(10-31-2017 02:20 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 10:48 PM)namssa Wrote:  https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-...-football/

This article pretty much says it all. ESPN is a dead man walking. They are going the way of MTV and Blockbuster. They create no content only broadcast other people's content. They are a middle man the way blockbuster was. No need for ESPN once you can get the content through streaming and other sources.

ESPN is the production side, cable is the supply side. ESPN still owns the production and content. Not like Netflix can stream Penn St vs Ohio St without going through ESPN first.

Until they don't need ESPN for the production. As others have noted, ESPN is the middle man who packages up the game, marks it up and then sells it as their own. The product is supplied by the teams themselves. All four of the major sports have their own networks now - they don't need ESPN's production. The B1G and Pac-12 have their own independent networks, too. ESPN has an ownership stake in the SEC network, the Longhorn Network and the planned ACC Network, but those conferences could soon go independent. If all of these sports decided to cut ESPN out and start controlling their own product, ESPN would have to go back to airing Australian Rules Football.

USFFan

(10-31-2017 02:20 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 10:48 PM)namssa Wrote:  https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-...-football/

This article pretty much says it all. ESPN is a dead man walking. They are going the way of MTV and Blockbuster. They create no content only broadcast other people's content. They are a middle man the way blockbuster was. No need for ESPN once you can get the content through streaming and other sources.

ESPN is the production side, cable is the supply side. ESPN still owns the production and content. Not like Netflix can stream Penn St vs Ohio St without going through ESPN first.

Bingo. That why I keep saying, the danger to ESPN isnt cord cutting. ESPN can do fine as a free standing streaming platform if need be. The danger to ESPN is that its content providers (leagues and conferences) begin bypassing ESPN by offering their content direct to consumers via streaming. Without live content these leagues and conferences provide---ESPN is just CBS-Sports Network. Nobody is paying $7 a month for Sportscenter and Lumberjack competitions.

ESPN is doomed.

(10-31-2017 03:57 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 02:20 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 10:48 PM)namssa Wrote:  https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-...-football/

This article pretty much says it all. ESPN is a dead man walking. They are going the way of MTV and Blockbuster. They create no content only broadcast other people's content. They are a middle man the way blockbuster was. No need for ESPN once you can get the content through streaming and other sources.

ESPN is the production side, cable is the supply side. ESPN still owns the production and content. Not like Netflix can stream Penn St vs Ohio St without going through ESPN first.

Bingo. That why I keep saying, the danger to ESPN isnt cord cutting. ESPN can do fine as a free standing streaming platform if need be. The danger to ESPN is that its content providers (leagues and conferences) begin bypassing ESPN by offering their content direct to consumers via streaming. Without live content these leagues and conferences provide---ESPN is just CBS-Sports Network. Nobody is paying $7 a month for Sportscenter and Lumberjack competitions.

That is exactly right. ESPN is not a producer of content. They are a redistributor of it. The only content ESPN creates are shows like Sportscenter. But now anyone can get highlights of games they want with the click of a mouse without waiting through all the other games you don't care about. This is why ESPN is in trouble. Add in the cord cutting, the rising cost of broadcasting rights, other content providing options and the move to internet content, ESPN is being squeezed out, much like Blockbuster was. Blockbuster did not adjust. Netflix saw the light and moved VERY aggressively and quickly to streaming and away from DVD mailing. ESPN I think is trying to move towards personality content with shows like First Take, Pardon the Interuption, etc, but I don't think it will be enough. They will always be a player, but they may end up more like MTV.

(10-31-2017 05:40 PM)namssa Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 03:57 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 02:20 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 10:48 PM)namssa Wrote:  https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-...-football/

This article pretty much says it all. ESPN is a dead man walking. They are going the way of MTV and Blockbuster. They create no content only broadcast other people's content. They are a middle man the way blockbuster was. No need for ESPN once you can get the content through streaming and other sources.

ESPN is the production side, cable is the supply side. ESPN still owns the production and content. Not like Netflix can stream Penn St vs Ohio St without going through ESPN first.

