(12-14-2017 12:35 PM)4x4hokies Wrote:  

(12-14-2017 10:59 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-14-2017 10:31 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  

(12-14-2017 09:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-14-2017 09:28 AM)BadgerMJ Wrote:  This is kind of a head-scratcher.

Fox is holding on to FS1, FS2, and BTN, but giving up their regional sports networks?

You'd think is they wanted to be a player in sports they would have held on to those regional networks and somehow merged content with the FS networks. On the other hand, if they were looking to divest their sports holdings, why not sell off BTN and decrease the size of the FS networks?

There's a logic to it: They wanted to remain a player in national sports but not regional sports.

Disney, OTOH, is a strong national sports player but lacked regional reach.

IMO, this is a phenomenal deal for FOX, we know the holders of current FOX shares are massive winners. For Disney, any $60B acquisition is a huge risk, so this is a huge risk.

I agree, Fox share holders made out like bandits.

I wonder if, as you stated, Fox wants to remain a national player how this will effect the college sports landscape? Since Fox held on to BTN, they must want to at least have a presence. Makes me wonder if they'll focus their attention on trying to work a deal with the PACN and/or the XII. Could make for an interesting few years leading up to 2024/25.

I think Fox is going to eventually sell what's left to someone else. The assets they kept, I think they kept them -- for now -- primarily because including them in the deal would have raised more antitrust concerns for the feds.

Seems like a good fit for At&t after their merger. It's pretty much CBS or Fox if they want to add a national network. It would require selling CNN but there will be a lot of buyers interested.

I think for at&t to buy what is left of FOX they'll have to sell off the entire Turner lineup (TBS, TNT, TRUTV, CNN, HLN) to someone else to pass regulatory hurdles. Then Fox would have another studio to back them up but this time Warner Bros. Maybe change the name to The WB or CW.

More likely "Remain Fox" will continue on as a smaller company for some years.

Personally I think this deal is horrible for sports fans. The Mouse ruins everything it touches, and I am certain the regional sports channels will be next.

(12-17-2017 01:16 PM)indianasniff Wrote:  Personally I think this deal is horrible for sports fans. The Mouse ruins everything it touches, and I am certain the regional sports channels will be next.

Depends on which fans you speak of. Overall, I do wish there would be more competition. However, as an ACC fan, ESPN really helped the ACC to be Power 5 and help destroy the OBE.

(12-17-2017 01:34 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(12-17-2017 01:16 PM)indianasniff Wrote:  Personally I think this deal is horrible for sports fans. The Mouse ruins everything it touches, and I am certain the regional sports channels will be next.

Depends on which fans you speak of. Overall, I do wish there would be more competition. However, as an ACC fan, ESPN really helped the ACC to be Power 5 and help destroy the OBE.

Yes and where the realignment part of the help was somewhat indirect as it was the ACC doing the inviting they've done a very nice job a making sure the ACC is showcased during football season.

Interesting article from John Ourand_SBJ (man does he write some great stuff!)

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...-Fox.aspx?

"Though each of the town halls lasted for more than an hour, the company’s plans for Fox Sports were not a large part of the talks. Shanks also spoke during the town hall meetings, reiterating that Fox Sports would continue to innovate and invest in sports programming.

The general mood in Fox’s offices in New York and Los Angeles in the immediate aftermath of the deal was one of angst mixed with hope. The angst came from uncertainty. Nobody knows how aggressive the new Fox will be in the sports arena or how nimble the new company will be.

The hope came from the idea that the new Fox company will make an even bigger bet on sports."

(12-18-2017 04:35 PM)TerpsNPhoenix Wrote:  Interesting article from John Ourand_SBJ (man does he write some great stuff!)

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...-Fox.aspx?

"Though each of the town halls lasted for more than an hour, the company’s plans for Fox Sports were not a large part of the talks. Shanks also spoke during the town hall meetings, reiterating that Fox Sports would continue to innovate and invest in sports programming.

