(03-15-2018 03:48 PM)johndwilliams1962 Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 12:18 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 11:52 PM)johndwilliams1962 Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 06:14 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(03-14-2018 05:55 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  Hate to tell ya brother but your deal is just as crappy. The only difference is we're not excited about it.

Nah, our tv deal isn’t great, but it’s better than what we used to get and it’s better than what y’all are getting even if just slightly.

You get a hell of a lot less money (about half per school) and your school pays for production. Meanwhile an unspecified number of games (think a lot or they'd have specified) will be behind the ESPN + paywall. Saying it's better may help you sleep at night, but it isn't better. The only thing you have better is ESPN + has your inventory that we currently have on the CUSAtv network which is a way better platform. But your actual TV deal is not good.

Nope. Money is essentially equal. The finny thing is that anyone who has any perspective should not be surprised about that. A lot of us saw this coming years ago. There is not a significant difference between the SBC, MAC and CUSA. Some schools in each conference are really investing in infrastructure and sources of revenue and those are the ones that will flourish if there is ever another big shuffle.

Nobody watches CBSSN unless they are specifically looking for their team. ESPN draws a lot more casual eyes. ESPN streaming is also a better streaming service because people actually install ESPN apps on their phones.

The money is the same but I am happy to be on the ESPN/ABS networks instead of CBSSN/FB.

Nope. Money isn't the same. The gross revenue is the same but you aren't including the 3rd tier package revenue (currently BeIn) which CUSA goes back to market with in the coming year nor the revenue each school gets from CUSA.tv (rumored to be $100k each). CUSA schools "net" between $400k-$500k per school for their various TV packages with that expected increase a marginal amount when BeIn package gets negotiated. ESPN offered to acquire all CUSA's packages. I've been told they offered over $500k per school but expected schools to cover production costs which CUSA estimated would take half the revenue.

No one is arguing ESPN is a bigger family of networks with a better overall penetration. But anyone arguing the deal is financially equal is being silly. The CUSA net per school is probably 75-100% greater. Bad news for CUSA schools is that only equates to $150-$200k each.

Come at me with more than speculation, rumored amounts or "expected to be". If we are talking anything less than $200K difference then it is meaningless in budgets that reach 25 to 40 million. The value in these deals is not really the $ anyhow. The value is how many TVs you are reaching in terms of actual viewers. You don't build your brand or promote your program to recruits and fans with games that nobody will watch unless they are already a fan of the schools playing.

Meanwhile, let's all continue to debate which non-playoff earning/one bid league with a TV "deal" that is less than $1 million is the best!

(03-16-2018 06:54 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 06:36 AM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 07:51 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 07:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-15-2018 06:55 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  [quote='Crump1' pid='15176235' dateline='1521137624']
It has actually been kind of awesome having weeknight games.

1. It is spread among the teams (ASU has been on more weeknights since we are winning) so it is not that frequent.

2. You get a LOT more exposure when you are the only or one of a few games on TV on a Thursday compared to playing on Saturday when everyone is on TV.

3. You still get Saturday non-conference games on TV.

4. The bye weeks created to accommodate weeknights are great if you have a family you want to spend time with doing things other than watching football.

5. Weeknight games on the road are great for the fans of the road team. Most cannot travel anyhow and, again, it frees a weekend.

6. Recruits are likely to be home watching football on a weeknight other than Friday. Not so much on Saturday.

There is a bit of a trade off losing one Saturday game but overall it is a great deal for the schools and the league. I get tons of people stopping by my office the night after we play (and beat) someone the night before. Those folks are less likely to watch us on a Saturday.

I’m glad you see a value to weekday games. I see none.
In fact, I see them as something that will destroy a program. It’s like having the NFL in your city. Bad.

When we are playing well, we've had some nice weeknight crowds. One per season at home is ideal but AState gets two this year because the only road game we play against a team that was over .500 in 2017 is at Bama.

I thinks it’s a little easier for a city school. We’ve Had some great crowds for weekday games. The Louisville game in 2016 was excellent. Cinci has had some good weeknight crowds.

