Hacker News Reader

Comment by baq | Hacker News Reader

smart move for twitch. they have a platform, an audience and some among the top performers in the scene.

Seems almost like a conflict of interest though. Like the NBA owning one of its own teams.

wouldn't it be more: Like NBC owning a team?

Thats true. What came to my mind was the NBA actually did own one of its teams for a while in a bailout, I think it was Charlotte.

Fox used to own the Dodgers. Disney used to own the Angels and the Ducks. Liberty Media still owns the Braves (I think). MSG owns the Knicks and Rangers. And a bunch of other teams own their networks - the Red Sox own NESN, the Yankees own a large part of YES. Fox owns half of the Big Ten Network. ESPN owns a large part of the Longhorn Network and the SEC Network. I could go on and on, but suffice it to say that there's a ton of precedent.

Turner Network used to own the Braves iirc?

not quibbling about precedent or anything along those lines.

I'm just interested in the correctness of the metaphor.

Yeah, this is more apt, since Twitch doesn't directly run any major tournaments that I know of (although they do often sponsor some).

In e-sports land, KeSPA owned Team 8 (now Jin Air Green Wings) for a year or so until they found a sponsor. MBCGame owned MBCGame HERO for a while.

this was already the case, one example: http://d2l.gg/

I'm a business/legal newb, but when you mention conflict of interest, is there any actual real recourse against this?

Unlikely, Twitch would have to do something pretty significant to harm other teams in an anti-competitive manner. Even then, I'm not sure anyone can do anything.

> Like the NBA owning one of its own teams.

NBA has owned teams in the past; most recently being the New Orleans Pelicans from 2010-2012.

Yep, they generally only do so for short terms in special cases. It's not good for the league to own a team.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com