Quote:
I get the same


~Mike

~Mike
This gripe comes up all of the timeI've whined about it too.
That is the inexcusable issue we have here with TW. 

This gripe comes up all of the timeI've whined about it too.
That is the inexcusable issue we have here with TW. 

in between all of the important chatter regarding this new HD channel so graciously given to us during this sacred time of the year. We should be genuflecting before the kind hearted TW empire with gratitude because life is not fair and if we don't like what we see on our tube--we should probably move to Studio City California to a broadcast booth and then we will probably be content. 
Advertisers pay for commercial time with specific broadcast rights. If ESPN pops up a game from, let's say Seattle, we will be seeing advertising that was paid for exclusively in Seattle. IT's free for us. In other words, we are now a lost revenue viewing audience. MLB and their partners are not going to lose available revenue.
I agree with you 100% that we are getting the shaft but that's the way it is. There should be programming on-- that is specific to blackout situationsespecially since we are paying a premium for the channel. 

~Mike



Advertisers pay for commercial time with specific broadcast rights. If ESPN pops up a game from, let's say Seattle, we will be seeing advertising that was paid for exclusively in Seattle. IT's free for us. In other words, we are now a lost revenue viewing audience. MLB and their partners are not going to lose available revenue.

I'm not disagreeing with your statement but I am curious to know why then, as Mike original questioned, we do not get another game instead of a blackout screen? Am I correct in my post, where even though they are not contractually obligated to provide a game, they chose not to as to not interfere with the untapped revenues?


I'm not disagreeing with your statement but I am curious to know why then, as Mike original questioned, we do not get another game instead of a blackout screen? Am I correct in my post, where even though they are not contractually obligated to provide a game, they chose not to as to not interfere with the untapped revenues?





