Thinking Inside the Box: Walter O’Malley and Pay Television

Researched and edited by Brent Shyer and Robert Schweppe

“My jaw dropped when Walter O’Malley called me just prior to the announcement that the Dodgers were moving to Los Angeles. I never dreamed that the Dodgers would leave Brooklyn,” said Tom Villante, longtime former Dodger radio-TV producer for BBDO in New York. “In the early 1950s, Walter truly believed in pay television (cable and subscription) as the future for sports on TV. He saw it as affordable for fans, particularly for home games, as proposed pricing was less expensive than going to a game. In 1964, it was Walter and the Dodgers who were the first major league team to offer select home games on Subscription TV in Los Angeles.” 

Walter O’Malley and Pay Television Chronology:

• January 28, 1949

  Lawrence W. Lowman, Vice President of CBS, sends Walter O’Malley a letter regarding the latest statistics on television set ownership (the number of receivers in homes and in public places) by metro market.

• February 28, 1951

  In the New York Times, upon signing the longest TV deal ever by a Major League Baseball club (seven years with options on WOR-TV), Walter O’Malley said that television “definitely has hurt attendance,” but added, “I feel this is a passing phase and that eventually television will build new baseball fans all over the country.” New York Times, February 28, 1951

• March 4, 1952

  According to a Dodger press release, Walter O’Malley states that the Dodgers expect baseball, television and motion pictures to collaborate in the showing of actual games in theatres on large size screens via TV. Happy Felton’s Knothole Gang, the TV program immediately preceding every Brooklyn Dodger home game, will be commercially sponsored by Loew’s Theatres and MGM. O’Malley continues, “This is a significant association between TV, the Motion Picture Industry and Baseball. The impact of this popular pre-game program will be studied this year to determine if these groups can coordinate their future plans to bring at least portions of the big games to theatre TV screens.”  Some 83 of these theatres in the metropolitan New York area were used for Saturday morning Knothole Gang meetings. Also, the Dodger share of the TV broadcasts amounted to $15,000, which O’Malley turned over to the Brooklyn Amateur Baseball Foundation. Brooklyn Eagle, March 4, 1952

• August 6, 1952

  In a letter to James Bealle of Batten, Barton, Durstine & Osborn, Inc., Walter O’Malley asks for the agency’s input regarding a move to televise road games. “The above idea, incidentally, is one that we considered with the agency some time ago, but there were many problems then because of the limitations of co-axial cable. I am told that some of these problems have been solved and that it might be possible to take road games from Boston, Philadelphia and perhaps Pittsburgh and Chicago and then send them back to Brooklyn. It would probably make very little difference to the sponsors whether it was a Dodger game at home or a Dodger game on the road as long as we had adequate camera coverage plus our own announcers for the commercials and ad libs. But difference in price would be something to consider. This idea, incidentally, might be closer to us than we realize as I think we must all acknowledge that television has really had a bad effect on our gate…Let me have your candid advice on the feasibility of doing an experimental series of road games in lieu of home games next season.”

• January 18, 1953

  New York Giants owner Horace Stoneham discusses pay-TV in a New York Times’ article: “I think we have reached the point where we definitely need some sort of pay-as-you-go television. Everybody realizes that television is hurting attendance to a certain extent. But, of course, it shouldn’t take the whole rap. There are a lot of other reasons why fans aren’t coming out to the ball parks as they did in the boom years. I feel like President Walter O’Malley of the Dodgers, who points out that television is creating new fans. But these new fans themselves generally admit they would be willing to pay something for the privilege of having the games brought into their living rooms or to places of entertainment.” New York Times, “Giants’ Stoneham for ‘Juke Box’ TV, January 18, 1953

• February 3, 1953

  Walter O’Malley responds to Senator Edwin C. Johnson (D-Colorado), who is also President of the Western League (Class-A league), and Johnson’s concerns about the future of television and its impact on the minor leagues. O’Malley believed the future was “in the field of subscription television.” O’Malley also wrote that “major leagues would do well to limit their broadcasts to their particular local influence areas. You must recognize the good side of television also. Some 25,000,000 people viewed the (1952) World Series on television and nobody can tell me that such widespread interest in the game is a detriment to it.” Pat Robinson, International News Service, Ft. Worth Star-Telegram, “Subscription TV on Way – O’Malley”, February 4, 1953

