QUOTE:

"Further cracks emerged this week in the pay TV bundle as media companies and distributors indicated that more people are cutting the cord and ditching pricey channel packages.

Disney's stock tumbled 9 percent Wednesday, a day after reporting that it was trimming its forecast for TV subscriber-fee profit growth through next year because of subscriber losses at its flagship ESPN sports network. Other channel operators also saw shares drop. Viacom fell 7.5 percent, Time Warner fell 9 percent, CBS fell 4.6 percent and Discovery Communications fell 12.1 percent.

Dish said its satellite TV subscriber losses accelerated in the quarter through June, falling 81,000 to 13.9 million, nearly double the loss of 44,000 a year ago."

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150806...21bf2.html

Pay TV gonna be a whole lot cheaper in the future despite what a few naysayers say about a la carte TV prices going up... People are dropping cable because it is already too expensive, jack up the price and it will drive away even more subscribers.. the remaining few who MUST see HGTV or watch every sports game on Big Ten Network will pay 500% more than what they pay now (but it won't be me).

Sports TV rights will start to tail off from here. Live sports was the last ditch effort to keep the cable model together and so it was bid up as the last valuable content. That bubble was bid up too high and now it will tail off from here.

During the Pac12 media days the Pac12 Commish said he was glad the PAC12 had recently signed their deal and that any future deals would face headwinds. Conference USA is sitting in a tight spot and is likely heading for a reduced contract. ESPN isnt interested nor has the timeslots available. NBCSN is booked with soccer, motor sports, NHL, and UFC. CBSSN has abandoned them, and FOX is the only bidder available as ASN doesn't pay anything.

.

It would be nice to live in a world where it was that simple. We don't.

Cable companies are going to seek the same overall revenue that they've traditionally got from internet and TV service, from just internet service.

That means internet prices are going up. People won't give internet up.

And if they're smart, which I think they are, they'll charge a premium/fee (or perhaps make us pay for an entirely separate allotment of data) for "streaming video data", as opposed to all other types of data.


That's just for the people who bring the data you want to your home.


Then there's the people who create the content you want to watch.

Bundles are most certainly not going away. Why would the content creators just throw away a model that has worked so well for them and been so profitable?


You're going to have to buy something like a "Disney Account", which gives you access to all Disney owned content (including ESPN), if you want to see any of it. Who knows how much they'll charge per month for that.

The same will go for all major content creator parent companies. You'll need a Viacom Account, a NBC account, a Scripps account, etc. That's in addition to the HBO accounts we already pay for.



No I'm afraid that the fantasy world where TV magically floats on a cloud, blowing in the wind, down to your device for free is never going to come to fruition.

It's sad the number of TV addicts that we apparently have around here.

(08-06-2015 08:13 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  And if they're smart, which I think they are, they'll charge a premium/fee (or perhaps make us pay for an entirely separate allotment of data) for "streaming video data", as opposed to all other types of data.

If you look closely, many ISP's actually have a datacap, whereas they can charge you extra if you go over it. I have Uverse and the cap is 250 gig. I don't know how often they actually enforce it, but to your point, if they ever felt the squeeze, they can and would.

IMO the money paid is not going to change. They only thing that will change is the method of delivery and how many channels you get.

(08-06-2015 10:19 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 08:13 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  And if they're smart, which I think they are, they'll charge a premium/fee (or perhaps make us pay for an entirely separate allotment of data) for "streaming video data", as opposed to all other types of data.

If you look closely, many ISP's actually have a datacap, whereas they can charge you extra if you go over it. I have Uverse and the cap is 250 gig. I don't know how often they actually enforce it, but to your point, if they ever felt the squeeze, they can and would.

IMO the money paid is not going to change. They only thing that will change is the method of delivery and how many channels you get.

I am aware of datacaps on standard residential internet service agreements.

And for example, the ISP could hypothetically devise a system where the cap on "all non-streaming video data" is high, like it is now, but a new cap is placed on "streaming video data" of 10GB. Every GB after that is a $X fee.

Else, you can buy an "upgraded streaming video data package" that includes a 200GB cap for streaming video data.


Either way, viola - the ISP are now collecting additional revenue for TV again.


Not saying it will happen. Just don't be surprised if it does. That's what I'd do, if I were them.

These networks will continue to pay top dollar for the live content. That is how they will make the money. Without desirable live content, then they close as a company. Therefore, professional leagues, etc, will still get paid. People want their football. People want their March Madness, etc, etc.

(08-06-2015 10:56 AM)Nebraskafan Wrote:  These networks will continue to pay top dollar for the live content. That is how they will make the money. Without desirable live content, then they close as a company. Therefore, professional leagues, etc, will still get paid. People want their football. People want their March Madness, etc, etc.

