Toggle sidebar

ESPN Bubble Bursting? Interesting Article

S

St. Anger

Senior
Dec 13, 2007
10,420
690
0
I cut cable almost a year ago. Share Netflix with a buddy and use a streaming site for movies. Also use a digital antenna for main channels (CBS, NBC), so I do get some sports but I do miss having more football at times. Overall though, I'd never go back. The hell with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HuskerO58 and NECoach31BB
P

Pennsyhusker_rivals246774

All-American
Aug 6, 2009
15,511
8,571
0
I quit cable two years ago and do not regret it. We stream everything and there is plenty of good stuff out there. I live in PA and only make it to Lincoln for one game a year. I have rediscovered the joy of listening to Husker games on streaming radio. I then watch the game on replay once it is posted online. Takes me back to my youth listening to Bremser on KFAB while tossing a football around with my buddies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: morninghusker
N

Nate004

Junior
Feb 13, 2007
2,401
322
0
ESPN is hurt by several factors... Crappy programming outside of live sporting events being #1 imo. Their tie in with the SEC probably drove some people away(although to be fair, it probably brought in a ton of SEC fans too), FS1 while not a huge player yet, is an alternative now. Raising cable costs by itself probably drove a ton of people away, coupled with the fact that you can find nearly any game online now if you're willing to look a little. All that together, and bam... 7 million less people not having to put up with steven smith yelling his brains out about everything or Skip saying the stupidest things imaginable.
 
P

puddinhead0404

Freshman
Nov 9, 2004
12,818
63
0
mkbrkloster said:
This fact will only hurt the BIG as we negotiate our next TV deal.
Click to expand...

If this trickles down to the TV deal level (which seems logical over the next 5-10 years) it will hit all sports and their respective conferences across the board. Would be a welcome change IMO.
 
T

Tulsa Tom_rivals17485

Senior
Aug 28, 2003
18,519
483
0
puddinhead0404 said:
If this trickles down to the TV deal level (which seems logical over the next 5-10 years) it will hit all sports and their respective conferences across the board. Would be a welcome change IMO.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything here except the "if." It really is "when." Those who think the number of people defaulting out of cable won't lower conference deals in the future must be the ones who believed that housing prices would always rise too.
 
N

NikkiSixx_rivals269993

All-Conference
Sep 14, 2013
9,783
2,226
0
mkbrkloster said:
This fact will only hurt the BIG as we negotiate our next TV deal.
Click to expand...
True..

And it's going to hit sports the hardest.


Think of it this way.. Pretend you own a TV network. What do you put on your network?

1) Sports! Heck Yeah!, but wait, it's going to cost you umpteen millions of dollars to pay all the athletes, managers, franchises, etc

2) Action Movies! Heck Yeah, but wait, that is still expensive, high paid actors, special effects, etc.

3) Reality Shows! The Best Eva! You could put dumb reality tv shows on, where the cast might cost you a max of 1 million.

4) American Ninja Warrior! This is actually the best of everything, by making it a contest, it doesn't cost you hardly squat, just the price for the industrial size jungle gym and camera operators.

Trying to be funny here, but also make a point about the future of paid sports programming.
 
J

Jimmy Frank

Senior
Nov 26, 2006
5,706
854
0
St. Anger said:
I cut cable almost a year ago. Share Netflix with a buddy and use a streaming site for movies. Also use a digital antenna for main channels (CBS, NBC), so I do get some sports but I do miss having more football at times. Overall though, I'd never go back. The hell with them.
Click to expand...
Same, don't mind listening to some games on the radio. I have Verizon and for a few $ a month you get all NFLll games.
 
N

nebcountry

Senior
Oct 29, 2013
1,878
796
0
Does peer-to-peer streaming still exist on the net? Call it P2P. You could at one time find pretty much every sporting event at the live broadcast time.
 
N

nebcountry

Senior
Oct 29, 2013
1,878
796
0
St. Anger said:
There's a site I used to use that got super sketch. Whenever a site tells me to turn off adblock, it's sketch.
Click to expand...

