Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
ESPN Could Lose More Viewers If No Agreement Be Made With Altice/Suddenlink
Author Message
Attackcoog Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,202
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 835
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #11
RE: ESPN Could Lose More Viewers If No Agreement Be Made With Altice/Suddenlink
(10-01-2017 12:03 PM)UNT15 Wrote:  attackcoog,
you point out the sports fans who will leave sudden link for competitors? but what about the folks who leave the competition for suddenlink when they can offer cheaper prices by not having the ESPN offerings?

Price sensitvie customers are going to cut the cord and go to Suddentlink for a $10-15 discount ---with no ABC and no sports? Why would they do that when they can use the opportunity to go to VUE, Sling, HULU, or YouTube TV and get ABC and sports and all the other channels they want for HALF the price (or less) of Suddenlink? The price sensitive niche features the consumers MOST like to cut the cord and jump to much cheaper steaming options. Thats not good niche to occupy for a cable company. On the other hand, the sports fans are the niche that is much more likely to pay higher prices to get what they want. Id argue the niche you want to be in as a cable company is the one that appeals to sports fans.
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2017 12:56 PM by Attackcoog.)
10-01-2017 12:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,255
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 69
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #12
RE: ESPN Could Lose More Viewers If No Agreement Be Made With Altice/Suddenlink
Remember, ABC is New York City area. Everybody else could keep the local ABC station since they are not really owned by ABC/Disney. They are local own affiliates.

Suddenlink in Arkansas would still have the ABC station in Little Rock. All they would be losing is Disney, Freeform and ESPN channels. As it is, the cord cutters are people who do not watch sports, and leaving in droves because of high prices. As it is, ESPN channel alone is costing us $10 already. That is why Altice is fighting back. Too many people are complaining about the high price of cable because of the ESPN. We ust got back the Viacom channels. They are a lot cheaper to keep than the Disney/ESPN channels.
10-01-2017 01:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 441
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 17
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #13
ESPN Could Lose More Viewers If No Agreement Be Made With Altice/Suddenlink
If ESPN can afford to pay a bimbo like Michelle Beadle 1.3 mil a year, they are not hurting that bad.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
10-01-2017 03:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,947
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 122
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #14
RE: ESPN Could Lose More Viewers If No Agreement Be Made With Altice/Suddenlink
(10-01-2017 12:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 12:03 PM)UNT15 Wrote:  attackcoog,
you point out the sports fans who will leave sudden link for competitors? but what about the folks who leave the competition for suddenlink when they can offer cheaper prices by not having the ESPN offerings?

Price sensitvie customers are going to cut the cord and go to Suddentlink for a $10-15 discount ---with no ABC and no sports? Why would they do that when they can use the opportunity to go to VUE, Sling, HULU, or YouTube TV and get ABC and sports and all the other channels they want for HALF the price (or less) of Suddenlink? The price sensitive niche features the consumers MOST like to cut the cord and jump to much cheaper steaming options. Thats not good niche to occupy for a cable company. On the other hand, the sports fans are the niche that is much more likely to pay higher prices to get what they want. Id argue the niche you want to be in as a cable company is the one that appeals to sports fans.

not surprisingly you have it 100% totally backwards

1. Altice/Suddenlink is an internet company as well and their CEO has made it clear that they are going to invest in the internet portion of their plant in the near and longer term future

2. you seem to not understand that to get a "cheaper streaming service" you need an INTERNET SERVICE which is Altice/Suddenlink

3. 56% of cable subs said they would gladly drop ESPN and ESPN II (much less all the other channels) to save $5 dollars a month and ESPN and ESPN II and the others currently cost well over $5 a month

so the economics are in the cable companies favor

4. ABC is an over the air channel you do not need cable to get it

5. so if all you care about is ESPN and ESPN II and ABC and you are "mad" they are gone from your cable well as you pointed out all you have to do is pay LESS to stream them with your ISP........with Altice/Suddenlink being that potential ISP so they still keep your business and the main business that they are moving towards

6. if you want cable and you are one of the 56% that would ditch ESPN and the rest to save $5 a month well Altice/Suddenlink offering you a cheaper package appeals to you

so as of now Altice has better control of what happens with their potential customers because they have the control to appeal to those that want cable for a lower cost and specifically without sports channels for way too much money AND they still have the available option of ditch cable with us, keep internet with us and stream your sports OR keep cable for a lower cost, keep your internet with us and stream your sports

Altice also has the option of bundling internet and a lower cost cable package to keep some of those sports customers as cable subs especially if it means they can keep their non sports cable subs as well