Bingo. That why I keep saying, the danger to ESPN isnt cord cutting. ESPN can do fine as a free standing streaming platform if need be. The danger to ESPN is that its content providers (leagues and conferences) begin bypassing ESPN by offering their content direct to consumers via streaming. Without live content these leagues and conferences provide---ESPN is just CBS-Sports Network. Nobody is paying $7 a month for Sportscenter and Lumberjack competitions.

That is exactly right. ESPN is not a producer of content. . They are a redistributor of it. The only content ESPN creates are shows like Sportscenter. But now anyone can get highlights of games they want with the click of a mouse without waiting through all the other games you don't care about. This is why ESPN is in trouble. Add in the cord cutting, the rising cost of broadcasting rights, other content providing options and the move to internet content, ESPN is being squeezed out, much like Blockbuster was. Blockbuster did not adjust. Netflix saw the light and moved VERY aggressively and quickly to streaming and away from DVD mailing. ESPN I think is trying to move towards personality content with shows like First Take, Pardon the Interuption, etc, but I don't think it will be enough. They will always be a player, but they may end up more like MTV.

ESPN absolutely Produces the content, they stage it, record it, play by play it, and package it up for Distribution. They also Own it while under contract. The cable companies are just the pipe. Half the people who "cut the cord" just use somebody else's password to access Watch ESPN. Both my kids are in college out of state and use my account still. Cord cutting is just changing the delivery method for the content

(10-31-2017 07:09 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 05:40 PM)namssa Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 03:57 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 02:20 PM)Sellular1 Wrote:  

(10-30-2017 10:48 PM)namssa Wrote:  https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-...-football/

This article pretty much says it all. ESPN is a dead man walking. They are going the way of MTV and Blockbuster. They create no content only broadcast other people's content. They are a middle man the way blockbuster was. No need for ESPN once you can get the content through streaming and other sources.

ESPN is the production side, cable is the supply side. ESPN still owns the production and content. Not like Netflix can stream Penn St vs Ohio St without going through ESPN first.

Bingo. That why I keep saying, the danger to ESPN isnt cord cutting. ESPN can do fine as a free standing streaming platform if need be. The danger to ESPN is that its content providers (leagues and conferences) begin bypassing ESPN by offering their content direct to consumers via streaming. Without live content these leagues and conferences provide---ESPN is just CBS-Sports Network. Nobody is paying $7 a month for Sportscenter and Lumberjack competitions.

That is exactly right. ESPN is not a producer of content. . They are a redistributor of it. The only content ESPN creates are shows like Sportscenter. But now anyone can get highlights of games they want with the click of a mouse without waiting through all the other games you don't care about. This is why ESPN is in trouble. Add in the cord cutting, the rising cost of broadcasting rights, other content providing options and the move to internet content, ESPN is being squeezed out, much like Blockbuster was. Blockbuster did not adjust. Netflix saw the light and moved VERY aggressively and quickly to streaming and away from DVD mailing. ESPN I think is trying to move towards personality content with shows like First Take, Pardon the Interuption, etc, but I don't think it will be enough. They will always be a player, but they may end up more like MTV.

ESPN absolutely Produces the content, they stage it, record it, play by play it, and package it up for Distribution. They also Own it while under contract. The cable companies are just the pipe. Half the people who "cut the cord" just use somebody else's password to access Watch ESPN. Both my kids are in college out of state and use my account still. Cord cutting is just changing the delivery method for the content

ESPN is simply an aggregator of content. They are a middle man. The live content they produce comes from either pro or college leagues. ESPN doesnt own any leagues and dont produce anything other than talking head shows. If the leagues decide there is more profit in retaining their TV rights---and go to a direct to consumer streaming model---ESPN doesnt have anything of significant value to broadcast. ESPN has no recourse. Thats why the idea that ESPN wont be bidding aggressively is wrong. They will be. They cant afford to lose live sports content rights---its all they really have. Having a near monopoly on live sports is what makes ESPN what it is.

Aggregator, producer, rights holder......it doesn't matter. The point is, the days of throwing money around are over, and that should make people here nervous.

We will be sitting fat and happy on Amazon while others will see their payouts decreased due to ESPN losses (cord cutting).

