(07-27-2012 04:19 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  I would wonder if NBC Universal would consider putting WWE on NBCSN from USA to help build ratings up for it.

Interesting idea, although I don't know if that really helps the NBCSN brand. On paper, WWE has high ratings in the most desirable demographic (males 18-49), yet advertisers don't pay a premium for those ratings because of the reputation (whether real or perceived) of it drawing a downscale audience. Those high ratings are "empty calories" in TV advertising parlance. WWE is basically the opposite of golf (which draws a smaller older audience but is so upscale that blue chip advertisers still pay a premium). Hockey and college sports draw more of a golf-like audience (better educated and higher income viewers) than a WWE-type audience. In theory, if Comcast could combine the Golf Channel and NBCSN together, that would actually be a pretty strong across-the-board platform. Comcast's broadest cable sports contracts are actually with the PGA and that provides a ton of content (the first two rounds of every PGA, Champions Tour, Women's PGA and European PGA event). However, the Golf Channel has proven to be a very lucrative niche channel - it has wider carriage and draws higher subscriber fees than NBCSN, so Comcast doesn't want to mess with that. Comcast/NBC combined has a lot of sports rights, but the way all of their deals are structured doesn't allow for much or any cross-pollination among its channels (with the main exception being the Olympics). As of now, having the NFL and Notre Dame on NBC and the PGA on Golf Channel doesn't do much for NBCSN. This is in contrast to ESPN/ABC, where ESPN literally took over ABC Sports (both in terms of leadership and branding) so that everything would be funneled through one source.

(07-30-2012 09:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-27-2012 04:19 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  I would wonder if NBC Universal would consider putting WWE on NBCSN from USA to help build ratings up for it.

Interesting idea, although I don't know if that really helps the NBCSN brand. On paper, WWE has high ratings in the most desirable demographic (males 18-49), yet advertisers don't pay a premium for those ratings because of the reputation (whether real or perceived) of it drawing a downscale audience.

Also, from WWE's perspective, when they originally went from USA to TNN/Spike, they went to a lower-audience channel and weren't thrilled with the results. I don't think they'd want to repeat the experiment substituting NBC-SN for Spike. (NBC-SN and Spike both have near-universal carriage, but they get lower ratings than USA network.)

How about getting the network up and running smoothly? NBC has the hockey, Olympics, Notre Dame, and other contracts. Get your network running and get ready for the next round of contact talks a few years from now. The network immediately changes when they grab the NBA or NFL or SEC or.... Subscriber fees can change with meaningful contracts.

Fox used this same strategy and grabbed the NFC from CBS many years ago. Fox was not a 24 hour network and wasn't offered in all markets. They won the contract and grew.

An NFL strategy might be to offer your local game in your market on the NBC channel (I would get the Chicago Bears) and a "national game" on the NBC sports channel. All games are being recorded. Having another game does not add to production costs but it could allow for something of national interest.

(07-30-2012 09:50 AM)chess Wrote:  How about getting the network up and running smoothly? NBC has the hockey, Olympics, Notre Dame, and other contracts. Get your network running and get ready for the next round of contact talks a few years from now. The network immediately changes when they grab the NBA or NFL or SEC or.... Subscriber fees can change with meaningful contracts.

The network is already running. The point is that, for the next 10 years, they CAN'T grab the NFL (locked up until 2022) or the SEC (locked up until 2024), the two most valuable football properties. They don't seem to be in position to get the college football playoffs, either, which will be locked up until 2024. They missed out on the PAC (locked up until 2024 or so) and the Big XII probably signed with ESPN and Fox until 2024. The ACC is signed with ESPN through 2027.

