Major League Baseball Offering Gift Subscriptions for MLB At Bat 2014

[MacRumors]

For the first time, Major League Baseball is allowing customers to purchase gift subscriptions for family and friends to its MLB At Bat streaming audio service.

Users can gift a $20 subscription that gives access to in-game streaming radio broadcasts for the entire 2014 baseball season, including pre- and postseason games, with no blackouts.

Previously, users wishing to gift MLB At Bat premium subscriptions would need to purchase mall or generic credit card gift cards for users to buy the service themselves. The subscription is good for multiple platforms including the iPhone, iPad, the Web, as well as a number of Android devices.

At Bat also gives users access to MLB's video archive of 2013 baseball games, video highlights of new games as they happen, and a streaming selection of classic games.

Subscriptions to MLB.com At Bat, the 10th highest grossing mobile app in App Store history, are now available as holiday gifts for the first time. Instead of waiting in bricks-and-mortar store lines or giving a generic gift card, anyone can gift At Bat for the 2014 MLB season, through a direct purchase of the $19.99 full-season subscription from MLB.com.

With access to the complete set of premium features in 2014, including live audio of every game and the MLB.TV Free Game of the Day, At Bat 14 will be the perfect holiday gift for any baseball fan.

At Bat currently offers full coverage of the Hot Stove and the upcoming Baseball Winter Meetings in December. MLB Advanced Media's mobile developers also are working on new features to be unveiled in the 2014 edition of At Bat. Complete details will be available at launch next year.

MLB At Bat is available as a free download for iPhone and iPad, while premium subscriptions for 2014 will be available via in app purchase next year. [Direct Link]

Article Link: Major League Baseball Offering Gift Subscriptions for MLB At Bat 2014

 

[KSpider]

If they have MLB.tv as a gift option, then I have something to put on my list.

 

[Evmanw]

Price Increase?

Wasn't it $15 last year?

 

[Jessica Lares]

How does the login work? My dad and brother would like this.

 

[Westside guy]

I buy the iOS app subscription every year - it's a great way to listen to every game.

The TV package, though... not such a deal. MLB's draconian blackout policies make the subscription useless to the vast majority of fans. If you live out of your favorite team's huge exclusion zone, then it *might* make sense - otherwise, no.

Silly thing is - MLB could just provide in-zone fans streaming access to their local team's TV feed, ads and all, and most people wouldn't complain. I'd gladly pay the $120/year for that just for the flexibility - getting to have a playoff game up in the corner of my monitor at work, for example.

BTW, MLB execs - because of cost, I deliberately chose a cable TV tier that does NOT include my local team's cable channel. So, in my case at least, this would be money from me that you don't currently receive at all.

----------

wasn't it $15 last year?

$19.95.

----------

The subscription is good for multiple platforms including the iPhone, iPad, the Web, as well as a number of Android devices.

Purchasing the audio subscription via the iOS app gives you free audio access on the MLB.com website as well.

The reverse is not true - subscribing via the MLB.com website does NOT let you access the audio feed on the iOS app (unless they've changed the rules since last season).

 

[jlgolson]

Purchasing the audio subscription via the iOS app gives you free audio access on the MLB.com website as well.

The reverse is not true - subscribing via the MLB.com website does NOT let you access the audio feed on the iOS app (unless they've changed the rules since last season).

That should not have been the case last year. If you bought the audio streaming subscription last year on mlb.com, the login should work on their app too.

I did that with the video subscription and it works great.

 

[Mahler12x]

The TV package, though... not such a deal. MLB's draconian blackout policies make the subscription useless to the vast majority of fans. If you live out of your favorite team's huge exclusion zone, then it *might* make sense - otherwise, no.

Totally agree. Location Spoofer is the only reason I jailbreak. I'm just hoping they'll have an iOS7 jailbreak by the time the season starts. Just jailbreak, install location spoofer, set your location to Mexico or something, and say goodbye to blackouts! Did this for my grandpa who doesn't have cable and he and I got to text back and forth the whole season about the A's great season as he got to watch every game only 12 miles from the Oakland Coliseum! I'm in eastern Nevada now myself and that's STILL A's territory according to MLB's boundary lines. Stupid.

 

[Westside guy]

That should not have been the case last year. If you bought the audio streaming subscription last year on mlb.com, the login should work on their app too.

I did that with the video subscription and it works great.

Last year I thought that would work, and initially bought the audio subscription on MLB.com. I later logged in with the iPad app and got a message saying I needed to pay $19.95 (again). So I wrote to their help desk, and they confirmed that was actually the way it was supposed to be. So I asked them to cancel (which they did), and bought the audio through the iPad app - at which point I could listen on my iPhone, iPad, or by logging onto MLB.com.

