First jump into sports for the CW Network. I wonder if they may add some more sports. From what I'm reading, LIV is picking up all the production costs and sharing in ad revenue. So basically, the CW Network adds 14 events (42 days of golf) for nothing. And they probably didn't have anything 1st run on that network during those time slots so it's a pretty good deal for CW.

Looks like the WACoff FBS wannabe conference has a network to play on Wednesday nights with!

I have been surprised that the CW hasn't tried to get packages of different sports for a while now. It's in pretty much every TV market. It's an OTA and should be able to draw better than cable channels.

The CW also signed a deal to broadcast a bowl game in Cincinnati, provided the game is able to secure enough sponsorship funding and NCAA approvals.

PAc-12 on CW? Kidding, kind of.

(01-19-2023 06:57 PM)AzonTheKid Wrote:  I have been surprised that the CW hasn't tried to get packages of different sports for a while now. It's in pretty much every TV market. It's an OTA and should be able to draw better than cable channels.

I would have preferred the Final Four on the CW than on TBS. They used to be affiliated with CBS.

I was curious about this as I knew CBS had sold The CW. Wasn't sure who bought them though.

Nexstar Media Group is the answer.

The CW appears to be the 2nd major national network the company owns. The other is NewsNation, a fairly new cable news network and basically what the old WGN superstation evolved into(I had wondered what happened to that station too).

They also own a bunch of local TV stations around the country.

So anyway, looks like Nexstar may be attempting to form a strong TV conglomerate. Makes perfect sense they would dive into sports and I bet this isn't the last dip in the pool.

Nexstar is axing most of the CW scripted shows. Cutting costs and going with 'reality' filler like the other networks. Along with low budget sports it seems.

LIV Golf is effectively giving away its product right now because anyone with a relationship with the PGA (which primarily consists of CBS and NBC/Golf Channel along with ESPN for the PGA Championship) wasn’t going to touch them.

I don’t see the CW/Nexstar going after anything other than minor or very inexpensive sports rights. As other posters have mentioned, they are in heavy cost cutting mode (even more compared to the rest of the industry) and just trying to wring out whatever cash is available from these legacy linear TV channels.

(01-22-2023 11:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  LIV Golf is effectively giving away its product right now because anyone with a relationship with the PGA (which primarily consists of CBS and NBC/Golf Channel along with ESPN for the PGA Championship) wasn’t going to touch them.

I don’t see the CW/Nexstar going after anything other than minor or very inexpensive sports rights. As other posters have mentioned, they are in heavy cost cutting mode (even more compared to the rest of the industry) and just trying to wring out whatever cash is available from these legacy linear TV channels.

Cheap sports, yes, but LIV is relatively high profile given the controversy. It could draw some decent viewership on a network that doesn't have to fight for carriage. It's a pretty smart play especially given the price tag.

I'm not suggesting they'll go after anything major anytime soon, but it's an interesting option for any college conference looking for OTA opportunities. Unlike the other broadcast networks, The CW will have plenty of slots.

Also, I think you're underestimating the power of OTA a little bit. It will never be what it was in the old days when you basically had 3 TV stations, but streaming options are a mixed bag...especially when it comes to sports. People thought cable would effectively kill off traditional OTA television. Here we are a few decades later and cable is dying while traditional OTA is still strong. I don't really see anything that suggests they won't be viable in the marketplace going forward even if linear cable is on the way out.

As long as Nexstar finds a way to monetize online content then they'll be in a pretty good spot. Actually, I've wondered for a long time why CBS(I've recently realized it was co-owned by Warner Bros) or some other company hadn't taken advantage of what The CW could be.

To your point about cost-cutting, you are correct, but remember that a lot of that scripted content simply wasn't profitable. They're not just trying to trim fat like an ESPN or someone else...they just want to get the property back to where it's making money.

Also, The CW didn't really own the rights to any of that DC content. All of it really belongs to AT&T/Warner Bros or whatever it's called this week. In fact, with the formation of the new DC Studios, it seems they're pretty much rebooting the whole universe in an effort to more closely mirror what Marvel has done with the MCU. I think it's unclear whether the Arrowverse would have even received a great deal of backing from DC Studios for much longer. It wasn't a great investment for The CW even if the shows were popular.

Just some background:

Hollywood Reporter - CW used to spend twice that of other networks

Deadline - CW to be profitable by 2025, going for broader appeal

Deadline - CW seeking various types of scripted content

(01-22-2023 11:47 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-22-2023 11:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  LIV Golf is effectively giving away its product right now because anyone with a relationship with the PGA (which primarily consists of CBS and NBC/Golf Channel along with ESPN for the PGA Championship) wasn’t going to touch them.

I don’t see the CW/Nexstar going after anything other than minor or very inexpensive sports rights. As other posters have mentioned, they are in heavy cost cutting mode (even more compared to the rest of the industry) and just trying to wring out whatever cash is available from these legacy linear TV channels.

Cheap sports, yes, but LIV is relatively high profile given the controversy. It could draw some decent viewership on a network that doesn't have to fight for carriage. It's a pretty smart play especially given the price tag.

I'm not suggesting they'll go after anything major anytime soon, but it's an interesting option for any college conference looking for OTA opportunities. Unlike the other broadcast networks, The CW will have plenty of slots.

Also, I think you're underestimating the power of OTA a little bit. It will never be what it was in the old days when you basically had 3 TV stations, but streaming options are a mixed bag...especially when it comes to sports. People thought cable would effectively kill off traditional OTA television. Here we are a few decades later and cable is dying while traditional OTA is still strong. I don't really see anything that suggests they won't be viable in the marketplace going forward even if linear cable is on the way out.

As long as Nexstar finds a way to monetize online content then they'll be in a pretty good spot. Actually, I've wondered for a long time why CBS(I've recently realized it was co-owned by Warner Bros) or some other company hadn't taken advantage of what The CW could be.

To your point about cost-cutting, you are correct, but remember that a lot of that scripted content simply wasn't profitable. They're not just trying to trim fat like an ESPN or someone else...they just want to get the property back to where it's making money.

Also, The CW didn't really own the rights to any of that DC content. All of it really belongs to AT&T/Warner Bros or whatever it's called this week. In fact, with the formation of the new DC Studios, it seems they're pretty much rebooting the whole universe in an effort to more closely mirror what Marvel has done with the MCU. I think it's unclear whether the Arrowverse would have even received a great deal of backing from DC Studios for much longer. It wasn't a great investment for The CW even if the shows were popular.

Just some background:

Hollywood Reporter - CW used to spend twice that of other networks

Deadline - CW to be profitable by 2025, going for broader appeal

Deadline - CW seeking various types of scripted content

To be sure, I'm a large believer of sports on the 4 main OTA networks (ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX). So, I don't underrate OTA as a general platform. My skepticism is with Nexstar's ownership of the CW and their outlined plan for that particular network. For instance, Nexstar has spent a ton of capital on changing WGN America into NewsNation only to see their ratings go below the old cheap syndicated reruns that WGN America used to have. There were legitimately more people watching WGN News at Nine (the local Chicago newscasts) *nationally* when WGN was a superstation than there have been with NewsNation.

Now, I understand that Paramount and Warner were essentially using CW as a loss leader where they'd produce shows that would lose money as a pure network TV show but then be very profitable with streaming, syndication and international rights. However, the CW did have one core value that made it valuable: it was *young*. That's the one thing that every single network and streaming service has been chasing and the CW *had* it.

So, to see Nexstar turn around and literally state, "Our goal is for the CW audience to get OLDER" (which is what those articles you've posted are saying when Nexstar says they want to "broaden the audience") is pretty mind-boggling outside of what I've stated before: they just want to wring out cash from this asset until it eventually dies (if only because it's openly chasing an audience that is going to literally die off within the next 10-15 years).

Once again, I get that Nexstar can't use the CW as a loss leader for new scripted shows in the way that Paramount and Warner did before. However, that just points to them only looking for cheap programming that will be a low rent version of CBS. In that sense, LIV Golf fits the bill since Nexstar isn't even paying any rights fees for it and that will certainly get an old audience.