Interesting idea, but IMO you have to define 'city' schools. E.g., many SEC schools are in 'cities' that are relatively small (Gainesville, Tuscaloosa, etc.), but the entire town basically consists of supporters of the school, so it really is a 'city' in that sense, tens of thousands always are very close to the stadium.

Also, even big cities differ in important ways. E.g., Tampa isn't the same kind of "big city" as is Cincinnati. Cincy is "compact", has a much denser profile, while "Tampa" sprawls across an immense area about 30 miles long and wide, it is much more an "area" than a city in the older, northern sense. It is much looser in terms of residential configuration, and even many USF fans who are technically within the city limits have a long/pain in arse commute to the stadium, which bad weather can impact.

Im really talking about schools traditionally large metro areas. Schools like Houston, Memphis, Temple, Gerogia St, FIU, UCF, USF, UTSA, etc. Most of their season ticket base lives in the city. So, a weeknight game, while not ideal, is still going to be fairly viable for most of their fans. You'll lose the walk up fans and a small perentage that come from elesewhere (or those who work weekday evening and cant get off for the game). You may lose a few who dont want to fight traffic--but most will come--though it might be a late arriving crowd.

Im not saying it wont have any effect--it will. Im just saying that a conference with a lot of schools in metro areas is better suited to minimize the attendance effect of weekday games. If each school has no more than one weekday game--its probably fairly negligible. For example, I think CUSA could have sold off a small 10 game "week night" package to ESPN and picked up some decent money while doubling their linear exposure without suffering a ton of attendance damage.

I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I think it is entirely possible that the number of regular season linear games will decline. Big events like post-season may stay linear the rest of my lifetime but I think if you want to watch the annual SEC vs. Sun Belt early season challenge series in football (tongue firmly in cheek) that you will be direct subscribing to something to watch.

(03-16-2018 10:44 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I think it is entirely possible that the number of regular season linear games will decline. Big events like post-season may stay linear the rest of my lifetime but I think if you want to watch the annual SEC vs. Sun Belt early season challenge series in football (tongue firmly in cheek) that you will be direct subscribing to something to watch.

Doubt that happens anytime soon. That's the old model that recently got supplanted in the last 10 years. They make more money the current way. Also, they want visibility, so that won't happen until the whole cable model gets displaced.

(03-16-2018 10:44 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I think it is entirely possible that the number of regular season linear games will decline. Big events like post-season may stay linear the rest of my lifetime but I think if you want to watch the annual SEC vs. Sun Belt early season challenge series in football (tongue firmly in cheek) that you will be direct subscribing to something to watch.

I want my Sun Belt vs SEC challenge for free.

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I dont think linear TV is going anywhere. It will continue to be major media platform for many many years to come. Just as TV didn't kill radio---just as cable TV didn't kill over the air TV--I think streaming wont kill linear TV. When it all shakes out, I think streaming will just be another mass media competitor.

(03-16-2018 12:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I dont think linear TV is going anywhere. It will continue to be major media platform for many many years to come. Just as TV didn't kill radio---just as cable TV didn't kill over the air TV--I think streaming wont kill linear TV. When it all shakes out, I think streaming will just be another mass media competitor.

Linear TV isn't going to vanish in the next couple of years. The relevant question for sports franchises (including both pro and college sports) is whether those who have been paying them large sums for broadcast rights (i.e., ESPN, Fox, ABC, CBS, NBC) will still be making as much money through linear TV 5 or 10 years from now, because if they start getting far less money from TV, then they'll start paying out far less to broadcast pro and college sporting events.

If the article in the Hattiesburg American is correct, then CUSA is currently paying production costs. Hence, most likely why $0 production costs are such a strong talking point regarding the next contract.

Quote:The league still has one year left on its contract with beIN Sports, but Gilbert said there’s a chance C-USA will eventually re-up with that network. He added schools will still have the opportunity to broadcast their games on ESPN3.

Under the current agreement, each institution was responsible for production costs. That will change this fall.

“There are a lot of times we may be on a certain network or entity and we have to cover the production costs,” Gilbert said. “That can be expensive. So, in this deal, (CBS Sports Network, Stadium or Facebook will be) covering the production cost of putting the game on. It’ll be a high-quality production, which is really encouraging.”

