Some folks were asking about ESPN and other networks. Just saw this. It's from October, but should be relatively close.

 

 

 

ESPN Loses 621,000 Subscribers; Worst Month in Company History | Outkick The Coverage

 

This is why they have been having layoffs and will continue to. I wonder what happens when they can't pay these contracts out to the NBA and NFL.

ESPN canned Marc Stein and Chad Ford, two of their top NBA guys.

 

ESPN is hiring Adrian Wojnarowski from Yahoo. He's by far the best in the business when it comes to NBA scoops IMO.

 

I saw a tweet alluding to this the other day. Comedy. They won't lose a thing when it comes to substance about the NBA. Excellent replacements and I love Stein and Ford.

How many people do you know canceled their cable or satellite service because ESPN slants left?

 

I don't know a single person who did so and KY is almost full fledged anti-liberal at this point.

I don't know a single person who did so and KY is almost full fledged anti-liberal at this point.

Exactly. No one is cutting the cord because they don't like ESPN. My guess is 99.9% of the public thought they were making their stand by just not watching the channel. ESPN better improve non live sporting event programming, figure out a solution to reach the cord cutters, and increase advertisement revenue so it's a bigger percentage of the pie. Long term the contracts they are offering to leagues will have to come back to reality. It's obviously not bring the returns they expected.

Exactly. No one is cutting the cord because they don't like ESPN. My guess is 99.9% of the public thought they were making their stand by just not watching the channel. ESPN better improve non live sporting event programming, figure out a solution to reach the cord cutters, and increase advertisement revenue so it's a bigger percentage of the pie. Long term the contracts they are offering to leagues will have to come back to reality. It's obviously not bring the returns they expected.

 

I'm with you.

 

I like ESPN but I am cutting the cord because it will save me over 100 dollars a month. Money talks.

It is insane to think that ESPN pays the NFL 1.9 Billion dollars to broadcast one NFL game a week and it is a crappy NFL game at that. Pure insanity.

How many people do you know canceled their cable or satellite service because ESPN slants left?

 

Well, there sure were a bunch of commentators on articles last week that seemed to indicate that as a reason, if of course you believe what they were posting. As for me personally, it's a reason I don't watch/listen to it much any more. I sometimes find myself tuned in to an ESPN radio show only to tune out and find something else as it inevitably turns political and the personality goes on some political rant. Now, SOMETIMES that can be interesting, but many times not. As for people I know it's something I never specifically asked but I do know many who don't watch/listen to ESPN any more, or at least the way they used to, and have heard comments like "can't listen to/watch that junk any more". I can only assume they are also feed up with a lot of the agenda driven, quite left leaning political talk that permeates a lot of the network now.

I'm with you.

 

I like ESPN but I am cutting the cord because it will save me over 100 dollars a month. Money talks.

 

Only reason we haven't done so yet is because of Xavier & Kentucky basketball games and Reds baseball. Probably look long and hard at it once my current discounts are up with DirecTV.

It is insane to think that ESPN pays the NFL 1.9 Billion dollars to broadcast one NFL game a week and it is a crappy NFL game at that. Pure insanity.

 

Man, you got that right.

Only reason we haven't done so yet is because of Xavier & Kentucky basketball games and Reds baseball. Probably look long and hard at it once my current discounts are up with DirecTV.

 

I'm 99.9% sure I am cutting the cord come against once my contract is up. Still researching my options. My main issue is making sure all of the TVs in the house are the same.

Well, there sure were a bunch of commentators on articles last week that seemed to indicate that as a reason, if of course you believe what they were posting. As for me personally, it's a reason I don't watch/listen to it much any more. I sometimes find myself tuned in to an ESPN radio show only to tune out and find something else as it inevitably turns political and the personality goes on some political rant. Now, SOMETIMES that can be interesting, but many times not. As for people I know it's something I never specifically asked but I do know many who don't watch/listen to ESPN any more, or at least the way they used to, and have heard comments like "can't listen to/watch that junk any more". I can only assume they are also feed up with a lot of the agenda driven, quite left leaning political talk that permeates a lot of the network now.

I don't disagree with what you're saying. I do know people who won't watch ESPN because of politics, but every single one of them still has cable or satellite service. So while they may think they are sticking it to ESPN, their checks are still being cashed in Bristol.

Exactly. No one is cutting the cord because they don't like ESPN. My guess is 99.9% of the public thought they were making their stand by just not watching the channel. ESPN better improve non live sporting event programming, figure out a solution to reach the cord cutters, and increase advertisement revenue so it's a bigger percentage of the pie. Long term the contracts they are offering to leagues will have to come back to reality. It's obviously not bring the returns they expected.

 

That's essentially one in the same, especially as far as advertisers are concerned. If people aren't watching, no matter the number of subscribers, then advertisers aren't going to pay ESPN, and that's where the bulk of the money is. I mean, if you have 50 million subscribers, but only average a couple million viewers, then that's what the ad people are going to base what to pay for ad time, not the 50 million. If all those 50 million were tuning in, ad revenue galore. 2 million, not so much.

 

I have ESPN on my tv. I think ESPN comes with even the most basic satellite package so unless you totally do away with it you have it. I have yet to "cut the cord" so to speak as the girlfriend likes the home improvement and cooking shows on the upper channels and the odd show here and there on the network, but I am looking for another avenue. And that other avenue probably won't have ESPN as a part of it.

Let me use another analogy.

 

The NY Times can print 100 million copies of their paper every day. But if their readership is only 50,000, what number are the advertisers going to use to base their calculations on when figuring what to pay for ad space?

That's essentially one in the same, especially as far as advertisers are concerned. If people aren't watching, no matter the number of subscribers, then advertisers aren't going to pay ESPN, and that's where the bulk of the money is. I mean, if you have 50 million subscribers, but only average a couple million viewers, then that's what the ad people are going to base what to pay for ad time, not the 50 million. If all those 50 million were tuning in, ad revenue galore. 2 million, not so much.

 

I have ESPN on my tv. I think ESPN comes with even the most basic satellite package so unless you totally do away with it you have it. I have yet to "cut the cord" so to speak as the girlfriend likes the home improvement and cooking shows on the upper channels and the odd show here and there on the network, but I am looking for another avenue. And that other avenue probably won't have ESPN as a part of it.

But that's not where the bulk of ESPN's money is or has ever been. They make the majority of their revenue off of subscribers. They make somewhere north of $8 per month per subscriber. That's over $8.5 billion per year at 90,000,000 customers.

 

90,000,000

But that's not where the bulk of ESPN's money is or has ever been. They make the majority of their revenue off of subscribers. They make somewhere north of $8 per month per subscriber. That's over $8.5 billion per year at 90,000,000 customers.

 

90,000,000

 

Got to say, that I did not know and not historically how TV worked. Looks like I do need to cut the cord.