Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
Author Message
Tiger8589 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 644
Joined: Apr 2009
Reputation: 64
I Root For: Tigers
Location:
Post: #21
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 01:37 PM)stever20 Wrote:  For the NBA- I'm not saying that ESPN has to get everything, but rather keep it status quo sharing with Turner. Fox getting the NBA would be a bad thing for ESPN.

Big Ten- it's funny, but as important as tier 1 is, tier 2 is just as important. ESPN's schedule is full of Saturday noon starts of Big Ten football. If that got taken away, that's not good for ESPN at all, plus it gives FS1 great programming.

Bottom line, I don't see FS1 able to survive if all they have is some P12,B12, BE hoops, 1 MLB game a week, UFC, and Soccer. They have to get more of the big time sports.

No one knows how this is going to play out. But, what we should all know is FOX knows TV and is not afriad to overspend to get in the game. So, we have a track record to go but and that's it. This is the same outfit that built an OTA network on the back of the NFL. These are not dumb shortsighted people that do not have the resources to make a mark.

No one to my knowledge has said or implied that they can make a dent with just what they have. The thought is to aquire more and to go after what's coming up next. The thought is long term, at least that's what it seems to me. You know maybe like this wholde idea actually may have been hatched a couple years before it was on anyones radar....like when they were aquring some of these rights and as an example: what the heck is the BIG12 on FX for? verymove made over the past three years or so was likely made to support the new sports channel, including when they started showing college FB OTA last year.

Now, if one is to beleive FOX is just going to roll over and let Disney kick them in the nuts and just take everything I would say game over. Bit, count me as one that does not ssubscrive to that trian of thought.
08-16-2013 02:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OwlFamily Offline
FLORIDA ATLANTICS DEFENDER OF THE FAITH
*

Posts: 7,110
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation: 251
I Root For: FLORIDA ATLANTIC
Location: Boca Raton, FL.
Post: #22
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 02:49 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  Bottom line ABC and ESPN still rules College Sports. 07-coffee3

Very ture, and probably will for the next 3-5 years. But FS1 appears to be making the strongest play yet. Competition is always a good thing.
08-16-2013 02:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tiger8589 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 644
Joined: Apr 2009
Reputation: 64
I Root For: Tigers
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 02:49 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  Bottom line ABC and ESPN still rules College Sports. 07-coffee3

That goes without saying. I think eveybody know that.
Is that going to hold true 10 years from now? That no one can answer.
Does ESPN still have the same market share in terms of % 10 years from now? no one can answer that.
08-16-2013 02:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,240
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #24
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
The problem that FS1 will face is networks a lot of times re-open their current deals prior to the contract going to the open market. See what the Big 12 and NFL did in the last year. If ESPN was smart, they go to the NBA and try to get them to redo their deal now prior to it going on the open market.

I've just seen some folks who think that FS1 is automatically going to be toe to toe with ESPN. That's not a guarantee at all. If FS1 doesn't get at least 1 of NBA, NFL, or Big Ten, they are going to be in a lot of trouble. What they have isn't sustainable long term. FS1 can't wait until 2020 or so when all the current deals start coming up for bids again to get more programming.
08-16-2013 03:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 10:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  FS1 has better sports rights than NBCSN, but it's no where near what ESPN has. Not even in the same stratosphere.

NFL- ad ESPN
NBA- ad ESPN
MLB- just from a quanity standpoint, ad ESPN. know FS1 has some playoff baseball, but that's only advantage.
college football- ad ESPN(SEC,Big Ten,ACC together better than P12, B12-and ESPN has some of P12/B12 as well)
college basketball- ad ESPN- especially come conference tourney time and also preseason tourney time

really only things FS1 has going for them are Nascar, UFC, and Soccer. Good things, but that can't overcome the huge advantages ESPN has other places.

Where ESPN has to be careful is 2 places coming up:
1- NBA. They can't let Fox get the NBA at all costs
2- Big Ten Probably even bigger than the NBA quite frankly.

