|
LordPants posted:They should try and be Netflix but for sports. And live. That's basically what WatchESPN/ESPN3 is.
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 12:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
DJExile posted:That's basically what WatchESPN/ESPN3 is. But it's not entirely divorced from the cable system right? What I was getting at was allowing to people to just dump cable and only get ESPN like you get say, MLB TV or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 12:30
|
|
|
LordPants posted:But it's not entirely divorced from the cable system right? What I was getting at was allowing to people to just dump cable and only get ESPN like you get say, MLB TV or whatever. Oh, yeah it's still linked to cable/satellite subscriptions. Odds are it's going to eventually get to something resembling that latter point, but then they'll be dealing with who gets what rights/fees with the various league services (NHL Gamecenter, MLB TV, etc), the local broadcasts, etc. Thinking about it, I suppose I could see ESPN have a sort of bundled service of the various leagues plus all the regular ESPN3 stuff, but for the most part I think people want their specific team or their specific sport.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 12:36
|
|
|
Seems like we're destined to get a la carte cable via individual streaming services.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 13:17
|
|
|
And after I pay for ESPN, Fox, NBC, Be In Sports, and my regional channel, I'm probably close to what my cable bill already is. I have no faith in the industry that ala carte packages will be as great as everyone thinks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 14:33
|
|
|
ElwoodCuse posted:And after I pay for ESPN, Fox, NBC, Be In Sports, and my regional channel, I'm probably close to what my cable bill already is. I have no faith in the industry that ala carte packages will be as great as everyone thinks. But then we will (hopefully) get third party companies to work out deals with all these disparate streaming services and offer bundles. And competition will keep prices low-ish since there is no physical region lock-in. So, cusomters will have their choice of individual services and bundles. In an ideal world, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 14:37
|
|
|
Don't forget paying a premium to that same cable company for the privilege of having your bandwidth capped!
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
LordPants posted:They should try and be Netflix but for sports. And live. They still make a ton of money from cable companies and don't want to kill the relationship there. If current trends hold and people keep pulling the plug I'm sure they'll start offering an over the top version of WatchESPN where you don't need a cable subscription to get it, but I don't think they want to change a business model that has been wildly successful earlier than they need to. They already have the basic framework in place for it, it's just a matter of turning it into a subscription service and making it more widely available.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
I thought it would be years before HBO offered an independent of cable streaming service, but they did it this year. ESPN essentially has the infrastructure set up already, so it wouldn't take much for them to offer up subscriptions for like $10/month. I think if ESPN did that, you'd probably see all of the cable companies essentially subsidize the TV portion just to keep subscribers. I really want to find some numbers on how many people keep cable TV strictly or at least mostly for sports.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
It would probably be part of a larger Disney empire package.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
That's basically what Sling tv is already. $20 a month for ESPN, ESPN2, TNT and a bunch of other disney and other cable channels with upgradable packages for the other ESPN stuff. Few downsides like the xbox app is atrocious, ESPN and like half the channels(?) disable the pausing / show replay features of it and the commercials are pretty much only the same dozen ESPN office ads on loop mixed with 1-2 ABC show ads that play over and over and over again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
SlingTV is nice because with the sports deal you get Goal Line/Buzzer Beater/Bases Loaded if you're into college and Sling counts as a provider for ESPN3. edit: I got goal line and game plan confused. Peanut President fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Oct 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2015 22:15
|
|
|
FS1's broadcast of today's USWNT friendly vs. Brazil will feature an all-female announcing crew for the first time ever
DJExile fucked around with this message at 19:21 on Oct 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
its the womens team, not the USMNT, which makes way more sense
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:its the womens team, not the USMNT, which makes way more sense Oh poo poo duh I typed M completely out of force of habit
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
Big Ten Network is expecting to bring in $40,000,000 per school, thanks to the Maryland/Rutgers expansions 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
still not the worth the shame of sharing a conference with rutgers
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 16:30
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Big Ten Network is expecting to bring in $40,000,000 per school, thanks to the Maryland/Rutgers expansions Iowa State's entire athletic budget is $70 million, and it was under $30 million in 2005. God I wish we had Big 10 money.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Yeah and while I'm sure it'll be a huge cash grab short term, I can't help but wonder how the continuing trend of cord-cutting is going to affect it. The way that report reads, it's less about anyone actually tuning in and more that those televisions are simply there, and hooked up to cable/satellite.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
Yea, I meant to say that it certainly feels like we're in a bubble as far as TV payouts go. The BTN gets some ridiculous amount of money for each subscriber in the state that has a Big 10 team.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
And the athletes still get nothing yay NCAA sports.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
But remember, if the big ten had to share a single penny of that with the players they'd go broke and have to replace all sports with club teams
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
ElwoodCuse posted:But remember, if the big ten had to share a single penny of that with the players they'd go broke and have to replace all sports with club teams As if that would be a bad thing, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2015 16:55
|
|
|
Awful Announcing and SportsBusinessDaily have worked out that ESPN is cutting costs like crazy because they've lost $3 billion in revenue and feesquote:Why, just the increase in the rights fee to the college football playoff (+$483 million annually) would be enough to cover what ESPN needs to cut over the next two years. It may not be a one-to-one comparison, but we’re seeing the price ESPN is paying not just in dollars, but in human resources too, to have the right to televise those three games. jesus christ
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