7. ESPN has two options both out of their control

hope that customers leave Altice and sign up with another TV provider that has given in to their pricing or hope that customers that either stick with Altice stream ESPN with or without Altice as their ISP

of course Disney might be dumb enough to try and cut Altice internet from streaming and drive those subs to another ISP, but I don't think that would work even if technology feasible for them to do

so as long as Altice stays in front of Disney and controls the narrative and makes their subs options clear to them they are in the driver seat

because at least 56% of their subs would love to see ESPN and the rest go away to save money and the others have an option that still involved Altice as their ISP and streaming ESPN

what ESPN is faced with is watching a large % of their subs they have been cramming their channels on to be freed from paying for them and then either resigning themselves to that or trying to go head long against Altice by begging and or forcing Altice ISP subs to switch internet providers and or trying to get those that want sports to switch cable MSOs

so in the end Disney is looking at losing a lot of subs that do not want their product and that would be glad it is gone and never getting them back ever

so Disney is the one that needs to decide can they afford to hold the line, lose potential revenues while trying to force Altice's hand or does Disney do the math and realize they cannot stay in the lowest tier of cable packages forever and allow themselves to be put in a package all their own or a higher tier package

because of Altice holds the line and cable subs do not drop off dramatically you can bet every other MSO will be looking to do the same

there are two other players in this as well that should be watching closely

AT&T/DirectTV and Dish Network

Dish Network because they have ZERO ISP offering for their subs so it if becomes clear that Altice subs are A OK with losing Disney and ESPN especially because the ones that want those Disney offerings can stream it......well you can bet that Dish Network subs will want them to hold the line as well......but dish has no ISP/Streaming to offer those that do want sports so they are faced with what attackcoog wrongly believes that Altice is faced with......either give in and lose subs or don't give in and lose subs

AT&T/DirectTV on the other hand has been looking to move their UVerse TV subs off of UVerse and on to Direct TV this is because the fundamental technology of sat/dish is perfect for TV, but terrible (and never physically able to get better) for internet because of the distance/speed of sound/latency issues with sat transmissions

sat is GREAT for large VOLUMES of information in a continuous stream, but TERRIBLE for small volumes in short burst to all types of different WWW areas

so moving subs off of UVerse TV and onto Direct TV frees up more UVerse bandwidth for internet as AT&T/DirectTV is able to fully remove TV bandwidth usage from their plant and allocate it to internet

so for AT&T/DirectTV they have the best of three worlds right now (even if one interferes in the short term with their long term plans)

they can hold the line on Disney with UVerse TV, offer those sports subs the streaming options/ability by keeping them as an ISP customer OR switch them over to DirectTV where they might capitulate to Disney or somewhat capitulate at least in the short term while they see what happens with sub numbers

so in the short term that means they might not transition all TV UVerse subs over to Direct TV while they keep the ones that do not want Disney on UVerse without Disney and most likely a lot of Direct TV subs will have little other choice because of no terrestrial cable service or no FIOS to go woth so they are stuck paying for Direct TV and Disney/ESPN even if they do not want it

and the ones that do not want Disney/ESPN and have a choice still need a choice of a cable MSO or FIOS/Verizon that is holding the line on Disney and ESPN to keep bills lower

so right now Altice is making decisions they have options to get around and that also make decisions for the two major players in "cable" which are Dish and Direct and AT&T

ESPN needs to get this right or they are going to be in a world of hurt
10-01-2017 04:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,202
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 835
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #15
RE: ESPN Could Lose More Viewers If No Agreement Be Made With Altice/Suddenlink
(10-01-2017 04:17 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 12:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 12:03 PM)UNT15 Wrote:  attackcoog,
you point out the sports fans who will leave sudden link for competitors? but what about the folks who leave the competition for suddenlink when they can offer cheaper prices by not having the ESPN offerings?

Price sensitvie customers are going to cut the cord and go to Suddentlink for a $10-15 discount ---with no ABC and no sports? Why would they do that when they can use the opportunity to go to VUE, Sling, HULU, or YouTube TV and get ABC and sports and all the other channels they want for HALF the price (or less) of Suddenlink? The price sensitive niche features the consumers MOST like to cut the cord and jump to much cheaper steaming options. Thats not good niche to occupy for a cable company. On the other hand, the sports fans are the niche that is much more likely to pay higher prices to get what they want. Id argue the niche you want to be in as a cable company is the one that appeals to sports fans.

not surprisingly you have it 100% totally backwards

1. Altice/Suddenlink is an internet company as well and their CEO has made it clear that they are going to invest in the internet portion of their plant in the near and longer term future

2. you seem to not understand that to get a "cheaper streaming service" you need an INTERNET SERVICE which is Altice/Suddenlink

3. 56% of cable subs said they would gladly drop ESPN and ESPN II (much less all the other channels) to save $5 dollars a month and ESPN and ESPN II and the others currently cost well over $5 a month

so the economics are in the cable companies favor

4. ABC is an over the air channel you do not need cable to get it

5. so if all you care about is ESPN and ESPN II and ABC and you are "mad" they are gone from your cable well as you pointed out all you have to do is pay LESS to stream them with your ISP........with Altice/Suddenlink being that potential ISP so they still keep your business and the main business that they are moving towards

6. if you want cable and you are one of the 56% that would ditch ESPN and the rest to save $5 a month well Altice/Suddenlink offering you a cheaper package appeals to you

so as of now Altice has better control of what happens with their potential customers because they have the control to appeal to those that want cable for a lower cost and specifically without sports channels for way too much money AND they still have the available option of ditch cable with us, keep internet with us and stream your sports OR keep cable for a lower cost, keep your internet with us and stream your sports