I haven't watched P2P in quite awhile. Used to be a site that listed pretty much every sporting event and then 2 or 3 links. And the link just took you to a browser page with the game. But like I said, it's been awhile.
 
R

Row80

Freshman
Dec 11, 2008
1,057
89
0
Cell phone bills are another easy area to cut. I recently switched from a $95/mo Sprint bill to what will probably be a $35 to $40/mo Ting bill. Ting runs on the Sprint network, so the only thing I've lost is free data roaming and free evening minutes. But since I don't use a ton of minutes, my bill will be less than half.

The only reason I still have Cable TV is last year I was able to cut my $130/mo CenturyLink bill to $95/mo by offering to cancel unless they got the bill under $100/mo without losing my DVR or BTN or ESPN channels. Surprisingly they did it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stringcheese
S

stringcheese

Redshirt
Feb 26, 2014
59
16
8
Row80 said:
Cell phone bills are another easy area to cut. I recently switched from a $95/mo Sprint bill to what will probably be a $35 to $40/mo Ting bill. Ting runs on the Sprint network, so the only thing I've lost is free data roaming and free evening minutes. But since I don't use a ton of minutes, my bill will be less than half.

The only reason I still have Cable TV is last year I was able to cut my $130/mo CenturyLink bill to $95/mo by offering to cancel unless they got the bill under $100/mo without losing my DVR or BTN or ESPN channels. Surprisingly they did it.
Click to expand...


I have cut my cell phone bill down to $40 a month for 2 cell phones and a house phone. We use Ting (best cell phone company by far) and Ooma for a home phone (which is free other than $4 a month in taxes). Paying $40 a month for 3 phones is the only reason I keep a $70 cable bill around -- and thats only for sports and a few other channels for my wife and kids. Once you start adding in a hulu bill and a netflix bill $40-50 a month for sports and a DVR is worth it IMO.
 
T

TheBeav815

All-Conference
Feb 19, 2007
18,955
4,696
0
Row80 said:
Cell phone bills are another easy area to cut. I recently switched from a $95/mo Sprint bill to what will probably be a $35 to $40/mo Ting bill. Ting runs on the Sprint network, so the only thing I've lost is free data roaming and free evening minutes. But since I don't use a ton of minutes, my bill will be less than half.

The only reason I still have Cable TV is last year I was able to cut my $130/mo CenturyLink bill to $95/mo by offering to cancel unless they got the bill under $100/mo without losing my DVR or BTN or ESPN channels. Surprisingly they did it.
Click to expand...
$100 is no problem for them. They sign people up at $20 - $40. I'm on hold trying to cancel DirecTV right now.

Cell phone is about $30 a month with Republic Wireless.

The next frontier of getting f**king fleeced is on internet charges. I noticed it got a lot harder in the last year to get a decent speed for less than $50.
 
D

Dean Pope

Senior
Oct 11, 2001
13,288
917
0
Nate004 said:
ESPN is hurt by several factors... Crappy programming outside of live sporting events being #1 imo. Their tie in with the SEC probably drove some people away(although to be fair, it probably brought in a ton of SEC fans too), FS1 while not a huge player yet, is an alternative now. Raising cable costs by itself probably drove a ton of people away, coupled with the fact that you can find nearly any game online now if you're willing to look a little. All that together, and bam... 7 million less people not having to put up with steven smith yelling his brains out about everything or Skip saying the stupidest things imaginable.
Click to expand...

If I understand it correctly, ESPN gets paid extra per subscriber. So while that provided a boost at first, it now gives the company a loss every time someone cuts the cord and goes without cable. People are turning away from cable and saving money. It's not necessarily a loss of popularity with ESPN-- I would say the majority of those "lost subscriptions" where people who didn't watch much ESPN to begin with.
 
Husker.Wed._rivals

Husker.Wed._rivals

All-Conference
Feb 13, 2004
17,441
3,149
98
Gotta pay over $100 for my DirecTV. How else could I have 250 channels and ***** every night that there is "nothing on". Watching Intervention on LMN as I type.
 
