What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Grantland.com (1 Viewer)

Very interesting article in the WSJ journal today (google search: ESPN Tightens Its Belt as Pressure on It Mounts)

on the bind ESPN finds itself in overall with rising costs everywhere and diminishing subsribers. Makes it sound like Simmons (and Olbermann for that matter) never had a chance.

The specifics: they've lost almost 8 million subscribers since July 2011 and have seen SportsCenter ratings sag the past year. BTW they can activiate their out with SlingTV. The WSJ says to make the math work, if they want to do their own standalone streaming service they'd need to charge $30 a month to be revenue neutral and that cable systems would undercut them. Makes it sound like ESPN has some pretty big legacy revenue and cost problems.
Other than their live sports (which they do exceptionally well) all of their products are crap. Their talk shows, sports center, their website is the worst and even that stupid magazine if it's still around.
:goodposting: The only thing I have any interest in with ESPN is live sports, specifically college football and NFL. Otherwise they offer nothing interesting and it's certainly not worth a subscription fee.

 
Other than their live sports (which they do exceptionally well)
Their baseball telecasts have become unwatchable mostly because of how awful Kruk and Schilling are together. They obviously despise each other, and Schilling begins every sentence with "When I played....", and Kruk just grunts for three hours.

 
Probably never happen due to Disney contract but I was kinda hoping Cousin Sal would do a weekly podcast and have Simmons on to guess the lines. Could even give him a stupid nickname and have him be like an old school masked wrestler that everyone knows is really Dusty Rhodes/Simmons. "I'm Cousin Sal and this week I'm joined by The Night Ranger!"

 
Very interesting article in the WSJ journal today (google search: ESPN Tightens Its Belt as Pressure on It Mounts)

on the bind ESPN finds itself in overall with rising costs everywhere and diminishing subsribers. Makes it sound like Simmons (and Olbermann for that matter) never had a chance.

The specifics: they've lost almost 8 million subscribers since July 2011 and have seen SportsCenter ratings sag the past year. BTW they can activiate their out with SlingTV. The WSJ says to make the math work, if they want to do their own standalone streaming service they'd need to charge $30 a month to be revenue neutral and that cable systems would undercut them. Makes it sound like ESPN has some pretty big legacy revenue and cost problems.
I hope this is all true. ESPN stink so bad now, and despite them covering the NFL ad nauseam, their actual coverage sucks. They give most games like a 20-second highlight clip and move on to letting one of their 332 talking heads blather on for minutes. Awful.

 
Very interesting article in the WSJ journal today (google search: ESPN Tightens Its Belt as Pressure on It Mounts)

on the bind ESPN finds itself in overall with rising costs everywhere and diminishing subsribers. Makes it sound like Simmons (and Olbermann for that matter) never had a chance.

The specifics: they've lost almost 8 million subscribers since July 2011 and have seen SportsCenter ratings sag the past year. BTW they can activiate their out with SlingTV. The WSJ says to make the math work, if they want to do their own standalone streaming service they'd need to charge $30 a month to be revenue neutral and that cable systems would undercut them. Makes it sound like ESPN has some pretty big legacy revenue and cost problems.
I hope this is all true. ESPN stink so bad now, and despite them covering the NFL ad nauseam, their actual coverage sucks. They give most games like a 20-second highlight clip and move on to letting one of their 332 talking heads blather on for minutes. Awful.
Agree with all this...

However, I sleep with the TV on...and out of force of habit I cannot sleep unless it's on ESPN for some reason. I always go to sleep with Sportscenter on :lol: and have for probably 15 years now.

 
Probably never happen due to Disney contract but I was kinda hoping Cousin Sal would do a weekly podcast and have Simmons on to guess the lines. Could even give him a stupid nickname and have him be like an old school masked wrestler that everyone knows is really Dusty Rhodes/Simmons. "I'm Cousin Sal and this week I'm joined by The Night Ranger!"
:lol: Great idea. He can do his Andrew Luck voice as his disguise.

 
Very interesting article in the WSJ journal today (google search: ESPN Tightens Its Belt as Pressure on It Mounts)

on the bind ESPN finds itself in overall with rising costs everywhere and diminishing subsribers. Makes it sound like Simmons (and Olbermann for that matter) never had a chance.

The specifics: they've lost almost 8 million subscribers since July 2011 and have seen SportsCenter ratings sag the past year. BTW they can activiate their out with SlingTV. The WSJ says to make the math work, if they want to do their own standalone streaming service they'd need to charge $30 a month to be revenue neutral and that cable systems would undercut them. Makes it sound like ESPN has some pretty big legacy revenue and cost problems.
I hope this is all true. ESPN stink so bad now, and despite them covering the NFL ad nauseam, their actual coverage sucks. They give most games like a 20-second highlight clip and move on to letting one of their 332 talking heads blather on for minutes. Awful.
Agree with all this...

However, I sleep with the TV on...and out of force of habit I cannot sleep unless it's on ESPN for some reason. I always go to sleep with Sportscenter on :lol: and have for probably 15 years now.
I can't name a single current Sportscenter anchor. I remember when they were so good, you couldn't help but know who they were.

 
Very interesting article in the WSJ journal today (google search: ESPN Tightens Its Belt as Pressure on It Mounts)

on the bind ESPN finds itself in overall with rising costs everywhere and diminishing subsribers. Makes it sound like Simmons (and Olbermann for that matter) never had a chance.

