I understand what you're saying, but MLB would be literally preventing millions of people from even being able to watch their games by this. Also, as I said, there is no alternative. The SS analogy doesn't work for me because there are no similar products. I would equate that to a player in MLB - possibly a team at best - but not the entire league.
If MLB wants to prevent millions of people from buying its product, that's its decision. It may be dumb, but presumably (I know with Bud Selig in charge, this is a leap) MLB is making a decision in its best interest.
Perhaps Chevrolet would sell more cars if it didn't sell exclusively to Chevrolet dealers, but it doesn't. Why? Because Chevrolet feels that if it has exclusive dealers, those dealers will work to promote the Chevy brand and reduce intrabrand competition and promote interbrand competition.
Like it or not, there are only so many sports entertainment dollars to go around, and as much as you'd like to separate baseball into its own individual market, it's not. People don't view baseball that way; rather, it's simply a sport, on which they will choose or not choose to spend money based on their entertainment budget. MLB, in a very real way, competes for money from NASCAR and the NFL and the NBA, and if MLB thinks that an exclusive dealings contract with DirecTV will help it better position itself for the limited entertainment dollar of Americans, then who am I to question? Who is John Kerry to question?
B.S., TBS is provided by every cable company.