J

jimbosc

Senior
Jul 27, 2001
4,473
761
0
Technology is creating an alternative to cable and satellite TV subscriptions. You still have to pay a subscription for your broadband (THAT is where the real money is) and whatever content you are willing pay to stream (Netflix, Amazon, etc.)

So the revenue is shifting to Broadband providers (Cox, Comcast, etc.) and content providers that stream.

What ESPN (and others) need to do is figure out how to provide their live content to anyone that wants it and make money. I live in BFE - and CANNOT get the ESPN3 streaming content from my cable provider because they are not on the list of "big guy" providers. What a stupid model ESPN uses - screwing over everyone that is not on a big cable or satellite company. One of the reasons I hate ESPN.

Right now they are using live sports as a way to keep cable/satellite subscribers on the hook (or expand subscribers - NBCSN is using NASCAR to do just that). I did go the package route when they upgraded our house to FTTH - I get phone, fiber optic internet and digital cable for about $100 a month. And I use Tracfon for my cell - which I spend about $100 a year on (a bit less for the wife). I get all the ESPNs, Fox Sports, Comcast sports out of Chicago and NBCSN - which I really wanted since I like to watch NASCAR.

The minute I could get live sports (primary Nebraska games and NASCAR) via streaming I would cut the cord on cable - even if I had to pay a bit to get it.
 
M

MAG_rivals203855

Senior
May 29, 2001
9,934
607
0
What might help cable and satellite TV from losing subscribers is allowing people to "cherry pick" exactly what channels they want rather then settle for a package of channels just so to get one, two, or three channels you actually want. I'm with Cox and probably 80 percent of the channels I never watch.
 
C

chicolby

All-Conference
May 3, 2012
4,329
2,999
0
jimbosc said:
Technology is creating an alternative to cable and satellite TV subscriptions. You still have to pay a subscription for your broadband (THAT is where the real money is) and whatever content you are willing pay to stream (Netflix, Amazon, etc.)

So the revenue is shifting to Broadband providers (Cox, Comcast, etc.) and content providers that stream.

What ESPN (and others) need to do is figure out how to provide their live content to anyone that wants it and make money. I live in BFE - and CANNOT get the ESPN3 streaming content from my cable provider because they are not on the list of "big guy" providers. What a stupid model ESPN uses - screwing over everyone that is not on a big cable or satellite company. One of the reasons I hate ESPN.

Right now they are using live sports as a way to keep cable/satellite subscribers on the hook (or expand subscribers - NBCSN is using NASCAR to do just that). I did go the package route when they upgraded our house to FTTH - I get phone, fiber optic internet and digital cable for about $100 a month. And I use Tracfon for my cell - which I spend about $100 a year on (a bit less for the wife). I get all the ESPNs, Fox Sports, Comcast sports out of Chicago and NBCSN - which I really wanted since I like to watch NASCAR.

The minute I could get live sports (primary Nebraska games and NASCAR) via streaming I would cut the cord on cable - even if I had to pay a bit to get it.
Click to expand...
I love that you hate ESPN for screwing over the small cable providers. I'd say your hate is in the wrong place. You think ESPN doesn't want to be on every provider? You should hate your small cable provider for not ponying up the money. ESPN is in the business of making money.
 
P

puddinhead0404

Freshman
Nov 9, 2004
12,818
63
0
MAG said:
What might help cable and satellite TV from losing subscribers is allowing people to "cherry pick" exactly what channels they want rather then settle for a package of channels just so to get one, two, or three channels you actually want. I'm with Cox and probably 80 percent of the channels I never watch.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if this does help. I believe the article said that ESPN alone made up around $35.00 of that cable bill. I always wondered how Netflix was able to provide the streaming service they do at $8.00 a month with such a deep library. Well, this helps.

That said, if I could just pick individual channels at say $5.00/ month I would be interested in that option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom