You should frame this one and hang it on your wall. 100% pure gold.
The accusations of ESPN employment. Confirmation of your beliefs based on your expectation of a result that is unknown, based on the blathering of a PR person on one side of the deal.
Somehow you continue to realize that ESPN collects 6-7 billion in subscriber fees - yet think that NBC has another formula to monetize sports coverage? What do you think NBCS is going to do? Extract the money directly from people's checking accounts? They are trying to build their ratings and properties to the point where they can collect higher subscriber fees.
The rest of the thread about the damage to ESPN on losing Big East basketball. They just took 2 of the major television properties the league had. The Big East may have increased the level of play on the football field, but it's certainly been damaged on the basketball side - ESPN might lose UConn, Louisville, Georgetown, Notre Dame, Nova and Marquette - a handful of programs who matter the rest are road apples. Adding the Big East hardly creates a competitor. One company has the NFL, NBA, MLB, MLS, Tennis and Golf majors, SEC/Big 10/Pac 10/ACC/Big 12 - the other would have the NHL, MLS, 2 weeks of Olympic programming every 2 years that draws a different demographic and the Big East. If ESPN decides to kill the Big East, it takes probably a month to move Louisville and UConn to new homes - and then tell me what you've got left.
Your argument doesn't even make any sense. If subscriber fees are a bubble - guess what business NBC/Comcast are in - oh yeah the same business. They are behind ESPN online and via smartphones - so if things changed how is NBC and improvement over ESPN?
Gee whaler, I re-read my post twice, and i didn't talk about NBC anywhere, I actually wasn't thinking about NBC at all when I wrote it. I wrote about the recent Direct TV and VIacom standoff on subscriber fees and how a major production company, tried to jack up rates for a television service provider carrying it's production products, and used the traditional strong arm / blackout tactics.....and it backfired. The people paying money out of their pockets for television, didn't side with Viacom on this one.
I also wrote that I'm sure that ESPN is paying attention.
I'll add why here, because ESPN - by FAR is the most expensive subscriber fee product on television. It's completely outside and above and beyond the market that other productions are charging. VIacom tried to follow status quo, and jack up rates for MTV, VHI, Comedy Central, NIckelodeon - Nick is a HUGE television product.....but becuase people are getting educated on how their money is getting allocated when the TV bill comes every month - it didn't work.
The next time ESPN tries to jack up rates? Well - there's precedent now, that it may just create problems, if a carrier service - like Direct TV did - simply says - Nope - not this time. We're going to let our customers know what you're doing.
And yes - they're on a bubble with subscriber fees, because they are so far and above and beyond what the market value is for cable service subscriber fees across the board, the value they're getting in subscriber fees, is not true market value. It's extremely inflated, without any true underpinning value. As soon as the market actually starts to look at the true value of things, it's in danger of popping, all it takes is for people to have an alternative to turn to for sports programming, that costs a hell of a lot less.
Disney, stands to lose a TON if that happens, because ESPN, by far has become the profit driver for that entire corporation.
Too big to fail? Well - it's all right here in front of you.
I personally, think that the big east, would be foolish to sign with ESPN during the exclusive window, because of the simple fact, and you touch on it - is where is all this money coming from to fund these contracts? The big east would be smart to explore, exactly what you ask - how a company like NBC, CBS, or Fox - would fund a multi-billion dollar contract.
I'm not going to go into how I think a company like NBC, or CBS, or Fox would fund a multi-billion dollar contract over the next decade or so. You'd probably just look the other way anyway.
I do know how ESPN plans to fund all their billions and billions, for all the products they've got already, and it's based on subscriber fees at least staying right where they are, or most likely inflating, and since being acquired by Disney, they've turned into a scripted, production and marketing machine for their own investments (see ACC conference) rather than actually a sports channel.
Sports - are unscripted though - and that's why they have value.
Are you concerned about something?
