Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Media Entertainment

Amazon Wants To Include Live Sports as Part of Prime Membership ( 77

An anonymous reader writes: Amazon's next Prime membership benefit could be the ability to stream live sports. The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that Amazon is in talks with leagues like the NFL, NBA, MLB, and a handful of others about live game rights. The fact that Amazon wants to stream live sports isn't a new development. But the Journal did have a noteworthy tidbit: Amazon could offer a "premium, exclusive sports package" to those who pay for a $99 per year, or $8.99 per month, Prime membership. Amazon is exploring streaming rights to multiple sports at a variety of levels. The Journal reported that Amazon wanted to exclusively license NBA's League Pass streaming product; it is also reaching out to traditional broadcasters like Univision and ESPN about the content they own but don't end up airing on TV.Amazon was also recently exploring deals with Indian Premier League, a cricket match league. In a recent interview with David Remnick of The New Yorker, Reed Hastings said that one of the most difficult decisions for him has been to not do live sports. He said Netflix doesn't want to move away from movies and TV shows, and only focus on improving the quality of the shows and user experience.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon Wants To Include Live Sports as Part of Prime Membership

Comments Filter:
  • by TodPunk ( 843271 ) on Tuesday November 22, 2016 @11:27AM (#53338949) Homepage

    This is the last difficult part of being a cord cutter (if one cares about this kind of content). One can get just about any other set of content from streaming if it's available at all (there are always holes, mind you). I don't envy the rights negotiations, as they are a mess, but it would solve a major problem in the lineup of content.

    • This is the last difficult part of being a cord cutter (if one cares about this kind of content). One can get just about any other set of content from streaming if it's available at all (there are always holes, mind you). I don't envy the rights negotiations, as they are a mess, but it would solve a major problem in the lineup of content.

      You're forgetting one huge hurdle when it comes to being a cord cutter: spouses who watch HGTV, the cooking channel, the Hallmark Channels (yes, there is more than one), and all of those "Judge Judy" shows (there are several copycat versions). Much of that content is only available from cable.

      • HGTV has its own streaming service, same with the cooking channel, I'm sure the the judges have a streaming service as well.
        • HGTV has its own streaming service

          The link "Sign In to Your Provider" at the top of this page [] makes me think HGTV streaming is yet another "TV Everywhere" that requires authenticating a subscription to a package on a traditional multichannel pay television (that is, cable or satellite) provider that includes HGTV. The FAQ [] backs this up.

      • SlingTV may be the option for you if you're in the US (or can get a good US-based VPN) service.

        We get all the channels we want. Just need local news, which I'm working on with an OTA network box.

      • That's easy to avoid: don't marry someone who watches a lot of TV.

        As a now-divorced man, I simply will not date anyone who's a big TV watcher. It's an entirely different lifestyle than what I lead, so someone like that would not be compatible with me.

        Luckily, it's not that hard these days to find women who don't watch TV (or much TV). One big clue: if they're thin, they probably don't watch much TV.

    • I've been contemplating cord cutting and sports, specifically Big Ten Network, was the second to last stumbling block. Then found that Playstation Vue has BTN and many other sports channels so that roadblock is gone. Now just need to figure out DVR options so the wife can watch the damn soaps.

    • Except this particular development is starting to look like Cable TV 2.0. Instead of a "Prime Sports" package, the sports broadcasting will be subsidized across *all* prime members. The only difference is we'd be paying for one bundle we don't use, instead of 20.
    • Couldn't agree more. This is the primary reason I haven't cut the cord.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Please don't. Live sport are extremely expensive and just push up the price for us that don't give a monkeys.

  • When they rose the price of Prime from £49 to £79 and bundled in Prime Video I wasn't all that happy and until Grand Tour was released I had yet in the years since that increase to find a program I wanted to watch on there. I'd check, see if it was on Amazon or Netflix before often purchasing it on Google Play.

    But 90% of the time that a show is actually on there it's not included. I wanted to watch Stargate SG1 the other day and they're charging £2.50 per episode, no offer to buy by the se

    • That was the reason I cancelled my Prime Video subscription. OK, the selection is crap as well but I'd probably have lived with that if it wasn't all mixed in with the non-free stuff. The killer was that some seasons are free and others are non-free within the same show.

  • As a sports fan, I would be OK with Amazon offering live sports, as long as it doesn't require non-sports fans to subsidize my enjoyment. But that's a little bit like me saying because I don't like the Gilmore Girls and Two Broke Girls, I shouldn't have to subsidize the people that watch those programs.

    But Amazon streaming video, including live sporting events, has one big issue to iron out, and that's Google. Right now, I pay to be able to watch giant men give each other brain damage on my home televisio

  • Price will have to go in some areas local rsn's have high costs.
    Sports net LA is $4.50-$5.00 /mo just for 1 team and in all the other area RSN's and it's about $8-$15 /mo

    CSN Chicago is about $3-$5 /mo and if the cubs start there own RSN they may want $2-$4 /mo.

  • A la carte please (Score:4, Interesting)

    by stomv ( 80392 ) on Tuesday November 22, 2016 @12:43PM (#53339419) Homepage
    I don't want a year or a month of MLB. I want to buy by the game. Charge me a buck or two for a single ball game. No monthly or annual fee (above the Amazon Prime fee), and let me just watch what I want, when I want, and pay for just that. Hell, I'll throw in an extra buck per game if you fill the "ad space" time with a single Amazon ad and then run sports highlights during the teevee timeouts.
  • I'd like to know how they expect to pay for licensing all of this sports content without severely impacting the price. Currently if you want to watch hockey online, your only option is NHL Center Ice. It costs $220 for the season ($18 per month), and you don't get playoff or locally broadcast (including cable) games. To add something like a major pro sport onto the pricing that people expect from Amazon Prime, the league owners would have to drastically change the way they do things. Not to mention that t

  • So a computer literate audience... and the want to sell them sports?

    I'm guessing this is to appeal to, what? Brogrammers?

  • The dinosaurs in charge of Major League Baseball will almost certainly insist on only allowing streaming access to games outside of your local market - basically the same thing as they enforce with their product.

    The fundamental problem is that a huge chunk of most team's (and the leagues') profits come from cable tv deals, so MLB insists on pretending that the cable tv market is still thriving. I can only offer one data point, but I decided a couple years ago it wasn't worth paying an extra $65-$70 a

  • As a cord cutter, yes please.

    As a sports fan, EXTRA yes please.

    Slight tangent, but one of the problems facing several sports today is ridiculously over-inflated salaries:
    -This leads to rule changes to prevent injury: can't have your bazillion dollar player getting hurt.
    -And that's gonna pump up owner salaries... can't have "just" a multi-millionaire owner presiding over millionaire players... no no no
    -It leads to god awful sponsorship deals by the players: "Eat Papa Johns pizza, I swear it's not garbage

  • Bah, wake me up when Amazon broadcasts the World Cup with non-US English commentators. Then, I'll be interested.

  • I cancelled my satellite, because I got tired of subsidizing all of the sports fans. Their movie and TV show catalog is pretty pathetic as is. And more and more, I'm not even getting the two day shipping I was promised. If Amazon goes this route, I'll cancel the first time I see an increase in the membership costs. I was already on the fence as is.

  • I just did. I enough of us complain to Amazon directly about not wanting to pay for sports, that might help. Ranting here is less effective...

Kill Ugly Processor Architectures - Karl Lehenbauer