Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="frankthetank, post: 2812614, member: 2517"] Cable companies probably would like a la carte very much for this type of network. They would love it if sports networks would be offered like HBO because such sports networks are typically the most expensive basic cable channels. However, there's a bit of a catch-22: the high cost of cable (often driven by sports channels) is causing cord cutting on the one hand... but sports are also simultaneously the biggest reason why remaining subscribers *don't* cut the cord on the other hand. That's why sports networks have been able to charge such high subscriber fees in the first place. Sports are unique in that they're live (AKA people actually see the commercials) and exclusive (AKA you can't just wait for episodes to come out on Netflix/Hulu/Prime). I can watch Better Call Saul in a lot of different ways as long as I'm willing to wait, but that is meaningless when it comes to live sporting events. So, are cable companies looking to get a broader base of less expensive customers but the non-exclusive programming is much more susceptible to competition from streaming companies, or are cable companies looking for a smaller base of more expensive customers that will pay for sports and other exclusive content? There's no right or wrong there - that's simply something that still needs to shake out in the marketplace. At the same time, pretty much every cable network subscriber contract includes a most favored nation clause, which means that it cannot offer the channel on better terms to one cable company without having to changing its existing agreements with ALL other cable companies to reflect those same better terms. Therefore, as long as, say, BTN has an agreement in place with DirecTV, it can't offer better terms to Comcast (which would include the ability to go a la carte). It's the same situation for virtually every other cable network out there, which is why no cable network (sports or not) has even dared to have an a la carte offering outside of the ones that were already a la carte (e.g. HBO, Showtime, etc.). Cable networks can't create an a la carte model without immediately destroying ALL of their basic cable subscription contracts... and cable networks simply make a LOT LOT LOT LOT more with even drastically reduced numbers of basic cable subscribers compared to any a la carte model. Cable networks are probably still better off financially seeing basic cable subscriber numbers dropping to 25% or even less of where they are now than ever offering a la carte. * Note that I would group streaming network bundles like PS Vue as effectively the same as a cable company - that's just the form being different (streaming as opposed to cable or satellite) as opposed to the substance (a subscription to a basic set of channels). In contrast, the substance and financial models of Netflix and Amazon Prime are substantively different than the cable companies. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach