ESPN might just focus on political and social opinion since it seems to be more important for them to share their thoughts.
ESPN - within 5 years cant cover existing contracts owed
44,699 Views |
249 Replies |
Last: 6 yr ago by 45-70Ag
First thing we'll probably see is fewer televised CFB games and stiff PPV costs costs for bigger games.
The days of sitting home on a Saturday and flipping between games will be over. It will cost $35 to check in on a game.
The days of sitting home on a Saturday and flipping between games will be over. It will cost $35 to check in on a game.
jja79 said:
First thing we'll probably see is fewer televised CFB games and stiff PPV costs costs for bigger games.
The days of sitting home on a Saturday and flipping between games will be over. It will cost $35 to check in on a game.
I disagree. It won't be priced so high that demand craters. I'm thinking more like Netflix.
They could start with getting rid of the undefeated garbage along with the ESPN news channel. Cut salaries down for people like mike and mike who make something beteeen 3-5 million. Get rid of first take and let Monday night football go back to either abc, NBC or CBS.
Fire Berman's dumbass
Getting rid of cheap content is definitely how to right the ship at a TV network.
I love CFB but you had to know the party would be up one day when schools like the Houston who average 30k a game were suddenly able to afford 300MM stadium renovations. Numbers schools are getting from TV contracts relative to real interest in their games really make no sense.
I love CFB but you had to know the party would be up one day when schools like the Houston who average 30k a game were suddenly able to afford 300MM stadium renovations. Numbers schools are getting from TV contracts relative to real interest in their games really make no sense.
Everyone agrees that cable bills have gotten completely out of hand, and that going a la carte is preferable if it means lowering rates. However, this will not solve the growing financial problems for the sports programming industry, and it will likely make them worse. Right now, ESPN et al receives a large percentage of their revenues from the non sporting public as an ancillary benefit from the existing cable billing structure. While this benefit may be rapidly eroding with the advent of widespread cable cutting, going to an a la carte structure would virtually eliminate it immediately. However, the current trend makes it very clear that the days of free money are coming to an end for ESPN and everyone else. So what happens when this Pandora's box is opened?
These real question is, can the current licensing contracts be sustained, and how much will it cost each member of the sporting public to sustain them? Will the a la carte rate for sports programming that is required to offset the lost revenue from the disinterested public cause an increase or decrease in overall costs for those who want to watch sports? If broadcast contracts are to be sustained, I think it's very likely that overall costs per household will increase, perhaps dramatically, for the privilege of watching sports. Your current cable bill could be a painfully fond memory as you pay double to get less. Something has to give, and I doubt anyone will like it.
Or you could just listen to Dave South and Will Johnson.
These real question is, can the current licensing contracts be sustained, and how much will it cost each member of the sporting public to sustain them? Will the a la carte rate for sports programming that is required to offset the lost revenue from the disinterested public cause an increase or decrease in overall costs for those who want to watch sports? If broadcast contracts are to be sustained, I think it's very likely that overall costs per household will increase, perhaps dramatically, for the privilege of watching sports. Your current cable bill could be a painfully fond memory as you pay double to get less. Something has to give, and I doubt anyone will like it.
Or you could just listen to Dave South and Will Johnson.
Whatever the cost you won't be able to tune in to a game Texags points you to without paying.
And beerJDL 96 said:
Bottom line: we may not keep getting more sports than we pay for. Cable TV forced non-sports fans into subsidizing sports. New technology means people don't have to pay for as much that they don't want. ESPN, media deals, player salaries, stadiums, and owner profits, and maybe even youth sports will all shrink.
CAVEAT: gambling and sports betting may have a bigger role.
I'd be fine if they just had game audio without commentators. There is a lot of potential savings right there.
Live Sports are the Steak. Everything else is the crappy side dish or salad you only eat if still hungry after eating the steak.
The solution is to keep the wheat and cut the chaff. The talking heads are chaff. All the stupid petty debates they have...painful to watch most of the time. Mike and Mike, painful most of the time. Sportscenter...they do not need 5 different sportscenter crews. They need maybe 2 people and 2 understudies. I dont even watch anymore. Why bother? I can go online and get everything in 5 minutes.
The play-by play people are mostly overpaid. I would do Verne's job for free, if they would pay for me to travel to the best SEC game each week. Most of us would. Surely one in a thousand people could do Verne's job.