• February 9, 1953

  O’Malley believed “that the time has passed when an operation like big league baseball can depend upon the revenue from gate receipts alone.” He said, “Even if we didn’t telecast, there isn’t a night in the week that our attendance won’t be affected by something like Milton Berle or ‘I Love Lucy.’ And we need night games, since too few people are free to come out in the afternoon.” O’Malley continued ‘subscription television,’ with a coin-box attached to your TV set, will provide most of the answers.” Tommy Holmes writes, “This is a wrinkle that supposedly has been perfected, but awaits the okay of the Federal Communications Commission.” Tommy Holmes, Brooklyn Eagle, “Sports Studies Coin-Box Video”, February 9, 1953

• May 20, 1953

  O’Malley talks about pay-TV in The Sporting News: “The idea of meter television for telecasts of our games is the thing I have talked about the most…I am interested greatly in the idea and other club owners should be interested, too, as I believe they are. It’s time we realized that we cannot give away our product and then wonder why attendance is off.” The Sporting News, May 20, 1953

  Walter O’Malley also announces at a press conference that the Dodgers will broadcast as many as 18 road games in 1953, but will not eliminate any of the home telecasts from Ebbets Field. Speculation is that the Dodgers will substitute more road games for home games in the future. Brooklyn Eagle, May 21, 1953

• May 3, 1954

  In the minutes of the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of the Brooklyn National League Baseball Club, Inc., held at 215 Montague Street, Walter O’Malley reported that “Management is following closely subscription television. Hearings are presently scheduled before F.C.C.”

• May 4, 1955

  Walter O’Malley says the Brooklyn Dodgers are considering the adoption of subscription television, if pay TV is approved by the F.C.C., at a rate of about 50 cents per game. “I’ve always been in favor of subscription television,” said O’Malley. “I’m satisfied the public is ready for it.” AP stated, “The Federal Communications Commission will open hearings June 9 on whether subscription television is to be approved.” AP, May 4, 1955; printed in The Washington Post, “Subscription TV Favored By Dodgers”, May 5, 1955

• June 9, 1955

  The Daily News reports that “Pay-TV, the most explosive issue in the history of broadcasting, will be examined by its proponents and opponents during Ed Murrow’s “See It Now” next Tuesday at 10:30 via CBS-TV. Among those who will present the pros and cons of the question will be: playwright Robert E. Sherwood; Brooklyn Dodgers prexy Walter O’Malley; CBS president Frank Stanton and possibly, Barney Balaban, president of Paramount Pictures. O’Malley is said to be receptive to telecasting the Dodgers ball games on a pay-as-you-see basis; Balaban’s company controls Tele-meter, a coin-operated pay-TV system; Stanton is firmly opposed to toll television, and Sherwood’s position is unknown, although it’s expected to be a moderate one.” New York Daily News, “News Around the Dials”, June 9, 1955

• June 14, 1955

  Walter O’Malley is a guest on The Edward R. Murrow “See It Now” show on CBS-TV about the pros and cons of subscription television. O’Malley was interviewed at Ebbets Field for an hour in advance of the airing.  He stated that subscription (or toll) TV would provide fans access to all games on television for 50 cents a game and believed more than one million would sign up. “I’m very strong for pay as you see television,” said O’Malley on the show interviewed by Ed Scott. “I think it’s an economic necessity. I think it’s something that we have to come to if we’re going to survive in baseball. We would benefit by it in that the audience would be a clocked audience just as attendance at the ballpark is clocked by the turnstiles. We would know exactly how many viewers were watching the game and the visiting club could be paid some proportion of that income, just as they are now paid a proportion of the money of paid attendance. We believe that in a market such as we enjoy in New York that it would not be unreasonable to expect a viewing audience of one million. That, of course, would run into very substantial money.” Scott asked if O’Malley would be in favor of advertising on pay TV. O’Malley said, “Yes, I can see no objection to that. You buy a newspaper. In that newspaper are paid advertisements. You ride in a subway in New York City and you pay your fare to ride in the subway and all the time you’re riding, you see those colorful car card displays in the subway system. They’re all paid advertisements. Or, if you buy a magazine, it has paid advertising in it. Or, if you pay to go into a ballpark, you see paid advertising on the fences and you have paid advertising in the program, so why shouldn’t there be sponsored pay as you see television? I like the idea because I think that would help to bring the price down to the average viewer.”