Hey expensive hot take machine Stephen A Smith is defending domestic violence again, if ESPN needs to cut corners they could find a million dudes on Twitter to do the same for minimum wage
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Awful Announcing and SportsBusinessDaily have worked out that ESPN is cutting costs like crazy because they've lost $3 billion in revenue and fees So is this time of sports leagues getting paid dump trucks coming to an end soon or will there always be some other dumbass corporation to pick up the slack?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
ESPN is stuck in a hard place because people want their sports and they don't want someone else to grab them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
Peanut President posted:So is this time of sports leagues getting paid dump trucks coming to an end soon or will there always be some other dumbass corporation to pick up the slack? Rogers/Sportsnet in Canada spent 5.2 billion over 12 years for broadcast/digital rights to the NHL two years ago and has already started panic'd cost cutting. I think all leagues should be prepared to face huge cuts in their next round of tv deals.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
Peanut President posted:So is this time of sports leagues getting paid dump trucks coming to an end soon or will there always be some other dumbass corporation to pick up the slack? The massive payouts from the regional sports networks has always been a bubble and given the trouble we've seen with the failure of CSN Houston and the fall of Rome currently going on at LA Sportsnet, I think we're definitely seeing that bubble bursting. I mean, this is why the NFL negotiated seven-year deals with all the networks last year, because they had the foresight to see that the gravy train wasn't going to last forever so they might as well get those billions while they still could. (It still amazes me that ESPN pays almost as much for MNF as CBS and NBC combined do for their packages.) Edit: Hell, the Cubs were counting on getting one of those big RSN paydays, which is why they opted out of their WGN deal a few years ago (and which is why Bob Brenly left, because he didn't want a two-year deal), and then when their TV rights came up last year, they wound up having to go crawling back to WGN to complement their share on CSN Chicago (which is co-owned by like every other team in the city except the Bears, so the Cubs don't get a huge cut). They're now hoping to package their broadcast and cable rights for a deal in 2020, by which point the RSN bubble will have completely melted. Timby fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Oct 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
ESPN's a bit of an outlier because overpaying for MNF allows them to produce all of the other hours of NFL-related programming that they have. Not having a deal with a sports league severely limits the amount of access you have to the league and it's multimedia, that was brought up as to why ESPN doesn't run NHL2Nite anymore. If they didn't overpay for the NFL, that eliminates hours of weekly programming, three hours of Sunday programming, and keeps them out of the game of the biggest sports league in the country, and for a 24-hour sports network that's simply not acceptable. NBC or CBS could survive without the NFL, FOX not really because of FS1. But an ESPN that can't run thousands of hours of NFL-related programming, be it dedicated programming or related stories, is an ESPN that's a hurting unit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
ESPN kind of created this monster themselves by arguably overbidding for TV rights to pull them off of network TV, which is where (at least at the time, not sure if it matters anymore) leagues wanted their content to be. Now they've pretty much playing chicken with NBC and Fox to see who can keep affording to have sporting program on their sporting channels. ESPN backed by Diseny has the means to beat them but I'm not sure how much longer the will is going to hold out since it's probably easier to turn a profit on Star Wars and Marvel, and those properties fit better under Disney umbrella.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
Will any of this result in ESPN returning some major content to ABC? It's absolutely outrageous that the college football playoffs aren't on network TV.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
The only notable rights coming up is the Big Ten, and who knows if ESPN at this rate could keep at least a fair share of that (kinda like them and Fox splitting the Big 12 and Pac 12).
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
OSU still draws the best ratings by a decent bit as far as I know (which is how you wind up with their game against loving Rutgers as the major prime time game), so between that and Michigan back on the rise I imagine they're going to try pretty hard to keep it, especially since CBS already has the rights to the best SEC game every week.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
Bird in a Blender posted:Yea, I meant to say that it certainly feels like we're in a bubble as far as TV payouts go. The BTN gets some ridiculous amount of money for each subscriber in the state that has a Big 10 team. I'm sure they've done the math and determined something to the effect of getting $20 a month from me will make up for the loss of the 30 cents from everyone that's not me when the day comes that I can just pay for BTN2GO!!! without the nuisance of cable tv.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Speaking of BTN2Go, why hasn't Fox folded in BTN to Fox Sports Go and made BTN2Go just the BTN Plus stuff? I'd prefer having fewer apps on my tablet, so they should make this work better.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Mahoning posted:Will any of this result in ESPN returning some major content to ABC? It's absolutely outrageous that the college football playoffs aren't on network TV. I doubt it. I think the point of them getting it was so they could charge the high subscriber fees. Gives them enormous leverage over the cable companies. Same reason the NFL started Thursday Night Football. It basically forced the cable companies to put NFL Network on their standard cable packages.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 05:40
|
|
|
CaptainYesterday posted:Speaking of BTN2Go, why hasn't Fox folded in BTN to Fox Sports Go and made BTN2Go just the BTN Plus stuff? I'd prefer having fewer apps on my tablet, so they should make this work better. They don't fully own it and the Big Ten probably wants it to be separate thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 05:54
|
|
|
MourningView posted:They don't fully own it and the Big Ten probably wants it to be separate thing. I don't think BTN is available nationwide, either. Someone out west would have to c/d that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 06:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 12:03 |
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:I don't think BTN is available nationwide, either. Someone out west would have to c/d that. Everyone offers it as far as I know but it's not always on the basic tier like it is for satellite or most cable providers in the Midwest. I had to go one tier up to get it. It's actually way easier to get here than the Pac-12 Network though. MourningView fucked around with this message at 07:04 on Oct 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2015 07:01
|
|