Altice also has the option of bundling internet and a lower cost cable package to keep some of those sports customers as cable subs especially if it means they can keep their non sports cable subs as well

7. ESPN has two options both out of their control

hope that customers leave Altice and sign up with another TV provider that has given in to their pricing or hope that customers that either stick with Altice stream ESPN with or without Altice as their ISP

of course Disney might be dumb enough to try and cut Altice internet from streaming and drive those subs to another ISP, but I don't think that would work even if technology feasible for them to do

so as long as Altice stays in front of Disney and controls the narrative and makes their subs options clear to them they are in the driver seat

because at least 56% of their subs would love to see ESPN and the rest go away to save money and the others have an option that still involved Altice as their ISP and streaming ESPN

what ESPN is faced with is watching a large % of their subs they have been cramming their channels on to be freed from paying for them and then either resigning themselves to that or trying to go head long against Altice by begging and or forcing Altice ISP subs to switch internet providers and or trying to get those that want sports to switch cable MSOs

so in the end Disney is looking at losing a lot of subs that do not want their product and that would be glad it is gone and never getting them back ever

so Disney is the one that needs to decide can they afford to hold the line, lose potential revenues while trying to force Altice's hand or does Disney do the math and realize they cannot stay in the lowest tier of cable packages forever and allow themselves to be put in a package all their own or a higher tier package

because of Altice holds the line and cable subs do not drop off dramatically you can bet every other MSO will be looking to do the same

there are two other players in this as well that should be watching closely

AT&T/DirectTV and Dish Network

Dish Network because they have ZERO ISP offering for their subs so it if becomes clear that Altice subs are A OK with losing Disney and ESPN especially because the ones that want those Disney offerings can stream it......well you can bet that Dish Network subs will want them to hold the line as well......but dish has no ISP/Streaming to offer those that do want sports so they are faced with what attackcoog wrongly believes that Altice is faced with......either give in and lose subs or don't give in and lose subs

AT&T/DirectTV on the other hand has been looking to move their UVerse TV subs off of UVerse and on to Direct TV this is because the fundamental technology of sat/dish is perfect for TV, but terrible (and never physically able to get better) for internet because of the distance/speed of sound/latency issues with sat transmissions

sat is GREAT for large VOLUMES of information in a continuous stream, but TERRIBLE for small volumes in short burst to all types of different WWW areas

so moving subs off of UVerse TV and onto Direct TV frees up more UVerse bandwidth for internet as AT&T/DirectTV is able to fully remove TV bandwidth usage from their plant and allocate it to internet

so for AT&T/DirectTV they have the best of three worlds right now (even if one interferes in the short term with their long term plans)

they can hold the line on Disney with UVerse TV, offer those sports subs the streaming options/ability by keeping them as an ISP customer OR switch them over to DirectTV where they might capitulate to Disney or somewhat capitulate at least in the short term while they see what happens with sub numbers

so in the short term that means they might not transition all TV UVerse subs over to Direct TV while they keep the ones that do not want Disney on UVerse without Disney and most likely a lot of Direct TV subs will have little other choice because of no terrestrial cable service or no FIOS to go woth so they are stuck paying for Direct TV and Disney/ESPN even if they do not want it

and the ones that do not want Disney/ESPN and have a choice still need a choice of a cable MSO or FIOS/Verizon that is holding the line on Disney and ESPN to keep bills lower

so right now Altice is making decisions they have options to get around and that also make decisions for the two major players in "cable" which are Dish and Direct and AT&T

ESPN needs to get this right or they are going to be in a world of hurt

lol....As usual, you make my case with your own points. 56% would take the discount over having ESPN. That means nearly HALF (43%) of their subscribers WANT ESPN. Case closed. No sane provider is risking the loss of HALF their subscriber base. Ive said it before, you clearly must work for a government agency or academia, because you wouldn't last a week in the private sector. ESPN didnt become the highest cost network for no reason. They have the clout to demand that high subscriber fee because carriers know they have a large number of subscribers that will leave if they cant offer ESPN. Its basically the same reason the SEC Network is such a success. The moment ESPN no longer is a desired network by a significant portion of their subscribers, the leverage will shift to the carriers---but right now---content is king and ESPN has the content enough people want that ESPN still commands great leverage.
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2017 04:33 PM by Attackcoog.)
10-01-2017 04:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,255
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 69
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #16
RE: ESPN Could Lose More Viewers If No Agreement Be Made With Altice/Suddenlink
(10-01-2017 04:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 04:17 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 12:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 12:03 PM)UNT15 Wrote:  attackcoog,
you point out the sports fans who will leave sudden link for competitors? but what about the folks who leave the competition for suddenlink when they can offer cheaper prices by not having the ESPN offerings?