But NBCSN beats FS1 in soccer until the World Cup.
08-16-2013 03:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
The question I'd love to have the answer to is, "How many of the deals ESPN currently has, have a right of refusal clause?"

If ESPN has the right to match the Fox offers to the Big 10 or the NBA, the odds of ESPN retaining them are pretty darn good.

I felt that ESPN matched NBCSN on the American simply because the price was worthwhile to prevent NBCSN from becoming a nuisance.
(This post was last modified: 08-16-2013 03:13 PM by arkstfan.)
08-16-2013 03:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 46,240
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 725
I Root For: Sports
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 02:39 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 02:15 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 02:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 01:37 PM)stever20 Wrote:  For the NBA- I'm not saying that ESPN has to get everything, but rather keep it status quo sharing with Turner. Fox getting the NBA would be a bad thing for ESPN.

Big Ten- it's funny, but as important as tier 1 is, tier 2 is just as important. ESPN's schedule is full of Saturday noon starts of Big Ten football. If that got taken away, that's not good for ESPN at all, plus it gives FS1 great programming.

Bottom line, I don't see FS1 able to survive if all they have is some P12,B12, BE hoops, 1 MLB game a week, UFC, and Soccer. They have to get more of the big time sports.

Delany made some comments indicating the Big 10 wanted to keep a relationship with ESPN (IMO it would be a huge mistake not to have any). Maybe Fox is talking to AACK! and MWC schools trying to get a decent #6 conference in case they get shut out of the Big 10 Tier 1 and 2 and would have something to offer the east coast other than a bunch of west of the Mississippi teams.

I think FS1 getting Big 10 tier 2 would be huge. That would knee cap ESPN quite frankly. ESPN would go to having ACC, SEC, Big 12, Pac 12, and then AAC, MWC. Esp if the deal would be worded that the tier 1 games have to be on broadcast.

The BTN primarily has all Tier two now and in the future. I don't necessarily agree with that but that's what the deals say.

I would say BTN is more tier 3 than ESPN...

look at week 2- 11/12 teams play at home....

noon:
ESPN2/ESPNU USF @ Michigan St, Cincy @ Illinois
BTN: E Michigan @ Penn St, Tennessee Tech @ Wisconsin, Missouri St @ Iowa, Indiana St @ Purdue
(would say the ESPN2/U games are tier 2, others tier 3)
3:30:
ABC/ESPN2 San Diego St @ Ohio St(tier 1)
6pm:
BTN: Syracuse @ Northwestern, Navy @ Indiana, So Miss @ Nebraska
8pm:
ESPN: Notre Dame @ Michigan

I'd say outside of maybe Syracuse/Northwestern, ESPN has the top 4 games shown that day. BTN definitely has the worst 6 games shown that particular day....
08-16-2013 03:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NYCTUFan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,511
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 169
I Root For: Temple
Location: New York City
Post: #28
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 03:12 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The question I'd love to have the answer to is, "How many of the deals ESPN currently has, have a right of refusal clause?"

If ESPN has the right to match the Fox offers to the Big 10 or the NBA, the odds of ESPN retaining them are pretty darn good.

I felt that ESPN matched NBCSN on the American simply because the price was worthwhile to prevent NBCSN from becoming a nuisance.

This is a great point, i was wondering the same thing. It can become a situation where ESPN says the value in over paying is keeping inventory away from FS1. The price becomes a non issue.
08-16-2013 03:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wilkie01 Offline
Cards Prognosticater
Jersey Retired

Posts: 26,753
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 1072
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Planet Red
Post: #29
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 02:57 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 02:49 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  Bottom line ABC and ESPN still rules College Sports. 07-coffee3

That goes without saying. I think eveybody know that.
Is that going to hold true 10 years from now? That no one can answer.
Does ESPN still have the same market share in terms of % 10 years from now? no one can answer that.

Yes, that is true, but then who will be strong enough to do that? There is no answer for that either. 07-coffee3
08-16-2013 03:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 03:19 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 03:12 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The question I'd love to have the answer to is, "How many of the deals ESPN currently has, have a right of refusal clause?"