• July 1, 1955

  In a letter to the editor of Newsday in New York, Walter O’Malley discusses the possible development of sponsored pay-TV for baseball. He writes, “I would not object to paid TV being sponsored if such sponsorship would bring the cost of the program down. We pay to ride on the subway and yet we see paid ads. If there was no income from the ads going into the budget I assume that the fare would be higher. We buy a newspaper which is very largely dedicated to paid advertisements. Were it not for these ads I am sure the price of the newspaper to the subscriber would be higher than it is now. One can travel by automobile to New York from Philadelphia over the old network of roads or one can take the New Jersey Turnpike and pay a reasonable fee. The public apparently is willing to pay for something better in such a case. At different times I have tried to make my position clear to the effect that I would rather have subscription TV of baseball games than no TV.” Newsday, Letter to the Editor, July 1, 1955

• April 23, 1956

  While the majority of baseball team owners felt that television represented a major threat to attendance, Walter O’Malley stated in Newsweek, “The solution is pay-as-you-see. Until the government legalizes pay TV, the best any baseball man can do is come up with a stopgap.” Newsweek, “That ‘Monster’: Is Pay-to-See the Answer?”, April 23, 1956,  p. 84 According to the article, “O’Malley’s stopgap is a contract to televise all 77 Brooklyn Dodger home games and 25 road games for an estimated $750,000 a year. Ibid. Baseball Commissioner Ford C. Frick in the same article refers to television as “That monster.” Ibid.

• June 26, 1957

  Walter O’Malley testifies before the Special Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives in Connection with Its Study of The Anti-Trust Laws. In his testimony before Chairman Emanuel Celler (D-Bklyn.), O’Malley responded to the Chairman’s question “Have you made any arrangements with Skiatron?” stating, “I started out about seven years ago getting on the soap box for subscription television and I have made a number of public statements which have appeared in The Sporting News. In February, last February of this year, the Skiatron people came to Vero Beach and told me that they thought they would be in a position to put on programs next year. I was naturally very interested because I believed in it. I had conducted a poll of my fans on the subject and got very excellent responses. So we started to negotiate a contract, a pilot contract, a standard form contract. There are many very troublesome clauses. I did reach a point on that contract where I was satisfied with the terms and said, ‘I will sign in escrow, not operative’, which I did.” Official Verbatim Transcript of Hearings Before Special Subcommittee of the House of Representatives in Connection With its Study of The Anti-Trust Laws, June 26, 1957

  O’Malley continued regarding the price per game for Skiatron, “My personal preference, Mr. Chairman, would be 50 cents. I don’t want to make a speech on it, but I happen to believe that baseball is a popular price sport. That is why I didn’t raise my prices at Ebbets Field, 3 years ago you still could have gotten in the bleachers in Ebbets Field for the same price you got in 25 years ago, and it was only when that darn city tax came along that I went along and raised the price on that. I have questioned a lot of people on this subject and they say they have no objection to paying $1 to watch your ballgame, 10 or 15 of us would sit around a television set and it would save us driving 40 miles into the city to watch the game. I think that would be all right, and I think we are putting on a show that people are willing to pay for. They will still get that for free on radio.” Ibid.

• August 13, 1957

  According to a Pulse survey, New York figures show that 40% of the viewers would pay to see a ballgame on TV. “Pulse claims that if the Dodgers were to charge a quarter per contest, the returns would bring in $54,500 for each game. This would top the $34,700 Dodger average per home game for ’56 from box office income and radio-TV rights.” Matt Messina, New York Daily News, “News Around the Dials”, August 14, 1957

• September 18, 1957

  The F.C.C. tentatively agrees to consider authorizing trial runs of public pay-as-you-see television sometime after March 1, 1958. The tryout period is for three years. “Five corporations have proposed various pay television systems. They are Zenith, Skiatron International, Telemeter, Inc., Teleglobe and Blonder-Tongue, Inc. Under most systems, both the picture and sounds would be “scrambled.” Both would become clear to the viewer through a decoding device attached to the set. The public would pay for the program either by dropping money into a coin box or by being billed later.” United Press, “Pay TV Dispute Flaring up Again”, New York World-Telegram and Sun, September 19, 1957

