MLB Network Receiving Mostly Positive Reviews Following Debut

Writer Praises MLB Network For Chemistry Between On-Air Talent

MLB Network's launch Thursday "came off clean, and without hitches, a good sign for fans looking for a 24/7/365 option on television," and the net overall "could be headed for a home run," according to BIZ OF BASEBALL's Maury Brown, who wrote under the header "MLB Network Launch Nearly A Grand Slam." The chemistry between analysts Harold Reynolds, Barry Larkin and Al Leiter was "lively and natural," and their banter "seemed to take a play out of TNT's NBA coverage playbook by adding a good dose of personality to the mix." Brown wrote, "What the future will be like for MLBN, will define them. If delicate subjects such as [the legal cases of free agents P Roger Clemens and LF Barry Bonds], possible labor disputes, and some of baseball's missteps, such as collusion are avoided entirely, then MLBN could simply be viewed as a mouthpiece for the league" (BIZOFBASEBALL.com, 1/3). In Chicago, Paul Sullivan wrote the net "figures to be a nice place to turn once the season starts and there's actual news to cover." However, there are "some things we'd like to see as the MLB Network fine-tunes itself." The net should air "more classics" and less Harold Reynolds, as the "ever-perky Reynolds and co-host Hazel Mae sometimes seemed like they were doing a late-night infomercial." Also, the net should air more of its "Hot Stove" show, the equivalent of ESPN's "Baseball Tonight," as the program "featured an intelligent conversation between" analysts Tom Verducci and Jon Heyman. Sullivan added the net should be "less East Coast-centric" (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 1/5). In DC, Tim Lemke wrote MLB Network's debut at first was "somewhat inauspicious," and discussions "lacked new insights." Lemke: "I question, for instance, the logic of having three former players debate the offseason spending by the New York Yankees." But the net "hit a grand slam with its re-broadcast of Don Larsen's perfect game from the 1956 World Series" (WASHTIMES.com, 1/2).

BLOGGER REAX: PHILLIES NATION's Tim Malcolm wrote of MLB Net, "All in all, it’s a victory no matter what" (PHILLIESNATION.com, 1/5). But BLESS YOU BOYS' Ian Casselberry wrote, "If you're going to discuss transactions that teams have or haven't made -- for instance, why Manny Ramirez hasn't signed with anyone yet -- three ex-players aren't going to give you a full insight into the situation" (BLESSYOUBOYS.com, 1/4). BUGS & CRANKS' Patrick Smith wrote, "The whole network kind of has that eerie infomercial feel. ... In all, MLB Network feels very corporate and very sterile" (BUGSANDCRANKS.com, 1/2).

DRESSED FOR SUCCESS: MEDIA LIFE MAGAZINE's Kevin Downey notes MLB, having watched NFL Network struggle since launching in '03, "set about to avoid all of its mistakes by taking on important partners and getting the pricing right." NFL Net launched with 11.5 million subscribers and has grown to 42 million, but the net charges about $0.88 per sub. MLB Net is charging "less than a third of that" at $0.24, and the net is "free for subscribers if they have expanded basic or digital packages" from Comcast, Time Warner Cable, Cox, Charter, Cablevision, DirecTV and Verizon FiOS. SNL Kagan estimated that MLB Net is "likely to be profitable in its first year," as the net is "expected to generate $150[M] from subscriber fees and an additional $50[M] in ad revenue, having lined up advertisers such as Chevrolet, Pepsi and Anheuser-Busch." SNL Kagan forecasts that the net "will have 67 million subscribers by 2012, when it's expected to generate $306[M] in licensing fees and advertising" (MEDIALIFEMAGAZINE.com, 1/6).