(11-01-2017 02:23 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Aggregator, producer, rights holder......it doesn't matter. The point is, the days of throwing money around are over, and that should make people here nervous.

You are so see through you're translucent. . . I know it sucks being stuck in the Most Won't Care, but you are so desperate to pull the AAC back that it is blatant and laughable.

Enjoy SDSU's long slow decline towards san jose st level.

(11-01-2017 02:23 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Aggregator, producer, rights holder......it doesn't matter. The point is, the days of throwing money around are over, and that should make people here nervous.

No. What it actually means is the era in which a single network can maintain a near monopoly on sports is probably over. It now simply costs too much to accomplish. If rights fees were going to decrease, ESPN could maintain its monopoly---but thats not whats been happening and its not whats going to happen. This isnt a "bubble burst" (especially for college sports which are probably significantly undervalued with respect to its pro counterparts). This new era is simply opening the door for other competitors to obtain valuable properties. Content that draws an audience willing to watch it in real time with the commercials will continue to increase in value and there will be plenty of other networks looking to get in on the attractive properties that have made ESPN a "must have" network for years.

(11-01-2017 11:13 AM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(11-01-2017 02:23 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Aggregator, producer, rights holder......it doesn't matter. The point is, the days of throwing money around are over, and that should make people here nervous.

You are so see through you're translucent. . . I know it sucks being stuck in the Most Won't Care, but you are so desperate to pull the AAC back that it is blatant and laughable.

Enjoy SDSU's long slow decline towards san jose st level.

Sweetheart darling, I am so proud of you that you have learned a new word. Well done. Remember, in todays world, you can be anything you want to be. Don't let anyone tell you differently.

But that Franky Tanky dude said ESPN did not overpay for the NBA or the NFL and that ESPN was the greatest company in the history of the world. I mean I've read a ton of financial and wall street analyst say just the opposite but hey never doubt Franky Tanky dude, his knowledge of the industry is second to none. In fact he will pop in form time to time to remind everyone....forrealz, look it up

(11-01-2017 12:40 PM)Bigdog731 Wrote:  But that Franky Tanky dude said ESPN did not overpay for the NBA or the NFL and that ESPN was the greatest company in the history of the world. I mean I've read a ton of financial and wall street analyst say just the opposite but hey never doubt Franky Tanky dude, his knowledge of the industry is second to none. In fact he will pop in form time to time to remind everyone....forrealz, look it up

Franky is obsessed with the smell of his own farts.

(11-01-2017 12:52 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Franky is obsessed with the smell of his own farts.

As a side note " blind smell tests" show that people actually do prefer the smell of their own farts. Just went and looked that up -----

(11-01-2017 01:20 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(11-01-2017 12:52 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Franky is obsessed with the smell of his own farts.

As a side note " blind smell tests" show that people actually do prefer the smell of their own farts. Just went and looked that up -----

Perhaps, but that guy wears a mask attached to the hose sticking out of his ***...

(10-28-2017 06:38 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(10-28-2017 03:18 AM)Meatwad Wrote:  people aren't dropping ESPN because of the political tweets of some on air personality. those 13m that they lost cut cable period. and i haven't met anyone who when they thought about ESPN talked to me about their shows, it's about the games and the games aren't enough to keep people from cutting the cord. and guess what ... when they cut the cord they not only lose ESPN, they also lose their favorite political networks as well. ya don't say.

Exactly most are cutting cord due to high cost of it. We don’t think of it but there are millions that for years were force to pay for sports that they don’t care about. It will get worse as the new generation finds away around cable/ dish and pays a la carte.

That's not the only reason, though. A smug sense of superiority is, if not the reason, a big reason.

(11-01-2017 01:26 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(11-01-2017 01:20 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(11-01-2017 12:52 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  Franky is obsessed with the smell of his own farts.

As a side note " blind smell tests" show that people actually do prefer the smell of their own farts. Just went and looked that up -----

Perhaps, but that guy wears a mask attached to the hose sticking out of his ***...

Yea, really, how can it be a blind smell test??? There is no doubt whether the subject knows the hose is up his or someone else.

(10-31-2017 10:41 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:00 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 09:49 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:57 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:30 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Are there still those that think the AAC is going to get $7-10 million next time around?

