(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.
ypu are too stupid to understand that the vast majority of the companies you listed are not in competition with Altice/Suddenlink
Comcast and Altice/Suddenlink most likely compete in NO MARKET and it would be rare that AT&T and Altice/Suddenlink compete in most markets
there might be a few where AT&T competes with them, but not many
even more ignorant you are too dense to figure out as I explained that to get VUE or HULU you need a damn ISP and that can just as easily be Altice/Suddenlink as any other available one
you do not understand how this works
"cable TV" has the most competition and that competition is with Direct TV (exclusive of AT&T Uverse or coax cable) and Dish Network which with a few exceptions are available to everyone in the USA
after that some people in the USA will have the choice of a coax cable company and a copper pair or fiber provider and even fewer will have an over builder coax provider or a twister pair copper or fiber CLEC provider or over builder
so for a "cable MSO" of any method (be it coax, copper pair, fiber, or sat) to compete they need to have the most options available and the lowest cost available to their subscribers
that is why a CABLE company (of any of the above methods) will want to have the LOWEST COST OPTIONS available to their subs because people with a brain understand that cable subscriptions are dropping like flies and it is not because cable companies are not offering ESPN it is because cable companies have refused to stand up to ESPN and other channel/bill crammers
so in the case of Dish Network especially for them to compete they HAVE TO cater to the 56% that could care less about ESPN
because Dish Network has ZERO ISP/Internet options ot offer their subscribers
next for a cable MSO to compete with Dish or Direct and to compete if there is a coax over builder or a FIOS or UVerse or fiber over builder in the area then they need to pay attention to the 56% that want nothing to do with ESPN
because that 56% has the most options to choose from and they are eventually going to gravitate to the one that stands up to ESPN and others
you can't seem to understand that 56% is the largest % of subscribers by a meaningful amount and also they are going to be the ones with the most options......you think the 46% that MIGHT want ESPN are the coveted subscriber when they are not
especially when all but Dish Network and Direct TV in non-AT&T copper pair/fiber/coax areas are the only ones that do not offer those same ESPN consumers other options for them to get ESPN
like VUE or HULU.....THAT REQUIRE AN INTERNET CONNECTION WHICH IS OFTEN PROVIDED BY THE SAME COMPANY THAT CAN PROVIDE "CABLE TV"
you are too damn dense to understand that the most competition is for the consumer that does not care about ESPN and that is 56% of cable consumers
you are also too dense to understand that with the exception of Dish Network and Direct TV areas that are not AT&T coax/fiber/copper pair all the other areas are going to have a "cable company" that is also an ISP and thus that cable company that is ALSO AN ISP has the ability to provide a service to those that desire ESPN not only can utilize, but that they NEED to "stream" ESPN
the only one at risk of having nothing to offer are Dish Network, Direct TV in non AT&T coax/copper pair/fiber and most importantly ESPN
because ESPN NEEDS A LAST MILE PROVIDER TO GET STREAMED OR DELIVERED ON "cable"
cable companies (with the exception of Dish Network and Direct Tv in non AT&T coac/copper pair/fiber areas) do not give a damn how someone gets their ESPN of they want it what they give a damn about is having the most options to offer ALL OF THEIR SUBSCRIBERS especially the 56% that does not give a damn about ESPN
because as long as that "cable company" is also an ISP they CAN STILL GET THAT SUBSCRIBER TO ESPN......and more importantly if they stand up to ESPN and other channel crammers they can also offer a product to the 56% of consumers that do not care about ESPN
only a stupid person cannot understand how that works
as a company you cannot ignore the will of 56% of your consumers when that 56% of consumers has the largest amount of choice coming to them AND when you have the ability to satisfy the other 46% of your consumers with OTHER PRODUCTS that the consumer MUST HAVE to get ESPN exclusive of "cable TV"
only Dish Network is in the poor position of needing to really worry about totally alienating people that must have ESPN because they have no ISP option to offer and yet at the same time they have to worry about the 56% that do not want ESPN because if you can get Dish Network you can get Direct TV as well
and only Direct TV in areas that are not also served by AT&T coax/copper pair/fiber has that concern as well and yet they also in many areas do have an ISP option so they can afford to stand up to ESPN
all other "cable companies" can satisfy those that MUST HAVE ESPN with an ISP offering and streaming and thus they need to focus on retaining their cable customers that DO NOT WANT ESPN because those are the ones that could leave them the easiest