Price sensitvie customers are going to cut the cord and go to Suddentlink for a $10-15 discount ---with no ABC and no sports? Why would they do that when they can use the opportunity to go to VUE, Sling, HULU, or YouTube TV and get ABC and sports and all the other channels they want for HALF the price (or less) of Suddenlink? The price sensitive niche features the consumers MOST like to cut the cord and jump to much cheaper steaming options. Thats not good niche to occupy for a cable company. On the other hand, the sports fans are the niche that is much more likely to pay higher prices to get what they want. Id argue the niche you want to be in as a cable company is the one that appeals to sports fans.

not surprisingly you have it 100% totally backwards

1. Altice/Suddenlink is an internet company as well and their CEO has made it clear that they are going to invest in the internet portion of their plant in the near and longer term future

2. you seem to not understand that to get a "cheaper streaming service" you need an INTERNET SERVICE which is Altice/Suddenlink

3. 56% of cable subs said they would gladly drop ESPN and ESPN II (much less all the other channels) to save $5 dollars a month and ESPN and ESPN II and the others currently cost well over $5 a month

so the economics are in the cable companies favor

4. ABC is an over the air channel you do not need cable to get it

5. so if all you care about is ESPN and ESPN II and ABC and you are "mad" they are gone from your cable well as you pointed out all you have to do is pay LESS to stream them with your ISP........with Altice/Suddenlink being that potential ISP so they still keep your business and the main business that they are moving towards

6. if you want cable and you are one of the 56% that would ditch ESPN and the rest to save $5 a month well Altice/Suddenlink offering you a cheaper package appeals to you

so as of now Altice has better control of what happens with their potential customers because they have the control to appeal to those that want cable for a lower cost and specifically without sports channels for way too much money AND they still have the available option of ditch cable with us, keep internet with us and stream your sports OR keep cable for a lower cost, keep your internet with us and stream your sports

Altice also has the option of bundling internet and a lower cost cable package to keep some of those sports customers as cable subs especially if it means they can keep their non sports cable subs as well

7. ESPN has two options both out of their control

hope that customers leave Altice and sign up with another TV provider that has given in to their pricing or hope that customers that either stick with Altice stream ESPN with or without Altice as their ISP

of course Disney might be dumb enough to try and cut Altice internet from streaming and drive those subs to another ISP, but I don't think that would work even if technology feasible for them to do

so as long as Altice stays in front of Disney and controls the narrative and makes their subs options clear to them they are in the driver seat

because at least 56% of their subs would love to see ESPN and the rest go away to save money and the others have an option that still involved Altice as their ISP and streaming ESPN

what ESPN is faced with is watching a large % of their subs they have been cramming their channels on to be freed from paying for them and then either resigning themselves to that or trying to go head long against Altice by begging and or forcing Altice ISP subs to switch internet providers and or trying to get those that want sports to switch cable MSOs

so in the end Disney is looking at losing a lot of subs that do not want their product and that would be glad it is gone and never getting them back ever

so Disney is the one that needs to decide can they afford to hold the line, lose potential revenues while trying to force Altice's hand or does Disney do the math and realize they cannot stay in the lowest tier of cable packages forever and allow themselves to be put in a package all their own or a higher tier package

because of Altice holds the line and cable subs do not drop off dramatically you can bet every other MSO will be looking to do the same

there are two other players in this as well that should be watching closely

AT&T/DirectTV and Dish Network

Dish Network because they have ZERO ISP offering for their subs so it if becomes clear that Altice subs are A OK with losing Disney and ESPN especially because the ones that want those Disney offerings can stream it......well you can bet that Dish Network subs will want them to hold the line as well......but dish has no ISP/Streaming to offer those that do want sports so they are faced with what attackcoog wrongly believes that Altice is faced with......either give in and lose subs or don't give in and lose subs

AT&T/DirectTV on the other hand has been looking to move their UVerse TV subs off of UVerse and on to Direct TV this is because the fundamental technology of sat/dish is perfect for TV, but terrible (and never physically able to get better) for internet because of the distance/speed of sound/latency issues with sat transmissions

sat is GREAT for large VOLUMES of information in a continuous stream, but TERRIBLE for small volumes in short burst to all types of different WWW areas

so moving subs off of UVerse TV and onto Direct TV frees up more UVerse bandwidth for internet as AT&T/DirectTV is able to fully remove TV bandwidth usage from their plant and allocate it to internet

so for AT&T/DirectTV they have the best of three worlds right now (even if one interferes in the short term with their long term plans)

they can hold the line on Disney with UVerse TV, offer those sports subs the streaming options/ability by keeping them as an ISP customer OR switch them over to DirectTV where they might capitulate to Disney or somewhat capitulate at least in the short term while they see what happens with sub numbers

so in the short term that means they might not transition all TV UVerse subs over to Direct TV while they keep the ones that do not want Disney on UVerse without Disney and most likely a lot of Direct TV subs will have little other choice because of no terrestrial cable service or no FIOS to go woth so they are stuck paying for Direct TV and Disney/ESPN even if they do not want it

and the ones that do not want Disney/ESPN and have a choice still need a choice of a cable MSO or FIOS/Verizon that is holding the line on Disney and ESPN to keep bills lower

so right now Altice is making decisions they have options to get around and that also make decisions for the two major players in "cable" which are Dish and Direct and AT&T

ESPN needs to get this right or they are going to be in a world of hurt

lol....As usual, you make my case with your own points. 56% would take the discount over having ESPN. That means nearly HALF (43%) of their subscribers WANT ESPN. Case closed. No sane provider is risking the loss of HALF their subscriber base. Ive said it before, you clearly must work for a government agency or academia, because you wouldn't last a week in the private sector. ESPN didnt become the highest cost network for no reason. They have the clout to demand that high subscriber fee because carriers know they have a large number of subscribers that will leave if they cant offer ESPN. Its basically the same reason the SEC Network is such a success. The moment ESPN no longer is a desired network by a significant portion of their subscribers, the leverage will shift to the carriers---but right now---content is king and ESPN has the content enough people want that ESPN still commands great leverage.


