Streaming College Sports | Page 8 | The Boneyard

Streaming College Sports

With my cable package discounts going away, I’m looking at options like YouTube TV while reducing my costs and dispersing with channels the family doesn’t watch.
 
pepband99 said:

Wow. Charter is threatening to go as far as exiting TV. We've hit the tipping point.
Expand ...
To a (much much less extent)- Google did the same with exiting FiberTV a few years ago. It was a great product but they saw the writing on the wall and got out, opting to push everyone to YouTubeTV

Legacy cable companies as streaming aggregators makes a ton of sense. Absolutely nobody is enjoying this “middle ground” of sorts- I streamed 6 games at once on Saturday which was awesome but trying to navigate moving between Peacock, YouTubeTV and ESPN+ was incredibly annoying.
 
.-.
.-.
NoSpamHere said:
Here's another great layout of the (inevitably dismal) future of ESPN. Their "let's force people who don't want our product to pay for it anyway" grift is on its last legs.

The Rise & Fall of ESPN's Leverage
Expand ...

Great article.

I don't agree with the writer's conclusion, that there will be a rebundling, but I need to think about it. Access is so easy in streaming that a bundle just doesn't produce a lot of value for the end-user, and trying to push additional costs onto consumers for stuff they don't want is going to keep getting harder to do.
 
in the midst of a paradigm shift you can take two approaches
which is what the thread is about you as a player in the old model can ride that out or you could embrace the new model . The ESPN name itself can be transitioned into the newer model by partnering with a strong player in that field Ie an Apple or Amazon purchase of ESPN is an extremely intriguing option for. survival. The old Kings typically resist change and perish but it doesn’t have to be that way .
 
Fox is in the same boat as ESPN...so, let's also talk about the demise of Fox sports and the Big Ten's contract.

Fox Remains Committed to Cable-TV Bundle​


Fox Corp. said it "remains bullish on the value of the traditional pay-television bundle" for its sports and entertainment content, despite "continued subscriber losses due to cord-cutting and an industrywide shift to streaming." The cable-television paywall "drives value of Fox Sports and will for...

Fox remains committed to pay-TV bundle for sports

The cable-television paywall "drives value of Fox Sports and will for a long time to come," Fox CEO Lachlan Murdoch said on today's earnings call.
www.sportsbusinessjournal.com www.sportsbusinessjournal.com
 
ESPN, however, is going Direct to Consumer (DTC)...

In the short term, ESPN plans to launch the streaming service while keeping the cable network intact. But unlike ESPN+, the new streamer will no longer serve as a supplement to the flagship cable network; all original content and live games will be featured on both platforms.

Now thanks to a Disney project code-named ‘Flagship,’ Disney staff are actively working on turning ESPN into a streaming service. This means at some point, you will be able to subscribe to just ESPN directly and watch the channel live without cable TV or a live TV streaming service.

According to reports from the New York Post ESPN’s streaming service may not happen until 2025 or even 2026. Now though with Spectrum demanding a major change to the cable TV model, that time may come as soon as 2024.
 
billybud said:
Fox is in the same boat as ESPN...so, let's also talk about the demise of Fox sports and the Big Ten's contract.

Fox Remains Committed to Cable-TV Bundle​


Fox Corp. said it "remains bullish on the value of the traditional pay-television bundle" for its sports and entertainment content, despite "continued subscriber losses due to cord-cutting and an industrywide shift to streaming." The cable-television paywall "drives value of Fox Sports and will for...

Fox remains committed to pay-TV bundle for sports

The cable-television paywall "drives value of Fox Sports and will for a long time to come," Fox CEO Lachlan Murdoch said on today's earnings call.
www.sportsbusinessjournal.com www.sportsbusinessjournal.com
Expand ...
Or we could not talk about it? Cause, we only care about ESPN'S demise?
 
billybud said:
Fox is in the same boat as ESPN...so, let's also talk about the demise of Fox sports and the Big Ten's contract.

Fox Remains Committed to Cable-TV Bundle​


Fox Corp. said it "remains bullish on the value of the traditional pay-television bundle" for its sports and entertainment content, despite "continued subscriber losses due to cord-cutting and an industrywide shift to streaming." The cable-television paywall "drives value of Fox Sports and will for...

Fox remains committed to pay-TV bundle for sports

The cable-television paywall "drives value of Fox Sports and will for a long time to come," Fox CEO Lachlan Murdoch said on today's earnings call.
www.sportsbusinessjournal.com www.sportsbusinessjournal.com
Expand ...

Fox will eventually be going DTC through the BTN, among other platforms. I assume the next Big East deal will also start to have some DTC aspects to it.