To be clear, I'm not a hater on that front - I actually like watching golf. However, it would be naive to think that this means that the CW is going to be anything more than a place to park niche sports. Truly getting into US sports means being a player for the 4 major pro sports leagues and P5 college conferences.

CW could get some CAA for cheap. They are paying to be on CBSSN right now and that deal expires at the end of this year.

For some reason the CW isn't a live channel on YouTube TV in my area.

(01-23-2023 09:55 AM)solohawks Wrote:  CW could get some CAA for cheap. They are paying to be on CBSSN right now and that deal expires at the end of this year.

Nexstar has been paying the SoCon for a Game Of The Week for football for a few seasons.

(01-23-2023 10:30 AM)Yosef Himself Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 09:55 AM)solohawks Wrote:  CW could get some CAA for cheap. They are paying to be on CBSSN right now and that deal expires at the end of this year.

Nexstar has been paying the SoCon for a Game Of The Week for football for a few seasons.

Good point

Monmouth/Hofstra/Stony Brook - WPIX
Drexel/Delaware - WPHL
Hampton/W&M - WAVY
NC A&T/Elon - WGHP
Campbell - WNCN
Charleston - WCBD

Im sure you could get a station in Baltimore and Boston.
I know you could get a station in Wilmington

Maybe that is a route Nexstar looks at with the SoCon template in place.

(01-23-2023 09:44 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(01-22-2023 11:47 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-22-2023 11:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  LIV Golf is effectively giving away its product right now because anyone with a relationship with the PGA (which primarily consists of CBS and NBC/Golf Channel along with ESPN for the PGA Championship) wasn’t going to touch them.

I don’t see the CW/Nexstar going after anything other than minor or very inexpensive sports rights. As other posters have mentioned, they are in heavy cost cutting mode (even more compared to the rest of the industry) and just trying to wring out whatever cash is available from these legacy linear TV channels.

Cheap sports, yes, but LIV is relatively high profile given the controversy. It could draw some decent viewership on a network that doesn't have to fight for carriage. It's a pretty smart play especially given the price tag.

I'm not suggesting they'll go after anything major anytime soon, but it's an interesting option for any college conference looking for OTA opportunities. Unlike the other broadcast networks, The CW will have plenty of slots.

Also, I think you're underestimating the power of OTA a little bit. It will never be what it was in the old days when you basically had 3 TV stations, but streaming options are a mixed bag...especially when it comes to sports. People thought cable would effectively kill off traditional OTA television. Here we are a few decades later and cable is dying while traditional OTA is still strong. I don't really see anything that suggests they won't be viable in the marketplace going forward even if linear cable is on the way out.

As long as Nexstar finds a way to monetize online content then they'll be in a pretty good spot. Actually, I've wondered for a long time why CBS(I've recently realized it was co-owned by Warner Bros) or some other company hadn't taken advantage of what The CW could be.

To your point about cost-cutting, you are correct, but remember that a lot of that scripted content simply wasn't profitable. They're not just trying to trim fat like an ESPN or someone else...they just want to get the property back to where it's making money.

Also, The CW didn't really own the rights to any of that DC content. All of it really belongs to AT&T/Warner Bros or whatever it's called this week. In fact, with the formation of the new DC Studios, it seems they're pretty much rebooting the whole universe in an effort to more closely mirror what Marvel has done with the MCU. I think it's unclear whether the Arrowverse would have even received a great deal of backing from DC Studios for much longer. It wasn't a great investment for The CW even if the shows were popular.

Just some background:

Hollywood Reporter - CW used to spend twice that of other networks

Deadline - CW to be profitable by 2025, going for broader appeal

Deadline - CW seeking various types of scripted content

To be sure, I'm a large believer of sports on the 4 main OTA networks (ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX). So, I don't underrate OTA as a general platform. My skepticism is with Nexstar's ownership of the CW and their outlined plan for that particular network. For instance, Nexstar has spent a ton of capital on changing WGN America into NewsNation only to see their ratings go below the old cheap syndicated reruns that WGN America used to have. There were legitimately more people watching WGN News at Nine (the local Chicago newscasts) *nationally* when WGN was a superstation than there have been with NewsNation.

