Started By
Message
re: Do the troubles at ESPN bother anyone else?
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:19 am to FearlessFreep
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:19 am to FearlessFreep
quote:
TV contracts for all sports are ridiculously overpriced.
Perhaps you are missing the deeper issue. TV sports were cheap and allowed economies of scale to fuel fewer media giants. Lost in all this was growing the next generation of fans as TV does not connect the same way live events do. Baby boomers attended live games with older generations and created a tangible bond with the sports and teams.
Fast forward to this generation and killing off the generational bonding and the younger set are less tied to teams so as cost of tickets, food, and parking rise at double and quadruple the cost of living wages it is no surprise the cliff approaches and no younger generation is there to build the ladder to the other side. Cord cutting is in response to cost more than content but media giants keep forgetting the simple solution of reducing costs to the rank and file is the best plan even if it means short term reductions in record profits.
1
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:25 am to Cheese Grits
quote:
Cord cutting is in response to cost more than content
Content cost to the service provider is basically the #1 driver of service cost to the consumer.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:25 am to Vecchio Cane
Time is a flat circle and there's only one entity that can save the SEC....
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:27 am to LSU316
quote:
So if the SEC asks the same amount they will have the same problems that Disney/ESPN have today.
Disney asks 6 to 7 dollars when the next competitor asks 1 - 2 dollars. That is a whole lot of wiggle room. If the SECN only asks 1 dollar they can probably get it and if spun off from ESPN it means you attract a market sensitive to price.
I used to love pro sports but the ever escalating costs to pay salaries and profits well over any reasonable number means I stopped going about 20 years ago and stopped watching about 10 years ago. I have adjusted my support and viewing habits to the MUCH less expensive college sports and saved lots of money in the process to spend on kids and grandkids while creating bonding experiences at sporting events like I did with my dad and granddad.
Where the bubble is most likely to burst is the higher cost NFL and NBA programming as they price themselves out of the reach of the common man who sitting at home can flip the channel and become addicted to some cheap reality TV programming.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:27 am to FairhopeTider
As Ray Tanner once told me when the SECN was first announced ... "it's all about inventory - they want a lot of inventory."
The network basically runs itself 14 of 24 hours a day most days. It's a money making machine.
If University Presidents and ADs are smart they will negotiate their next deal to include a no politics clause.
You can't have it both ways. You can't have politics injected into college sports without alienating half of your subscriber base and you cannot inject politics into your product without alienating half of your advertiser clientele. It's a no win situation the moment you step over the line ... and that's not taking into account the cord cutting issues that are about to hit ESPN harder than they will impact any other of the major content providing players.
From what I understand the SECN is very flexible in that regard and that by 2021 we, as a conference, will be ready to go independent if need be.
The beauty of the SEC is that we have tons of inventory - past, present and future - to offer to the viewing public. And our market is growing for a lot of reasons, not all of them strictly sports motivated.
ESPN, in the meantime, will continue to be the dominant force in the genre until Fox Sports or CBS Sports finds a way to overtake them ... or two of them merge.
The network basically runs itself 14 of 24 hours a day most days. It's a money making machine.
If University Presidents and ADs are smart they will negotiate their next deal to include a no politics clause.
You can't have it both ways. You can't have politics injected into college sports without alienating half of your subscriber base and you cannot inject politics into your product without alienating half of your advertiser clientele. It's a no win situation the moment you step over the line ... and that's not taking into account the cord cutting issues that are about to hit ESPN harder than they will impact any other of the major content providing players.
From what I understand the SECN is very flexible in that regard and that by 2021 we, as a conference, will be ready to go independent if need be.
The beauty of the SEC is that we have tons of inventory - past, present and future - to offer to the viewing public. And our market is growing for a lot of reasons, not all of them strictly sports motivated.
ESPN, in the meantime, will continue to be the dominant force in the genre until Fox Sports or CBS Sports finds a way to overtake them ... or two of them merge.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:28 am to FairhopeTider
HELLO!
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:28 am to FearlessFreep
quote:Our local news recently reported that y'all are about to spend +/-$28mm on new locker rooms & a designated recruiting facility, and another $12mm on a press box annex & club seating.
Well, at least my alma mater spent its windfall from SECN wisely....
Your Administration seems to finally be willing to use some of that SECN cash on much needed stadium improvements.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:28 am to Vecchio Cane
I am not a fan of the SEC Network. The first year they host the bigger games to get people to sign up and now they mainly just broadcast the week's crappy games. I'd rather it go away and save me a few bucks on my cable bill.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:32 am to Cheese Grits
So you are saying that the SEC would be willing to do exactly what ESPN isn't willing to do....essentially take less money for providing content which would ultimately mean making less money.
I hope you are right because if ESPN were to do something like you suggest they would probably continue to the the World's sports leader.
Just so everyone knows....this would mean that that $ amount that would be doled out to your school every year from SECN would be lower.
I hope you are right because if ESPN were to do something like you suggest they would probably continue to the the World's sports leader.
Just so everyone knows....this would mean that that $ amount that would be doled out to your school every year from SECN would be lower.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:50 am to TimeOutdoors
quote:Ditto. Alabama football is always on CBS/ESPN/ABC, I caught the Bama/Kent State game on SECN @ 11:00 slot once last year.
I am not a fan of the SEC Network. The first year they host the bigger games to get people to sign up and now they mainly just broadcast the week's crappy games. I'd rather it go away and save me a few bucks on my cable bill.