Schools will still be on the hook for production costs of any games broadcast by ESPN3. Gilbert said the increase in revenue will help Southern Miss improve its equipment and streaming capabilities.

https://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/stor...429479002/

(03-16-2018 01:37 PM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  If the article in the Hattiesburg American is correct, then CUSA is currently paying production costs. Hence, most likely why $0 production costs are such a strong talking point regarding the next contract.

Quote:The league still has one year left on its contract with beIN Sports, but Gilbert said there’s a chance C-USA will eventually re-up with that network. He added schools will still have the opportunity to broadcast their games on ESPN3.

Under the current agreement, each institution was responsible for production costs. That will change this fall.

“There are a lot of times we may be on a certain network or entity and we have to cover the production costs,” Gilbert said. “That can be expensive. So, in this deal, (CBS Sports Network, Stadium or Facebook will be) covering the production cost of putting the game on. It’ll be a high-quality production, which is really encouraging.”

Schools will still be on the hook for production costs of any games broadcast by ESPN3. Gilbert said the increase in revenue will help Southern Miss improve its equipment and streaming capabilities.

https://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/stor...429479002/

That's really not accurate.

CUSA schools COULD be on ESPN3 if they paid the production costs. That hasn't changed. If MTSU wants a game not selected by CBSSN or Stadium to be on ESPN3 they can pay the production costs to be there or the production costs to be on CUSA TV.

No one is paying production costs to be on ESPN/2/U/News/ABC or CBSSN under the old deals or the new deals.

CUSA is spinning this production cost thing really hard and it makes no sense at all.

(03-16-2018 12:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I dont think linear TV is going anywhere. It will continue to be major media platform for many many years to come. Just as TV didn't kill radio---just as cable TV didn't kill over the air TV--I think streaming wont kill linear TV. When it all shakes out, I think streaming will just be another mass media competitor.

With the cord cutting, digital TV (soon to be 4k broadcasting) and sub-channels. OTA is making a come back with the cord cutting and the cord nevers finding about free TV over-the-air.

TV is toast. sports will come in 5 second streaming snippets. you can't keep this SJW generation tuned into the tube long enough to get ad revenue...and ESPN needs ad revenue so their execs can pay for their coke habits.

(03-16-2018 12:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I dont think linear TV is going anywhere. It will continue to be major media platform for many many years to come. Just as TV didn't kill radio---just as cable TV didn't kill over the air TV--I think streaming wont kill linear TV. When it all shakes out, I think streaming will just be another mass media competitor.

Radio as your grandparents knew it (maybe your parents depending on their age) did die.

It evolved from trying to attract the largest possible audience listening at home to capturing an attractive demographic while they were in the car or at work.

Radio stations cleared out niches, top 40, rock, metal, country, jazz, news, talk.

In the 80's radio station prices started rising rapidly and by the recession had started crashing. A station that would have sold for $100 million in 2005 could be had for 20% of that five years later.

Just today iHeart filed for bankruptcy trying to shed half of its $20 billion in debt most of which came from a stock buyback to take the company private because Wall Street was flat hammering Clear Channel over falling revenue.

AM stations are getting battered so much that the FCC puts AM stations at the head of the line to get new FM licenses in the same market as long as the function as a translator.

The radio I grew up with is now nearly dead. DJ's don't sit at the station playing what they want or what they want off the approved list, chatting up the audience except in the morning. A lot of the voices you hear are now somewhere a thousand miles away.

In 2015 35% of people in a survey said that at least one day a week they listen to music on their phone in the car.

Once again radio has to reinvent itself if it can.

Our AD asked me once what I thought of our play by play guy. I honestly answered I had no idea because I hadn't listened to a game on radio in years. The other information radio gave me pops up on my phone from twitter and I can pull the rolling stats up with my phone. I watch in person or on TV.

I don't listen to games on the radio other than baseball and that's just because I get the audio streams with MLB.tv and sometimes a baseball game I'm not closely following makes good background noise while I work.

TV is going to have to change or die as well.

(03-16-2018 04:04 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 12:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I dont think linear TV is going anywhere. It will continue to be major media platform for many many years to come. Just as TV didn't kill radio---just as cable TV didn't kill over the air TV--I think streaming wont kill linear TV. When it all shakes out, I think streaming will just be another mass media competitor.