Now, I understand that Paramount and Warner were essentially using CW as a loss leader where they'd produce shows that would lose money as a pure network TV show but then be very profitable with streaming, syndication and international rights. However, the CW did have one core value that made it valuable: it was *young*. That's the one thing that every single network and streaming service has been chasing and the CW *had* it.

So, to see Nexstar turn around and literally state, "Our goal is for the CW audience to get OLDER" (which is what those articles you've posted are saying when Nexstar says they want to "broaden the audience") is pretty mind-boggling outside of what I've stated before: they just want to wring out cash from this asset until it eventually dies (if only because it's openly chasing an audience that is going to literally die off within the next 10-15 years).

Once again, I get that Nexstar can't use the CW as a loss leader for new scripted shows in the way that Paramount and Warner did before. However, that just points to them only looking for cheap programming that will be a low rent version of CBS. In that sense, LIV Golf fits the bill since Nexstar isn't even paying any rights fees for it and that will certainly get an old audience.

To be clear, I'm not a hater on that front - I actually like watching golf. However, it would be naive to think that this means that the CW is going to be anything more than a place to park niche sports. Truly getting into US sports means being a player for the 4 major pro sports leagues and P5 college conferences.

Is it really so naive to wait and see what they can produce?

As I said, they're not chasing anything big anytime soon, but it also wouldn't be prudent to chase down properties like that until you can show profitability now would it? What major sports league wants to rely on broadcast rights from a network that doesn't make money? It's not a relevant critique.

As I said, you are underrating the value of OTA. It's fine to view ABC, CBS, NBC, and FOX in more positive terms. After all, they're profitable and have a serious head start, but they are not the only OTA networks, that's the point. The CW has an advantage that can't simply be duplicated by sheer effort. It requires vision to take advantage of that, however.

Yes, I'm aware their approach is to get the older audience, but you're also missing the point that the older audience as it stands is their hope in profitability. The "young" audience wasn't profitable which is why the property was up for sale in the first place. What Paramount and Warner had was obviously not all that desirable from their perspective. Regardless of the universal need to obtain a young audience, that audience is moving ever more towards streaming...something that didn't aid the profitability of The CW in the slightest. Why jack up your production costs so someone else can make money?

CBS obviously had no need to invest in another OTA network to compete with the one they have. Warner's model is more diverse. They might have been in a better position to take advantage of The CW, but they likely have too many irons in the fire as it is. Their incessant restructuring hardly leaves time for anyone to get on the same page much less keep up with what entity is under which umbrella. Nonetheless, both entities retain a minority ownership. They didn't fully sell out which in itself demonstrates they believe in the potential of the product.

The lack of success with NewsNation doesn't really mean anything. As if all media entities don't have missteps and miscalculations...

Pretending that Nexstar got into this project in order to fleece a few retirees before the whole business model goes belly up? I mean, if you're telling me that ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX will have significantly diminished profitability in the next 15 years then I guess that would be a consistent outlook, but I don't think that's your view. The reality is that markets change and people adapt. Despite any human inclination towards pessimism, markets keep changing and people keep adapting and that's a one sentence summation of the history of economics.

Why don't we revisit the progress in 2025?

(01-22-2023 11:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  LIV Golf is effectively giving away its product right now because anyone with a relationship with the PGA (which primarily consists of CBS and NBC/Golf Channel along with ESPN for the PGA Championship) wasn’t going to touch them.

I don’t see the CW/Nexstar going after anything other than minor or very inexpensive sports rights. As other posters have mentioned, they are in heavy cost cutting mode (even more compared to the rest of the industry) and just trying to wring out whatever cash is available from these legacy linear TV channels.

LIV Golf presented by MBS and the Saudi Government. They are giving this away for exposure because no one else would touch it. Even Apple and Amazon were not interested. This is either an image enhancement tour or the Saudis just have too much money and don't know what to do with it all.

(01-22-2023 11:47 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-22-2023 11:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  LIV Golf is effectively giving away its product right now because anyone with a relationship with the PGA (which primarily consists of CBS and NBC/Golf Channel along with ESPN for the PGA Championship) wasn’t going to touch them.