If ESPN has the right to match the Fox offers to the Big 10 or the NBA, the odds of ESPN retaining them are pretty darn good.

I felt that ESPN matched NBCSN on the American simply because the price was worthwhile to prevent NBCSN from becoming a nuisance.

This is a great point, i was wondering the same thing. It can become a situation where ESPN says the value in over paying is keeping inventory away from FS1. The price becomes a non issue.

That's the thing.

If you can't get the compelling content up to the higher tiers you go.

I don't ming paying higher tier to get NBCSN because of EPL and MLS content but that's a small pool of people. FS1 is for the most part a lot of niche product that a lot of people will pay higher tier for but not a lot that will have people threatening to leave for another provider if it isn't on the base tier.
08-16-2013 03:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NYCTUFan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,511
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 169
I Root For: Temple
Location: New York City
Post: #31
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 03:29 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 03:19 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 03:12 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The question I'd love to have the answer to is, "How many of the deals ESPN currently has, have a right of refusal clause?"

If ESPN has the right to match the Fox offers to the Big 10 or the NBA, the odds of ESPN retaining them are pretty darn good.

I felt that ESPN matched NBCSN on the American simply because the price was worthwhile to prevent NBCSN from becoming a nuisance.

This is a great point, i was wondering the same thing. It can become a situation where ESPN says the value in over paying is keeping inventory away from FS1. The price becomes a non issue.

That's the thing.

If you can't get the compelling content up to the higher tiers you go.

I don't ming paying higher tier to get NBCSN because of EPL and MLS content but that's a small pool of people. FS1 is for the most part a lot of niche product that a lot of people will pay higher tier for but not a lot that will have people threatening to leave for another provider if it isn't on the base tier.

Good point, and base tier rates are something the consumers are complaining about more and more. As base rates rise things like FS1 will be relegated to the add on sports packages, and then it’s not a matter of how many households Direct TV is in, it’s a matter of how many Direct TV households have the premium sports package when generating advertising dollars for FS1.

I’m not a TV expert, so correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe ESPN is still part (at least some of their base channels) of a lot of basic cable and satellite packages. The CBS Time Warner Cable case is setting a precedent. Cable companies and consumers are pushing back against higher fees. This may have been FS1 best chance at getting that premium they were looking for.
08-16-2013 04:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #32
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 03:12 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The question I'd love to have the answer to is, "How many of the deals ESPN currently has, have a right of refusal clause?"

If ESPN has the right to match the Fox offers to the Big 10 or the NBA, the odds of ESPN retaining them are pretty darn good.

Would be surprising if the NBA gave ESPN or Turner a right of first refusal because that would take away much of the NBA's leverage, and the NBA has enough bargaining power that they'd have no reason to let ESPN or Turner have first-refusal rights. An exclusive negotiating period seems more likely.

Big Ten also seems unlikely to have given those rights to ESPN given the drama from their last negotiation with ESPN. Also, the very high projections for the next TV deal that Delany gave to Rutgers and Maryland are consistent with the assumption of a bidding war, not with a negotiation limited by the fact that any new bidder could see their deal taken away by ESPN.

Looks like the NBA has already opened discussions on its next TV deals (current ones don't expire until 2016), and wants to finalize the deal next year after the new commish takes over. http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journ...ights.aspx

Article on the potential bidders for the next NBA TV contracts here: http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2013/02/...enge-espn/ . I agree with the author of that article about one point: The NBA is unlikely to turn its back completely on ESPN and risk becoming invisible on SportsCenter and other ESPN "news" shows like the NHL did after moving off of ESPN. If Fox gets a piece of the NBA in the next go-round, the "odd man out" would likely be Turner and not ESPN.
08-16-2013 04:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goofus Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,285
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 148
I Root For: Iowa
Location: chicago suburbs
Post: #33
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 04:21 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 03:29 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 03:19 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 03:12 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The question I'd love to have the answer to is, "How many of the deals ESPN currently has, have a right of refusal clause?"

If ESPN has the right to match the Fox offers to the Big 10 or the NBA, the odds of ESPN retaining them are pretty darn good.