Radio as your grandparents knew it (maybe your parents depending on their age) did die.

It evolved from trying to attract the largest possible audience listening at home to capturing an attractive demographic while they were in the car or at work.

Radio stations cleared out niches, top 40, rock, metal, country, jazz, news, talk.

In the 80's radio station prices started rising rapidly and by the recession had started crashing. A station that would have sold for $100 million in 2005 could be had for 20% of that five years later.

Just today iHeart filed for bankruptcy trying to shed half of its $20 billion in debt most of which came from a stock buyback to take the company private because Wall Street was flat hammering Clear Channel over falling revenue.

AM stations are getting battered so much that the FCC puts AM stations at the head of the line to get new FM licenses in the same market as long as the function as a translator.

The radio I grew up with is now nearly dead. DJ's don't sit at the station playing what they want or what they want off the approved list, chatting up the audience except in the morning. A lot of the voices you hear are now somewhere a thousand miles away.

In 2015 35% of people in a survey said that at least one day a week they listen to music on their phone in the car.

Once again radio has to reinvent itself if it can.

Our AD asked me once what I thought of our play by play guy. I honestly answered I had no idea because I hadn't listened to a game on radio in years. The other information radio gave me pops up on my phone from twitter and I can pull the rolling stats up with my phone. I watch in person or on TV.

I don't listen to games on the radio other than baseball and that's just because I get the audio streams with MLB.tv and sometimes a baseball game I'm not closely following makes good background noise while I work.

TV is going to have to change or die as well.

Video killed the radio star.

(03-16-2018 12:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I dont think linear TV is going anywhere. It will continue to be major media platform for many many years to come. Just as TV didn't kill radio---just as cable TV didn't kill over the air TV--I think streaming wont kill linear TV. When it all shakes out, I think streaming will just be another mass media competitor.

That is the way it is right now.

Technology is just getting to the point where you can use your mobile device for all of your TV needs. The price savings are dramatic.

For $75 dollars a month you can have a smartphone plan with unlimited data and a Hulu/Showtime package. No DSL or cable subscription required. All of your digital needs taken care of for under 100 dollars.

(03-16-2018 10:44 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I think it is entirely possible that the number of regular season linear games will decline. Big events like post-season may stay linear the rest of my lifetime but I think if you want to watch the annual SEC vs. Sun Belt early season challenge series in football (tongue firmly in cheek) that you will be direct subscribing to something to watch.

They'll keep ABC/ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU tiers but they'll be streaming.

Conferences will get paid based on what tier their game is on.

Advertising rates will become all platform which will greatly benefit those who produce the most content.

(03-16-2018 04:04 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 12:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I dont think linear TV is going anywhere. It will continue to be major media platform for many many years to come. Just as TV didn't kill radio---just as cable TV didn't kill over the air TV--I think streaming wont kill linear TV. When it all shakes out, I think streaming will just be another mass media competitor.

Radio as your grandparents knew it (maybe your parents depending on their age) did die.

It evolved from trying to attract the largest possible audience listening at home to capturing an attractive demographic while they were in the car or at work.

Radio stations cleared out niches, top 40, rock, metal, country, jazz, news, talk.

In the 80's radio station prices started rising rapidly and by the recession had started crashing. A station that would have sold for $100 million in 2005 could be had for 20% of that five years later.

Just today iHeart filed for bankruptcy trying to shed half of its $20 billion in debt most of which came from a stock buyback to take the company private because Wall Street was flat hammering Clear Channel over falling revenue.

AM stations are getting battered so much that the FCC puts AM stations at the head of the line to get new FM licenses in the same market as long as the function as a translator.

The radio I grew up with is now nearly dead. DJ's don't sit at the station playing what they want or what they want off the approved list, chatting up the audience except in the morning. A lot of the voices you hear are now somewhere a thousand miles away.

In 2015 35% of people in a survey said that at least one day a week they listen to music on their phone in the car.

Once again radio has to reinvent itself if it can.

Our AD asked me once what I thought of our play by play guy. I honestly answered I had no idea because I hadn't listened to a game on radio in years. The other information radio gave me pops up on my phone from twitter and I can pull the rolling stats up with my phone. I watch in person or on TV.