Fox and ESPN think (or hope) that YouTubeTV, Hulu Live, FUBO and others will replace the cable bundle. For some, sure, but I expect a lot of people to go direct to the Paramounts and Peacocks. Even some of the bundlers, like Sling, don't include Fox and ESPN in their base package.

Fox and ESPN could enforce the bundling when there was only one video pipe into homes, but with streaming, there are going to be ways for people that do not want to pay for Fox and ESPN to not pay for Fox and ESPN. And when that happens, and it appears to be happening soon, the game is up.
 
.-.
noeynox said:
Or we could not talk about it? Cause, we only care about ESPN'S demise?
Expand ...

LOL...Sorry...I like the topic that Nelson posited...Didn't realize it was another knee jerk ...."we hate you...die...die...die" tantrum.

I got immersed in looking at the DTC movement...never thought of it till NelsonMuntz started posting.....thanks Nelson...thought provoking.
 
ctchamps said:
Just spitballing here and no where near as knowledgeable as many here are (or pretend to be) but will the vicious cycle with college conference payment demands/increases and the sports broadcasters willingness to accommodate those conference realignment money demands going to hurt ESPN now that the distributors of content are putting the brakes on Disney?

It seems those long term contracts with conferences were predicated on the ability for Disney to keep upping their demands. Is it possible that ESPN will not be able to fulfill their obligations causing them to declare bankruptcy or try to get those contracts renegotiated to avoid bankruptcy? If so what will be the future for conference realignment?
Expand ...

ESPN is going to have to renegotiate the back end of their current linear deals with the conferences, and basically anyone else. Those deals are going to be break-the-bank bad for ESPN about 5 years from now unless they can convert the payments to the conferences to a variable basis.

I do think there will be a lot of money in streaming for college sports, but it won't be in fixed price, linear TV contracts.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Fox will eventually be going DTC through the BTN, among other platforms. I assume the next Big East deal will also start to have some DTC aspects to it.

Fox and ESPN think (or hope) that YouTubeTV, Hulu Live, FUBO and others will replace the cable bundle. For some, sure, but I expect a lot of people to go direct to the Paramounts and Peacocks. Even some of the bundlers, like Sling, don't include Fox and ESPN in their base package.

Fox and ESPN could enforce the bundling when there was only one video pipe into homes, but with streaming, there are going to be ways for people that do not want to pay for Fox and ESPN to not pay for Fox and ESPN. And when that happens, and it appears to be happening soon, the game is up.
Expand ...
Could there be a similar fallout with the conference networks which would add to a reduction of profits to ESPN and FOX as well as to those conferences?
 
nelsonmuntz said:
ESPN is going to have to renegotiate the back end of their current linear deals with the conferences, and basically anyone else. Those deals are going to be break-the-bank bad for ESPN about 5 years from now unless they can convert the payments to the conferences to a variable basis.

I do think there will be a lot of money in streaming for college sports, but it won't be in fixed price, linear TV contracts.
Expand ...
Think about this. ESPN is going to pay the ACC another $70 million +/- for SMU, Cal, and Stanford. These schools are not additive, with the possible exception of adding to the cable bundled ACC Network in the short run. ESPN has enough inventory already from SEC/ACC/Big 12/AAC. This is a terrible business deal for ESPN.

For example, BC football had 2 games on an ESPN network last year, Clemson on ABC and Duke on ESPN2. The rest were on ACCN or RSN. BC men's basketball had 4 ACC games on an ESPN network, 3 on ESPNU and 1 on ESPN2. How is BC worth $25 million per year in ESPN money? Why will SMU/Cal/Stanford be any different?
 
nelsonmuntz said:
ESPN is going to have to renegotiate the back end of their current linear deals with the conferences, and basically anyone else. Those deals are going to be break-the-bank bad for ESPN about 5 years from now unless they can convert the payments to the conferences to a variable basis.
Expand ...
nelsonmuntz said:
Fox will eventually be going DTC through the BTN, among other platforms. I assume the next Big East deal will also start to have some DTC aspects to it.

Fox and ESPN think (or hope) that YouTubeTV, Hulu Live, FUBO and others will replace the cable bundle. For some, sure, but I expect a lot of people to go direct to the Paramounts and Peacocks. Even some of the bundlers, like Sling, don't include Fox and ESPN in their base package.

Fox and ESPN could enforce the bundling when there was only one video pipe into homes, but with streaming, there are going to be ways for people that do not want to pay for Fox and ESPN to not pay for Fox and ESPN. And when that happens, and it appears to be happening soon, the game is up.
Expand ...

