Cardinals officials met with reporters to close the organization’s Winter Warm-Up on Monday. The team’s local broadcasting contract was among the topics.
Owner Bill DeWitt Jr. confirmed the Cardinals would receive their full rights fees for 2024, per their contract with Bally Sports Midwest (link via Derrick Goold of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch). The Cardinals are among 12 teams affected by the ongoing Diamond Sports Group bankruptcy. Even as MLB and the broadcasting conglomerate continue discussions about renegotiating some of the deals, St. Louis has been assured they’ll be paid in full next season.
That doesn’t provide any kind of certainty beyond 2024. There’s a real possibility Diamond ceases operation of all the Bally Sports RSNs after next season. In that case, the teams will need to find a new means of in-market broadcasting. DeWitt suggested the Cards were considering a handful of different paths. One option would be a partnership with the NHL’s Blues for a shared channel. The club could also create a standalone channel of its own or partner with some of the other MLB teams that will likely be dropped by Bally after the ’24 campaign.
However they handle their post-’24 broadcasts, they’ll have one more season at their negotiated rights fees. Goold reports that number to be around $73MM (potentially more depending on inflation adjustments). DeWitt said the Cardinals approached the 2023-24 offseason without any spending restrictions tied to the rights fees as they operated on the assumption they’d be paid at least 80% of their contract for next season.
St. Louis is on track for a similar payroll as they had a season ago. Roster Resource projects their 2024 spending around $178MM. According to Cot’s Baseball Contracts, they opened the ’23 campaign in the $177MM range. President of baseball operations John Mozeliak indicated last weekend there was still some room to add this offseason, even if team president Bill DeWitt III has downplayed the chance of any huge splashes.
The middle relief corps stands as perhaps the team’s top remaining priority. After the Cardinals dealt Richie Palacios to the Rays for Andrew Kittredge, Katie Woo of the Athletic writes they’re likely to continue searching for free agent bullpen help. Previous reports have linked the team to Ryan Brasier and Phil Maton, each of whom remains unsigned.
Also in attendance on Monday was center fielder/middle infielder Tommy Edman. The switch-hitter discussed his rehab from October’s arthroscopic wrist procedure. He noted he hasn’t yet been cleared to make contact when he swings a bat. He’s likely to be delayed on the hitting side in camp but said he’s “very confident” he’ll be at full strength by the start of the season (Post-Dispatch link via Goold).
Edman also discussed his contract situation as he prepares for a potential arbitration hearing. He’s one of 22 arbitration-eligible players in MLB — and the only Cardinal — who didn’t reach a settlement before last Thursday’s deadline to exchange filing figures. Edman’s camp filed for a $6.95MM salary, while the team countered at $6.5MM. Like most clubs, St. Louis takes the “file-and-trial” approach and won’t continue negations on a one-year salary past the filing deadline.
Even “file-and-trial” teams are typically willing to discuss multi-year pacts after exchanging figures, however. Edman said he hasn’t heard anything about a multi-year deal to this point but suggested he expects there to be some discussion between the team and his representatives before the hearing. Edman has between four and five years of service time. A two-year deal would allow the sides to avoid a hearing without affecting his free agent trajectory.
The Cards won’t have to continue ‘negations’ after the filing deadline.
Litigant Edman is on official Notice that litigant DeWitt negated him.
If anybody on the Cardinals team deserves a multi year contract extension— it’s
Tommy Edman!!! He’s proven his worth consistently over the years he’s played, both offensively and defensively. He’s a potential Gold Glove defender every season. At any position they put him in. He’s a contact hitter with speed. Plus a threat to steal bases any time he is on base. In clutch hitting situations— Tommy Edman consistently has proved he can come through in the clutch— more times than not.
The Cardinals would be wise to extend Edman!! One would question the team’s intelligence if they refuse to extend Tommy Edman.
I know Cardinal fans might balk at this, but I think the Giants and the Cards match up very well for a trade. Edman to the Giants for one of their young arms (not Harrison, but perhaps Winn or Black or ?) plus a major league ready outfielder (Matos, Ramos, McCray?) someone who can handle CF.
I don’t think there’s a Cardinals fan in their right mind who would balk at that. If they could get Black and any one of those three OFers, they’d take that and run to the bank as fast as they possibly could.