I don't listen to games on the radio other than baseball and that's just because I get the audio streams with MLB.tv and sometimes a baseball game I'm not closely following makes good background noise while I work.

TV is going to have to change or die as well.

Here's the thing---streaming isnt offering some new product. Its the same TV shows (heck, most of it is stuff tv showed months or years ago). Streaming is nothing more than a delivery method--the delivered product is no different than cable. Heck--in many ways linear TV is better product than streaming TV.

Whats going to change is "cable bundle". Linear TV will be just fine. The traditional "cable bundle" is whats going to fade away.

(03-17-2018 12:08 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 04:04 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 12:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I dont think linear TV is going anywhere. It will continue to be major media platform for many many years to come. Just as TV didn't kill radio---just as cable TV didn't kill over the air TV--I think streaming wont kill linear TV. When it all shakes out, I think streaming will just be another mass media competitor.

Radio as your grandparents knew it (maybe your parents depending on their age) did die.

It evolved from trying to attract the largest possible audience listening at home to capturing an attractive demographic while they were in the car or at work.

Radio stations cleared out niches, top 40, rock, metal, country, jazz, news, talk.

In the 80's radio station prices started rising rapidly and by the recession had started crashing. A station that would have sold for $100 million in 2005 could be had for 20% of that five years later.

Just today iHeart filed for bankruptcy trying to shed half of its $20 billion in debt most of which came from a stock buyback to take the company private because Wall Street was flat hammering Clear Channel over falling revenue.

AM stations are getting battered so much that the FCC puts AM stations at the head of the line to get new FM licenses in the same market as long as the function as a translator.

The radio I grew up with is now nearly dead. DJ's don't sit at the station playing what they want or what they want off the approved list, chatting up the audience except in the morning. A lot of the voices you hear are now somewhere a thousand miles away.

In 2015 35% of people in a survey said that at least one day a week they listen to music on their phone in the car.

Once again radio has to reinvent itself if it can.

Our AD asked me once what I thought of our play by play guy. I honestly answered I had no idea because I hadn't listened to a game on radio in years. The other information radio gave me pops up on my phone from twitter and I can pull the rolling stats up with my phone. I watch in person or on TV.

I don't listen to games on the radio other than baseball and that's just because I get the audio streams with MLB.tv and sometimes a baseball game I'm not closely following makes good background noise while I work.

TV is going to have to change or die as well.

Here's the thing---streaming isnt offering some new product. Its the same TV shows (heck, most of it is stuff tv showed months or years ago). Streaming is nothing more than a delivery method--the delivered product is no different than cable. Heck--in many ways linear TV is better product than streaming TV.

Whats going to change is "cable bundle". Linear TV will be just fine. The traditional "cable bundle" is whats going to fade away.

By definition, linear TV is simply a program that cannot be fast-forwarded or recorded to watch later. Sports is always going to be linear.

Right now anyone with access to capital and servers is trying to join the bundle market. If they are successful in attracting market share then the bundle isn't going away and in many markets until a better way of receiving internet arrives, buying from a bundler may be your only viable option.

(03-16-2018 04:04 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 12:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I dont think linear TV is going anywhere. It will continue to be major media platform for many many years to come. Just as TV didn't kill radio---just as cable TV didn't kill over the air TV--I think streaming wont kill linear TV. When it all shakes out, I think streaming will just be another mass media competitor.

Radio as your grandparents knew it (maybe your parents depending on their age) did die.

It evolved from trying to attract the largest possible audience listening at home to capturing an attractive demographic while they were in the car or at work.

Radio stations cleared out niches, top 40, rock, metal, country, jazz, news, talk.

In the 80's radio station prices started rising rapidly and by the recession had started crashing. A station that would have sold for $100 million in 2005 could be had for 20% of that five years later.

Just today iHeart filed for bankruptcy trying to shed half of its $20 billion in debt most of which came from a stock buyback to take the company private because Wall Street was flat hammering Clear Channel over falling revenue.

AM stations are getting battered so much that the FCC puts AM stations at the head of the line to get new FM licenses in the same market as long as the function as a translator.