Part of the reason I don't see NBC-SN going hog-wild over the Big East is that they're going up against, on the randomly chosen weekend of October 6, 2012: (Cut and pasted from the ESPN website, ESPN-3 games deleted--sorry, Miami-Ohio at Cincinatti)

Thurs., Oct. 4 Arkansas State at FIU TBD ESPNU
Thurs., Oct. 4 USC at Utah 9 p.m. ESPN
Fri., Oct. 5 Pittsburgh at Syracuse 7 p.m. ESPN
Fri., Oct. 5 Utah State at BYU 10:15 p.m. ESPN or ESPN2
Sat., Oct. 6 Illinois at Wisconsin 3:30 p.m. ABC
Sat., Oct. 6 Nebraska at Ohio State 8 p.m. ABC, ESPN or 2

How many of those games does the best Big East game of the year beat? And this is before ESPN fills in with SEC Saturday games, almost all of which will do better numbers than Boise State-Louisville or Houston-Rutgers, and ACC Saturday games, half of which will equal the Big East game of the week.

Quote:Fox used this same strategy and grabbed the NFC from CBS many years ago. Fox was not a 24 hour network and wasn't offered in all markets. They won the contract and grew.

No, Fox did the exact opposite. When they signed the NFL, they didn't have a "real network." No news division, no 2- or 3-hour morning show, no soaps during the day, just 15 hours of prime time programming. The Big Three networks were doing 3 hours of prime-time a day, a national newscast, a 2-3 hour morning show, a couple of hours of soaps, and a late-night show. (Fox tried a late night show and Chevy Chase failed.)

They got the gotta-have content first--NFL football. Once they had NFC football games, they got affiliates from CBS. No one really cared that they didn't have a national newscast or morning show or soaps.

You're saying NBC Sportsnet should do the opposite, and they basically are. Mainly because they can't get those gotta-have properties.

Quote:An NFL strategy might be to offer your local game in your
market on the NBC channel (I would get the Chicago Bears) and a "national game" on the NBC sports channel. All games are being recorded. Having another game does not add to production costs but it could allow for something of national interest.

(07-30-2012 09:00 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(07-27-2012 04:19 PM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  I would wonder if NBC Universal would consider putting WWE on NBCSN from USA to help build ratings up for it.

Interesting idea, although I don't know if that really helps the NBCSN brand. On paper, WWE has high ratings in the most desirable demographic (males 18-49), yet advertisers don't pay a premium for those ratings because of the reputation (whether real or perceived) of it drawing a downscale audience. Those high ratings are "empty calories" in TV advertising parlance. WWE is basically the opposite of golf (which draws a smaller older audience but is so upscale that blue chip advertisers still pay a premium). Hockey and college sports draw more of a golf-like audience (better educated and higher income viewers) than a WWE-type audience. In theory, if Comcast could combine the Golf Channel and NBCSN together, that would actually be a pretty strong across-the-board platform. Comcast's broadest cable sports contracts are actually with the PGA and that provides a ton of content (the first two rounds of every PGA, Champions Tour, Women's PGA and European PGA event). However, the Golf Channel has proven to be a very lucrative niche channel - it has wider carriage and draws higher subscriber fees than NBCSN, so Comcast doesn't want to mess with that. Comcast/NBC combined has a lot of sports rights, but the way all of their deals are structured doesn't allow for much or any cross-pollination among its channels (with the main exception being the Olympics). As of now, having the NFL and Notre Dame on NBC and the PGA on Golf Channel doesn't do much for NBCSN. This is in contrast to ESPN/ABC, where ESPN literally took over ABC Sports (both in terms of leadership and branding) so that everything would be funneled through one source.

This is where I think Fox Sports can do some damage over Comcast. Between FX, FSN, Speed, Fox Sports Soccer, and Fuel you could combine rights for the new network. Getting Speed's spot on most cable systems would be the big step. Between Big 12, PAC-12, CUSA football you have games that would be watched. You could have NASCAR coverage to extent or different forms of live racing. UFC is big. English Premier League soccer. FOX could form a very good station that would be very comparable to ESPN2, which I think should be the goal of NBCSN and the new Fox Sports Station. Catch ESPN2 and you would have a very good ratings station and then it could set you up for potential big fish down the line to punch at ESPN.

Not to mention freeing up FSN's for more 3rd tier coverage and local events.