Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="UConnJim, post: 4841346, member: 1559"] ESPN has been offsetting some of the cable bundle fee declines with ESPN+ as some people have both ESPN and ESPN+. ESPN gets ~$10 per month from the bundle so to remain revenue neutral, they might need $50/month/subscriber or almost $600/year/subscriber if they go strictly straight to the consumer. I don't think direct to consumer will happen quickly as there will be some kind of bundle that many people will subscribe to, although it might be through a service like YouTube TV. I think BTN is less vulnerable to the cable bundle collapsing as they get ~$1.50 per sub in market and ~$0.05 to $0.10 per sub out of market. I think many sports fans would be willing to pay say $2.99/month for BTN and the change might actually increase their revenues. And, BTN is not on the basic tier for cable in many bundles unlike ESPN. [/QUOTE]