Stream TNT?

[tsitalon1]

Hey guys,

I've been OTA for years now and the only thing I miss are NBA games on TNT...

Any stream sources, even in 480p quality?

[reggie14]

Doubt it. At least, no legal ones. TNT does stream some TV shows, but no live shows as far as I can tell. And, even for what they do stream, you need to authenticate as a paid subscriber.

[darcilicious]

Originally Posted by tsitalon1

Hey guys,

I've been OTA for years now and the only thing I miss are NBA games on TNT...

Any stream sources, even in 480p quality?

You probably want(ed) something like: http://www.nba.com/leaguepass/

Typically, consumers are reliant on the sport (league) providing access to live sports (e.g. NHL GameCenter for hocky) or official sites like http://www.foxsoccer2go.com/ for soccer, etc.

They all cost $$

[reggie14]

Originally Posted by darcilicious

You probably want(ed) something like: http://www.nba.com/leaguepass/

The problem with things like LeaguePass is, if I understand correctly, if the game is broadcast on national TV, like TNT, then you won't be able to watch it online. You can only watch games that you *can't* watch on your local/regional networks or on national stations.

Basically, they don't want you getting LeaguePass as an alternative to getting cable or satellite TV.

[Slugger]

Originally Posted by reggie14

The problem with things like LeaguePass is, if I understand correctly, if the game is broadcast on national TV, like TNT, then you won't be able to watch it online. You can only watch games that you *can't* watch on your local/regional networks or on national stations.

Basically, they don't want you getting LeaguePass as an alternative to getting cable or satellite TV.

This is correct, at least for MLB and NHL (and probably NBA and NFL). However, given the current trends I expect that this will probably change during the next rounds of negotiations with the national TV rights holders. People want online access to their teams and want to cut ties with cable/satellite. I expect someday (in the distant future) the leagues will just start to pay the networks a fee to provide a signal of the games that the league will then resell exclusively online or they may just cut the middle man altogether and get into the production side themselves. The NFL might be the exception given the ridiculous rights fees they pull in from the networks. MLB might be on the fence, but I could definitely see the NHL doing it and maybe even the NBA.

[darcilicious]

Or, it could go the other way

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/busines...rC9agDUEkHae2I

(I still have cable tv but from a podunk provider, Frontier, who hasn't been included in any of the must-have-cable-for-access-to-content deals (e.g. TNT, HBOGo, etc) as far as I know.

[Slugger]

Originally Posted by darcilicious

Or, it could go the other way

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/busines...rC9agDUEkHae2I

(I still have cable tv but from a podunk provider, Frontier, who hasn't been included in any of the must-have-cable-for-access-to-content deals (e.g. TNT, HBOGo, etc) as far as I know.

Interesting, I suppose the HBOs and Showtimes, etc. probably make more money based on customer subs than they might if they offered their shows a la carte via the internet. So the HBOs probably want to keep the status quo. I know I spend $16/mth for TMN (Canada's movie channels) + HBO Canada. I don't even want the movie channels -- at least not for movies. In Canada, Showtime original series (Dexter, Californication, etc.) are shown on TMN and you can't get HBO on its own, you have to subscribe to TMN. And I only want these channels for access to the series, not the movies. I tend to record a movie here or there but not many and only because I have Sage to record and archive it. Same with digital specialty channels (Discovery, etc.), most wouldn't exist without forced bundling and only survive because of it. But the OTA networks, do cable/sat cos in the US have to pay the OTA networks (Fox, NBC, ABC, CBS, etc.) for distributing the signals? In Canada, the OTAs don't receive fees from cable/sat (except for the gov't owned CBC, but that's indirect through taxes) so if it's the same in the US then why don't they just tell sat/cable to get lost and distribute their signals over the web? (Again, not today, but someday. But you adjust the generation of customers more than willing to move to this model by allowing them to do so immediately while the older generation(s) continue to receive their programming from cable/sat). Requiring auth via cable/sat account number is just turning those who want to go this route off the model before they even start.

[wayner]

Originally Posted by Slugger

This is correct, at least for MLB and NHL (and probably NBA and NFL). However, given the current trends I expect that this will probably change during the next rounds of negotiations with the national TV rights holders. People want online access to their teams and want to cut ties with cable/satellite. I expect someday (in the distant future) the leagues will just start to pay the networks a fee to provide a signal of the games that the league will then resell exclusively online or they may just cut the middle man altogether and get into the production side themselves. The NFL might be the exception given the ridiculous rights fees they pull in from the networks. MLB might be on the fence, but I could definitely see the NHL doing it and maybe even the NBA.

Except that increasingly the teams are being purchased by the same media companies that have a vested interest in making sure that people maintain their cable/sat subscriptions.