There is more than over 100 million people in this country. How many people watch the sports? You could luckily get 10% of the USA population. That makes 90% do not watch sports. ESPN got way too greedy and over the SEC, ACC and the Longhorns their own Networks, and forced those Networks on the cable companies. Forced bundling is wrong. People would be happy with just ESPN, 2 and ESPN Classic. The rest they do not care much about. What ESPN, Big 10, PAC 12 and other networks should go to Premium channels like HBO. That would include the NFL, NBA, Golf, Tennis, Soccer and other specialty channels of sports. They could make more money that way.
10-01-2017 04:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,947
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 122
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #17
RE: ESPN Could Lose More Viewers If No Agreement Be Made With Altice/Suddenlink
(10-01-2017 04:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  lol....As usual, you make my case with your own points. 56% would take the discount over having ESPN. That means nearly HALF (43%) of their subscribers WANT ESPN. Case closed. No sane provider is risking the loss of HALF their subscriber base. Ive said it before, you clearly must work for a government agency or academia, because you wouldn't last a week in the private sector. ESPN didnt become the highest cost network for no reason. They have the clout to demand that high subscriber fee because carriers know they have a large number of subscribers that will leave if they cant offer ESPN. Its basically the same reason the SEC Network is such a success. The moment ESPN no longer is a desired network by a significant portion of their subscribers, the leverage will shift to the carriers---but right now---content is king and ESPN has the content enough people want that ESPN still commands great leverage.


typical dem coogs doh fan response (the same group that thinks people would suddenly want the PAC12n if dem coogs doh were in the conference)

that does not at all mean that the other 46% of the population WANTS ESPN (much less demands it) it simply means that % might put up with paying that $5 dollars a month if they had no other choice

but of course you are ignorant of the fact that ESPN and the others are well over $5 a month and getting higher and thus the % of people that will not want to pay for them will most likely go up as that price goes up

you are still oblivious to the fact that all but Dish Network that provide "cable" are also ISPs and while in the case of Direct TV AT&T is not an ISP in all areas that can get Direct TV because AT&T is not a CLEC/ILEC/or a coax cable provider all over the USA where AT&T provides UVerse they are also an ISP

so again these cable MSOs/ISPs have OPTIONS to retain customers and that is to retain them as an internet subscriber while they drop cable and go find a streaming service to get the sports they want or they can work deals with streaming services to offer that to their internet only customers or to customers that take a lower level of cable and still look to stream

you must not work anywhere that requires intelligence because you are oblivious to the fact that Disney/ESPN can deliver nothing to anyone without a last mile connection and right now with the exception of Dish Network and all the other major cable/TV last mile providers are also internet providers (and with the exception of Direct TV subs in areas without UVerse or DSL or Cable provide by AT&T)

ESPN is so profitable because they have existed in a time when consumers had ZERO choice about a great deal of the cable channels they were forced to pay for and like Disney/ESPN you seem ignorant to the fact of that coming to an END

ESPN is simply not going to forever be able to hang on to subscribers that do not want their product especially at an ever increasing cost and the sooner they realize that the sooner they can control how that happens

but like you Disney and ESPN seem to be ignorant of that fact and they believe they can hang on to them forever......when the last mile providers that Disney and ESPN are dependent on are letting them know that will end because it is killing those last mile providers as well

the last mile providers are going to get their money and it is up to Disney/ESPN how many and how much of those subs money they get especially those that do not want their product

and the answer from ESPN and clowns like you that do not understand a competitive market seems to be "keep forcing it on them at any price because some want it"

while the answer of cable MSOs and ISPs is "we are going to give our subs options"

and once those MSOs and ISPs find that many subs are taking the option of no ESPN the flood gates are opened and they will not be closed

Disney/ESPN is dependent on the last mile.....the subscriber is dependent on the last mile.....those that control the last mile will make the decisions in the future about the choices those subs have not Disney/ESPN and the higher the price of Disney/ESPN the sooner and faster those increased options become available and the faster that Disney/ESPN lose dollars from subs that never wanted them in the first place

and I am sure Disney/ESPN (like you) is dumb enough to think they will just make that up by charging those that "must have them" more for the same crappy product, but they will soon find like dem coogs doh found that people are not demanding something as much as you think they are

just like people that live in areas filled with PAC 12 teams and that care nothing about the PAC12n are not going to start demanding the PAC12n if dem coogs doh get added to the PAC 12.....because there is no economic threshold where suddenly there is enough of something that someone does not want to make them all the sudden want it

