CSNbbs

Would you subscribe to ESPN+ for $5 a month to access all AAC games that aren't on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNNEWS, if it meant a revenue increase of multiple factors (at x2.0 or more)?

Why or why not? What's your turning point?

EDIT: Assume all prior access to the main channels remain the same, and that the CBSSports content is rolled over to ESPN+

No. Good or bad and regardless of opponent, UCONN usually finds itself on one of the ESPN Networks.

(03-07-2018 02:16 PM)HuskyU Wrote: [ -> ]No. Good or bad and regardless of opponent, UCONN usually finds itself on one of the ESPN Networks.

(03-07-2018 02:17 PM)Pony94 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2018 02:16 PM)HuskyU Wrote: [ -> ]No. Good or bad and regardless of opponent, UCONN usually finds itself on one of the ESPN Networks.

I hate CBS, so yes.

Only if it were a clear upgrade over the field. Still think Aresco could entice NBC to put AAC product onto its OTA channel a la CBS and FOX.

(03-07-2018 03:04 PM)ShockerDR Wrote: [ -> ]Only if it were a clear upgrade over the field. Still think Aresco could entice NBC to put AAC product onto its OTA channel a la CBS and FOX.

That would be my worst nightmare.

Yes I would since $5 ain't all that much.

(03-07-2018 03:15 PM)8BitPirate Wrote: [ -> ]Yes I would since $5 ain't all that much.

One months rent in Tulsa

(03-07-2018 03:17 PM)shock Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2018 03:15 PM)8BitPirate Wrote: [ -> ]Yes I would since $5 ain't all that much.

One months rent in Tulsa

I think you bought the wrong bait. .

Try attendance numbers and museums seemed to work well.

We'll respond with the typical small private school triggered Koch/evil empire and Kansas is flat.

We shall see you at dawn good sir

I think it would be a really cool add-on .. but only if games aren't moved from the prime channels to this. Now if they are on the prime channels AND I could pay 5 dollars a month to see every game ... Let's do that.

(03-07-2018 03:47 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote: [ -> ]I think it would be a really cool add-on .. but only if games aren't moved from the prime channels to this. Now if they are on the prime channels AND I could pay 5 dollars a month to see every game ... Let's do that.

According to the little research I've done, access to ESPN+ does not enable access to any of the other channels, only content exclusively broadcast on ESPN+

I'm not sure if you have to pay extra for it or not, but that content will include MLB and NHL too, so that's a good value if you can get all that for $5.

no

(03-07-2018 04:06 PM)Kruciff Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2018 03:47 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote: [ -> ]I think it would be a really cool add-on .. but only if games aren't moved from the prime channels to this. Now if they are on the prime channels AND I could pay 5 dollars a month to see every game ... Let's do that.

According to the little research I've done, access to ESPN+ does not enable access to any of the other channels, only content exclusively broadcast on ESPN+

I'm not sure if you have to pay extra for it or not, but that content will include MLB and NHL too, so that's a good value if you can get all that for $5.

I know .. it's an add-on .. I'm saying that if we were the prime content for them to kick off their full streaming package .. then I'd be all for it .... as long as it doesn't pull the content off of the main channels.

(03-07-2018 04:10 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2018 04:06 PM)Kruciff Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2018 03:47 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote: [ -> ]I think it would be a really cool add-on .. but only if games aren't moved from the prime channels to this. Now if they are on the prime channels AND I could pay 5 dollars a month to see every game ... Let's do that.

According to the little research I've done, access to ESPN+ does not enable access to any of the other channels, only content exclusively broadcast on ESPN+

I'm not sure if you have to pay extra for it or not, but that content will include MLB and NHL too, so that's a good value if you can get all that for $5.

I know .. it's an add-on .. I'm saying that if we were the prime content for them to kick off their full streaming package .. then I'd be all for it .... as long as it doesn't pull the content off of the main channels.

That is what they will do...they will continue to give most of their prime spots to the P5 and conferences like the AAC will be on the ESPN+

They do this now...instead of ESPN+, they sell a lot of our stuff to CBSSN. We had some darn good match ups on CBSSN this year that should have been on ESPN or ESPN2. Espn+ will just take the place of CBSSN. The only people that will pay to watch the AAC on ESPN+ are AAC fans...which destroys our 'exposure'.

hard pass...

I think rather than messing around with this ESPN+ (let the A10 or some other conference try it) we need to take the ratings for games like WSU @ UC to ESPN and show them we draw eyeballs. Same can be said for many football games.