I felt that ESPN matched NBCSN on the American simply because the price was worthwhile to prevent NBCSN from becoming a nuisance.

This is a great point, i was wondering the same thing. It can become a situation where ESPN says the value in over paying is keeping inventory away from FS1. The price becomes a non issue.

That's the thing.

If you can't get the compelling content up to the higher tiers you go.

I don't ming paying higher tier to get NBCSN because of EPL and MLS content but that's a small pool of people. FS1 is for the most part a lot of niche product that a lot of people will pay higher tier for but not a lot that will have people threatening to leave for another provider if it isn't on the base tier.

Good point, and base tier rates are something the consumers are complaining about more and more. As base rates rise things like FS1 will be relegated to the add on sports packages, and then it’s not a matter of how many households Direct TV is in, it’s a matter of how many Direct TV households have the premium sports package when generating advertising dollars for FS1.

I’m not a TV expert, so correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe ESPN is still part (at least some of their base channels) of a lot of basic cable and satellite packages. The CBS Time Warner Cable case is setting a precedent. Cable companies and consumers are pushing back against higher fees. This may have been FS1 best chance at getting that premium they were looking for.

After going without cable for 3 years, I have gone back to cable for a year, and so far, its not worth it except to get HBO. I watch a lot of HBO both both live and on demand. I watch ESPN very little or any channels that show comercials. The programs I do watch that have comercials, I record and watch later, including ballgames. I am guessing the day HBO starts offering its on demand service without cable, is the day I am canceling cable for good. If fox sports ends up on basic cable, you have given another reason to cancel. I do not need to pay for commercials. My favorite college team has about 8 football games I want to watch every year and thats it. I can go to a bar to watch them.
08-16-2013 04:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #34
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 04:41 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 03:12 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The question I'd love to have the answer to is, "How many of the deals ESPN currently has, have a right of refusal clause?"

If ESPN has the right to match the Fox offers to the Big 10 or the NBA, the odds of ESPN retaining them are pretty darn good.

Would be surprising if the NBA gave ESPN or Turner a right of first refusal because that would take away much of the NBA's leverage, and the NBA has enough bargaining power that they'd have no reason to let ESPN or Turner have first-refusal rights. An exclusive negotiating period seems more likely.

Big Ten also seems unlikely to have given those rights to ESPN given the drama from their last negotiation with ESPN. Also, the very high projections for the next TV deal that Delany gave to Rutgers and Maryland are consistent with the assumption of a bidding war, not with a negotiation limited by the fact that any new bidder could see their deal taken away by ESPN.

Looks like the NBA has already opened discussions on its next TV deals (current ones don't expire until 2016), and wants to finalize the deal next year after the new commish takes over. http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journ...ights.aspx

Article on the potential bidders for the next NBA TV contracts here: http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2013/02/...enge-espn/ . I agree with the author of that article about one point: The NBA is unlikely to turn its back completely on ESPN and risk becoming invisible on SportsCenter and other ESPN "news" shows like the NHL did after moving off of ESPN. If Fox gets a piece of the NBA in the next go-round, the "odd man out" would likely be Turner and not ESPN.

The flip side of that is a bidder can gamble with a very high bid in excess of what they think they can justify and take the chance that ESPN matches just to stockpile the inventory and has too much tied up in that deal to go after the next key deal.
08-16-2013 04:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NYCTUFan Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,511
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 169
I Root For: Temple
Location: New York City
Post: #35
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 04:43 PM)goofus Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 04:21 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 03:29 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 03:19 PM)NYCTUFan Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 03:12 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The question I'd love to have the answer to is, "How many of the deals ESPN currently has, have a right of refusal clause?"

If ESPN has the right to match the Fox offers to the Big 10 or the NBA, the odds of ESPN retaining them are pretty darn good.

I felt that ESPN matched NBCSN on the American simply because the price was worthwhile to prevent NBCSN from becoming a nuisance.

This is a great point, i was wondering the same thing. It can become a situation where ESPN says the value in over paying is keeping inventory away from FS1. The price becomes a non issue.

That's the thing.

If you can't get the compelling content up to the higher tiers you go.