56% of the people that have cable do not want ESPN at a price well below what ESPN charges now and unlike you anyone with a brain knows that does not mean the other 46% MUST HAVE IT especially at any price

and when those 46% that MIGHT WANT IT at some price have multiple options to get it and the last mile providers have the ability to collect money from them o provide it they are going to do so as cheaply as possible and they are not going to cram it on others that do not want it and lose them as well

you are oblivious to the fact that cable subs are dropping like flies and it is NOT because they cannot get ESPN for many it is because of ESPN and others they do not want being crammed on them

and you are oblivious to the fact that all cable MSOs but Dish Network and Direct TV (in non AT&T areas) are also ISPs and thus they have the option to try and please cable subs that do not want ESPN AND to provide internet to those that might want ESPN and will stream it

ESPN has the option of dealing with that and trying to keep as many paying customers as possible in the process....and they like you think the answer is keep forcing it on people at a higher price because the "cable company" has their hands tied.....when the reality is the "cable company" with the exception of Dish Network and non AT&T area Direct TV customers controls the delivery methods and in many areas that choice is still limited
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2017 05:29 PM by TodgeRodge.)
10-01-2017 05:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,202
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 835
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #18
RE: ESPN Could Lose More Viewers If No Agreement Be Made With Altice/Suddenlink
(10-01-2017 04:52 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 04:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 04:17 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 12:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 12:03 PM)UNT15 Wrote:  attackcoog,
you point out the sports fans who will leave sudden link for competitors? but what about the folks who leave the competition for suddenlink when they can offer cheaper prices by not having the ESPN offerings?

Price sensitvie customers are going to cut the cord and go to Suddentlink for a $10-15 discount ---with no ABC and no sports? Why would they do that when they can use the opportunity to go to VUE, Sling, HULU, or YouTube TV and get ABC and sports and all the other channels they want for HALF the price (or less) of Suddenlink? The price sensitive niche features the consumers MOST like to cut the cord and jump to much cheaper steaming options. Thats not good niche to occupy for a cable company. On the other hand, the sports fans are the niche that is much more likely to pay higher prices to get what they want. Id argue the niche you want to be in as a cable company is the one that appeals to sports fans.

not surprisingly you have it 100% totally backwards

1. Altice/Suddenlink is an internet company as well and their CEO has made it clear that they are going to invest in the internet portion of their plant in the near and longer term future

2. you seem to not understand that to get a "cheaper streaming service" you need an INTERNET SERVICE which is Altice/Suddenlink

3. 56% of cable subs said they would gladly drop ESPN and ESPN II (much less all the other channels) to save $5 dollars a month and ESPN and ESPN II and the others currently cost well over $5 a month

so the economics are in the cable companies favor

4. ABC is an over the air channel you do not need cable to get it

5. so if all you care about is ESPN and ESPN II and ABC and you are "mad" they are gone from your cable well as you pointed out all you have to do is pay LESS to stream them with your ISP........with Altice/Suddenlink being that potential ISP so they still keep your business and the main business that they are moving towards

6. if you want cable and you are one of the 56% that would ditch ESPN and the rest to save $5 a month well Altice/Suddenlink offering you a cheaper package appeals to you

so as of now Altice has better control of what happens with their potential customers because they have the control to appeal to those that want cable for a lower cost and specifically without sports channels for way too much money AND they still have the available option of ditch cable with us, keep internet with us and stream your sports OR keep cable for a lower cost, keep your internet with us and stream your sports

Altice also has the option of bundling internet and a lower cost cable package to keep some of those sports customers as cable subs especially if it means they can keep their non sports cable subs as well

7. ESPN has two options both out of their control

hope that customers leave Altice and sign up with another TV provider that has given in to their pricing or hope that customers that either stick with Altice stream ESPN with or without Altice as their ISP

of course Disney might be dumb enough to try and cut Altice internet from streaming and drive those subs to another ISP, but I don't think that would work even if technology feasible for them to do

so as long as Altice stays in front of Disney and controls the narrative and makes their subs options clear to them they are in the driver seat

because at least 56% of their subs would love to see ESPN and the rest go away to save money and the others have an option that still involved Altice as their ISP and streaming ESPN

what ESPN is faced with is watching a large % of their subs they have been cramming their channels on to be freed from paying for them and then either resigning themselves to that or trying to go head long against Altice by begging and or forcing Altice ISP subs to switch internet providers and or trying to get those that want sports to switch cable MSOs

so in the end Disney is looking at losing a lot of subs that do not want their product and that would be glad it is gone and never getting them back ever

so Disney is the one that needs to decide can they afford to hold the line, lose potential revenues while trying to force Altice's hand or does Disney do the math and realize they cannot stay in the lowest tier of cable packages forever and allow themselves to be put in a package all their own or a higher tier package

because of Altice holds the line and cable subs do not drop off dramatically you can bet every other MSO will be looking to do the same

there are two other players in this as well that should be watching closely

AT&T/DirectTV and Dish Network

Dish Network because they have ZERO ISP offering for their subs so it if becomes clear that Altice subs are A OK with losing Disney and ESPN especially because the ones that want those Disney offerings can stream it......well you can bet that Dish Network subs will want them to hold the line as well......but dish has no ISP/Streaming to offer those that do want sports so they are faced with what attackcoog wrongly believes that Altice is faced with......either give in and lose subs or don't give in and lose subs

