I agree. Complete 180 turnaround for the worst from where they began.Houma de Wave wrote:Thanks, I don't need them. If there's any concern about why they are losing viewers by the dozen, just tune in during the day and hear 30 seconds of the spew and "debate" they engage in. It took years to do it, but they have ruined a good thing.tpstulane wrote:In an attempt to stop the bleeding Disney to charge $4.99 for ESPN Streaming App starting this spring.
https://twitter.com/cnbc/status/960986368812965888
ESPN subscriber collapse/ratings
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
Tulane Class of 1981
They should only do games. Eliminate all in studio BS except for big events.DfromCT wrote:And yet any of us that watch tonights basketball game are watching an ESPN network
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
Tulane Class of 1981
-
- Wild Pelican
- Posts: 13049
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
- Location: Stamford, CT
- Status: Online
I agree, though SportsCenter for an hour or two every morning would be ok. I also like their 30-30 type shows. Hate their sports reporter shows particularly anything with Steven A Smith. Don't like when they talk politics. But they have some compelling content (meaning games mostly) whether you get it through your cable or computer.tpstulane wrote:They should only do games. Eliminate all in studio BS except for big events.DfromCT wrote:And yet any of us that watch tonights basketball game are watching an ESPN network
I'll admit it's a CT company, I take a little pride in watching it grow from nothing to a media leader, and I know some of the key executives. I don't defend them and recognize that they're a wounded dog at this point. I can also see the argument that ESPN money drove a wedge between the "haves" and "have nots" (aka P5 vs everyone else) in college sports.
" If you laugh, you think, and you cry, that's a full day.." Jimmy V
ESPN takes another misstep gets closer to death.
https://www.lifezette.com/popzette/stru ... -to-death/
https://www.lifezette.com/popzette/stru ... -to-death/
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
Tulane Class of 1981
-
- Swell
- Posts: 1849
- Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:53 pm
- Status: Offline
They just don’t get it, do they? No different than the alphabet “news” networks.tpstulane wrote:ESPN takes another misstep gets closer to death.
https://www.lifezette.com/popzette/stru ... -to-death/
Sure looks that way.Houma de Wave wrote:They just don’t get it, do they? No different than the alphabet “news” networks.tpstulane wrote:ESPN takes another misstep gets closer to death.
https://www.lifezette.com/popzette/stru ... -to-death/
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
Tulane Class of 1981
-
- Wild Pelican
- Posts: 13049
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
- Location: Stamford, CT
- Status: Online
What if ESPN went bankrupt and out of business? What would happen to all the contracts they have, both the big $$ ones and the lesser ones, like with the AAC, CUSA, etc.? The traditional networks already have a good portion of their programming blocked off. There's a glut of content thrown into the market. Lesser networks, like TBS, TNT, and the various sports networks of CBS, NBC, and FOX end up carving up a lot of content from all the ESPN networks at bargain prices. Sure, there will be bids from Amazon, Facebook, Yahoo, etc. But the lions share will still be on traditional TV networks. The P5's suffer, but the G5's chances of getting decent TV deals in the next decade take a huge hit.
" If you laugh, you think, and you cry, that's a full day.." Jimmy V
- RobertM320
- Green Wave
- Posts: 9894
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
- Location: Covington, LA
- Contact:
- Status: Offline
I agree with you, but you also wonder if it could ultimately help the G5s. Without those TV contracts, how many P5s would all of a sudden be unable to pay off the debt they've acquired? I'm sure a lot of the have built lavish facilities on the basis of future money incoming. If that flow gets cut off, what cuts will they have to make to pay the bills. It could be more a case of them coming backwards towards the G5 than the G5s moving forward.DfromCT wrote:What if ESPN went bankrupt and out of business? What would happen to all the contracts they have, both the big $$ ones and the lesser ones, like with the AAC, CUSA, etc.? The traditional networks already have a good portion of their programming blocked off. There's a glut of content thrown into the market. Lesser networks, like TBS, TNT, and the various sports networks of CBS, NBC, and FOX end up carving up a lot of content from all the ESPN networks at bargain prices. Sure, there will be bids from Amazon, Facebook, Yahoo, etc. But the lions share will still be on traditional TV networks. The P5's suffer, but the G5's chances of getting decent TV deals in the next decade take a huge hit.