• October 17, 1957

  According to the Los Angeles Times, Pay TV for Los Angeles became a virtual certainty as the City Council voted 11-2 in favor of the legislation. Competitive bids were accepted from Skiatron, Inc., Fox West Coast-Telemeter and HarriScope. All three made identical bids, offering the city 2% of gross receipts. “Jerome L. Doff, vice-president and director of Skiatron TV, Inc., attended yesterday’s Council session but would not affirm or deny that a deal with the Dodgers had been made. He said he expected an announcement from New York within the next few days. Doff did say, however, that he expects actual work on the wired TV system to begin almost immediately. ‘The action of the Council today was the big thing. We expect soon to announce a pay TV program which will not only include baseball but other major sports and attractions.’” Carlton Williams, Los Angeles Times, “Council Accepts Bids for Pay TV”, October 17, 1957

• December 18, 1957

  Los Angeles City Council passes an ordinance for Pay TV by an 8-6 margin, validating franchises Skiatron TV, Inc. and Fox West Coast-Telemeter Corp. The majority of opposition was voiced by Southern California Theater Owners Assn., an independent theater group, which argued that theater owners would be adversely affected and eventually free TV wouldn’t exist. Carlton Williams, Los Angeles Times, “City Council Votes for Pay Television”, December 19, 1957

• March 24, 1958

  Sports Illustrated article about Walter O’Malley and the Dodgers discusses pay TV in detail. “I think subscription TV will offer a solution to the problems that are plaguing many major sports,” said O’Malley. “I’m not at all sure that the real baseball fan resents a modest price for subscription TV, free of commercials. I had hundreds of fans back in Brooklyn apologizing for not supporting the team in the park because they couldn’t get there, but some of those same fans were more than willing to pay something to watch the games on TV.” Robert Shaplen, Sports Illustrated, “O’Malley and the Angels”, March 24, 1958

• April 2, 1959

  In a Field Poll, Los Angeles area fans responded to the question, if you could watch games on pay TV, what would be the number of games you would view on TV if they cost $1. Two-thirds said they would probably not watch any games, while that number dropped to 52% when the price was 50 cents.  At 50 cents, 37 percent would watch one or more games. The California Poll, “Baseball Interest in California Reaches New High” by Mervin D. Field, April 2, 1959

• December 19, 1960

  In a letter, Dodger Executive Secretary Harry J. Walsh writes that “Mr. O’Malley has never owned any stock in Skiatron Electronics.”

• December 26, 1960

  Sports Illustrated reports on pay TV, “In the spring of 1959 (Matty) Fox announced that the following spring his Skiatron company, a licensee of Skiatron Electronics and Television Corp., would begin broadcasting the 1960 games of the Los Angeles Dodgers and the San Francisco Giants. Skiatron stock jumped from 3 5/8 to 9, fell again as the time approached and nothing happened, and finally attracted the attention of the SEC. The result, last December, was that public trading in Skiatron Electronics was suspended because of the ‘general unreliability’ of the ‘information’ used in promoting it. A few months ago the SEC, after winding up its inspection of Skiatron’s affairs, announced that it had never had a contract with the Dodgers and that although, in truth, it had had an option to televise Giant games, this had lapsed 18 months earlier ‘by reason of Fox’s failure to make payments of about $4.25 million.’” Sports Illustrated, “The $6,000,000,000 Question”, December 26, 1960   

• February 8, 1962

  Walter O’Malley writes a letter to Don Page of the Los Angeles Times explaining his position on pay TV:  “It has been well known for the past ten years that I have used every opportunity to go on record in favor of Pay TV…As an individual I have met with other individuals who shared an interest in Pay TV. Neither I nor the Dodgers are committed to any group or any particular program. We are interested, however, in each new plan or proposal that comes along and in most cases carefully investigate the same…I doubt if Pay TV would achieve the circulation of free TV. An overall general observation is this: I believe Pay TV will eventually come, when it does I want our Dodgers to be involved.”