AT&T/DirectTV on the other hand has been looking to move their UVerse TV subs off of UVerse and on to Direct TV this is because the fundamental technology of sat/dish is perfect for TV, but terrible (and never physically able to get better) for internet because of the distance/speed of sound/latency issues with sat transmissions

sat is GREAT for large VOLUMES of information in a continuous stream, but TERRIBLE for small volumes in short burst to all types of different WWW areas

so moving subs off of UVerse TV and onto Direct TV frees up more UVerse bandwidth for internet as AT&T/DirectTV is able to fully remove TV bandwidth usage from their plant and allocate it to internet

so for AT&T/DirectTV they have the best of three worlds right now (even if one interferes in the short term with their long term plans)

they can hold the line on Disney with UVerse TV, offer those sports subs the streaming options/ability by keeping them as an ISP customer OR switch them over to DirectTV where they might capitulate to Disney or somewhat capitulate at least in the short term while they see what happens with sub numbers

so in the short term that means they might not transition all TV UVerse subs over to Direct TV while they keep the ones that do not want Disney on UVerse without Disney and most likely a lot of Direct TV subs will have little other choice because of no terrestrial cable service or no FIOS to go woth so they are stuck paying for Direct TV and Disney/ESPN even if they do not want it

and the ones that do not want Disney/ESPN and have a choice still need a choice of a cable MSO or FIOS/Verizon that is holding the line on Disney and ESPN to keep bills lower

so right now Altice is making decisions they have options to get around and that also make decisions for the two major players in "cable" which are Dish and Direct and AT&T

ESPN needs to get this right or they are going to be in a world of hurt

lol....As usual, you make my case with your own points. 56% would take the discount over having ESPN. That means nearly HALF (43%) of their subscribers WANT ESPN. Case closed. No sane provider is risking the loss of HALF their subscriber base. Ive said it before, you clearly must work for a government agency or academia, because you wouldn't last a week in the private sector. ESPN didnt become the highest cost network for no reason. They have the clout to demand that high subscriber fee because carriers know they have a large number of subscribers that will leave if they cant offer ESPN. Its basically the same reason the SEC Network is such a success. The moment ESPN no longer is a desired network by a significant portion of their subscribers, the leverage will shift to the carriers---but right now---content is king and ESPN has the content enough people want that ESPN still commands great leverage.


There is more than over 100 million people in this country. How many people watch the sports? You could luckily get 10% of the USA population. That makes 90% do not watch sports. ESPN got way too greedy and over the SEC, ACC and the Longhorns their own Networks, and forced those Networks on the cable companies. Forced bundling is wrong. People would be happy with just ESPN, 2 and ESPN Classic. The rest they do not care much about. What ESPN, Big 10, PAC 12 and other networks should go to Premium channels like HBO. That would include the NFL, NBA, Golf, Tennis, Soccer and other specialty channels of sports. They could make more money that way.

Youre way off on how many people watch sports. In most NFL cities the local team will attract a 25% share of all local TV's . Thats just the NFL. There are college football fans, soccer fans, baseball fans, basketball fans, etc. Basically, Todd Rodge gave you the number. He said 56% of subscribers would dump ESPN in favor of a $10 cut in the cable bill. The only folks who wouldnt are sports fans...whcih means that 56% figure tells us about 43% of cable subscribers watch sports. No cable carrier is interested in dumping the 43% off their subscriber base. Honestly, I think the long term answer to the current mess is a la carte cable TV where you build you own "bundle" of networks....but we are long way from getting to that point. Right now, despite being under pressure, the current bundle system is still working for cable companies and content providers. That will eventually change.
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2017 05:35 PM by Attackcoog.)
10-01-2017 05:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 8,462
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 271
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #19
RE: ESPN Could Lose More Viewers If No Agreement Be Made With Altice/Suddenlink
(10-01-2017 12:49 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 10:20 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 10:12 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 08:52 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Pure speculation--I have to wonder if Altice being a foreign conglomerate plays a role. French executives aren't going to feel anything about losing Monday Night Football or a baseball playoff game--they're going to have a slightly different perspective than American executives.

Now, this could mean that the French executives see more clearly, rather than overvaluing American manhood tentpole programming. Or it could mean that the French executives misread their American customer base, who will demand that American manhood tentpole programming. I just think it's a factor that Altice is not going to think the same way Comcast or Time Warner will.

What you are not considering is how this is an incredibly dangerous gamble by Suddenlink. In an environment where cable customers are leaving cable providers in droves, Suddenlink is going to go dark on ESPN and ABC in the middle of the college and NFL football seasons? What will happen is droves of football fans will take the opportunity to leave Suddenlink and go to competitors like a Comcast, ATT, Direct Tv, Dish, or to one of the newer streaming options like VUE, HULUtv, or Sling. So Suddenlink could literally end up losing a quarter to half their subscriber base. No football fan is sticking with Suddenlink just because the bill is $10 cheaper-----not when VUE would be half of the reduced price of Suddenlink and provides all the ESPN+ABC networks.