"That mantra is the only consistent thing that never needs to ever change for the rest of this program’s existence because that is all that matters & as long as that keeps occurring, everything will handle itself" -- Nick Anderson
R320 I've thought about the facilities too but they have been getting big bucks for a long time. The facilities are likely paid for already. It's the enormous salaries that they'd have to figure out. But of course this won't come to pass. ESPN won't go under but even if they do other networks would step up with sizable offers. Where the G5's would suffer is with the elimination of all the Bowl Games that ESPN owns.
BAYWAVE&Sophandros are SPINELESS COWARDS
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
YOU NEED LEVERAGE TO BE PROACTIVE!
Small time facilities for small time programs
6-4-23:Now all of the mistakes Tulane has made finally catches up with them as they descend to CUSAAC.
- Show Me
- Tsunami
- Posts: 5100
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:24 pm
- Location: Saint Bernard
- Status: Offline
I agree. I hope the bowl games go away. It’s a joke to have so many. 6 wins to get a bowl is a sham. Our bowl games in the 70’s and ‘98 and Hawaii Bowl were well earned. The New Orleans Bowl under CJ was a sham. 7-5 should be the least for a bowl. 6-6 is a joke.winwave wrote:R320 I've thought about the facilities too but they have been getting big bucks for a long time. The facilities are likely paid for already. It's the enormous salaries that they'd have to figure out. But of course this won't come to pass. ESPN won't go under but even if they do other networks would step up with sizable offers. Where the G5's would suffer is with the elimination of all the Bowl Games that ESPN owns.
The hemorrhaging continues. ESPN loses another 500,000 subscribers in April. http://www.breitbart.com/sports/2018/05 ... ers-april/
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
Tulane Class of 1981
ESPN to curtail political talk because of viewers leavingDfromCT wrote: ↑Thu Feb 08, 2018 6:02 pmI agree, though SportsCenter for an hour or two every morning would be ok. I also like their 30-30 type shows. Hate their sports reporter shows particularly anything with Steven A Smith. Don't like when they talk politics. But they have some compelling content (meaning games mostly) whether you get it through your cable or computer.tpstulane wrote:They should only do games. Eliminate all in studio BS except for big events.DfromCT wrote:And yet any of us that watch tonights basketball game are watching an ESPN network
I'll admit it's a CT company, I take a little pride in watching it grow from nothing to a media leader, and I know some of the key executives. I don't defend them and recognize that they're a wounded dog at this point. I can also see the argument that ESPN money drove a wedge between the "haves" and "have nots" (aka P5 vs everyone else) in college sports.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47466/es ... ly-zanotti
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
Tulane Class of 1981
-
- Riptide
- Posts: 2766
- Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2015 7:26 pm
- Status: Offline
If I turn on ESPN, I want to see sports. I don't want to see "experts" or former professionals talking about sports. Remember in the early days of ESPN, if you turned it on at 3 AM in the summer, you saw Australian football. Now, you will see reruns of some talking head telling you HIS OPINION of why some baseball player is in a slump or where some football free agent will sign or why Tiger Woods will win the next 5 majors. Then they will throw in why all of these things are discriminatory against somebody and it's Trump's fault. Change the channel.