All the personal interest stories about how he grew up in a tough neighborhood, or he lost his mother to breast cancer, or she felt marginalized b/c she was a big ugly deeyike instead of a pretty chearleader...fugdat! I have to deal with people's problems everyday at work. I dont want to hear that. Fugdem, entertain me!
Sideline reporter...fugdat! Basically a stripper with a microphone anyways! I dont need to hear pretty girl attempt to get a coach to say a bunch of coachspeak! Forget postgame interviews. Most coaches just spit out coachspeak then too, unless they lost and then its either we're young or injured or both.
Bottom line is there is too much talking anyways. They ought to cut everyone who talks if necessary.
The solution is to keep the wheat and cut the chaff. The talking heads are chaff. All the stupid petty debates they have...painful to watch most of the time. Mike and Mike, painful most of the time. Sportscenter...they do not need 5 different sportscenter crews. They need maybe 2 people and 2 understudies. I dont even watch anymore. Why bother? I can go online and get everything in 5 minutes.
The play-by play people are mostly overpaid. I would do Verne's job for free, if they would pay for me to travel to the best SEC game each week. Most of us would. Surely one in a thousand people could do Verne's job.
All the personal interest stories about how he grew up in a tough neighborhood, or he lost his mother to breast cancer, or she felt marginalized b/c she was a big ugly deeyike instead of a pretty chearleader...fugdat! I have to deal with people's problems everyday at work. I dont want to hear that. Fugdem, entertain me!
Sideline reporter...fugdat! Basically a stripper with a microphone anyways! I dont need to hear pretty girl attempt to get a coach to say a bunch of coachspeak! Forget postgame interviews. Most coaches just spit out coachspeak then too, unless they lost and then its either we're young or injured or both.
Bottom line is there is too much talking anyways. They ought to cut everyone who talks if necessary.
Most schools have an Athletic Director.
tu has a booster plaintiff's lawyer. They're texas.
Lawyers, only lawyers. How sad.
tu has a booster plaintiff's lawyer. They're texas.
Lawyers, only lawyers. How sad.
Get rid of all these dumb shows. His and Hers, Highly Questionable, and First Take are all garbage. ESPN has Sportscenter, live sports, and I personally love 30-for-30s.
The talking head shows are annoying, but they make money for ESPN. The talk show have no rights fees, so they are much more profitable than the big events with big ratings and bigger rights fees.
The big events allows ESPN to charge the big fees, but I bet College Game Day, which has no rights fees, is much more profitable than the actual games.
The big events allows ESPN to charge the big fees, but I bet College Game Day, which has no rights fees, is much more profitable than the actual games.
That is what happens when you start giving away participation ribbons instead of winning trophies.aggiehawg said:Fox has their OTA channel that helps. But yes, FS1 lost subscribers as well. Not as many because they had much fewer to begin with, but still significant.MSU/SECALUM said:
So if ESPN lost 621,000 did FOX also lose the same amount? Doesn't FOX have lower rated games than ESPN? What about ad revenue...it would be interesting to see how much ESPN charges vs FOX.
It's not that millennials are eschewing watching football on TVs, it's that they don't watch sports, period.
The Notorious A.G.G.I.E.
Joined:
Dec 14, 2004
Posts:
9,197
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:
Sideline reporter...fugdat! Basically a stripper with a microphone anyways! I dont need to hear pretty girl attempt to get a coach to say a bunch of coachspeak! Forget postgame interviews. Most coaches just spit out coachspeak then too, unless they lost and then its either we're young or injured or both.
I don't mind Kaylee and Sam
Say what you will about Baylor but I think there is some truth to the idea that folks are sickened by ESPN promoting the Baylor story while trying to kill the Winston story a few years ago. Baylor folks seem to think that this sort of hypocrisy takes them off the hook (which is stupid) but I'm alleging there is more to this issue than just Baylor.
I noticed over the last 6 months since espn has started laying off and re-organizing their lineup, that just about every espn sports talk show now has the hosts trying to "entertain" us with very bad comedy and slapstick. Is this one of their ways they are trying to "lift" their ratings and get subscribers back?
They might want to try putting the "News" back into espn and stop with the liberal PC nonsense. They lost sight of their audience with the pc crap they are trying to pass off as sports content.