I agree.

The conferences have no incentive to accept less money than they're getting now, simply because the technology and distribution model is changing.


People still want to view telecasts of college football games, as much as they ever have. That's the prime mover in conferences getting paid.

That's the thing. I feel like folks from smaller conferences(like the OP who is a MAC guy), think that if this happens, all of a sudden the MAC is going to become much more powerful- and a lot closer to the P5 conferences. That's a bunch of malarkey. It's not happening.

I think I came to realize Iast year I do not need to watch my favorite team play 12 times on tv. Whatever shows up on the local free ABC/Fox/CBS channel is good enough for me.

I cut the cord from 2009-2012 but never said I would not go back. I am cutting the cord again on Aug 11, and this time it feels like I am done for good. But I will never say never.

If I'm honest with myself, I'll probably be one of the last to cut the cord. I love the convenience of having all entertainment options right there at all times in one place. I'll pay a lot for that convenience. There's a list of other wasteful expenses I'll trim first.

Talk about AAC's bad timing and luck, they were hoping to renegotiate their TV Contract when ESPN is in cost cutting mode. Don't see an increase coming any time soon.

(08-06-2015 11:27 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Talk about AAC's bad timing and luck, they were hoping to renegotiate their TV Contract when ESPN is in cost cutting mode. Don't see an increase coming any time soon.

lol...We will make BILLIONs! Ehh--We are so undervalued and provide so much cheap content, the AAC is still a screaming bargain for ESPN at 2 to 3 times its current price. Here is the thing, I see all the P5 slowly moving to place more and more of their content onto their own conference networks. ESPN is just the middle man and as the P5 conferences become more network savvy, they will eventually come to realize they dont need ESPN at all. They may sell a game of the week type package to ABC/ESPN, but most of their content will be retained for their conference network feeds.

Some of the ESPN channels will slowly morph into becoming G5 networks (because these conferences wont have the financial resources and fan bases to support conference networks) with the remaining P5 games ESPN continues to hold will be reserved for the flagship networks ESPN and ABC. That's kinda where I think this is all headed (provided, of course, that there is no split in FBS).
As far the larger trend of cable cutting and streaming content, the last mile of pipe/wire into the home has ALWAYS had value. Look for internet data to be metered in the future just like water or electricity. You will be charged based on your usage. These media/cable/network providers have HUGE sunk costs and the strain of consumers switching in mass to streaming content over cable will require massive upgrades in the system. There are no free rides. Developing and providing entertainment content (movies, series, reality shows, sports, news, etc) costs money. Infrastructure costs money. You're going to pay for infrastructure and media content one way or another. For short periods of time during periods of change, there may appear to be free rides as the business model struggles to keep up with technological changes. Eventually though, the business model adapts. That's why Netflix used to have tons of good movies on it and now it doesn't. The content providers realized they were getting hosed and changed their business practices.

You may see it in the sense of imagining it, but we haven't seen it in sense of actually seeing something like that happening yet.

(08-06-2015 11:54 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 11:27 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Talk about AAC's bad timing and luck, they were hoping to renegotiate their TV Contract when ESPN is in cost cutting mode. Don't see an increase coming any time soon.

lol...We will make BILLIONs! Ehh--We are so undervalued and provide so much cheap content, the AAC is still a screaming bargain for ESPN at 2 to 3 times its current price. Here is the thing, I see all the P5 slowly moving to place more and more of their content onto their own conference networks. ESPN is just the middle man and as the P5 conferences become more network savvy, they will eventually come to realize they dont need ESPN at all. They may sell a game of the week type package to ABC/ESPN, but most of their content will be retained for their conference network feeds.

Some of the ESPN channels will slowly morph into becoming G5 networks (because these conferences wont have the financial resources and fan bases to support conference networks) with the remaining P5 games ESPN continues to hold will be reserved for the flagship networks ESPN and ABC. That's kinda where I think this is all headed (provided, of course, that there is no split in FBS).
As far the larger trend of cable cutting and streaming content, the last mile of pipe/wire into the home has ALWAYS had value. Look for internet data to be metered in the future just like water or electricity. You will be charged based on your usage. These media/cable/network providers have HUGE sunk costs and the strain of consumers switching in mass to streaming content over cable will require massive upgrades in the system. There are no free rides. Developing and providing entertainment content (movies, series, reality shows, sports, news, etc) costs money. Infrastructure costs money. You're going to pay for infrastructure and media content one way or another. For short periods of time during periods of change, there may appear to be free rides as the business model struggles to keep up with technological changes. Eventually though, the business model adapts. That's why Netflix used to have tons of good movies on it and now it doesn't. The content providers realized they were getting hosed and changed their business practices.