I don't ming paying higher tier to get NBCSN because of EPL and MLS content but that's a small pool of people. FS1 is for the most part a lot of niche product that a lot of people will pay higher tier for but not a lot that will have people threatening to leave for another provider if it isn't on the base tier.

Good point, and base tier rates are something the consumers are complaining about more and more. As base rates rise things like FS1 will be relegated to the add on sports packages, and then it’s not a matter of how many households Direct TV is in, it’s a matter of how many Direct TV households have the premium sports package when generating advertising dollars for FS1.

I’m not a TV expert, so correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe ESPN is still part (at least some of their base channels) of a lot of basic cable and satellite packages. The CBS Time Warner Cable case is setting a precedent. Cable companies and consumers are pushing back against higher fees. This may have been FS1 best chance at getting that premium they were looking for.

After going without cable for 3 years, I have gone back to cable for a year, and so far, its not worth it except to get HBO. I watch a lot of HBO both both live and on demand. I watch ESPN very little or any channels that show comercials. The programs I do watch that have comercials, I record and watch later, including ballgames. I am guessing the day HBO starts offering its on demand service without cable, is the day I am canceling cable for good. If fox sports ends up on basic cable, you have given another reason to cancel. I do not need to pay for commercials. My favorite college team has about 8 football games I want to watch every year and thats it. I can go to a bar to watch them.

Your not alone, i know lots of people dumping cable and watching more online content.

With a $50 antenna from Best Buy for local channels, a high speed internet connection, and am Apple TV or Roku box for $100 with the exception of live sports you really aren't missing much.
08-16-2013 04:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chargeradio Offline
Vamos Morados
*

Posts: 7,467
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation: 121
I Root For: ALA, KY, USA
Location: Louisville, KY
Post: #36
Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
A loss of $0.65 per subscriber per month for 45,000,000 subscribers would be $351 Million annually. That said, if Fox Sports 1 picked up 4 million subscribers over Speed, that's still an $11 million a year in new revenue even without a price increase. It will be even more if Fox Sports 2 is debuting in more homes than Fuel TV.

Granted, ESPN has a few more channels, but I think Fox can make up $300-$400 million through ad revenue; ESPN has several billion dollars in ad revenue each year.
08-16-2013 06:33 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #37
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 06:33 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  A loss of $0.65 per subscriber per month for 45,000,000 subscribers would be $351 Million annually. That said, if Fox Sports 1 picked up 4 million subscribers over Speed, that's still an $11 million a year in new revenue even without a price increase. It will be even more if Fox Sports 2 is debuting in more homes than Fuel TV.

Granted, ESPN has a few more channels, but I think Fox can make up $300-$400 million through ad revenue; ESPN has several billion dollars in ad revenue each year.

How much ad revenue is attributable to ESPN2?

IMO, that's the realistic next-few-years goal for Fox, to get the average rating for FS1 to meet or beat ESPN2 and generate the same ad revenue.
08-16-2013 06:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,722
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 1775
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #38
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 02:42 PM)Tiger8589 Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 02:06 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 01:37 PM)stever20 Wrote:  For the NBA- I'm not saying that ESPN has to get everything, but rather keep it status quo sharing with Turner. Fox getting the NBA would be a bad thing for ESPN.

Big Ten- it's funny, but as important as tier 1 is, tier 2 is just as important. ESPN's schedule is full of Saturday noon starts of Big Ten football. If that got taken away, that's not good for ESPN at all, plus it gives FS1 great programming.

Bottom line, I don't see FS1 able to survive if all they have is some P12,B12, BE hoops, 1 MLB game a week, UFC, and Soccer. They have to get more of the big time sports.

Delany made some comments indicating the Big 10 wanted to keep a relationship with ESPN (IMO it would be a huge mistake not to have any). Maybe Fox is talking to AACK! and MWC schools trying to get a decent #6 conference in case they get shut out of the Big 10 Tier 1 and 2 and would have something to offer the east coast other than a bunch of west of the Mississippi teams.