I wish Fox Sports would get their act together and take advantage of espn's stupidity. Real competition would make a difference.
They might want to try putting the "News" back into espn and stop with the liberal PC nonsense. They lost sight of their audience with the pc crap they are trying to pass off as sports content.
I wish Fox Sports would get their act together and take advantage of espn's stupidity. Real competition would make a difference.
bleedmaroondad said:
I wish Fox Sports would get their act together and take advantage of espn's stupidity. Real competition would make a difference.
Good luck with that. Both Fox and ESPN pull from the same pool of slap-dick "talent" for their on-air hosts.
For anyone holding out hope that FS1 will be alternative to ESPN by having quality on air talent, I present Skip Bayless as example 1 of maybe not.
The on air talent is just frosting on the cake. The bigger problems come from the people behind the camera and what stories they decide to do or not do. And of course the opinions they give the on air people to spout.
The on air guy didn't decide to do a "heartwarming" story on the male to female 250lb ****** that just won its first boxing match.
The on air guy didn't decide to do a "heartwarming" story on the male to female 250lb ****** that just won its first boxing match.
It's not salaries.That **** is a drop in the bucket.
It's the rights fees that are unsustainable under the current model. And almost certainly under any new model that appears in the next 10 years.
It's the rights fees that are unsustainable under the current model. And almost certainly under any new model that appears in the next 10 years.
The Mouse Network just acquired a stake in a company that is in the forefront for streaming technology.MiniShrike said:
It's not salaries.That **** is a drop in the bucket.
It's the rights fees that are unsustainable under the current model. And almost certainly under any new model that appears in the next 10 years.
Quote:
Walt Disney announced Tuesday afternoon that it is taking a minority stake in MLB Advanced Media's spin-off media company, BAMTech. Disney is making a $1 billion investment in two paymentsnow and in January 2017that will give it a 33% interest in the media company, with an option to become the majority stakeholder in the future.
Disney said that BamTech will collaborate with ESPN to launch a "multi-sport" subscription streaming service, including live regional, national and international sports events.
The splitting of payment is significant. While details of the amounts for the two installments have not been revealed, the payment in January of 2017 would be discounted to ensure the $1 billion matched today's dollars.
As part of the transaction, BAMTech was separated from MLB's broader digital business, MLB Advanced Media, which has set an industry standard for live digital streaming services.
Sorry, no link. Stolen from the Realignment Thread on the shag. So we'll see how they end up structuring the streaming availability within the next decade. The rights fees will probably have to be renegotiated to scale with demand at some point, I suppose.Quote:
The deal will allow ESPN to use the agile nature of BAMTech to quickly jump into the streaming of their content as more and more consumers move from the traditional television set to streaming services.
In a statement, it was noted that "current content on ESPN's linear networks will not appear on the new subscription streaming service. More details about the new service will be announced in the months ahead."
"Our investment in BAMTech gives us the technology infrastructure we need to quickly scale and monetize our streaming capabilities at ESPN and across our company," said Robert A. Iger, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company. "We look forward to working closely with BAMTech as we explore new ways to deliver the unmatched content of The Walt Disney Company across a variety of platforms."
I know much has been written about the ratings decline of the NFL, but I believe that CFB ratings are up, except for the Big 12. Thanks to penalties and poor play and sub optional match ups, the NFL is no longer the must see appointment TV it once was, especially on Thursday nights and Monday nights. SEC fans will watch their team and other SEC teams. This also applies somewhat to the B1G, unless it is Maryland and Rutgers. This does as true fro Big 12, Pac 12 or ACC (except for basketball).
The big rights fees for ESPN are the NFL and the NBA. NBA ratings are up, but will they remain after LeBron and Steph? Don't expect the NFL to take a haircut come renewal time. The time could be coming soon when the networks and cable companies call the NFL's bluff. I don't really care about watching Jacksonville and Tennessee as a "feature" game.
The big rights fees for ESPN are the NFL and the NBA. NBA ratings are up, but will they remain after LeBron and Steph? Don't expect the NFL to take a haircut come renewal time. The time could be coming soon when the networks and cable companies call the NFL's bluff. I don't really care about watching Jacksonville and Tennessee as a "feature" game.
Interesting info, thanks Hawg!aggiehawg said:The Mouse Network just acquired a stake in a company that is in the forefront for streaming technology.MiniShrike said:
It's not salaries.That **** is a drop in the bucket.