Common sense would dictate that what you said should be true... but there's plenty of evidence that common sense is in short supply over there in the MLB.

 

[praterkeith]

Totally agree. Location Spoofer is the only reason I jailbreak. I'm just hoping they'll have an iOS7 jailbreak by the time the season starts. Just jailbreak, install location spoofer, set your location to Mexico or something, and say goodbye to blackouts! Did this for my grandpa who doesn't have cable and he and I got to text back and forth the whole season about the A's great season as he got to watch every game only 12 miles from the Oakland Coliseum! I'm in eastern Nevada now myself and that's STILL A's territory according to MLB's boundary lines. Stupid.

Agree 100%. I live about 2 1/2 hours from Atlanta and had the MLB package for a month. Was blacked out so watching on my Xbox was a problem. Ended up using a VPN through my Macbook and watching it on my TV and it worked but, thing is, I actually love watching sports on my iPad, so I'm hoping for the same as you. I don't agree with blackouts for these types of sports packages. Even if they were only offered on a team by team basis so that team would get revenue. I'd pay $120 per year to watch, say 5 teams with something similar to the NBA league pass.

 

[TouchMint.com]

I get this every year to watch cubs games (I am in az so its not blacked out unless they are playing the dbacks). I would say I get pretty good use of out this especially since wgn might be losing the cubs so it would be very hard to watch them at all in az.

 

[japanime]

Totally agree. Location Spoofer is the only reason I jailbreak. I'm just hoping they'll have an iOS7 jailbreak by the time the season starts. Just jailbreak, install location spoofer, set your location to Mexico or something, and say goodbye to blackouts! Did this for my grandpa who doesn't have cable and he and I got to text back and forth the whole season about the A's great season as he got to watch every game only 12 miles from the Oakland Coliseum! I'm in eastern Nevada now myself and that's STILL A's territory according to MLB's boundary lines. Stupid.

I upvoted your post because, like me, you're an A's fan.

Fortunately, Tokyo is outside of the A's territory, so I get to watch the games live via mlb.tv.

 

[larrylaffer]

Wasn't it $15 last year?

I believe that was 2 years ago.

Viva los Doyers!

 

[Westside guy]

Totally agree. Location Spoofer is the only reason I jailbreak. I'm just hoping they'll have an iOS7 jailbreak by the time the season starts. Just jailbreak, install location spoofer, set your location to Mexico or something, and say goodbye to blackouts! Did this for my grandpa who doesn't have cable and he and I got to text back and forth the whole season about the A's great season as he got to watch every game only 12 miles from the Oakland Coliseum! I'm in eastern Nevada now myself and that's STILL A's territory according to MLB's boundary lines. Stupid.

I'll have to try that - thanks! I jailbreak but didn't know about Location Spoofer.

I was actually wondering if it made sense to jailbreak anymore, since iOS7 pretty much adopted most of what SBSettings has offered (SBSettings and Activator are my two main jailbreak apps). Sounds like there is still a good reason to do it!

 

[IJ Reilly]

I buy the iOS app subscription every year - it's a great way to listen to every game.

The TV package, though... not such a deal. MLB's draconian blackout policies make the subscription useless to the vast majority of fans. If you live out of your favorite team's huge exclusion zone, then it *might* make sense - otherwise, no.

Silly thing is - MLB could just provide in-zone fans streaming access to their local team's TV feed, ads and all, and most people wouldn't complain. I'd gladly pay the $120/year for that just for the flexibility - getting to have a playoff game up in the corner of my monitor at work, for example.

BTW, MLB execs - because of cost, I deliberately chose a cable TV tier that does NOT include my local team's cable channel. So, in my case at least, this would be money from me that you don't currently receive at all.

The people who already paid huge money for exclusive in-market broadcast rights would not be amused.

 

[azentropy]

The people who already paid huge money for exclusive in-market broadcast rights would not be amused.

Then they should provide a way to view those in-market games on mobile platforms for those who have or are willing to pay for it.

I get DirecTV and pay for all the local sports packages. Even if I pay for the MLB.tv package DTV, web or mobile app - if I happen to be out of my house but in the "market area" I can't watch my local game/team on my iPhone/iPad.

Sorry, but that is ridiculous. At least they could have MLB.tv app verify that you also have a DirecTV account and limit your local access to the rebroadcast of that local station. Several other applications already do that (HBO Go, Showtime etc.)