I don’t see the CW/Nexstar going after anything other than minor or very inexpensive sports rights. As other posters have mentioned, they are in heavy cost cutting mode (even more compared to the rest of the industry) and just trying to wring out whatever cash is available from these legacy linear TV channels.

Cheap sports, yes, but LIV is relatively high profile given the controversy. It could draw some decent viewership on a network that doesn't have to fight for carriage. It's a pretty smart play especially given the price tag.

I'm not suggesting they'll go after anything major anytime soon, but it's an interesting option for any college conference looking for OTA opportunities. Unlike the other broadcast networks, The CW will have plenty of slots.

Also, I think you're underestimating the power of OTA a little bit. It will never be what it was in the old days when you basically had 3 TV stations, but streaming options are a mixed bag...especially when it comes to sports. People thought cable would effectively kill off traditional OTA television. Here we are a few decades later and cable is dying while traditional OTA is still strong. I don't really see anything that suggests they won't be viable in the marketplace going forward even if linear cable is on the way out.

As long as Nexstar finds a way to monetize online content then they'll be in a pretty good spot. Actually, I've wondered for a long time why CBS(I've recently realized it was co-owned by Warner Bros) or some other company hadn't taken advantage of what The CW could be.

They were. It's just that "what the CW could be" was "an incubator for shows that can then be sold to Netflix and internationally for a profit." The Netflix deal is over, and CBS Paramount Global and Warner Bros Discovery HBO Max Turner want the shows for their own streaming services--or not.

Nexstar was able to buy the CW (75% ownership) for $0 and an agreement to fund the continuing losses. Which makes sense for them because they own a ton of the CW's stations, and those stations gotta have SOMETHING to put on the air.

Could that "something" be low-level college football on fall Saturdays? Why not? ESPN sells games to CBS-SN, why not to the CW?

I also wonder if local pro sports start moving back to OTA on the MyNetwork TV and CW affiliates. If the leagues buy the wreckage of Diamond Sports out of bankruptcy, split the games between local TV and league-owned streaming services.

(01-24-2023 01:44 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-23-2023 09:44 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(01-22-2023 11:47 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-22-2023 11:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  LIV Golf is effectively giving away its product right now because anyone with a relationship with the PGA (which primarily consists of CBS and NBC/Golf Channel along with ESPN for the PGA Championship) wasn’t going to touch them.

I don’t see the CW/Nexstar going after anything other than minor or very inexpensive sports rights. As other posters have mentioned, they are in heavy cost cutting mode (even more compared to the rest of the industry) and just trying to wring out whatever cash is available from these legacy linear TV channels.

Cheap sports, yes, but LIV is relatively high profile given the controversy. It could draw some decent viewership on a network that doesn't have to fight for carriage. It's a pretty smart play especially given the price tag.

I'm not suggesting they'll go after anything major anytime soon, but it's an interesting option for any college conference looking for OTA opportunities. Unlike the other broadcast networks, The CW will have plenty of slots.

Also, I think you're underestimating the power of OTA a little bit. It will never be what it was in the old days when you basically had 3 TV stations, but streaming options are a mixed bag...especially when it comes to sports. People thought cable would effectively kill off traditional OTA television. Here we are a few decades later and cable is dying while traditional OTA is still strong. I don't really see anything that suggests they won't be viable in the marketplace going forward even if linear cable is on the way out.

As long as Nexstar finds a way to monetize online content then they'll be in a pretty good spot. Actually, I've wondered for a long time why CBS(I've recently realized it was co-owned by Warner Bros) or some other company hadn't taken advantage of what The CW could be.

To your point about cost-cutting, you are correct, but remember that a lot of that scripted content simply wasn't profitable. They're not just trying to trim fat like an ESPN or someone else...they just want to get the property back to where it's making money.

Also, The CW didn't really own the rights to any of that DC content. All of it really belongs to AT&T/Warner Bros or whatever it's called this week. In fact, with the formation of the new DC Studios, it seems they're pretty much rebooting the whole universe in an effort to more closely mirror what Marvel has done with the MCU. I think it's unclear whether the Arrowverse would have even received a great deal of backing from DC Studios for much longer. It wasn't a great investment for The CW even if the shows were popular.

