Status of MLB Network??? Nobody in Customer Service has a clue

meetmeinfrisco · ‎04-27-2010

Are there any people employed with AT&T that monitor the forums and hear complaints? I simply want what I was promised...a lower bill than what I had with Direct TV, and MLB Network to be added prior to season begin. Can this be resolved, or do I need to go back?

mibrnsurg · ‎07-15-2008

Employees were told no MLB Network in 2010 and were encouraged to pass this along in public forums/blogs. It was passed on here and remains the only statement by ATT on MLB Network.

Chris

_____________________________________________________________________

Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
I Call It Like I See It, Your Results May Vary, In My Humble Opinion
Simply a U-verse user, nothing more

nern1969 · ‎03-05-2009

It is kind of sad in a way that AT&T would not have MLB Network added. They do understand that they are losing some loyal customers this summer. The MLB Network is doing a reality show on the White Sox this summer and Comcast is really pushing this in the Chicago market. i might just make the switch for the year and come back to Uverse next year when they still will not have the MLB Network.

mibrnsurg · ‎07-15-2008

Think it is a contractural impasse, MLB wants so much and ATT will not agree to pay it. Might have to do w/being too expensive to put into the Sports Package w/o an increse from $10/mo.

Chris

_______________________________________________________________________

Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
I Call It Like I See It, Your Results May Vary, In My Humble Opinion
Simply a U-verse user, nothing more

smcleod1106 · ‎12-23-2008

mibrnsurg wrote:
Think it is a contractural impasse, MLB wants so much and ATT will not agree to pay it. Might have to do w/being too expensive to put into the Sports Package w/o an increse from $10/mo.

Chris
_______________________________________________________________________
Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
I Call It Like I See It, Your Results May Vary, In My Humble Opinion
Simply a U-verse user, nothing more

I think it is just the opposite, I think MLB wants their network on the basic package, which would mean U-verse would have to pay more for the channel because there are more subscribers in the basic package versus the sports package. I might be wrong but aren't the fees paid by the providers on a per subscriber basis? I think that was the sticking point with the NFL network they would only allow a provider to carry the channel if it was in the basic package and not the sports package. MLB Network is probably trying a similar tactic.

mibrnsurg · ‎07-15-2008

No, just like the NHL Network, it belongs in the Sports Package. I sure don't want it in u200 as I don't want to pay for it as the only team I care about is the Detroit Tigers and all games are on FS Detroit 1737/1738.

Chris

_____________________________________________________________________

Please NO SD stretch-o-vision or 480 SD HD Channels
1-800-983-2811 to avoid Mr. Voice Recognition
I Call It Like I See It, Your Results May Vary, In My Humble Opinion
Simply a U-verse user, nothing more

bnichols_1 · ‎01-29-2009

mibrnsurg wrote:
No, just like the NHL Network, it belongs in the Sports Package.
Chris
_____________________________________________________________________

Actually, I think you just proved smcleod's point. The NFL Network had enough clout (showing actual NFL games no one else could carry) to force its way onto U-200. The NHL Network obviously allowed itself to be placed in the Sports Package which has fewer subscribers. That may explain why it is the only one of the pro league related networks to be on U-Verse--the others (MLB, NBA) may be insisting on U-200 and not the Sports Package like NFL Net.

texasguy37 · ‎05-18-2009

One would argue that baseball is at least if not more popular than football. Since the NFL Network is included in the U200 and above package, it would not be unreasonable for the MLB Network to also be included in those same packages. As others have said, this may be the sticking point in the negotiations between U-verse and MLB. U-verse would have to pay MLB more money than it is prepared to pay in order to carry the channel.

kryptonite · ‎04-10-2009

bnichols wrote:
Actually, I think you just proved smcleod's point. The NFL Network had enough clout (showing actual NFL games no one else could carry) to force its way onto U-200. The NHL Network obviously allowed itself to be placed in the Sports Package which has fewer subscribers. That may explain why it is the only one of the pro league related networks to be on U-Verse--the others (MLB, NBA) may be insisting on U-200 and not the Sports Package like NFL Net.