• April 29, 1962

  A New York Telegraph article sums up O’Malley’s longtime interest in subscription television.  “As far back as ’51-’52, when TV revenue was less than half it is today, O’Malley was talking about selling the games at 50 cents a shot. He even suggested that, given the go-ahead signal, a group financing him would wire some representative city, assuming the entire cost. At that time, he figured installation costs, per set, would run about $125.” Harold Rosenthal, Sports, New York Telegraph, April 29, 1962

• August 22, 1963

  The Los Angeles Dodgers issued this statement:  “The Dodgers have entered into an agreement with Subscription TV by which the pay TV company will start televising Dodger home games March 30, 1964, and will continue subject to the condition that there must be 20,000 subscribers in this area by July of 1964. It is a five-year contract and gives the company the rights to an area within a 50-mile radius of home plate at Dodger Stadium, plus an option on an extended area which comprises all of California south of the Northern boundaries of San Luis Obispo, Kern and San Bernardino Counties.” 

• August 31, 1963

  The Dodgers and San Francisco Giants make the front page in The Sporting News with a headline “Pay-TV of Giant, Dodger Games Likely in ’64”. “The system is not expected to be ready for operation at the start of the ’64 season, but should be set to start screenings by about mid-season, one source indicated. Once the toll-TV system begins, it is reliably reported all Giant and Dodger home games will be available to customers of Subscription Television. Currently, followers of the two West Coast clubs are able to see for free on television only their team’s nine road games against each other.”[1] Dodger Assistant General Manager Red Patterson issued a statement that “the Dodgers…have been on public record for more than 12 years in favor of subscription television if and when some responsible group with the know-how came along and that they hoped to help pioneer the system.” Patterson said, “This undertaking has our full support and we are willing to co-operate to offer our baseball games to this new media in addition to our present broadcast schedule.” The story also points out that Walter O’Malley felt “the charge for pay-TV should not exceed the cost of the lowest-priced ticket in the park” ($1.50 for general admission and pavilion tickets at Dodger Stadium). Clifford Kachline, The Sporting News, “Pay-TV of Giant, Dodger Games Likely in ’64”, August 31, 1963

• April 1, 1964

  Sports columnist Joe Williams writes about Walter O’Malley and pay-TV: “The mere fact that the New York-born Irishman is the prime mover in this, the first major campaign to sell TV in sports, makes it significant. He has established himself as the most astute, aggressive and forward-looking man in baseball.” O’Malley said, “Actually, pay TV should be much further advanced than it is. Public misconceptions, most of them inspired, have held it back. Special interests have encouraged the fallacy that pay TV means the end of free TV. Which, of course, isn’t true at all. Pay TV simply offers exclusive features, without commercials, at a modest cost, and which in no way affect free programs. Either the home viewer will buy, or he won’t. At least, he’s entitled to this decision.” Regarding the World Series on pay TV, O’Malley said, “Not the World Series. That, of course would be the most desirable program of all, but it’s the game’s showcase and it should always remain on free TV.” Joe Williams, New York World-Telegram & Sun, “$’Malley Smiles…He’s Going on Pay TV”, April 1, 1964

• April 4, 1964

  Walter O’Malley speaks to Hal Lebovitz of the Cleveland Plain Dealer writing in The Sporting News about plans for MLB games to be put on subscription television.  “This special unit is put into your home, connected to the telephone lines and to your TV set,” said O’Malley. “This will give the viewers of various intellectual levels a choice of programs. He can watch the ball game, or a concert, or a program specially designed for youngsters. Or perhaps there is a theater play or a science lecture. If he doesn’t want to watch any of these, he can still see the free programs on his set over the regular channels. Or he can listen to music 24 hours a day at no extra charge.” O’Malley is asked about someone who might share programming with a neighbor. “I don’t believe so. It’s inconvenient and the man whose house the set is in is going to get tired of paying for the snacks and the drinks.” When asked if there is any opposition to STV, O’Malley replies: “Oh yes. The movie theaters are seeking a referendum to have us stopped. This is really ironic, for it was really the theaters who started pay-TV. They televise the championship fights into their theaters and charge $10 to $20, meanwhile keeping it from the general public. They show on Theater TV for a high price what we want to give you at home for a low price. I don’t think they have a chance of stopping us.” Hal Lebovitz, The Sporting News, “Everybody’s Eyeing O’Malley’s Big Test of Subscription TV”, April 4, 1964