All bigshots make calculated PR comments. Remeber this is the same guy that gave ESPN the middle finger and started the BTN. In fact some think there may not even be a BTN if ESPN had not tried to strong arm the Big10 during the last round on negotiations.

Realistically, the Big Ten is going to have some type of presence on ESPN. What I'd anticipate is that the Big Ten will have a deal that's very similar to the Pac-12 deal in terms of a split of rights between ESPN, Fox and the conference network, only the Big Ten is going to end up with a significantly larger rights fee (probably around $30 million per school per year from ESPN/Fox *before* taking into account BTN revenue - that's not an exaggeration).
08-16-2013 08:44 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Frank the Tank Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 18,722
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 1775
I Root For: Illinois/DePaul
Location: Chicago
Post: #39
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
(08-16-2013 10:57 AM)stever20 Wrote:  
(08-16-2013 10:32 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  The idea is more of a long-term play with Fox, which matches what they did for Fox News. Fox essentially gave Fox News away for free (and even paid some operators to carry it) to ensure that it got distribution. A few years later, when Fox News became a channel with devoted viewership, Fox was able to essentially name its price to get back all of the initial fees that they conceded upon launch and then some. That's the same playbook with Fox Sports 1. We'll see whether it works, but FS1 definitely has much better sports rights than NBCSN, so Fox is much more likely to be a viable competitor to ESPN.

I think one major difference between Fox News and Fox Sports is one is news and one is sports. Carriers are starting to really fight back on sports networks.

Another difference is in news, Fox can cover anythign they want to. They are all in for debates, etc. In sports, FS1 isn't getting NFL games(unless the NFL sells a Thursday night package) for at least 8 years. FS1 won't have a SEC home game for 20 years. Huge difference there.

Yes, I very much agree and that's the argument that I've made in the past in being skeptical of a viable competitor to ESPN whenever people bring up the CNN/Fox News/MSNBC comparison. FS1 and/or NBCSN aren't going to ever going to usurp ESPN based on their studio shows that compete with SportsCenter, PTI, GameDay, etc. - they need live event programming to make a dent and all of that programming is exclusive (i.e. if you want to watch Monday Night Football, you *have* to watch ESPN - there's no sports equivalent to the internally created conservative counterprogramming that Fox News used against CNN and MSNBC). The thing is that I believe FS1 has very good live event programming to start with: MLB (including some playoff games), Big 12, Pac-12, Big East, U.S. Open golf, Champions League and World Cup Soccer and NASCAR. It's impossible to build a stable like ESPN overnight, but FS1's offerings have a lot more to position the channel as a strong #2 to ESPN compared to NBCSN and it's very evident that Fox is willing to pay big-time rights fees (whereas Comcast talked a big game but didn't really deliver). The US Open rights that Fox just won are evidence of that - there's NFW that the USGA would have gone with Fox unless it was a huge overbid. Plus, Rupert Murdoch has done this 3 times with his channel in Australia, BSkyB in the UK, and over-the-air Fox itself in the US (when it shocked the world by taking the NFC package away from CBS). His broadcast empire is largely based on building channels by spending a ton of money on sports. Now, I don't think that anyone is beating ESPN, but Fox is certainly a formidable competitor that puts its money where its mouth is (and that's a good thing for rights holders like the NBA and Big Ten that are going to come up for bid over the next couple of years).
(This post was last modified: 08-16-2013 08:59 PM by Frank the Tank.)
08-16-2013 08:56 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jet915 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 831
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 13
I Root For: Creighton/Navy
Location:
Post: #40
RE: Sports Business Daily article on the neg to get FS1 and 2 distributed
Fox going with the low rate is a long term play. They need to get into the 90 million households and develop a fan base for the channel. Once that happens, they can increase their rates. I think it was a smart decision. Also, alot of their content and advertising requires a certain number of viewership in order to be shown on FS1. Starting the channel in only 40 million homes would have been disastrous as no one would be able to watch it and it would be a PR nightmare. This way, everyone can see the channel, the content is there and over time, the rates will go up. It is hard for the distributors to take away a channel once it is established.
08-17-2013 06:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.