They might fall ass-backwards into the strategy of being the lower-cost, lower-programming provider. Switch to Altice and get a free digital antenna, combined with the lowest rates on internet service with some cable TV thrown in. (When we tried to go internet-only with Time WArner, they gave us a package that threw in very-basic-cable--ESPN, CNN, no Comedy Central--for $5 less than Internet-plus-landline-no-cable would have been.)

Plenty of people do not care about sports, and aren't super particular about their TV.

Quote:The French ownership can't afford to black out ESPN and ESPN knows it.

The point is, I'm not certain that the head office in France knows it, in the same way that Comcast and AT&T know it.

They may not know that they cant dump ESPN. Its also true that plenty of cable subscribers dont care about sports. But I dont know a single cable company willing to lose 25% to 50% of its subscriber base. These days, whats left of cable subscribers tends to run to an older demographic that DOES like sports. Plus, a significant portion of that subscriber base probably watches some shows on ABC or other Disney networks. Trying to cut out ESPN/ABC while everyone else is carrying the networks (inclusding streaming options that are less than half the price of your service) is a losing strategy. I mean--you can be the low price cable provider---but why would that be an attractive niche when price sensitive consumers are the most likely to cut the cord and move to cheaper streaming options? Suddenlink is going to be a huge loser if they try to push this for very long. They just dont have much leverage.

Because you'd BE the cheaper streaming option. Netflix, Amazon, Youtube, whatever--the money is in being your Internet provider. Internet plus a digital antenna equals being the low cost option. Content is nothing, the wires running into your house are everything, in this model.
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2017 06:25 PM by johnbragg.)
10-01-2017 06:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,202
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 835
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #20
RE: ESPN Could Lose More Viewers If No Agreement Be Made With Altice/Suddenlink
(10-01-2017 06:24 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 12:49 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 10:20 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 10:12 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-01-2017 08:52 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Pure speculation--I have to wonder if Altice being a foreign conglomerate plays a role. French executives aren't going to feel anything about losing Monday Night Football or a baseball playoff game--they're going to have a slightly different perspective than American executives.

Now, this could mean that the French executives see more clearly, rather than overvaluing American manhood tentpole programming. Or it could mean that the French executives misread their American customer base, who will demand that American manhood tentpole programming. I just think it's a factor that Altice is not going to think the same way Comcast or Time Warner will.

What you are not considering is how this is an incredibly dangerous gamble by Suddenlink. In an environment where cable customers are leaving cable providers in droves, Suddenlink is going to go dark on ESPN and ABC in the middle of the college and NFL football seasons? What will happen is droves of football fans will take the opportunity to leave Suddenlink and go to competitors like a Comcast, ATT, Direct Tv, Dish, or to one of the newer streaming options like VUE, HULUtv, or Sling. So Suddenlink could literally end up losing a quarter to half their subscriber base. No football fan is sticking with Suddenlink just because the bill is $10 cheaper-----not when VUE would be half of the reduced price of Suddenlink and provides all the ESPN+ABC networks.

They might fall ass-backwards into the strategy of being the lower-cost, lower-programming provider. Switch to Altice and get a free digital antenna, combined with the lowest rates on internet service with some cable TV thrown in. (When we tried to go internet-only with Time WArner, they gave us a package that threw in very-basic-cable--ESPN, CNN, no Comedy Central--for $5 less than Internet-plus-landline-no-cable would have been.)

Plenty of people do not care about sports, and aren't super particular about their TV.

Quote:The French ownership can't afford to black out ESPN and ESPN knows it.

The point is, I'm not certain that the head office in France knows it, in the same way that Comcast and AT&T know it.

They may not know that they cant dump ESPN. Its also true that plenty of cable subscribers dont care about sports. But I dont know a single cable company willing to lose 25% to 50% of its subscriber base. These days, whats left of cable subscribers tends to run to an older demographic that DOES like sports. Plus, a significant portion of that subscriber base probably watches some shows on ABC or other Disney networks. Trying to cut out ESPN/ABC while everyone else is carrying the networks (inclusding streaming options that are less than half the price of your service) is a losing strategy. I mean--you can be the low price cable provider---but why would that be an attractive niche when price sensitive consumers are the most likely to cut the cord and move to cheaper streaming options? Suddenlink is going to be a huge loser if they try to push this for very long. They just dont have much leverage.

Because you'd BE the cheaper streaming option. Netflix, Amazon, Youtube, whatever--the money is in being your Internet provider. Internet plus a digital antenna equals being the low cost option. Content is nothing, the wires running into your house are everything, in this model.

Those providers are paying the same price for ESPN as the traditonal cable outlets. There are no free rides. Suddenlink can go cheaper without ESPN---but they just are going to see a big drop off in subscribers. ATT, VUE, HUle, Comcast, etc are all for Suddenlink dropping ESPN.
(This post was last modified: 10-01-2017 06:49 PM by Attackcoog.)
10-01-2017 06:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2017 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.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2017 MyBB Group.