It's the rights fees that are unsustainable under the current model. And almost certainly under any new model that appears in the next 10 years.Quote:
Walt Disney announced Tuesday afternoon that it is taking a minority stake in MLB Advanced Media's spin-off media company, BAMTech. Disney is making a $1 billion investment in two paymentsnow and in January 2017that will give it a 33% interest in the media company, with an option to become the majority stakeholder in the future.
Disney said that BamTech will collaborate with ESPN to launch a "multi-sport" subscription streaming service, including live regional, national and international sports events.
The splitting of payment is significant. While details of the amounts for the two installments have not been revealed, the payment in January of 2017 would be discounted to ensure the $1 billion matched today's dollars.
As part of the transaction, BAMTech was separated from MLB's broader digital business, MLB Advanced Media, which has set an industry standard for live digital streaming services.Sorry, no link. Stolen from the Realignment Thread on the shag. So we'll see how they end up structuring the streaming availability within the next decade. The rights fees will probably have to be renegotiated to scale with demand at some point, I suppose.Quote:
The deal will allow ESPN to use the agile nature of BAMTech to quickly jump into the streaming of their content as more and more consumers move from the traditional television set to streaming services.
In a statement, it was noted that "current content on ESPN's linear networks will not appear on the new subscription streaming service. More details about the new service will be announced in the months ahead."
"Our investment in BAMTech gives us the technology infrastructure we need to quickly scale and monetize our streaming capabilities at ESPN and across our company," said Robert A. Iger, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The Walt Disney Company. "We look forward to working closely with BAMTech as we explore new ways to deliver the unmatched content of The Walt Disney Company across a variety of platforms."
I remember reading that ESPN was going to make the upcoming ACC Network more techno-centric, so maybe they'll use them as the test case to see how well it's received, then move SEC Network in that direction.
But with the B1G, PAC, and BDF under Fox, does that vault SEC and ACC into yet another atmosphere?
Face it: It's major coin to listen to a guy named "Booger" educate you.
We pay for cable with most of the movie channels and high speed internet. I'd happily pay more for Texas A&M football, meaning ESPN and SECN. I don't know where my cutoff would be, but it would be pretty high.
I don't really watch much TV outside of whatever my wife is watching. She watches lots of TV - some cable, some on netflix, some on amazon prime. I guess its more than we need, but she likes the variety of shows, and I believe that a happy wife is a happy life.
My brother tried to "cut the cable", and asked me for our logins for HBO go, ESPN, Netflix and the like. I just laughed at him. That's not cutting the cable, its being parasitic. He's now back with the program and pays for cable. His kids eventually broke him.
I don't really watch much TV outside of whatever my wife is watching. She watches lots of TV - some cable, some on netflix, some on amazon prime. I guess its more than we need, but she likes the variety of shows, and I believe that a happy wife is a happy life.
My brother tried to "cut the cable", and asked me for our logins for HBO go, ESPN, Netflix and the like. I just laughed at him. That's not cutting the cable, its being parasitic. He's now back with the program and pays for cable. His kids eventually broke him.
If ESPN keeps losing cable fees, they will be at a serious disadvantage to the broadcast networks. Maybe Monday Night football moves back to ABC (Still a Disney product). The money will still be there for the big 4 broadcast networks IMO and they still reach the largest audience at no cost to the consumer. That is all driven by ratings though, so the NFL needs to watch its Ps & Qs.McInnis80 said:
I know much has been written about the ratings decline of the NFL, but I believe that CFB ratings are up, except for the Big 12. Thanks to penalties and poor play and sub optional matches ups, the NFL is no longer the must see appointment TV it once was, especially on Thursday nights and Monday nights. SEC fans will watch their team and other SEC teams. This also applies somewhat to the B1G, unless it is Maryland and Rutgers. This does as true fro Big 12, Pac 12 or ACC (except for basketball).
The big rights fees for ESPN are the NFL and the NBA. NBA ratings are up, but will they remain after LeBron and Steph? Don't expect the NFL to take a haircut come renewal time. The time could be coming soon when the networks and cable companies call the NFL's bluff. I don't really care about watching Jacksonville and Tennessee as a "feature" game.