I boycotted Finebalm in 2010, and don't care much for the rest of the viewing on the network other than an occasional softball game.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:53 am to LSU316
quote:
I hope you are right because if ESPN were to do something like you suggest they would probably continue to the the World's sports leader.
it is a double edged sword with double taxation on the consumer
Content provider gets a greatly inflated price (say ESPN)
Content carrier gets a greatly inflated price (say Time Warner)
While these are not the numbers, consider the profits in added value
Your cable bill is 100 dollars per month
15 dollars goes to Disney (10 of that to ESPN)
15 dollars goes to all the others (Lifetime, History Channel, et al)
20 dollars go to taxes at the bottom of your bill
50 dollars goes to Time Warner
If Time Warner cut its share to 25 bucks (they can still show a profit at 25)
If Disney cuts to 3 dollars and everybody else totals 2 (5 bucks total)
If taxes drop from 20 to 5 (less money taxed to consumers)
Now you have a cable bill of say 50 dollars a month which is much more in line with consumer needs and much more in line with corporate growth rates before the 1980's "greed is good" mantra.
If cost of living is say 3% per year, corporations should be happy with say just 4% or 5% per year and still be viable in the long term. Overage could be passed along to shareholders in the form of dividends instead of lining the pockets of a few top management folks who have no skin in the game. If I give a single CEO 100 million bonus he will spend that in his own back yard. If I pay 100 million in dividends then that money gets spent all over the country in every bodies back yard.
Concentration of wealth to a few key cities is no way to run a country.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:56 am to TimeOutdoors
quote:
I am not a fan of the SEC Network. The first year they host the bigger games to get people to sign up and now they mainly just broadcast the week's crappy games. I'd rather it go away and save me a few bucks on my cable bill.
That's kind of my point. I love SEC Sports but I rarely tune in unless my team is playing. I'm probably not alone.
I hate that Finebaum is the face of the network but they probably get a good ROI on his show.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 10:56 am to FairhopeTider
I wonder if JP will use potatoes for cameras again for nostalgic reasons.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 11:00 am to Cheese Grits
No real idea about the SECN's ....or, to be honest, the bamaN...worth but it/ESPN just built Finebaum a big fancy set for his show. However, the new set is in Bristol & Finebaum's show is based in Carolina, so if he now has 2 sites, the network must not be doing too badly. Jerry Springer sells apparently.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 11:02 am to DarthRebel
They become way too political anyway.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 11:02 am to Vecchio Cane
Bother!? Hell no! This is great. They're getting exactly what they deserve for going all-in ALT-LEFT politically. i hope the place fires err'body and shows only live Sports.
I was in a hotel for an entire morning recently. It's literally embarrassing all the sorry BS they put out all day after the morning SC's run.
Fck em
I was in a hotel for an entire morning recently. It's literally embarrassing all the sorry BS they put out all day after the morning SC's run.
Fck em
Posted on 4/11/17 at 11:04 am to Keltic Tiger
quote:
worth but it/ESPN just built Finebaum a big fancy set for his show.
One day, someone will realize that Finebaum really doesn't know anything outside of the politics of college sports and even at that all he does is hedge his bets.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 11:06 am to LSU316
quote:
Just so everyone knows....this would mean that that $ amount that would be doled out to your school every year from SECN would be lower.
I am not sold on this.
The beauty of the SECN is it is a "bargain" cost so is probably more inelastic to consumers voting with their wallets.
If ESPN gets 7 dollars, and SECN gets 1 dollar, ESPN content is easier to save quicker money with. College sports was the domain of the Big 3 (ABC / CBS / NBC) before cable and it cost consumers no toll to watch an event (cable and satellite charge a fee to watch). Young folks forget the original tradeoff of the models when they broke from the Big 3.
Network was free and made money from commercials
Cable cost money but was free from commercials
In the "greed is good" mantra of the 1980's the model was merged and 2x to 4x money was made and the consumers forgot the earlier bargain. Now we pay for cable / satellite that is full of commercials. After decades of feeding at the trough, the prices have escalated so high that folks are cutting the cord.
If the SECN went with the commercial only model, they could give it away to the consumers for free (which would increase viewership and increase advertiser demand)
If the SECN went with the commercial free model, they need only charge a dollar or two a month and can still make money (Tuner Classic Movies works on this model and I think they get 50 cents or 1 dollar per subscriber). Clearly this model works as they have something like the 4 highest subscription level behind ESPN, FOX, and somebody else.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 11:09 am to Cheese Grits
It sounds like you are trying to change the world.
The likelihood of this happening in my eyes is relatively low.
I think the absolute best that we can hope for is for sport's leagues to get OK with less money (yea I know), allowing content providers to charge less, and thus allowing the service providers to pass that to the customer.
Honestly, I don't even think all of that would happen much less what you propose.
The likelihood of this happening in my eyes is relatively low.
I think the absolute best that we can hope for is for sport's leagues to get OK with less money (yea I know), allowing content providers to charge less, and thus allowing the service providers to pass that to the customer.
Honestly, I don't even think all of that would happen much less what you propose.
Posted on 4/11/17 at 11:12 am to FairhopeTider
quote:
I love SEC Sports but I rarely tune in unless my team is playing.
For every one of you there is a person like me who will watch the other teams because network TV has gotten so bad and the SECN is cheap time filler. Probably 60% to 80% of my TV viewing is now SECN (though I am watching less TV overall). Personally, I never watch Paul, but I really think he is for ratings from folks outside the footprint who tune in to see what they stereotype the SEC fans to be. Seems like lots of B1G fans calling Paul so they must be watching.
Paul trolls the non SEC for ratings the same way Dook basketball draws high ratings from non Dook folks tuning in hoping they will lose. Notre Dame football has a similar viewer component.
Page 3 of 7
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News