Welcome to talk sports here, but if you want to talk politics of money... worry about your own beat up house.

We want something 'fair' that allows us to keep up with the P5. On their current deals, we may hope for 7-10... but the landscape is changing. Market forces will dictate what we get... so we try to stay as attractive as possible. We want to play with the big boys. It's too bad the G4 don't have that same aspiration.

I understand you want what is "fair." I think we all all people, want what is fair in every aspect of life. Certainly, and unfortunately, that is not always the case.

This is certainly a sports related topic. Do you think the 7-10 million number is something that is attainable? If so, how so?

What I mean by 'fair' is not any predetermined value... just an appropriate and legitimate assessment of market value of an 'intact conference' by working market forces.

Basically, when the AAC negotiated it's TV deal, it had just be ripped apart by realignment, and just replaced all the losses with new additions. Then we lost/sold the 'Big East' name, and didn't even have a new replacement name yet. Further, the entire world was speculating that we would continue to be ripped apart... and likely not survive. Yet ahead of the first season, we still needed a TV deal.

So, ESPN made us an absolutely ridiculous offer... and we had no recourse but to accept. What I mean by 'fair' is a now established (and named) AAC, with a few years of history and success. I want to see what 'THIS' AAC is offered... should be interesting.

Stop asking us to endorse 7-10 million... we don't have a crystal ball, and it sounds like you just want us to commit to a number so you can come back and gloat later. All we can do is win on the field, get our stadiums full as possible, get as many viewers as possible... then send our media shark Commissioner in to negotiate. We'll see what happens.

All fair points here.

One thing to note, $7-10 million has been said here many times, and I have commented that that number is insane. People have then shouted me down. I think the Memphis President said the $10 million number as well. I just want to know if people here still think that is close to possible.

As always, I have said that ~$3 million is probably likely. $5 million would be a HUGE victory, and I would laud the AAC for it.

where's the lauding??

Holy resurrection thread. 2017

(10-14-2021 01:20 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:41 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:00 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 09:49 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:57 AM)Bull Wrote:  Welcome to talk sports here, but if you want to talk politics of money... worry about your own beat up house.

We want something 'fair' that allows us to keep up with the P5. On their current deals, we may hope for 7-10... but the landscape is changing. Market forces will dictate what we get... so we try to stay as attractive as possible. We want to play with the big boys. It's too bad the G4 don't have that same aspiration.

I understand you want what is "fair." I think we all all people, want what is fair in every aspect of life. Certainly, and unfortunately, that is not always the case.

This is certainly a sports related topic. Do you think the 7-10 million number is something that is attainable? If so, how so?

What I mean by 'fair' is not any predetermined value... just an appropriate and legitimate assessment of market value of an 'intact conference' by working market forces.

Basically, when the AAC negotiated it's TV deal, it had just be ripped apart by realignment, and just replaced all the losses with new additions. Then we lost/sold the 'Big East' name, and didn't even have a new replacement name yet. Further, the entire world was speculating that we would continue to be ripped apart... and likely not survive. Yet ahead of the first season, we still needed a TV deal.

So, ESPN made us an absolutely ridiculous offer... and we had no recourse but to accept. What I mean by 'fair' is a now established (and named) AAC, with a few years of history and success. I want to see what 'THIS' AAC is offered... should be interesting.

Stop asking us to endorse 7-10 million... we don't have a crystal ball, and it sounds like you just want us to commit to a number so you can come back and gloat later. All we can do is win on the field, get our stadiums full as possible, get as many viewers as possible... then send our media shark Commissioner in to negotiate. We'll see what happens.

All fair points here.

One thing to note, $7-10 million has been said here many times, and I have commented that that number is insane. People have then shouted me down. I think the Memphis President said the $10 million number as well. I just want to know if people here still think that is close to possible.

As always, I have said that ~$3 million is probably likely. $5 million would be a HUGE victory, and I would laud the AAC for it.

where's the lauding??

The money aspect of it is very positive. A good windfall. Alas, it does not seem it will last.

Good while it lasted I guess.

I would stop the ESPN worship though. It’s unbecoming of a man and conservative.