Just some background:

Hollywood Reporter - CW used to spend twice that of other networks

Deadline - CW to be profitable by 2025, going for broader appeal

Deadline - CW seeking various types of scripted content

To be sure, I'm a large believer of sports on the 4 main OTA networks (ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX). So, I don't underrate OTA as a general platform. My skepticism is with Nexstar's ownership of the CW and their outlined plan for that particular network. For instance, Nexstar has spent a ton of capital on changing WGN America into NewsNation only to see their ratings go below the old cheap syndicated reruns that WGN America used to have. There were legitimately more people watching WGN News at Nine (the local Chicago newscasts) *nationally* when WGN was a superstation than there have been with NewsNation.

Now, I understand that Paramount and Warner were essentially using CW as a loss leader where they'd produce shows that would lose money as a pure network TV show but then be very profitable with streaming, syndication and international rights. However, the CW did have one core value that made it valuable: it was *young*. That's the one thing that every single network and streaming service has been chasing and the CW *had* it.

So, to see Nexstar turn around and literally state, "Our goal is for the CW audience to get OLDER" (which is what those articles you've posted are saying when Nexstar says they want to "broaden the audience") is pretty mind-boggling outside of what I've stated before: they just want to wring out cash from this asset until it eventually dies (if only because it's openly chasing an audience that is going to literally die off within the next 10-15 years).

Once again, I get that Nexstar can't use the CW as a loss leader for new scripted shows in the way that Paramount and Warner did before. However, that just points to them only looking for cheap programming that will be a low rent version of CBS. In that sense, LIV Golf fits the bill since Nexstar isn't even paying any rights fees for it and that will certainly get an old audience.

To be clear, I'm not a hater on that front - I actually like watching golf. However, it would be naive to think that this means that the CW is going to be anything more than a place to park niche sports. Truly getting into US sports means being a player for the 4 major pro sports leagues and P5 college conferences.

Is it really so naive to wait and see what they can produce?

Well, we're going by their actual results (NewsNation, which I'm not so worried about) AND by their announced plans.

Quote:What major sports league wants to rely on broadcast rights from a network that doesn't make money? It's not a relevant critique.

Nexstar doesn't have the bank to compete with Disney, WBD, Comcast or even Paramount or Fox. They're not bidding for any major sports packages, they're scavenging in the discount bins. Which is fine.

Quote:As I said, you are underrating the value of OTA. It's fine to view ABC, CBS, NBC, and FOX in more positive terms. After all, they're profitable and have a serious head start, but they are not the only OTA networks, that's the point. The CW has an advantage that can't simply be duplicated by sheer effort. It requires vision to take advantage of that, however.

They're on everyone's OTA TV. but there is near-zero habit of watching those channels. Big boy OTA has universal market penetration, and a built in audience of millions who will give pretty much anything they put on a shot.

Quote:CBS obviously had no need to invest in another OTA network to compete with the one they have. Warner's model is more diverse. They might have been in a better position to take advantage of The CW, but they likely have too many irons in the fire as it is. Their incessant restructuring hardly leaves time for anyone to get on the same page much less keep up with what entity is under which umbrella. Nonetheless, both entities retain a minority ownership. They didn't fully sell out which in itself demonstrates they believe in the potential of the product.

The lack of success with NewsNation doesn't really mean anything. As if all media entities don't have missteps and miscalculations...

Pretending that Nexstar got into this project in order to fleece a few retirees before the whole business model goes belly up? I mean, if you're telling me that ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX will have significantly diminished profitability in the next 15 years then I guess that would be a consistent outlook, but I don't think that's your view.

That's pretty much a locked in reality actually. The networks are looking good right now by comparison, because the cable bundle apocalypse is upon us. But the OTA networks get a good chunk of their money (30% I think) from cable retransmission fees.

Quote:The reality is that markets change and people adapt. Despite any human inclination towards pessimism, markets keep changing and people keep adapting and that's a one sentence summation of the history of economics.

Why don't we revisit the progress in 2025?