I still believe the money in CFB will be in tier 1 as cable cutting becomes more of a thing, so fewer games but more good games. ESPN owns almost all the bowl games as well, I don't believe that will be sustainable so fewer of those will survive.
Get ready for a 9 game conference schedule and possibly two P5 OOC games on the schedule. FCS games will become a thing of the past. The driving factor will be more Tier 1 inventory.
I have the same problem with my wife as well. I still have a kid in the house and many streaming services only allow one stream at a time. Then I hear complaints about buffering issues when trying to watch a game with lots of eyeballs. Still some things to figure out before I am able to cut the cord.RDV-1992 said:
We pay for cable with most of the movie channels and high speed internet. I'd happily pay more for Texas A&M football, meaning ESPN and SECN. I don't know where my cutoff would be, but it would be pretty high.
I don't really watch much TV outside of whatever my wife is watching. She watches lots of TV - some cable, some on netflix, some on amazon prime. I guess its more than we need, but she likes the variety of shows, and I believe that a happy wife is a happy life.
My brother tried to "cut the cable", and asked me for our logins for HBO go, ESPN, Netflix and the like. I just laughed at him. That's not cutting the cable, its being parasitic. He's now back with the program and pays for cable. His kids eventually broke him.
Remember when MTV was just music videos and ESPN was live sports and highlights? Oh, the good ol' days.
I'm a bit confused about this. I saw the headlines where ESPN had a record number of subscriber loss etc...BUT...
I don't know of any cable or sat services where I can " subscribe" to ESPN. I have to buy these packages that have various channels and damn near all of the basic has ESPN. You get the ESPNxyz channel as you move up the food chain. Are we really simply discussing the cumulative loss by ESPN due to folks downgrading from SUPER DOOPER 70000 EXTRA package to the Dooper 700 package and losing ESPNU ?
Once the college season is over I delete ALL sports channels from my guide. Every one of them. Yet thanks to my subscription to UVERSE MEGA SUPER AWESOME GARGANTUAN 300 ( of which I delete 279 of em) package I guess that I am still counted as a " subscriber" to all of the sports networks that I NEVER watch.
I don't know of any cable or sat services where I can " subscribe" to ESPN. I have to buy these packages that have various channels and damn near all of the basic has ESPN. You get the ESPNxyz channel as you move up the food chain. Are we really simply discussing the cumulative loss by ESPN due to folks downgrading from SUPER DOOPER 70000 EXTRA package to the Dooper 700 package and losing ESPNU ?
Once the college season is over I delete ALL sports channels from my guide. Every one of them. Yet thanks to my subscription to UVERSE MEGA SUPER AWESOME GARGANTUAN 300 ( of which I delete 279 of em) package I guess that I am still counted as a " subscriber" to all of the sports networks that I NEVER watch.
Cord cutters have more options and aren't forced into large channel packages to get the few channels they want.
We cut the cord about five years ago. And by cord I mean satellite.
We still stream something on Netflix from time to time, but daily watching is rare. We binged Stranger Things over a weekend and I'll stream a football game a couple times per year, but my time is more valuable to me now and sitting in front of the tube for hours is not a priority.
I'll put some dvd/bluray shows on for background noise while I work around the house or on my laptop, but we don't miss broadcast tv.
News I can check in five minutes online.
Weather even faster.
If I don't attend an Aggie game, I'll usually listen on the radio while working in the garage unless I stream some of it if the stream is free.
I can watch the TAMU Highlights in a couple of days after the game and see what I need to see. The money and time just are t worth it to me anymore.
We still stream something on Netflix from time to time, but daily watching is rare. We binged Stranger Things over a weekend and I'll stream a football game a couple times per year, but my time is more valuable to me now and sitting in front of the tube for hours is not a priority.
I'll put some dvd/bluray shows on for background noise while I work around the house or on my laptop, but we don't miss broadcast tv.
News I can check in five minutes online.
Weather even faster.
If I don't attend an Aggie game, I'll usually listen on the radio while working in the garage unless I stream some of it if the stream is free.
I can watch the TAMU Highlights in a couple of days after the game and see what I need to see. The money and time just are t worth it to me anymore.
Featured Stories
See All
9:11
14h ago
17k
42:45
22h ago
4.7k
The Good Ol' Days: Reminiscing on Texas A&M's magical spring of '89
by David Sandhop