3) I think the big loser here *may* be the out-of-market fans, who have gotten ESPN360/ESPN3 games for nothing for years. It wouldn't shock me at all if SNY bought the games they traditionally had, but + was required for out-of-market.
...but you could always get SNY games for free online, being outside the SNY footprint.This would actually be way better for this out of market viewer. I dumped my $176 a month DirectTV bill last month in favor of a $49 Hulu Live subscription. The one downside was losing SNY and any UConn games they had. If I could pick them up for $5 a month on ESPN+ that would be awesome.
Not out of market. The only way I could get them in Reno was on via my DirectTV account....but you could always get SNY games for free online, being outside the SNY footprint.
Not out of market. The only way I could get them in Reno was on via my DirectTV account.
During 2018, all Mets and UConn Men's and Women's basketball games on SNY will be streamed in-market on SNY.tv on PCs as well as on the NBC Sports app - NBC Sports Group's live streaming platform for desktops, mobile devices, tablets and connected TVs.
Well, almost all viewing is moving towards streaming and pay for content as the cable bundle continues to decline. Do you think the majority of SNY subs are going to be part of a bundle in 5 to 10 years? On my TV, all I have to do is hit 2 buttons to get to Netflix, Amazon Prime, Sling, You Tube TV, ... Getting streaming services on a TV is easy and getting easier. I really don’t understand the negativity around ESPN+.
Soon, Netflix subscribers will pass cable subscribers. Amazon Prime has more members than cable subscribers in the US. I remember my father in the day saying he wasn't going to subscribe to cable when he could watch free TV. That lasted about 5 years.Our viewership will plummet on ESPN+ games.
It's also disruptive for those who haven't cut from cable/satellite, which is still the majority.
My household is an example - i pay a hefty bill to allow for live sports viewing across all the sports i care about, which unfortunately are all in-market. A service that would give me equivalent online sports viewing would be prohibitively expensive. Adding another $5 a month to watch (hopefully) and handful (only) of UConn events is annoying at best, insane at worst.
I will re-research my cord-cutting cost comparison, but unless it's at least 10% cheaper, it's not worth the hassle or up-front cost.
I hate to take the optimistic view on the deal, but with ESPN+ I don't think there will be an issue affecting recruiting. How many recruits have a cable package with the U, News, etc? All it takes now is a "friend of the program" to foot the bill for a few ESPN+ subscriptions and recruits can watch us at any time.
Soon, Netflix subscribers will pass cable subscribers. Amazon Prime has more members than cable subscribers in the US. I remember my father in the day saying he wasn't going to subscribe to cable when he could watch free TV. That lasted about 5 years.
The video world is changing rapidly and what is clearly in decline is the cable bundle.
They got their $7M a year, and are looking towards 2023.
So many people named Nostradamus on the Boneyard. I don't think we have any idea what this will really look like for basketball or football. I don't think we know what ESPN+ will mean to ESPN, what the adoption rate will be or how it will function in another year or two.
Can you imagine how cheap this will look in 4 or 5 years, let alone 12 years.This is a 12 year media contract. TWELVE! Within 12 years streaming will be the only option, cable will be gone....this wasn’t a deal made for UConn and UConn knows and is okay with that, that’s why there is the opt-out clause.
They got their $7M a year, and are looking towards 2023.
Yeah, which is sorta the point why you don't want to get locked in for 12 years.
Can you imagine how cheap this will look in 4 or 5 years, let alone 12 years.