Streaming College Sports

[noeynox]

Taking channels off the air because of a negotiation? Yes. They've done it for as long as I've been alive. Usually gets resolved fairly quickly, but it's not something new. For example 6 or 7 years ago people couldn't watch the Yankees in NYC because of a similar dispute.

Same thing with SNY and Dish. It happens.

 

[yuckformak]

Can you imagine a cable company doing that even 4 years ago?

Yes. Comcast does it all the time. We still so not have any of the MSG channels. No knicks, Rangers, Devils, Islanders. These are professional sport teams.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Yes. Comcast does it all the time. We still so not have any of the MSG channels. No knicks, Rangers, Devils, Islanders. These are professional sport teams.

They take ESPN off the air all the time? Really?

 

[pepband99]

They take ESPN off the air all the time? Really?

Yes. Really. Google "carriage dispute" and you'll get myriad similar items over the years.

Admittedly this is a big one with 1) a big entertainment company with lots of channels, and 2) a larger provider, but it's absolutely common, at this point.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Yes. Really. Google "carriage dispute" and you'll get myriad similar items over the years.

Admittedly this is a big one with 1) a big entertainment company with lots of channels, and 2) a larger provider, but it's absolutely common, at this point.

ESPN won those disputes every single time. Until now.

Are you really arguing that ESPN's cable bundling advantage is a myth? I just want to understand your position on this.

 

[pepband99]

ESPN won those disputes every single time. Until now.

Are you really arguing that ESPN's cable bundling advantage is a myth? I just want to understand your position on this.

Uh, my position is that carriage disputes are common. And I'm right. And they're usually just corporate posturing. The only notable thing about this one, is that it's big boys on both sides.

Unless these things go fully over the top, "streaming" isn't really protected here, either. I have ESPN+, but any ESPN stuff that needs a provider sub got whacked with this too.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Uh, my position is that carriage disputes are common. And I'm right. And they're usually just corporate posturing. The only notable thing about this one, is that it's big boys on both sides.

Unless these things go fully over the top, "streaming" isn't really protected here, either. I have ESPN+, but any ESPN stuff that needs a provider sub got whacked with this too.

There were always big boys on both sides, and ESPN/Disney ALWAYS WON the disputes. Until now. Sling has unbundled ESPN, and they will not be the last streaming aggregator/cable company to unbundle ESPN. ESPN is simply too expensive and it is hard to pass that cost onto consumers who don't watch ESPN in a world where roughly 4,000,000 cable subscribers are cutting the cord every year.

 

[hoopsfan22]

What is the obsession with ESPN on here? Did some of you guys work there? Get rejected/fired by them or what?

 

[pepband99]

There were always big boys on both sides, and ESPN/Disney ALWAYS WON the disputes. Until now. Sling has unbundled ESPN, and they will not be the last streaming aggregator/cable company to unbundle ESPN. ESPN is simply too expensive and it is hard to pass that cost onto consumers who don't watch ESPN in a world where roughly 4,000,000 cable subscribers are cutting the cord every year.

"won" is relative. How much of a cost increase were they asking for, and what did they get? Etc.

Disney has had carriage disputes with the following in the last 18 months:
Dish/Sling
Youtube TV
Roku (which is interesting because that's a streaming-only provider)
Charter

I'm not disagreeing with your premise, in general, but my point is that carriage disputes have been common for a long time now.

 

[yuckformak]

They take ESPN off the air all the time? Really?

Maybe not espn but big sports networks, yes. I live in the NYC demo and there was like a 2 year period I couldn't even watch a game. Now we can't get the knicks or any of the local hockey games. Comcast is doing everything they can to hold onto their linear subscribers which at this point is probablly older people who haven't figured out how to use the internet.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

"won" is relative. How much of a cost increase were they asking for, and what did they get? Etc.

Disney has had carriage disputes with the following in the last 18 months:
Dish/Sling
Youtube TV
Roku (which is interesting because that's a streaming-only provider)
Charter

I'm not disagreeing with your premise, in general, but my point is that carriage disputes have been common for a long time now.

If you go back 10 years, ESPN had knock down, drag outs with half the major cable providers in the country. And ESPN won every single time. But not anymore.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Maybe not espn but big sports networks, yes. I live in the NYC demo and there was like a 2 year period I couldn't even watch a game. Now we can't get the knicks or any of the local hockey games. Comcast is doing everything they can to hold onto their linear subscribers which at this point is probablly older people who haven't figured out how to use the internet.

Exactly right. Which means they are going a la carte with the channel menu. That is a death sentence to ESPN. Whether people cut the cord and go to streaming or the cable companies push ESPN to a la carte, the outcome is the same to ESPN. They are dead.

The point I was making about ESPN winning every time they got into it with a cable company was that ESPN HAD TO WIN EVERY TIME. One loss would have been the end of their business model, so ESPN could never back down to any cable company, for the last 20+ years. And now ESPN lost, and one loss will lead to two and to ten and to all of the aggregators and cable companies going a la carte. When that happens, ESPN can no longer outbid everyone else, and many of the sports leagues (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL) will go DTC. ESPN's best case is becoming a niche sports content provider and production company. That company will generate maybe 30% of the revenue that ESPN generates today.

