehicle for free access for casual fans. Feels like Garber is laying groundwork for an early termination of the deal. Or his resignation. If they aren't revenue sharing with Messi, how can he truly be "bullish" about future years of the deal without him?
Well of course his remarks will be full of "ifs" when he's speculating about the future. MLS doesn't know what it holds any more than any other business. They have a consumer discretionary product. Those always wax and wane to some extent.
I thought it was reported last year that they hit the revenue sharing minimum. Maybe they were close. The t-mobile deal was great to garner interest. T-mobile probably paid them some $. WST notoriously hates MLS and will take any op to rake the league
Would this have been worth pissing off potentially thousands of people who would have to "pay extra" to watch their team's road games? Or maybe...give STHs the road games and MLS NP, but then give them a discount for full access. This would be an interesting study: How many STHs watch *only* their team's games? How many STHs watch other games and how much time do they spend watching other games?