• May 18, 1964

  • 

    Larger View

  An experiment in Dodger baseball on pay television was in the works as Walter O’Malley meets with Pat Weaver, the head of Subscription TV, who was a visionary in the field and the former President of NBC from 1953-55. Weaver, the father of actress Sigourney Weaver, and O’Malley debut the first game on Subscription TV, the Dodgers and Chicago Cubs on July 17, 1964.

• June 27, 1964

  Although the debut of Subscription TV was delayed because of a telephone strike and anti-pay TV forces, the first Dodger game scheduled to be televised on the service is July 17 against the Chicago Cubs. The area that has been wired in Los Angeles is between La Cienega Boulevard on the east, Overland Avenue on the west, Pico Boulevard on the north and Exposition and Venice boulevards on the south. The San Francisco Giants were to make their debut on STV on August 14. Bob Hunter, The Sporting News, “Pay-TV Encounters Roadblock; L.A. Debut Delayed to July 17”, June 27, 1964

• July 17, 1964

  • 

    Larger View

  • 

    Larger View

  The Dodgers are the first team to present a game on pay television when they beat the Chicago Cubs, 3-2, at Dodger Stadium on newly-launched Subscription TV, formed by Lear-Siegler, Inc., Santa Monica and R.H. Donnelley Corp. (a subsidiary of Dun & Bradstreet). Frank Sims handles the play-by-play, while Dodger V.P. Fresco Thompson is the analyst. According to the Los Angeles Times, “As for the debut of Subscription TV here in a narrow 4-sq.-mile area on the West Side, its opening date was chosen to coincide with the return of the Dodgers to town. Inasmuch as baseball is a major offering of the system, it had to open with a ball game. The Cubs-Dodgers battle tonight in Dodger Stadium, their meeting Saturday afternoon and their double-header Sunday — each for the $1.50 price of a bleacher seat (on STV) — are prime entrees on the pay menu.” Some 2,500 homes viewed the Dodger game in color (with a color set) on Channel “B,” one of three channels offered (Channels “A”, “B” and “C”). Cecil Smith, Los Angeles Times, “The TV Scene”, July 17 and 18, 1964

• July 20, 1964

  • 

    Larger View

  After the launch of Subscription TV, it was reported that more than one-third of initial subscribers paid to see one or more of its programs on July 17. Of these, 61% watched the Dodgers beat the Chicago Cubs. Cecil Smith, Los Angeles Times, “The TV Scene”, July 20, 1964

• July 25, 1964

  In its July 25-31 issue, TV Guide reported in “For The Record”:  “Pay As You Watch:  Last Thursday night in Hollywood, just a few blocks from Sunset and Vine, where the wreckers have left only a pile of rubble of what was once NBC’s proud Hollywood Radio City, an invited audience of press people saw samples of what some observers think may rattle the foundations of television – Subscription TV, which is pay television via cable. The night after the press preview, regularly schedule transmission began to approximately 2500 charter members in West Los Angeles, who paid $5 to have a coaxial cable run to their homes and a three-channel selector box attached to their television sets, and who now, for a price, may see a variety of popular and esoteric programs. The opening night’s program featured (for $1.50) the Los Angeles Dodgers vs. the Chicago Cubs in color (for subscribers with color sets), on one channel…On succeeding nights, subscribers could see more Dodgers games, more travel and athletic films, more theater. ‘The one disappointment in our schedule,’ says Sylvester L. (Pat) Weaver, president of Subscription TV, ‘is the lack of new movies.’ He says they are ‘working on it.’” Henry Harding, TV Guide, “For The Record”, July 25-31, 1964 issue  