Cards have Victor Scott who just did very well in AA and is a non roster spring training invitee. They might do it for Black and McCray though.
Weird take on the term “contact hitter”
All this RSN nonsense resulted from MLB picking a dance partner in Diamond that had red flags before the ink on the contract had dried. Are any teams that invested to build their own RSNs having financial difficulties? I ask that seriously. I don’t know the answer. Of course, this current issue could have been avoided if the Justice Department hadn’t forced Disney to sell off its sports RSNs as part of the 20th Century Fox acquisition. Ultimately, a new model will need to evolve, but it may require investment from the teams impacted, and history says they’ll resist, looking for the easy money upfront as opposed to investing for future growth.
Most teams signed with Fox before Diamond existed. Bally was picked for them. The problem is caused by the evolution of TV markets and cord cutting.. It was coming even if Disney owned the media rights.
Meaning by Disney on the Fox sale? Pretty bad deal if they had no input on a change of control.
Meaning that neither Fox nor Disney could control the quickly changing marketplace. This was all inevitible once cord cutting and streaming became the standard.
Streaming is an awful way to broadcast baseball games. They lose over 50-60%
of their coverage of the club, commercials, etc. Maybe more. That means less dollars in the Teams pockets and a tremendous loss in numbers of viewers in the Cardinals case—- who generate more viewers than most all teams in MLB.
They have no choice but to move to streaming. Cable is dying. It won’t be much longer before it collapses completely. It’s over and time to move on.
The Cardinals have the highest viewership rate in MLB. They have only a fraction of the viewers that the Dodgers and Yankees. Their market is too small to complete with the viewers of the true big market teams.
Streaming does NOT pay what cable does. For the Cardinals to replace $73 million in media rights money solely through streaming will take 73,000 annual subscribers for a $100 annual subscription.
You got 73,000 fans in St. Louis willing to fork over $100 to stream Cardinals games??? Streaming money and Cable money ain’t the same. They are trying to figure out how to make streaming more financially lucrative. Only way to do it is to skyrocket the price. That won’t work!
According to MLB, the Cardinals have the highest ratings of all MLB teams. This was prime time ratings as of Febuary of 2023. It doesn’t include last years viewership. It’s the newest one I could find and it’s not close.
Cardinals (Bally Sports Midwest): 7.87
Padres (Bally Sports San Diego): 5.19
Brewers (Bally Sports Wisconsin): 5.07
Phillies (NBC Sports Philadelphia): 4.54
Astros (AT&T SportsNet Southwest): 4.44
The numbers of viewers for New York, Chicago, LA, SF, and Atlanta still dwarfs the number of viewers for the Cardinals.
What part of cable dying do you not understand? Cable companies are refusing to pay Bally what they need to make a profit. That’s the root of this entire problem.
Every time somebody cuts the cord, Bally does not get their monthly per cable subscriber fee. This is the real problem. The pie keeps getting smaller. ESPN gets $8.25 per month from EVERY cable subscriber. EVERY subscriber pays the fee regardless of whether or not they actually to the box to ESPN.
Streaming only pays from the people who actually use the product. Cable model pays for everybody regardless if they watch.
You still have commercials and ad space during broadcasts, the entire sum doesn’t need to come from the people purchasing the stream.
Yes easily – this past year I had to pay $100 per month to stream on fubo as the only other provider was satellite at a much higher rate. They will easily get 73k subscribers especially if that’s the only viewing option. $100 annually is less than $10 per month and a heck of a deal.
Agreed. People pay more than that to watch their team on MLBTV, and half those games are blacked out if you live in the local market. $10/month is nothing to watch your favorite team play nearly every day.
I stream everything. I didn’t know cable companies were still used? Huh.
@ very barry
we’ll cable companies did it to themselves by not adapting to current trends and not giving options on what there customers want subscribe. i used to have cable and out of all the channels i got i only used 3 so paying over 100 for 3 channels wasn’t worth it. as far as mlb teams going to streaming they really have no choice yes the deals with cable are better but unless there’s a big shift on how we consume media cable is going to be dead in the next 10 years or so. even if the revenue from streaming is lower it’s still better than a 0 or the uncertainty if the bill will get paid at all
Cutting the cord from mockingbird mainstream media programming is a good idea for just about anyone with reliable internet service, in mu opinion. Eventually, I plan to disconnect from most “professional” sports, too.
