Jump to content

The Sports Bubble is About to Pop


mvcg66b3r

Recommended Posts

Goody, the "baseball is boring" narrative.

 

I do wonder what's going to happen if ESPN can't pay out the nose for sports rights anymore. What they might have to give up, what the licensors will do (ESPN is paying more than $600 million a year for the College Football Playoff - that's just a few games a year!)...the stories that someone in Silicon Valley will scoop up any sports rights packages doesn't seem like it will happen anytime soon (though who knows, it could even be in the next five years), and I doubt that the leagues will just decide to produce and distribute all their coverage themselves, because they'd miss out on the rights fees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goody, the "baseball is boring" narrative.

 

I do wonder what's going to happen if ESPN can't pay out the nose for sports rights anymore. What they might have to give up, what the licensors will do (ESPN is paying more than $600 million a year for the College Football Playoff - that's just a few games a year!)...the stories that someone in Silicon Valley will scoop up any sports rights packages doesn't seem like it will happen anytime soon (though who knows, it could even be in the next five years), and I doubt that the leagues will just decide to produce and distribute all their coverage themselves, because they'd miss out on the rights fees.

With ESPN owned by Disney does "out of money" sound realistic to you anytime soon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who would pay $20 bucks just for a sports-only package with satellite providers? I would gladly pay $20 bucks just to watch my favorite teams play and to catch all of the highlights and analysis of all of the games.

 

but would you do it every month? even during the slow sports month of July

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If cable television went a la carte across all networks and genres of programming, I'd pay 20, heck, even 40 or 50 bucks a month for a sports package. In my house, it's the TruTV's, OWN's, and MTV's (and 3 dozen others) of the world that would have to worry. I can really only think of about a dozen non-sports channels that I have any use for, and I'd imagine I'm far from alone among current cable subscribers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If cable television went a la carte across all networks and genres of programming, I'd pay 20, heck, even 40 or 50 bucks a month for a sports package. In my house, it's the TruTV's, OWN's, and MTV's (and 3 dozen others) of the world that would have to worry. I can really only think of about a dozen non-sports channels that I have any use for, and I'd imagine I'm far from alone among current cable subscribers.

I could probably count on my hands how many non OTA channels I'd keep...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, not per se, because the Disney parks and all that merchandise are a goldmine. It's a matter of Disney's priorities.

True but I can't see them getting rid of it anytime soon, if they are keeping ABC and the stations then theres a pretty low floor there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goody, the "baseball is boring" narrative.

 

I do wonder what's going to happen if ESPN can't pay out the nose for sports rights anymore. What they might have to give up, what the licensors will do (ESPN is paying more than $600 million a year for the College Football Playoff - that's just a few games a year!)...the stories that someone in Silicon Valley will scoop up any sports rights packages doesn't seem like it will happen anytime soon (though who knows, it could even be in the next five years), and I doubt that the leagues will just decide to produce and distribute all their coverage themselves, because they'd miss out on the rights fees.

 

I can almost guarantee that if the whole cable sports network bubble burst, the leagues would just produce their own stuff. Whatever they'd lose on licencing fees would be gained back by "double selling" their content (that is, selling advertisements and then selling online subscriptions) because you know people would buy it. They've already got their own cable networks, it wouldn't be that hard to just expand that branding to web-exclusive streams.

 

Most of the time the venue's in-house feed is good enough for broadcast anyways. Just take that and patch in the radio announcers, slap on some better graphics, and you've got a streaming service.

 

TV is cheap to make. They could handle it... It's not like they have to pay for their stadiums half of the time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Here's an interesting article from 1992 about a similar crisis faced by networks and sports leagues.

 

Down The Tubes? Experts See Mega-tv Deals Coming To An End

Art Modell has seen the future of television sports and it is not particularly pretty.

 

It is filled with low ratings, anemic advertising revenue and coldhearted network executives who would sell their mothers for a profitable quarter.

 

"I think there's going to be a major shaking out throughout the sports world by television," warned Modell, the Cleveland Browns' owner and the longtime chairman of the National Football League's television committee. ''They're just not going to keep providing the funds for these skyrocketing salaries and demands made of them by (professional sports) ownership."

 

Modell's message is clear: The television networks no longer are inclined - or able - to continue serving as a cash cow for the frivolous spending car dealers, shipbuilders and real-estate magnates who own professional sports teams.

 

"The days of astronomical (rights fee) increases are a thing of the past," said John Severino, president of Prime Ticket cable network and former president of ABC. "The spiraling rights fees that have been a part of the past are no longer going to be a part of the future."

http://articles.philly.com/1992-04-01/sports/26003608_1_tv-deals-television-and-advertising-industries-television-networks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny, I figured that sports bars and restaurants would of helped to stabilize it; considering that more people love to watch sports at bars or with family than themselves, I figured they would be the sports networks saviors.

 

I think the only solution would be to find a way to raise the rates for these resturants and bars instead of focusing on the number of homes. It doesn't matter if you're in all the homes in the US; not alot of people will turn into ESPN. Heck, even I don't tune into ESPN mainly because I'm not a crazy sports fanatic; just a casual fan. Would have to fully read up on the history of sports to even be considered a fanatic and that is a huge barrier of entry for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using TVNewsTalk you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.