• July 30, 1964

  Skiatron Electronics & Television Corporation places an ad in The Wall Street Journal stating, “History was made in California, July 17, 1964. First time Major League Baseball was televised without any advertising interruptions!! On July 17, 1964, the World’s Champion Los Angeles Dodgers, located at their new home, Dodger Stadium, Los Angeles, California, inaugurated full-scale Pay-TV operations under the auspices of Subscription Television, Inc. (STV), a publicly-owned company with more than $20,000,000 of paid-in capital, that holds an exclusive license from Skiatron for the entire United States, over a period of 90 years, expiring March 18, 2053.” Wall Street Journal, ad, July 30, 1964

• August 1, 1964

  In The Sporting News, Bob Hunter writes, “Major league baseball’s historic debut on a new electronic medium – pay television – staged a typical Hollywood premiere in the Los Angeles area the night of July 17. There were 2,500 subscribers wired for sight, sound and a statement at the end of the month and they watched the Dodgers play the Cubs in another Walter O’Malley first…All fans were enthusiastic with the reception and most observers actually raved about the color, which was noticeably more accurate than the usual color. This oddity was explained by STV officials in this way: Subscription television is by direct cable, while the free TV programs are reflected indirectly. In addition to the one area in Los Angeles, in which some 4,000 sets have been wired by the television company, there were receivers in the Stadium Club at Dodger Stadium, the Press Room and in the offices of O’Malley and Buzzie Bavasi…Installation for “charter” subscribers was a nominal $5 and the weekly $1 service fee was waived for one year in order to speed up interest. The charge for a ball game is $1.50, with an electronic computer figuring each subscriber’s tab by the month…Some subscribers reported they utilized only the picture of the Dodger-Cub game, using the radio voices by Vin Scully and Jerry Doggett…The pay-television business faces a battle of the ballot in the November election, with motion picture interests leading a successful fight to place an initiative before the voters, hoping to make this new form of home entertainment illegal in California.” Bob Hunter, The Sporting News, August 1, 1964

• September 24, 1964

  “We don’t know how this will result,” said Walter O’Malley in a New York Post article, about pay-TV. “There are not enough sets yet to measure the overall conditions of pay-TV.” Sid Friedlander (with Heywood Gould), New York Post, “The Big Business”, September 24, 1964

• September 25, 1964

  Melvin Durslag writes in the Los Angeles Herald Examiner, “Pay television, in which (Walter) O’Malley is deeply involved, has been a headache. The pay-TV issue in this state goes on the ballot in November. In the meantime, its stock has dropped from 12 to 6.” Melvin Durslag, Los Angeles Herald Examiner, September 25, 1964

• October 21, 1964

  Walter O’Malley writes in a letter to Mel Jones, business manager of the St. Paul Saints ballclub, “I am glad we got the (pay-TV) program started but they ran into every sort of obstacle just as we did when we brought the Dodgers to Los Angeles. Out of it all comes at least one conclusion and that is that Pay TV in the future will succeed.”

• November 3, 1964

  Passing by a two-to-one margin, Proposition 15 outlaws pay TV, effectively forcing STV to shut down. STV sues to overturn the Proposition.

• January 2, 1965

  Writing in the Pasadena Independent, Walter O’Malley addresses pay-TV. “No discussion of baseball’s future would be complete without an analysis of TV’s role…Pay TV? I believe in pay TV. The Dodgers games were aired. I believe Proposition 15 was unfortunate. I think pay TV eventually will be ruled constitutional and that this medium will return. At that time we will take a new look at it.” Walter O’Malley, President, Los Angeles Dodgers Baseball Club as told to Joe Hendrickson, Pasadena Independent, January 2, 1965

• September 2, 1965

  • 

    Larger View

  Subscription Television President Sylvester “Pat” Weaver, Jr. writes a letter to Dodger President Walter O’Malley updating him about the on-going legal troubles for the service. “As you probably know, the Supreme Court has held our case, and we will get our final verdict perhaps as early as the end of the year, and, in any event, early in 1966.” Voters in California passed a referendum (Proposition 15) which forced Subscription TV to cease operations in the fall of 1964, after the service had made its debut that summer. Letter from Sigourney “Pat” Weaver, Jr. to Walter O’Malley, Walter O’Malley Archive, September 2, 1965

• January 19, 1966

  Walter O’Malley predicts in an interview with the Los Angeles Times that pay-TV for baseball will make a comeback. “I wish it would start right now,” he said. “But I’m afraid it will be several years. They’re experimenting now with some novel approaches. One of them would be to bounce the signals off satellites. The subscriber would have a bowl-like device on his roof to receive the signal.” Los Angeles Times, January 19, 1966

• March 2, 1966

  The California Supreme Court rules Proposition 15 unconstitutional. “The court held in a 6-1 decision the Proposition 15 violates constitutional guarantees of free speech.” Jim Crane, Los Angeles Herald Examiner, “Pay TV Again Eyed in L.A.”, March 22, 1966 But, in fighting the ban, STV was hit hard financially and moved its offices to New York, never to return.