The radio I grew up with is now nearly dead. DJ's don't sit at the station playing what they want or what they want off the approved list, chatting up the audience except in the morning. A lot of the voices you hear are now somewhere a thousand miles away.

In 2015 35% of people in a survey said that at least one day a week they listen to music on their phone in the car.

Once again radio has to reinvent itself if it can.

Our AD asked me once what I thought of our play by play guy. I honestly answered I had no idea because I hadn't listened to a game on radio in years. The other information radio gave me pops up on my phone from twitter and I can pull the rolling stats up with my phone. I watch in person or on TV.

I don't listen to games on the radio other than baseball and that's just because I get the audio streams with MLB.tv and sometimes a baseball game I'm not closely following makes good background noise while I work.

TV is going to have to change or die as well.

Radio as music is killing itself. You get the DJs talking constantly. And the stations time the commercials so they all are doing commercials at the same time.

(03-17-2018 09:41 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-17-2018 12:08 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 04:04 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 12:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-16-2018 10:12 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I see all G5 leagues getting into the 5-10 million range once everything moves to ESPN+.

That is because they will be nested in their with P5 and pro leagues with their higher advertising rates. Once the advertising model catches up linear TV will probably be done.

As to the WCC or A10 type leagues they won't have the enrollments/product to get on the next wave of content viewing without FBS football product. Gonzaga is seeing the writing on the wall.

Sent from my SM-G950U using CSNbbs mobile app

I dont think linear TV is going anywhere. It will continue to be major media platform for many many years to come. Just as TV didn't kill radio---just as cable TV didn't kill over the air TV--I think streaming wont kill linear TV. When it all shakes out, I think streaming will just be another mass media competitor.

Radio as your grandparents knew it (maybe your parents depending on their age) did die.

It evolved from trying to attract the largest possible audience listening at home to capturing an attractive demographic while they were in the car or at work.

Radio stations cleared out niches, top 40, rock, metal, country, jazz, news, talk.

In the 80's radio station prices started rising rapidly and by the recession had started crashing. A station that would have sold for $100 million in 2005 could be had for 20% of that five years later.

Just today iHeart filed for bankruptcy trying to shed half of its $20 billion in debt most of which came from a stock buyback to take the company private because Wall Street was flat hammering Clear Channel over falling revenue.

AM stations are getting battered so much that the FCC puts AM stations at the head of the line to get new FM licenses in the same market as long as the function as a translator.

The radio I grew up with is now nearly dead. DJ's don't sit at the station playing what they want or what they want off the approved list, chatting up the audience except in the morning. A lot of the voices you hear are now somewhere a thousand miles away.

In 2015 35% of people in a survey said that at least one day a week they listen to music on their phone in the car.

Once again radio has to reinvent itself if it can.

Our AD asked me once what I thought of our play by play guy. I honestly answered I had no idea because I hadn't listened to a game on radio in years. The other information radio gave me pops up on my phone from twitter and I can pull the rolling stats up with my phone. I watch in person or on TV.

I don't listen to games on the radio other than baseball and that's just because I get the audio streams with MLB.tv and sometimes a baseball game I'm not closely following makes good background noise while I work.

TV is going to have to change or die as well.

Here's the thing---streaming isnt offering some new product. Its the same TV shows (heck, most of it is stuff tv showed months or years ago). Streaming is nothing more than a delivery method--the delivered product is no different than cable. Heck--in many ways linear TV is better product than streaming TV.

Whats going to change is "cable bundle". Linear TV will be just fine. The traditional "cable bundle" is whats going to fade away.

By definition, linear TV is simply a program that cannot be fast-forwarded or recorded to watch later. Sports is always going to be linear.

Right now anyone with access to capital and servers is trying to join the bundle market. If they are successful in attracting market share then the bundle isn't going away and in many markets until a better way of receiving internet arrives, buying from a bundler may be your only viable option.

I’ve never thought of linear tv by that narrow definition. For instance, most cable system boxes allow for you to pause, stop, rewind, and record shows for later viewing. Most all cable systems have a significant menu of on demand shows that can be watched. So, when i say linear TV—I’m talking cable TV/OTA. Cable is fairly close to streaming in terms of flexibility—just fewer on demand options. You are correct—OTA doesn’t have that same flexibility.