(01-24-2023 08:35 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(01-22-2023 11:47 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(01-22-2023 11:03 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  LIV Golf is effectively giving away its product right now because anyone with a relationship with the PGA (which primarily consists of CBS and NBC/Golf Channel along with ESPN for the PGA Championship) wasn’t going to touch them.

I don’t see the CW/Nexstar going after anything other than minor or very inexpensive sports rights. As other posters have mentioned, they are in heavy cost cutting mode (even more compared to the rest of the industry) and just trying to wring out whatever cash is available from these legacy linear TV channels.

Cheap sports, yes, but LIV is relatively high profile given the controversy. It could draw some decent viewership on a network that doesn't have to fight for carriage. It's a pretty smart play especially given the price tag.

I'm not suggesting they'll go after anything major anytime soon, but it's an interesting option for any college conference looking for OTA opportunities. Unlike the other broadcast networks, The CW will have plenty of slots.

Also, I think you're underestimating the power of OTA a little bit. It will never be what it was in the old days when you basically had 3 TV stations, but streaming options are a mixed bag...especially when it comes to sports. People thought cable would effectively kill off traditional OTA television. Here we are a few decades later and cable is dying while traditional OTA is still strong. I don't really see anything that suggests they won't be viable in the marketplace going forward even if linear cable is on the way out.

As long as Nexstar finds a way to monetize online content then they'll be in a pretty good spot. Actually, I've wondered for a long time why CBS(I've recently realized it was co-owned by Warner Bros) or some other company hadn't taken advantage of what The CW could be.

They were. It's just that "what the CW could be" was "an incubator for shows that can then be sold to Netflix and internationally for a profit." The Netflix deal is over, and CBS Paramount Global and Warner Bros Discovery HBO Max Turner want the shows for their own streaming services--or not.

Nexstar was able to buy the CW (75% ownership) for $0 and an agreement to fund the continuing losses. Which makes sense for them because they own a ton of the CW's stations, and those stations gotta have SOMETHING to put on the air.

Could that "something" be low-level college football on fall Saturdays? Why not? ESPN sells games to CBS-SN, why not to the CW?

I also wonder if local pro sports start moving back to OTA on the MyNetwork TV and CW affiliates. If the leagues buy the wreckage of Diamond Sports out of bankruptcy, split the games between local TV and league-owned streaming services.

Yes, if you're talking about low-level college football (e.g. G5 and FCS games), then sure. I would put that in the category of minor or inexpensive sports rights that I've noted before.

For local pro sports, MLB and NBA are already telegraphing what they want to do if/when they get those RSN rights back: they want their own league-wide streaming services for those local games. Now, unlike MLS, there would still be substantial national linear TV packages for MLB and NBA as there are now, but they'd still optimally want league control of what are now local TV rights so that they can use them for their respective streaming ambitions. It's going to be *worse* for us as fans - they're going to be even less inclined to put those games on OTA than they are today because the only way to even approach recouping what had been insanely lucrative RSN revenue is to wring out every penny of streaming revenue possible outside of the national TV deals. This isn't my conjecture: John Ourand from Sports Business Journal has said that this is what those leagues would want to do in the event of a Diamond Sports bankruptcy and what would eventually end up being a buyout of other RSNs.

Now, the issue with that plan is that the most valuable MLB and NBA franchises are still making an incredible amount of money from their respective RSNs and their own high franchise valuations are *directly* tied to having control of their local TV rights in their respective large markets (e.g. the pro teams in NYC, LA, Chicago and Boston). Even if RSNs were to go away, teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, and Lakers would much rather just have their own individual streaming services or sell them on their own (like how Amazon has dipped its toes in with the Yankees) as opposed to providing their TV rights back to their respective leagues. So, maybe the smaller market teams pool their local rights together to create a broader streaming package, but who knows how effective that would be if the large market teams aren't included. It's a real dilemma for MLB, NBA and NHL teams because RSN revenue has been SOOOO lucrative to them that virtually every other option for them is inherently worse financially.

I've been saying for many years that sports fans were failing to see the forest for the trees about the cost of the cable bundle (e.g. not realizing that all of those Lifetime and HGTV viewers were subsidizing sports fans as opposed to the other way around) and that we'd eventually be paying more to get the same games on streaming.