• February 18, 1967

  Walter O’Malley said despite its delays, pay TV is not dead and it eventually will be the medium through which major sports events are seen “The potential is there and it’s just staggering.” Charles Maher, Los Angeles Times, “O’Malley Sure Pay TV on the Way”, February 18, 1967

• April 25, 1967

  Speaking at the Hollywood Radio and Television Society luncheon at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel, Walter O’Malley discusses pay-TV. “I would like to see Pay-TV in the hands of the big boys (networks) and not run by amateurs as in the past try here. I don’t know why they don’t take a crack at it. I’d like to see it.” According to TV Editor Allen Rich, in the Los Angeles Evening Citizen News, “the reference to amateurs was to the group which blew $25 million on the venture last time around.” Allen Rich, Los Angeles Evening Citizen News, April 26, 1967

• February 22, 1977

  The Dodgers sign an agreement with National Subscription Television, known as ON TV in Los Angeles on KBSC Channel 52, to present six Dodger home games on a new subscription cable service in 1977. Dodger President Peter O’Malley said, “This is an experiment. How it’s received by the viewers, whether they think the fee is in line with the programming they see, will determine the future of it. I don’t think anyone can guess where it will be a year from now or 10 years from now. It’s just another experiment which hopefully will be successful. All of us in sports have looked at pay TV in anticipation that some day some system will go, whether it’s over-the-air or cable. What the system will be we don’t know. I’ve read pay TV is here. Well, you and I heard that 12 or 13 years ago. Our contract with this group is for one year. We’ll know a lot more at the end of the season.” Charles Maher, Los Angeles Times, “Now Batting for Pay TV – the Dodgers and Angels”, February 22, 1977

  The Dodgers continued presenting select home games with ON TV through the 1984 season.

• August 3, 2010

  From The New Yorker, “…no owner was more enamored of the idea of pay-per-view baseball than Walter O’Malley.” Michael Shapiro, The New Yorker, The Sporting Scene, “The Continentals”, August 3, 2010

• January 29, 2013

  From the New York Times Baseball Blog: “Walter (O’Malley) felt that the ideal situation was televising road games on free TV, but that all home games should be on pay TV, to give him an expanded box office,” said Tom Villante, an advertising executive at BBDO whose clients Schaefer Beer and American Tobacco (the maker of Lucky Strike) sponsored the Dodgers’ radio and TV games. His agency’s role, in turn, made him the executive producer of the broadcasts.” Richard Sandomir, bats.blogs.nytimes.com, January 29, 2013

• March 18, 2014

  On Hardballtalk.com, Craig Calcaterra writes, “…one of Walter O’Malley’s ideas about how to keep the Dodgers in Brooklyn was to capture revenues from fans who were moving out of the city and to the suburbs and were loathe to come back to Ebbets Field due to parking concerns and worries about crime and the like. How to do this? Pay TV. Pay TV in the 1950s, you ask? Oh yeah. People were talking about it. Specifically, O’Malley and a man named Matty Fox were talking about it. Calcaterra quotes from John Helyar’s “Lords of the Realm” book, “O’Malley was also intrigued by pay TV. He’d met a fellow named Matty Fox, who was trying to make the embryonic technology a commercial reality. He and O’Malley hatched a plan in which Fox’s company, called Skiatron, would put Dodger games on pay TV at a cost of one dollar a game for viewers. Skiatron would get two thirds of the gross, the Dodgers one third, and in this way the huge base of fans who couldn’t squeeze into Ebbets Field would be harvested.” Craig Calcaterra, hardballtalk.com, “The Dodgers on pay-TV-only is the culmination of Walter O’Malley’s dream, March 18, 2014