/rant

 

[Westside guy]

The people who already paid huge money for exclusive in-market broadcast rights would not be amused.

Which is why I said "ads and all" - since the ads are what is earning money for them.

But the fundamental problem - which I realize you understand already - is that MLB's current revenue model is stuck in the 1980s-1990s, with cable television seen as a cash cow. But the current state of cable TV is a lot like home telephone service was a decade ago, and is probably due for a similar collapse over this next decade.

 

[TouchMint.com]

Which is why I said "ads and all" - since the ads are what is earning money for them.

But the fundamental problem - which I realize you understand already - is that MLB's current revenue model is stuck in the 1980s-1990s, with cable television seen as a cash cow. But the current state of cable TV is a lot like home telephone service was a decade ago, and is probably due for a similar collapse over this next decade.

Hopefully. I love when the greedy get burnt! Wouldn't mind seeing the nfl get a bit of this either but they pretty much grow money so not as likely.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Then they should provide a way to view those in-market games on mobile platforms for those who have or are willing to pay for it.

I get DirecTV and pay for all the local sports packages. Even if I pay for the MLB.tv package DTV, web or mobile app - if I happen to be out of my house but in the "market area" I can't watch my local game/team on my iPhone/iPad.

Sorry, but that is ridiculous. At least they could have MLB.tv app verify that you also have a DirecTV account and limit your local access to the rebroadcast of that local station. Several other applications already do that (HBO Go, Showtime etc.)

/rant

If I read you right, you are asking for two, very different things here.

The first is the ability to subscribe to the broadcast of in-market games outside of a cable package. This is not going to happen, because those broadcast rights have already been sold, at huge prices, to cable and satellite providers. If MLB and the teams started bypassing these contracts, they'd get sued for more money than we can even imagine, because the cable and satellite providers already paid more than we an imagine for those exclusive rights.

The second is more doable. As you pointed out, several networks allow on-demand streaming of programming, but only if you are already paying your cable or satellite provider for those networks. To my knowledge no network is allowing us to buy programming directly from them, unless you want to count Netflix and Amazon as networks.

Which is why I said "ads and all" - since the ads are what is earning money for them.

But the fundamental problem - which I realize you understand already - is that MLB's current revenue model is stuck in the 1980s-1990s, with cable television seen as a cash cow. But the current state of cable TV is a lot like home telephone service was a decade ago, and is probably due for a similar collapse over this next decade.

This is one of the most common misunderstandings about the structure of sports media deals. The cost of paying the sports franchises for their media rights are passed directly through to cable subscribers in their monthly bills. This is why more than half of the average cable bill is the price the provider paid for the rights to broadcast sports programming -- including a lot of sports programming you probably never watch. (For instance, I watch the games of only one baseball team, but I also pay for all of the other in-market teams, including two basketball teams, two hockey teams, and another baseball team I could hardly care less about. Thankfully we don't have a football team in this market or I'd be paying for it too.)

The fundamental problem isn't MLB's revenue model. Not really. The problem is that the teams can strike longterm deals with cable providers for what amounts to involuntary passthroughs to their subscribers. The analogy to telephone doesn't work, if only because the sports teams own their broadcast rights and license them in contracts to cable providers that often last for decades. The entire system might cave in on itself someday, but really only if enough people decide that they just won't pay for cable, even if it means giving up watching live sports.

It's a mess, but I don't see a solution.

 

[alent1234]

Which is why I said "ads and all" - since the ads are what is earning money for them.

But the fundamental problem - which I realize you understand already - is that MLB's current revenue model is stuck in the 1980s-1990s, with cable television seen as a cash cow. But the current state of cable TV is a lot like home telephone service was a decade ago, and is probably due for a similar collapse over this next decade.

If they didn't have the tv money they would probably be charging a lot more than $149 per season making very little sense for anyone to buy it outside of a cable package

----------

Direct tv should have a live tv app like time warner cable does

Then they should provide a way to view those in-market games on mobile platforms for those who have or are willing to pay for it.

I get DirecTV and pay for all the local sports packages. Even if I pay for the MLB.tv package DTV, web or mobile app - if I happen to be out of my house but in the "market area" I can't watch my local game/team on my iPhone/iPad.

Sorry, but that is ridiculous. At least they could have MLB.tv app verify that you also have a DirecTV account and limit your local access to the rebroadcast of that local station. Several other applications already do that (HBO Go, Showtime etc.)

/rant

 

[mfelb282]

Good to know

I have several relatives that might be getting this for Christmas.

 

[Westside guy]

The entire system might cave in on itself someday, but really only if enough people decide that they just won't pay for cable, even if it means giving up watching live sports.