Indeed. The NHL Network is happy to be on a sports pack. That's why AT&T, Time Warner, and other providers put it there. The NFL Network insists on a "basic" or "expanded basic" lineup. That's why it is on the U-200. Time Warner has not yet agreed to the NFL Network's wishes. This is why you won't find the NFL Network on Time Warner.

Interestingly, there is a smaller provider (known as WOW!), which does carry the NFL Network. The last time I checked, since the NFL Network has started carrying live games, they increased their demands (read: they want more money.) WOW has refused to pay the increased fees. As a result, live NFL games are blacked out on WOW.

The bottom line is that a channel can "demand" to be on a certain tier. If the provider agrees to that, everything is good. If the provider wants it on a higher tier, too bad.

If AT&T says that they're happy to put MLB Network on the Sports Pack, but it's on other providers expanded basic tiers, then that is unfair to those other providers.

JamesTheName · ‎06-24-2008

The one year I had Comcast, they added NHL Network about half way through that year and they put it in their Sports Tier, which I was happy to pay for so I could get it. However, they had a special deal and it only cost me $3.00 a month instead of the usual $6.00. That made me happy. Now, Comcast has taken NHL Net out of their Sports Tier and made it more widely available in one of their digital pkgs. And here, I'm more than glad to pay the $10 a month for the Sports Pack just to have NHL Net.

tj_1 · ‎01-02-2010

"No, just like the NHL Network, it belongs in the Sports Package. I sure don't want it in u200 as I don't want to pay for it as the only team I care about is the Detroit Tigers and all games are on FS Detroit 1737/1738." How do you get by as an NHL fan without VERSUS? I hate paying $15 for only 1 channel...I think about dropping it but the bar I go to to watch sports doesnt even get versus, lol.

bailorg · ‎01-30-2010

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know, neither AT&T nor MLB Network have ever stated any actual reason(s) why MLB Network is not carried.

It could be package placement, it could be fees, it could be carriage of MLB Extra Innings, it could just be corporate spite and/or pettiness between the parties, or who knows what at this point.

Until someone says why, it's just speculation.

texasguy37 · ‎05-18-2009

Yes, it is all speculation. Hence the use of the words "may be" in the above comments.

cheer · ‎10-20-2007

bailorg wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know, neither AT&T nor MLB Network have ever stated any actual reason(s) why MLB Network is not carried.

It could be package placement, it could be fees, it could be carriage of MLB Extra Innings, it could just be corporate spite and/or pettiness between the parties, or who knows what at this point.

Until someone says why, it's just speculation.

Agreed, though I doubt very much that it's spite or pettiness. Not saying that doesn't happen (I've seen it), but 99 times out of 100 it's really about something far more prosaic.

We have no way of knowing even what the current status of negotiations is. They might not be talking at all, or they might be talking daily.

Or -- and this certainly is a distinct possibility -- the regular decision makers may have a framework in place but now it's in the hands of lawyers, and lawyers can take a long time arguing about fiddly contractual bits that would bore most of us to tears.

There's no doubt in my mind that AT&T wants to add it. There's no doubt in my mind that MLB wants AT&T to add it. But whether it can be done at a price that AT&T finds acceptable and with terms it finds acceptable, and whether it can be done at a price and terms that MLB finds acceptable...well, that's the sticky bit.

Those who above speculated about a disagreement in the "tier" may not be far off; it's the most logical explanation I've seen.

judiscott · ‎05-05-2010

I agree. I had Comcast and we at least had an option to watch out of market baseball games. The Uverse Sales Person told me they had YES NETWORK and could watch NY Yankee games. They also said it would be less money per month. Well we know that is [text removed - keep it courteous]. I don't get the aforementioned games and my bill went up soon after I signed up. Bait & switch?

When will the management at ATT start listening to their customers?