 

[yuckformak]

Exactly right. Which means they are going a la carte with the channel menu. That is a death sentence to ESPN. Whether people cut the cord and go to streaming or the cable companies push ESPN to a la carte, the outcome is the same to ESPN. They are dead.

The point I was making about ESPN winning every time they got into it with a cable company was that ESPN HAD TO WIN EVERY TIME. One loss would have been the end of their business model, so ESPN could never back down to any cable company, for the last 20+ years. And now ESPN lost, and one loss will lead to two and to ten and to all of the aggregators and cable companies going a la carte. When that happens, ESPN can no longer outbid everyone else, and many of the sports leagues (NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL) will go DTC. ESPN's best case is becoming a niche sports content provider and production company. That company will generate maybe 30% of the revenue that ESPN generates today.

And I think this is why UConn will be okay. Eventually this makes CBB just as important as CFB.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

And I think this is why UConn will be okay. Eventually this makes CBB just as important as CFB.

I think so too. Programming will go niche, just like it did on the streaming channels.

 

[HCCForever]

What is the recourse for a customer like myself? I have Spectrum and learned last night that I could not watch football on ESPN. I tried to disconnect TV on Spectrum this morning but got sick of waiting on the line. Typically you cannot drop service without talking to a human. I predict they will tell me that I cannot cancel until the remainder of my month is complete, I have 2 weeks to go. My thought is to cancel Spectrum and get Fubo now but I don't want to pay for both. What I should do is forget ESPN all together but I hate missing college football. How can Disney legally drop channels on customers? Is there no contractual obligations that they have to meet?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

What is the recourse for a customer like myself? I have Spectrum and learned last night that I could not watch football on ESPN. I tried to disconnect TV on Spectrum this morning but got sick of waiting on the line. Typically you cannot drop service without talking to a human. I predict they will tell me that I cannot cancel until the remainder of my month is complete, I have 2 weeks to go. My thought is to cancel Spectrum and get Fubo now but I don't want to pay for both. What I should do is forget ESPN all together but I hate missing college football. How can Disney legally drop channels on customers? Is there no contractual obligations that they have to meet?

Subscribe to ESPN directly, or get the Hulu/Disney/ESPN package. It is like $13 a month, and there are usually promotions.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

MSN

Spectrum does not appear to be budging. This is an existential threat to ESPN.

This must mean that the margins to the cable provider on video are already pretty thin when Disney/ESPN is included if they are willing to just sell the package without Disney and have consumers buy Disney/ESPN direct from Disney.

 

[billybud]

Spectrum can have its customers go without ESPN...but there is risk there.

My bet is there will be a compromise...

 

[HCCForever]

Subscribe to ESPN directly, or get the Hulu/Disney/ESPN package. It is like $13 a month, and there are usually promotions.

I tried to go to ESPN directly but received invalid media message due to having Spectrum as my provider. I have no free trials left in Sling or Fubi or other packages. I will try Hula since I haven't used that in the past but part of my issue is that I hate giving more money to ESPN since they stopped access for Spectrum customers.

Due to greed from multiple areas, it sure seems like all these schmucks are conspiring to kill college football.

 

[HCCForever]

Spectrum can have its customers go without ESPN...but there is risk there.

My bet is there will be a compromise...

There sure is risk. I will just drop Spectrum TV and keep internet. I watch other programming but most of my time is spent on sports programming.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Spectrum can have its customers go without ESPN...but there is risk there.

My bet is there will be a compromise...

Forcing customers that do not want ESPN to pay $10 a month for ESPN is higher risk than having customers subscribe to ESPN directly. If Spectrum doesn't budge, either ESPN is going to have to cut their prices to the cable providers or go DTC a lot sooner than they planned.

Good luck getting paid on the rest of your contract with ESPN if that happens.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I tried to go to ESPN directly but received invalid media message due to having Spectrum as my provider. I have no free trials left in Sling or Fubi or other packages. I will try Hula since I haven't used that in the past but part of my issue is that I hate giving more money to ESPN since they stopped access for Spectrum customers.

Due to greed from multiple areas, it sure seems like all these schmucks are conspiring to kill college football.

That is an ESPN problem, not a Spectrum problem.

 

[billybud]

Forcing customers that do not want ESPN to pay $10 a month for ESPN is higher risk than having customers subscribe to ESPN directly. If Spectrum doesn't budge, either ESPN is going to have to cut their prices to the cable providers or go DTC a lot sooner than they planned.

Good luck getting paid on the rest of your contract with ESPN if that happens.

We'll see

 

[king conn]

We'll see

So it looks like ESPN will not be collecting their monthly fee for the ACC network in NY now.

So Syracuse is now not carrying their weight and are not worthy of their spot. Do they get jettisoned?

 

[UConnJim]

It's not just ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU/ESPN News channels off the air, but it's also ACCN and SECN. Spectrum is basically not happy with the price ESPN charges and they want to give customers more choice on which channels they have to pay for to watch.

The ACC is expanding to get more bundled customers subscribing to the ACCN. That doesn't look like a good strategy in this environment.