Which is exactly what I did a couple weeks ago - I moved to a deal that gives fast internet and only the broadcast channels (plus, inexplicably, Discovery and HBO). If it weren't for my wife, I probably would have dropped the television subscription entirely... But, even so, I cut my cable bill by over sixty bucks a month.

Younger people are leading the way on this... but even an old guy like me sees there's little point to paying Comcast $130/month when most of what we watch is available - legally, even - on the web or through cheaper services like Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu Plus. Live sports is the last holdout, and I believe lots of folks are waking up and realizing they don't want to pay $60/month just for that.

Of course it helps that I'm a Seattle Mariners fan. Watching them is painful.

 

[alent1234]

Which is exactly what I did a couple weeks ago - I moved to a deal that gives fast internet and only the broadcast channels (plus, inexplicably, Discovery and HBO). If it weren't for my wife, I probably would have dropped the television subscription entirely... But, even so, I cut my cable bill by over sixty bucks a month.

Younger people are leading the way on this... but even an old guy like me sees there's little point to paying Comcast $130/month when most of what we watch is available - legally, even - on the web or through cheaper services like Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu Plus. Live sports is the last holdout, and I believe lots of folks are waking up and realizing they don't want to pay $60/month just for that.

Of course it helps that I'm a Seattle Mariners fan. Watching them is painful.

$50-$60 for internet
If you only do netflix it's ok. But if you subscribe to all the streaming services for their exclusives then you are pretty close to the cable bill

 

[IJ Reilly]

Which is exactly what I did a couple weeks ago - I moved to a deal that gives fast internet and only the broadcast channels (plus, inexplicably, Discovery and HBO). If it weren't for my wife, I probably would have dropped the television subscription entirely... But, even so, I cut my cable bill by over sixty bucks a month.

Younger people are leading the way on this... but even an old guy like me sees there's little point to paying Comcast $130/month when most of what we watch is available - legally, even - on the web or through cheaper services like Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu Plus. Live sports is the last holdout, and I believe lots of folks are waking up and realizing they don't want to pay $60/month just for that.

Of course it helps that I'm a Seattle Mariners fan. Watching them is painful.

For those of us who aren't Mariners fans (sorry about that), being totally cut off from local baseball would be even more painful. I hate paying that cable bill, but the other option is a poor one.

What I see happening is the number of cable subscribers gradually diminishing (it already is in most markets, I believe), leaving those who are left paying even more. What happens then has more to do with politics than economics. It will be the lobbyists for the cable industry and the pro sports against consumer groups who will be trying to unshackle subscribers from the channel tiers the industry says is good for us, but that nobody but them actually wants. As for how that turns out, we have to ask ourselves how often consumers win in Congress these days. Not a pretty picture.

 

[azentropy]

If I read you right, you are asking for two, very different things here.

The first is the ability to subscribe to the broadcast of in-market games outside of a cable package. This is not going to happen, because those broadcast rights have already been sold, at huge prices, to cable and satellite providers. If MLB and the teams started bypassing these contracts, they'd get sued for more money than we can even imagine, because the cable and satellite providers already paid more than we an imagine for those exclusive rights.

The second is more doable. As you pointed out, several networks allow on-demand streaming of programming, but only if you are already paying your cable or satellite provider for those networks. To my knowledge no network is allowing us to buy programming directly from them, unless you want to count Netflix and Amazon as networks.

No, I am not asking for the first - although others have.

I already subscribe to my in-market games/channel through DirecTV. In the past I have also subscribed to full MLB.tv (both just through the web and through DirecTV) I just want the ability then to be able to watch those in-market games while not at home but still in my market area. There is current NO option to be able to do this, paid or not, without some sort of "hack".

 

[IJ Reilly]

No, I am not asking for the first - although others have.

I already subscribe to my in-market games/channel through DirecTV. In the past I have also subscribed to full MLB.tv (both just through the web and through DirecTV) I just want the ability then to be able to watch those in-market games while not at home but still in my market area. There is current NO option to be able to do this, paid or not, without some sort of "hack".

One the first count, people can ask, but they are not going to get the ability to subscribe outside of a cable package unless the teams renegotiate their contracts with the providers -- for substantially less money. Maybe this happens if subscribers massively defect from cable and this cuts into both the cable company revenue and the viewership for the sports teams. Otherwise, nobody is motivated to change the current arrangement.

As for being able to watch games on MLB.tv outside of your own home, I wonder how that can be engineered without the danger that access can be poached by anyone who shares a login. They'd definitely want to have the gateway locked down so that only the paying subscriber can use it.