- RobertM320
- Green Wave
- Posts: 9894
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:18 pm
- Location: Covington, LA
- Contact:
- Status: Offline
tpstulane wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2019 10:22 pmESPN to curtail political talk because of viewers leavingDfromCT wrote: ↑Thu Feb 08, 2018 6:02 pmI agree, though SportsCenter for an hour or two every morning would be ok. I also like their 30-30 type shows. Hate their sports reporter shows particularly anything with Steven A Smith. Don't like when they talk politics. But they have some compelling content (meaning games mostly) whether you get it through your cable or computer.tpstulane wrote:They should only do games. Eliminate all in studio BS except for big events.DfromCT wrote:And yet any of us that watch tonights basketball game are watching an ESPN network
I'll admit it's a CT company, I take a little pride in watching it grow from nothing to a media leader, and I know some of the key executives. I don't defend them and recognize that they're a wounded dog at this point. I can also see the argument that ESPN money drove a wedge between the "haves" and "have nots" (aka P5 vs everyone else) in college sports.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/47466/es ... ly-zanotti
Its a simple formula really, and they've been too stupid to understand it. Their bell cow is football. Footballs most avid fans are in the Southeast. The Southeast is much more conservative than the rest of the country and they voted majority for Trump. Its a pretty logical conclusion that if you continually bash Trump, you're going to turn off a good section of your viewer base. Its why I never discuss personal politics with my customers. Business transactions are just that, business. I provide my services equally to anyone that wants to use them. To do otherwise would be just plain stupid.
"That mantra is the only consistent thing that never needs to ever change for the rest of this program’s existence because that is all that matters & as long as that keeps occurring, everything will handle itself" -- Nick Anderson
In an effort to boost viewership, ESPN may announce it will organize the TGG...Trans Gender Games, with live look in's from the Locker and Bath rooms
Last edited by golfnut69 on Wed May 22, 2019 2:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Be a Hero Today.... Adopt a Shelter Pet... The Beatles once sang "Can't Buy Me Love"... I disagree, unconditional Love can be bought, for the nominal adoption fee at your local Pet Shelter !
-
- Wild Pelican
- Posts: 13049
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
- Location: Stamford, CT
- Status: Online
You've got the answer! If you don't like the program, change the channel. It's not like there aren't a dozen other sports networks these days.anEngineer wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2019 7:11 am If I turn on ESPN, I want to see sports. I don't want to see "experts" or former professionals talking about sports. Remember in the early days of ESPN, if you turned it on at 3 AM in the summer, you saw Australian football. Now, you will see reruns of some talking head telling you HIS OPINION of why some baseball player is in a slump or where some football free agent will sign or why Tiger Woods will win the next 5 majors. Then they will throw in why all of these things are discriminatory against somebody and it's Trump's fault. Change the channel.
" If you laugh, you think, and you cry, that's a full day.." Jimmy V
-
- Swell
- Posts: 2358
- Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:16 pm
- Location: Houston, TX
- Status: Offline
ESPN was going to lose subscribers anyway, and I am personally of the opinion that trying to target politics in an effort to stem the tide really will not make much of a difference.
The ship has pretty much sailed on traditional tv packages.
The ship has pretty much sailed on traditional tv packages.
-
- Tsunami
- Posts: 7499
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 6:27 pm
- Status: Online
Bundle coming soon: Nov 12th
Disney's bundle of Disney+, ESPN+ and ad-supported Hulu will cost $12.99 per month
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/06/disney- ... month.html
Disney's bundle of Disney+, ESPN+ and ad-supported Hulu will cost $12.99 per month
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/06/disney- ... month.html
Be proactive, being reactive is for losers..
Tulane Class of 1981
Tulane Class of 1981
-
- Riptide
- Posts: 3203
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2016 11:24 am
- Status: Offline
It was a big announcement that was met with almost universal praise from insiders as a power move by Disney despite little info about the Disney+ details. Very competitive in the market, there will be many espn + subscribers
-
- Wild Pelican
- Posts: 13049
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:50 pm
- Location: Stamford, CT
- Status: Online
Why do you need the Disney+ and Hulu packages? Isn't all AAC content AFTER THIS YEAR going to be on ESPN or an ESPN app or network?
" If you laugh, you think, and you cry, that's a full day.." Jimmy V