The general mood in Fox’s offices in New York and Los Angeles in the immediate aftermath of the deal was one of angst mixed with hope. The angst came from uncertainty. Nobody knows how aggressive the new Fox will be in the sports arena or how nimble the new company will be.

The hope came from the idea that the new Fox company will make an even bigger bet on sports."

I think Fox/FS1 is going for the Big Events College and Professional. Not worrying about the small events. I could see them bid on the CFP, Men's NCAA Basketball Tourney to go along with the Big 10, Big East Basketball and Pac 12. Moving filler and other items to FS2. Murdoch has been very wise and seems to be a step ahead on trends.

(12-18-2017 07:35 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 04:35 PM)TerpsNPhoenix Wrote:  Interesting article from John Ourand_SBJ (man does he write some great stuff!)

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...-Fox.aspx?

"Though each of the town halls lasted for more than an hour, the company’s plans for Fox Sports were not a large part of the talks. Shanks also spoke during the town hall meetings, reiterating that Fox Sports would continue to innovate and invest in sports programming.

The general mood in Fox’s offices in New York and Los Angeles in the immediate aftermath of the deal was one of angst mixed with hope. The angst came from uncertainty. Nobody knows how aggressive the new Fox will be in the sports arena or how nimble the new company will be.

The hope came from the idea that the new Fox company will make an even bigger bet on sports."

I think Fox/FS1 is going for the Big Events College and Professional. Not worrying about the small events. I could see them bid on the CFP, Men's NCAA Basketball Tourney to go along with the Big 10, Big East Basketball and Pac 12. Moving filler and other items to FS2. Murdoch has been very wise and seems to be a step ahead on trends.

After reading the article, I wonder if Fox will make a play on either CUSA or the Mountain West. I think the AAC is to deep with ESPN and since they sold off assets to them they won't touch any existing ESPN ties.
If they want FS1/2 events, they could bid for CUSA or the MW. If their primetime as they say is 8pm to 10pm, then that does open the MW for some options.
Wonder if they get into the bowl broadcasting business also. I know a lot of them are tied ESPN and I don't know how long the Cure or Arizona bowl is with CBSSN...could be a possibility.

(12-18-2017 07:47 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 07:35 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 04:35 PM)TerpsNPhoenix Wrote:  Interesting article from John Ourand_SBJ (man does he write some great stuff!)

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...-Fox.aspx?

"Though each of the town halls lasted for more than an hour, the company’s plans for Fox Sports were not a large part of the talks. Shanks also spoke during the town hall meetings, reiterating that Fox Sports would continue to innovate and invest in sports programming.

The general mood in Fox’s offices in New York and Los Angeles in the immediate aftermath of the deal was one of angst mixed with hope. The angst came from uncertainty. Nobody knows how aggressive the new Fox will be in the sports arena or how nimble the new company will be.

The hope came from the idea that the new Fox company will make an even bigger bet on sports."

I think Fox/FS1 is going for the Big Events College and Professional. Not worrying about the small events. I could see them bid on the CFP, Men's NCAA Basketball Tourney to go along with the Big 10, Big East Basketball and Pac 12. Moving filler and other items to FS2. Murdoch has been very wise and seems to be a step ahead on trends.

After reading the article, I wonder if Fox will make a play on either CUSA or the Mountain West. I think the AAC is to deep with ESPN and since they sold off assets to them they won't touch any existing ESPN ties.
If they want FS1/2 events, they could bid for CUSA or the MW. If their primetime as they say is 8pm to 10pm, then that does open the MW for some options.
Wonder if they get into the bowl broadcasting business also. I know a lot of them are tied ESPN and I don't know how long the Cure or Arizona bowl is with CBSSN...could be a possibility.

I mean...maybe. But why would they? They have more content than they did 2 years ago when they walked away from CUSA and now they dont have the Fox Regionals to fill. I think they are good. They have 2 or 3 B12 games each week. They have 2-4 Big10 games every week. They have 2-3 Pac12 games each week. Thats a minimum of 6 college football games each week--and really, its probably closer to 8 or 9 a week (even more during the OOC heavy early season). Plus, they can buy surplus AAC, MAC, and Sunbelt games from ESPN if they really need to fill a gap here or there. I think they really only need 6 max a week (thats 3 FOX OTA windows and 3 FS1 windows. FS-2 would be for games in excess of 6 (plus you could wedge in a late window on FS1 if needed).