A few examples:

Rogers and Bell purchase Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment.
Comcast Spectacor (63% owned by Comcast) is the owner of the Philadelphia Phillies and 76ers.
The Phoenix Coyotes are rumoured to be moving to Quebec City where the new owner will be PK Peladeau, controlling shareholder of Quebecor which owns Videotron Cable.

The CEOs of cable/sat companies are not stupid. They know that sports are one of the strongest reasons to keep a cable/sat subscription and they won't give up the fight lightly to let you replace your cable/sat sub.

By the way, there are things that you can do to get around these types of IP blocking. I use a service called unblockus.com that allows me to get US and UK streaming services here in Canada. I think it also works with MLB, etc to allow you to get all games, including games that are blocked out for your "local" market. It costs $5/month but it is worth it to me.

edit - If you Google "live sports streaming" you see that various sources come up - these may or may not be legal in your country of residence.

[Slugger]

Originally Posted by wayner

Except that increasingly the teams are being purchased by the same media companies that have a vested interest in making sure that people maintain their cable/sat subscriptions.

A few examples:

Rogers and Bell purchase Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment.
Comcast Spectacor (63% owned by Comcast) is the owner of the Philadelphia Phillies and 76ers.
The Phoenix Coyotes are rumoured to be moving to Quebec City where the new owner will be PK Peladeau, controlling shareholder of Quebecor which owns Videotron Cable.

The CEOs of cable/sat companies are not stupid. They know that sports are one of the strongest reasons to keep a cable/sat subscription and they won't give up the fight lightly to let you replace your cable/sat sub.

Yeah, but the billionaires can't buy them all! (edit: Meant to say that the media corps can't buy them all, of course it's all billionaires from one sector or another that own them all ) Of course, they didn't get the billions from stupidity, but eventually they will have to learn to adjust or eventually sink, imho. Like what year will it be when landlines are nothing more than things kids read about in their history books (or more likely simply used as a transport for xDSL inet access/IPTV from the telcos)? Obviously all the major telcos are in the cellular game so not really an issue, but I think the cable/sat cos (more cable than sat because at least cable cos got the infrastructure to provide the inet access) will only be able to delay the inevitable for so long. Now that delay might be on the order of decades, but eventually they'll have to give in. I'm completely convinced that a future generation will have but a Boxee type device at their tv to access all things tv/movie/sports/etc. and cable/sat receivers will be non-existent. Again, I don't think this is like a year or two away, but on the order of a decade or two away, but it just seems inevitable. To me, sports is that "killer content" that keeps me tied to satellite. If the prices for the steaming alternative were on par with what I pay for the content from satellite then I'd easily switch. Unfortunately, it's not.

NHL Game Centre Live: $249/yr (nutty); free with NHLCI sub
MLB Xtra Innings: $129/yr (reasonable)
NFL: $169ish (I think)

So that's $618 with taxes in. Unfortunately, I only pay $35 * 8 = $280 a year (taxes in) for the NHLCI/NFLST combo with Shaw Direct. MLBXI isn't available with SD, but I don't need it anyway because all the Jays games are available on Sportsnet anyways. But I pay SD a total of about $1300 a year, including the sports packages. So even paying for those three online packages, I'd save almost $700 a year. I can pickup the big 4 US nets OTA from upstate NY, CBC HD from Belleville and if I'm lucky, Global HD from Toronto and CTV HD from Ottawa. Then my Showtime and HBO series I'd get via BluRay, but that's usually $50/show/season and there are 3-4 for sure I'd have to have so there's another $200/yr so now I'm over $800 to go OTA + streaming sports + BluRay. Everytime I work it out, it's still just not quite worth it. If those streaming packages come in at under $400/yr, that's when I make the switch I think. Getting OTA antennae pointing northeast to Ottawa, south to upstate NY and west to Toronto to get all the OTAs I'd want is also a hefty investment, but probably one I'd be willing to make if the sports were a little cheaper.

By the way, there are things that you can do to get around these types of IP blocking. I use a service called unblockus.com that allows me to get US and UK streaming services here in Canada. I think it also works with MLB, etc to allow you to get all games, including games that are blocked out for your "local" market. It costs $5/month but it is worth it to me.

Oh, yes, I'm aware.

edit - If you Google "live sports streaming" you see that various sources come up - these may or may not be legal in your country of residence.

Most (all except those from the league sites basically) definitely aren't legal and I'd want the legal ones because they're the ones that provide proper DVR capabilities, timeshifting of games, etc. I have no issues paying for the content, it's just too bad that the online packages are more costly (at this time) than the satellite version.

[wayner]

I agree that sports is the killer app that keeps you with cable. I am pretty sure that if it weren't for sports I would no longer have cable. And having everything in Sage available at all TVs in my house with full skipping capabilities, etc would be hard to give up.

Regarding OTA channels - is there really any point in worrying about getting CTV and Global if you get all of the US networks. They don't show anything of value that you can't already get - except in the years that CTV carries the Olympics.