1. Fox is not going OTT, especially not using the Big Ten. Tubi will be a side player, but FOX is very much not interested in the OTT side of things.


2. Peacock or Paramount are in desperate need of a buyer to consolidate with. Neither will make it on their own. I say this as a subscriber and big fan of the content on both. They won’t make it alone. Their ceiling is probably 20-25m subs and that won’t come close to paying off the investment required.

3. Nelson continues to fundamentally not understand this business at all, but I admire the conviction with which he makes his completely insane claims. Especially the one about ESPN needing to re-negotiate the back end of these deals. That 10000% will not occur.

4. If ESPN is in trouble then everyone else is in more trouble. It is against UConn and the Big East’s interests for them to be in trouble because it would remove a bidder.
 
zls44 said:
1. Fox is not going OTT, especially not using the Big Ten. Tubi will be a side player, but FOX is very much not interested in the OTT side of things.


2. Peacock or Paramount are in desperate need of a buyer to consolidate with. Neither will make it on their own. I say this as a subscriber and big fan of the content on both. They won’t make it alone. Their ceiling is probably 20-25m subs and that won’t come close to paying off the investment required.

3. Nelson continues to fundamentally not understand this business at all, but I admire the conviction with which he makes his completely insane claims. Especially the one about ESPN needing to re-negotiate the back end of these deals. That 10000% will not occur.

4. If ESPN is in trouble then everyone else is in more trouble. It is against UConn and the Big East’s interests for them to be in trouble because it would remove a bidder.
Expand ...


I understand 5% of this business. You have worked in it for what, a decade? And you still spewed this nonsense? Oof
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
I understand 5% of this business. You have worked in it for what, a decade? And you still spewed this nonsense? Oof
Expand ...
17 years pretty boy. And you overstated your understanding by 5%.
 
Good summary here from Andrew Marchand.

Charter has already agreed to pay Disney more money for ESPN. That is not in dispute.

The dispute is Charter wants subscribers to have access to Disney+ and ESPN+. I agree with them on that point!

nypost.com

Aaron Rodgers’ Jets debut could help force end to Charter-ESPN battle

If the Spectrum versus ESPN battle is the Super Bowl of cable rights disputes, then Aaron Rodgers may be the one who settles it.
nypost.com nypost.com
 
zls44 said:
17 years pretty boy. And you overstated your understanding by 5%.
Expand ...

The Charter statement validates what I have been saying since this thread started. Also, Iger gave an interview talking about selling ESPN, which CEOs never do. But hey, maybe you know more about ESPN than Iger.

If you are going to call out a poster, especially on a topic where you should be an expert, you have to occasionally be right. Let us know when that happens.

You may be right about Peacock because Peacock is so late to the game, although it’s library is really valuable, which gives them the ability to screw up a few times. Paramount is probably going to make it. Its library is gold.

Those libraries are such a huge competitive advantage over, say, ESPN, whose library expires as soon as the event is over.
 
zls44 said:
Good summary here from Andrew Marchand.

Charter has already agreed to pay Disney more money for ESPN. That is not in dispute.

The dispute is Charter wants subscribers to have access to Disney+ and ESPN+. I agree with them on that point!

nypost.com

Aaron Rodgers’ Jets debut could help force end to Charter-ESPN battle

If the Spectrum versus ESPN battle is the Super Bowl of cable rights disputes, then Aaron Rodgers may be the one who settles it.
nypost.com nypost.com
Expand ...

Did you think that a New York Post sports media reporter who thinks Spectrum is mad because ESPN will be going DTC is an authoritative source on the changing media landscape?
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Did you think that a New York Post sports media reporter who thinks Spectrum is mad because ESPN will be going DTC is an authoritative source on the changing media landscape?
Expand ...

…are you actually questioning Marchand’s credentials? He’s one of the most tied in reporters in the entire industry and hosts the biggest podcast on the subject, so yes, he’s incredibly authoritative.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
If you are going to call out a poster, especially on a topic where you should be an expert, you have to occasionally be right. Let us know when that happens.

You may be right about Peacock because Peacock is so late to the game, although its library is really valuable, which gives them the ability to screw up a few times. Paramount is probably going to make it. Its library is gold.
Expand ...

Paramount plus launched nearly a year after Peacock did.

You can’t even get simple facts right! Embarassing conduct! I thought I was gonna spar with a pro here!

Iger is not interested in selling the longtime cash cow of the company. ESPN is why Disney could buy Pixar. And Marvel. And Star Wars. The film division’s in the toilet and he’s going to jettison the thing that makes money? Sure.

(I’d rather work for Apple tho)
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,362
Messages
4,567,838
Members
10,468
Latest member
xxBlueChips


Top Bottom