(12-18-2017 07:47 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

Quote:I think Fox/FS1 is going for the Big Events College and Professional. Not worrying about the small events. I could see them bid on the CFP, Men's NCAA Basketball Tourney to go along with the Big 10, Big East Basketball and Pac 12. Moving filler and other items to FS2. Murdoch has been very wise and seems to be a step ahead on trends.

After reading the article, I wonder if Fox will make a play on either CUSA or the Mountain West. I think the AAC is to deep with ESPN and since they sold off assets to them they won't touch any existing ESPN ties.
If they want FS1/2 events, they could bid for CUSA or the MW. If their primetime as they say is 8pm to 10pm, then that does open the MW for some options.

They already have PAC, Big 12 and Big 10 football, Big East, Big Ten and PAC basketball. They're looking for sports events for FOX OTA, and North TExas @ Florida Atlantic would go over with the affiliates about as well as the XFL causing stations to cancel their 10 o' clock news in 2001.

Quote:Wonder if they get into the bowl broadcasting business also. I know a lot of them are tied ESPN and I don't know how long the Cure or Arizona bowl is with CBSSN...could be a possibility.

Bowls are a strong possibility. Very likely an arrangement is made with ESPN for FOX OTA and/or FS1 to run bowls on the Saturdays between the Army-Navy Game and NEw Years Eve.

(12-18-2017 07:35 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 04:35 PM)TerpsNPhoenix Wrote:  Interesting article from John Ourand_SBJ (man does he write some great stuff!)

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...-Fox.aspx?

"Though each of the town halls lasted for more than an hour, the company’s plans for Fox Sports were not a large part of the talks. Shanks also spoke during the town hall meetings, reiterating that Fox Sports would continue to innovate and invest in sports programming.

The general mood in Fox’s offices in New York and Los Angeles in the immediate aftermath of the deal was one of angst mixed with hope. The angst came from uncertainty. Nobody knows how aggressive the new Fox will be in the sports arena or how nimble the new company will be.

The hope came from the idea that the new Fox company will make an even bigger bet on sports."

I think Fox/FS1 is going for the Big Events College and Professional. Not worrying about the small events. I could see them bid on the CFP, Men's NCAA Basketball Tourney to go along with the Big 10, Big East Basketball and Pac 12. Moving filler and other items to FS2. Murdoch has been very wise and seems to be a step ahead on trends.

the CFP has 8 years left with ESPN. the NCAA tourney just got extended last year and runs thru 2032....

(12-18-2017 10:42 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 07:35 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 04:35 PM)TerpsNPhoenix Wrote:  Interesting article from John Ourand_SBJ (man does he write some great stuff!)

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal...-Fox.aspx?

"Though each of the town halls lasted for more than an hour, the company’s plans for Fox Sports were not a large part of the talks. Shanks also spoke during the town hall meetings, reiterating that Fox Sports would continue to innovate and invest in sports programming.

The general mood in Fox’s offices in New York and Los Angeles in the immediate aftermath of the deal was one of angst mixed with hope. The angst came from uncertainty. Nobody knows how aggressive the new Fox will be in the sports arena or how nimble the new company will be.

The hope came from the idea that the new Fox company will make an even bigger bet on sports."

I think Fox/FS1 is going for the Big Events College and Professional. Not worrying about the small events. I could see them bid on the CFP, Men's NCAA Basketball Tourney to go along with the Big 10, Big East Basketball and Pac 12. Moving filler and other items to FS2. Murdoch has been very wise and seems to be a step ahead on trends.

the CFP has 8 years left with ESPN. the NCAA tourney just got extended last year and runs thru 2032....

