(10-01-2017 06:47 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(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:  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.

Heck, if Suddenlink drops ESPN and lowers there price for the basic package, I might be willing to subscribe to them.