Seems simple to me. Partner with Blues and form SLSN or something. Call it St. Louis Sports Network. Then you own your rights and can negotiate some streaming. If Diamond is bankrupt, they should be willing to sell their broadcasting infrastructure for dirt cheap, as they need to pay bills, and will be in breach of contract anyway, if they don’t pay rights fees. They might have an out there, but will certainly need to give some sort of notice before opting out, no matter what. Anyway, pull in some local college games, maybe local high schools if anyone cares, and do features like “Great Moments in STL Sports History” showing old games. Simple. Now, it is not my money at risk here, so it’s easy for me to say…
Local high schools would be relatively huge for the St. Louis area, they’re all about their high school rivalries. I think the idea could work well in that market.
The problem they are having is that broadcasting is dying. No one wants their broadcasting infrastructure. MLB needs companies like Amazon and Google with streaming infrastructure.
By infrastructure, I mean the equipment and personnel already in place. They don’t have to buy and install all new equipment to broadcast or stream. It would lower the initial investment.
Almost every sports fan I know still streams live tv through various services like YouTube TV, Fubo, DirectTV Streaming serivce, Sling, Philo, etc, etc, etc. There are tons of these companies that sports fans flock to to get their live tv fix. No need for cable, but also no need to run to Apple, Amazon, Disney, Netflix, etc.
CLE used to have its own station, SportsTime Ohio. But then the Dolans sold it to Fox because operating their own station wasn’t lucrative enough in a small market.
The tv revenue gap already made a huge separation in big and small markets. Now with teams like the padres and soon to me more in jeopardy of losing the tv deals they have this could really create a massive gap from teams like the dodgers and Yankees.
With all the cord cutting and mlb being a local sport more so than a national sport. It will be interesting to see where they find the growing tv money stream.
The NFL and NBA weren’t always national sports. The first step to becoming a national sport is the centralize all media rights and control.
The RSN situation is going to be a tough nut to crack. Lucrative northeast teams own their RSNs (although MASN is kind of withering on the vine). MLB consolidating all the local media rights under one umbrella, might be best for all of baseball, but getting the Yankees, Mets, Red Sox and Orioles to agree is going to be a tough sell.
Bah humbug
Looks like the TV issue might have resolved itself with today’s Amazon investment in Diamond. Would be nice to be able to stream games on Amazon Prime.
MLB just shot that down. MLB wants Bally gone. They will deal with Amazon directly once Bally goes under. The question is going to be the amount of revenue available now that a hundred million or so forced subscribers are gone. How much is the average person willing to pay to watch baseball?
Diamond only owns 5 teams tv rights. It’s unlikely they get anymore and more likely they lose those 5 or some of them next year. MLB definitely wants to bypass diamond and work a deal directly with Amazon. They don’t need the middle man.
Bally still owns media rights to 11 teams after they gave up rights to 3 teams.
Media rights but not streaming rights
Not an expert at any of this Bally Sports, Diamond stuff, but I fail to see where individual teams were negligent. Still, there is an obvious substantial advantage teams have that know they are going to receive all their media revenue. MLB should issue 0 interest loans to those teams in this Bally Sports limbo to the full extent of the revenue they were to receive. These loans should be subsidized by all the teams that know they will be receiving all their media revenue. Terms of full repayment should be fair but prompt, upon resolution of this COMMON problem to ML baseball.
Unresolved, MLB is breeding inequity into the sport. Apparently the powers that be refuse to notice this.
As long as the Yankees and Dodgers continue to not win championships the mlb can point to a competitive league. They don’t care if teams with low revenues only get a small window every decade or two.
Who cares about “equity”
I see a lot of people on hear talking about how much they pay to watch ballgames, and especially the Cardinals. I know some people won’t do what I did, but here it is anyway. About 3 years ago I switched cell phone service providers because I was fed up with my old one (Verizon). I ended up switching to T-Mobile and low and behold one of the perks of being a customer is free MLB.TV EVERY season. Now, last time I looked MLB.TV was nearly $200 a season. I get to watch every single Cards game except ones that are Nationally televised OR the 3 games they play the Mariners since I live in Washington and they are blacked out. Just some food for thought for those looking to switch phone carriers