Plenty of bowls. They might be someone to approach with the concept of a Champions Bowl Series pitting the G5 champs against high end P5 selections in 3-4 high payout bowls. That would be 3-4 fairly highly watched bowls.

Interesting, this article puts the value of FSN at $20 billion, more than 1/3 the value of the entire Disney-Fox deal. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/earl...cial-woes/

This raises some interesting questions. While ESPN remains profitable, declining traditional cable viewership has killed its growth. It strikes me that purchasing FSN represents a doubling down on this risk. FSN, and other RSNs, rely on the same ability to extort large subscriber fees from all cable customers, regardless of their interest in sports. As a result, they are undoubtedly suffering from the same erosion of traditional cable and satellite viewership. Acquiring FSN, therefore increases Disney's exposure to this risk.

I have to conclude that, in additional to a major OTT/direct-to-customer strategy for movies and series, Disney must have a major OTT strategy for sports that includes local teams. Unlike movies and series, where Netflix has proven the value of OTT, the value of sports as an OTT offering is a huge question mark, and therefore whatever the strategy might be is a huge gamble. Should be very interesting to watch develop.

(12-19-2017 09:16 AM)orangefan Wrote:  Interesting, this article puts the value of FSN at $20 billion, more than 1/3 the value of the entire Disney-Fox deal. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/earl...cial-woes/

This raises some interesting questions. While ESPN remains profitable, declining traditional cable viewership has killed its growth. It strikes me that purchasing FSN represents a doubling down on this risk. FSN, and other RSNs, rely on the same ability to extort large subscriber fees from all cable customers, regardless of their interest in sports. As a result, they are undoubtedly suffering from the same erosion of traditional cable and satellite viewership. Acquiring FSN, therefore increases Disney's exposure to this risk.

I have to conclude that, in additional to a major OTT/direct-to-customer strategy for movies and series, Disney must have a major OTT strategy for sports that includes local teams. Unlike movies and series, where Netflix has proven the value of OTT, the value of sports as an OTT offering is a huge question mark, and therefore whatever the strategy might be is a huge gamble. Should be very interesting to watch develop.

I think Disney is reconstructing the cable bundle from the ashes of--the cable bundle.

For $50 a month, you get the Hulu Disney streaming service, with ESPN, local sports, the Disney/Fox/Marvel/Star Wars movie catalog, recent TV reruns from ABC and Fox, and the catalogs of 5-50 other cable channels in the recesses of the Disney and Fox empires.

I wouldn't bet against Disney.

John I think something what you theorize is close to what they do in the next 2-3 years.

Disruption will create huge winners and losers.

(12-19-2017 10:27 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  I wouldn't bet against Disney.

John I think something what you theorize is close to what they do in the next 2-3 years.

Disruption will create huge winners and losers.

I do too. And they will sell each service unbundled individually as well for those looking to save a couple of bucks.

(12-19-2017 10:27 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  I wouldn't bet against Disney.

John I think something what you theorize is close to what they do in the next 2-3 years.

Disruption will create huge winners and losers.

Yup. My feeling is content is king. Disney has gobs of content and continues to acquire more content. People who follow the local baseball and basketball team want to watch the games which are ONLY available on the RSN’s. As Disney writes new carriage agreements they will be including clauses allowing thier OTT streaming network which will allow them to monetize thier content more effectively in an era of cord cutting,

(12-19-2017 11:11 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-19-2017 10:27 AM)TexanMark Wrote:  I wouldn't bet against Disney.

John I think something what you theorize is close to what they do in the next 2-3 years.

Disruption will create huge winners and losers.

Yup. My feeling is content is king. Disney has gobs of content and continues to acquire more content. People who follow the local baseball and basketball team want to watch the games which are ONLY available on the RSN’s. As Disney writes new carriage agreements they will be including clauses allowing thier OTT streaming network which will allow them to monetize thier content more effectively in an era of cord cutting,

It would be interesting to know how the FSN carriage deals line up with ESPN's. If the expirations are the same or similar, it will provide ESPN even more leverage in negotiations.