ESPN+ is just ESPN's way of making the AAC feel like it's getting something, when in reality, it's not (see all the games they sold to CBSSN despite telling Aresco how much exposure we'd have, which was supposed to be the tradeoff for the peanuts tv deal they gave us).

again, HARD PASS on ESPN+....let them experiment with it with some other conference (A10, MoValley, etc).

(03-07-2018 04:13 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2018 04:10 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2018 04:06 PM)Kruciff Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2018 03:47 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote: [ -> ]I think it would be a really cool add-on .. but only if games aren't moved from the prime channels to this. Now if they are on the prime channels AND I could pay 5 dollars a month to see every game ... Let's do that.

According to the little research I've done, access to ESPN+ does not enable access to any of the other channels, only content exclusively broadcast on ESPN+

I'm not sure if you have to pay extra for it or not, but that content will include MLB and NHL too, so that's a good value if you can get all that for $5.

I know .. it's an add-on .. I'm saying that if we were the prime content for them to kick off their full streaming package .. then I'd be all for it .... as long as it doesn't pull the content off of the main channels.

That is what they will do...they will continue to give most of their prime spots to the P5 and conferences like the AAC will be on the ESPN+

They do this now...instead of ESPN+, they sell a lot of our stuff to CBSSN. We had some darn good match ups on CBSSN this year that should have been on ESPN or ESPN2. Espn+ will just take the place of CBSSN. The only people that will pay to watch the AAC on ESPN+ are AAC fans...which destroys our 'exposure'.

hard pass...

What if all else remains the same? The same amount of required games OTA, and move all CBS Sports games / ESPN3 games to ESPN+?

I'd do it just to not have to deal with those horrendously lengthy CBS commercials and production value.

(03-07-2018 04:17 PM)Kruciff Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2018 04:13 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2018 04:10 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2018 04:06 PM)Kruciff Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-07-2018 03:47 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote: [ -> ]I think it would be a really cool add-on .. but only if games aren't moved from the prime channels to this. Now if they are on the prime channels AND I could pay 5 dollars a month to see every game ... Let's do that.

According to the little research I've done, access to ESPN+ does not enable access to any of the other channels, only content exclusively broadcast on ESPN+

I'm not sure if you have to pay extra for it or not, but that content will include MLB and NHL too, so that's a good value if you can get all that for $5.

I know .. it's an add-on .. I'm saying that if we were the prime content for them to kick off their full streaming package .. then I'd be all for it .... as long as it doesn't pull the content off of the main channels.

That is what they will do...they will continue to give most of their prime spots to the P5 and conferences like the AAC will be on the ESPN+

They do this now...instead of ESPN+, they sell a lot of our stuff to CBSSN. We had some darn good match ups on CBSSN this year that should have been on ESPN or ESPN2. Espn+ will just take the place of CBSSN. The only people that will pay to watch the AAC on ESPN+ are AAC fans...which destroys our 'exposure'.

hard pass...

What if all else remains the same? The same amount of required games OTA, and move all CBS Sports games / ESPN3 games to ESPN+?

I'd do it just to not have to deal with those horrendously lengthy CBS commercials and production value.

CBSSN game telecasts KILLED ESPN3...half of the ESPON3 games were broadcast from the studio with the color guy on his cell phone driving his car to a P5 game.

At leasat CBSSN had the announcers AT the game and I thought they had really solid production.

(03-07-2018 04:17 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: [ -> ]I think rather than messing around with this ESPN+ (let the A10 or some other conference try it) we need to take the ratings for games like WSU @ UC to ESPN and show them we draw eyeballs. Same can be said for many football games.


ESPN+ is just ESPN's way of making the AAC feel like it's getting something, when in reality, it's not (see all the games they sold to CBSSN despite telling Aresco how much exposure we'd have, which was supposed to be the tradeoff for the peanuts tv deal they gave us).

again, HARD PASS on ESPN+....let them experiment with it with some other conference (A10, MoValley, etc).

Yup. SunBelt fans are giddy about it because it's an upgrade from not being on TV. For us....not so much.

stated another way, if ESPN+ is going to be that great, the ACC, SEC, B10, B12 and Pac would already be slotted to have the lion's share of games. They aren't. That's all you need to know.

The sunbelt, or some other dreg will be thrilled with it because its better than nothing, like HuskyU said.

The AAC needs to say no.