Between Justin Verlander’s comment about the new balk rule and the big TV contract signed by the Dodgers, I’m wondering if MLB reached the perfect moment to make a big reduction in the time of games. MLB could easily cut eight minutes off a game by reducing commercial time between innings by 30 seconds. In the past, the argument went that more commercials meant more money. However, the big television contracts that teams are currently signing result from high demand for advertising during events that don’t lend themselves to a DVR.
So it strikes me that if MLB reduced the supply of advertising time, the value of that time might go up. It’s possible that the teams and their broadcasters could make as much money from shorter break between innings.
Not quite that simple. Raising the cost per point, the currency used to value tv ads, will put mlb, and local nets at a relative disadvantage against other programming, even more time shifted programming.
networks would rather sell more inventory at a lower cost than potentially price themselves off a media plan. Because visionaries who care about improving the fan experience, they ain’t.