I disagree. Basically you are saying Pay for View is the wave of the future. Conferences and schools have been moving away from that. They are going to want the exposure ABC, Fox, ESPN, etc. can give them. And with that exposure comes bigger advertising $, making it more valuable than PPV.

Conference networks will go PPV, but they will have no more content than now. They will carry the junk the bigger networks don't want.

Now I can see ESPNU being used heavily for G5 football and other sports.

Oh no.. not the cable jobbers again!

From the article:

Meanwhile, CBS Corp. CEO Les Moonves was upbeat about CBS's go-it-alone online channels called CBS All-Access, which provides CBS content for $6 a month, and Showtime, with original shows and movies for $11 a month.

Not only are its online audiences younger — and therefore more valuable — but it is getting paid more for each subscriber than through traditional distributors, making any shift a benefit.

"Each of these deals resets the value of our content higher than it was before," he said.

Also from the article...

Iger said he didn't see "dramatic declines" in pay TV packages like those offered by DirecTV, Comcast and others "over the next, say, five years or so."

Keep in mind there is always a lag that follows how the economy is doing... and we are coming out of a down period.

Then there is this...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/perso...9/7711701/

(08-06-2015 11:54 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 11:27 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Talk about AAC's bad timing and luck, they were hoping to renegotiate their TV Contract when ESPN is in cost cutting mode. Don't see an increase coming any time soon.

lol...We will make BILLIONs! Ehh--We are so undervalued and provide so much cheap content, the AAC is still a screaming bargain for ESPN at 2 to 3 times its current price. Here is the thing, I see all the P5 slowly moving to place more and more of their content onto their own conference networks. ESPN is just the middle man and as the P5 conferences become more network savvy, they will eventually come to realize they dont need ESPN at all. They may sell a game of the week type package to ABC/ESPN, but most of their content will be retained for their conference network feeds.

Some of the ESPN channels will slowly morph into becoming G5 networks (because these conferences wont have the financial resources and fan bases to support conference networks) with the remaining P5 games ESPN continues to hold will be reserved for the flagship networks ESPN and ABC. That's kinda where I think this is all headed (provided, of course, that there is no split in FBS).
As far the larger trend of cable cutting and streaming content, the last mile of pipe/wire into the home has ALWAYS had value. Look for internet data to be metered in the future just like water or electricity. You will be charged based on your usage. These media/cable/network providers have HUGE sunk costs and the strain of consumers switching in mass to streaming content over cable will require massive upgrades in the system. There are no free rides. Developing and providing entertainment content (movies, series, reality shows, sports, news, etc) costs money. Infrastructure costs money. You're going to pay for infrastructure and media content one way or another. For short periods of time during periods of change, there may appear to be free rides as the business model struggles to keep up with technological changes. Eventually though, the business model adapts. That's why Netflix used to have tons of good movies on it and now it doesn't. The content providers realized they were getting hosed and changed their business practices.

AC,
I don't disagree I see G5 conferences becoming bigger on TV. My question is why would ESPN not wait to renegotiate the contract in Year 5 instead of Year 3 of a six year deal? It just seems that ESPN has the upper hand in waiting it out knowing it has a great deal for content. I know I am debating on switching to Sling when the Cable/Satellite contract is up next year.

(08-06-2015 11:11 AM)stever20 Wrote:  That's the thing. I feel like folks from smaller conferences(like the OP who is a MAC guy), think that if this happens, all of a sudden the MAC is going to become much more powerful- and a lot closer to the P5 conferences. That's a bunch of malarkey. It's not happening.

I agree to an extent. I think the G5 conferences will get more money, and probably more exposure, but the autonomous five will still be getting even more money and exposure than before.

So, then, what becomes the end game? Attempt to close the gap? Try to get into the A5? Be satisfied with where your school is at and not worry about the disadvantages you face against the A5 schools?

In North Carolina, the big ISPs are the phone and cable companies. If they are charging $150 per month for cable and internet, there is no way they can say, "We are going to drop the cable (or some major portion of it) and keep charging you $150 per month." They are governed by the Utility Commission. The UC will allow them to make a reasonable profit. If they can justify increased cost, the UC will let them increase their fee for Internet service. I can see their cost increasing, but I can't see it tripling. (I am assuming roughly 1/3 of the $150 is for Internet service.)

People are "cord cutting"but are still watching tv at a high rate. networks who produce the content aren't doing it for their health. When they stop getting paid, Netflix, hulu, Amazon, etc won't be $9 a month forever.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

M