The specifics: they've lost almost 8 million subscribers since July 2011 and have seen SportsCenter ratings sag the past year. BTW they can activiate their out with SlingTV. The WSJ says to make the math work, if they want to do their own standalone streaming service they'd need to charge $30 a month to be revenue neutral and that cable systems would undercut them. Makes it sound like ESPN has some pretty big legacy revenue and cost problems.
I hope this is all true. ESPN stink so bad now, and despite them covering the NFL ad nauseam, their actual coverage sucks. They give most games like a 20-second highlight clip and move on to letting one of their 332 talking heads blather on for minutes. Awful.
NFL Matchup has always been a top-notch show. They bury it in the schedule - one of my best things about a DVR is that it grabs that show for me.

 
Very interesting article in the WSJ journal today (google search: ESPN Tightens Its Belt as Pressure on It Mounts)

on the bind ESPN finds itself in overall with rising costs everywhere and diminishing subsribers. Makes it sound like Simmons (and Olbermann for that matter) never had a chance.

The specifics: they've lost almost 8 million subscribers since July 2011 and have seen SportsCenter ratings sag the past year. BTW they can activiate their out with SlingTV. The WSJ says to make the math work, if they want to do their own standalone streaming service they'd need to charge $30 a month to be revenue neutral and that cable systems would undercut them. Makes it sound like ESPN has some pretty big legacy revenue and cost problems.
I hope this is all true. ESPN stink so bad now, and despite them covering the NFL ad nauseam, their actual coverage sucks. They give most games like a 20-second highlight clip and move on to letting one of their 332 talking heads blather on for minutes. Awful.
Agree with all this...However, I sleep with the TV on...and out of force of habit I cannot sleep unless it's on ESPN for some reason. I always go to sleep with Sportscenter on :lol: and have for probably 15 years now.
MLB Network FTW

waking up to Heidi Watney :wub:

 
Very interesting article in the WSJ journal today (google search: ESPN Tightens Its Belt as Pressure on It Mounts)

on the bind ESPN finds itself in overall with rising costs everywhere and diminishing subsribers. Makes it sound like Simmons (and Olbermann for that matter) never had a chance.

The specifics: they've lost almost 8 million subscribers since July 2011 and have seen SportsCenter ratings sag the past year. BTW they can activiate their out with SlingTV. The WSJ says to make the math work, if they want to do their own standalone streaming service they'd need to charge $30 a month to be revenue neutral and that cable systems would undercut them. Makes it sound like ESPN has some pretty big legacy revenue and cost problems.
Other than their live sports (which they do exceptionally well) all of their products are crap. Their talk shows, sports center, their website is the worst and even that stupid magazine if it's still around.
i really enjoy PTI and to a much lesser degree Around the Horn...but other than that I am right there with you. Outside of a live game, I can't recall the last time I watched. I think I tuned in for the Hernandez stuff because that was just surreal.

 
I don't watch PTI and I'm one of the six or seven people nationwide who actually likes Kornheiser.

The rumors about ESPN's financial difficulties continue to circulate. I really think the way we buy sports content on tv is gonna change dramatically in the next decade.

 
Why don't leagues just cut out the middle men (ESPN/locals/TNT/etc.) and have their own channels?
Like the NFL network?
Like the NFL network + all the Sunday ticket channels (minus the Direct TV crap) without selling games to ESPN or Fox or CBS, yes.
Because the middle men are paying them billions of dollars for the privilege of airing games. And they can afford to because they have millions more subscribers than the sports networks would be able to get on their own. For now at least, until we get more cord cutting.This was a really good article on ESPN potentially being a bubble about to burst, based on the same info others were talking about earlier. The effect on league revenues from cord cutting isn't something I thought of before.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/is-espn-a-giant-bubble-about-to-burst-071215

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why don't leagues just cut out the middle men (ESPN/locals/TNT/etc.) and have their own channels?
Like the NFL network?
Like the NFL network + all the Sunday ticket channels (minus the Direct TV crap) without selling games to ESPN or Fox or CBS, yes.
Because the middle men are paying them billions of dollars for the privilege of airing games. And they can afford to because they have millions more subscribers than the sports networks would be able to get on their own. For now at least, until we get more cord cutting.This was a really good article on ESPN potentially being a bubble about to burst, based on the same info others were talking about earlier. The effect on league revenues from cord cutting isn't something I thought of before.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/is-espn-a-giant-bubble-about-to-burst-071215
The league's wouldn't make as much from the subs but couldn't they recoup it from the selling the advertising directly?

 
Maybe. I assume selling ad space for every airing of every event they have would require significantly more infrastructure. Otherwise, it's just a different middle man you're talking about.

And to be honest, they probably won't make it up. Many times these deals don't result in profits directly for the networks. It's used as a loss leader for their other programming. Think of how much CBS #### Nantz and co are plugging during the NCAA tourney.

 
Maybe. I assume selling ad space for every airing of every event they have would require significantly more infrastructure. Otherwise, it's just a different middle man you're talking about.

And to be honest, they probably won't make it up. Many times these deals don't result in profits directly for the networks. It's used as a loss leader for their other programming. Think of how much CBS #### Nantz and co are plugging during the NCAA tourney.
I agree. I think it's not just an ESPN bubble, I think it's a sports' revenue bubble. Get ready to see declining salary caps and player salaries.

 
Why don't leagues just cut out the middle men (ESPN/locals/TNT/etc.) and have their own channels?
Like the NFL network?
Like the NFL network + all the Sunday ticket channels (minus the Direct TV crap) without selling games to ESPN or Fox or CBS, yes.
Because the middle men are paying them billions of dollars for the privilege of airing games. And they can afford to because they have millions more subscribers than the sports networks would be able to get on their own. For now at least, until we get more cord cutting.This was a really good article on ESPN potentially being a bubble about to burst, based on the same info others were talking about earlier. The effect on league revenues from cord cutting isn't something I thought of before.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/is-espn-a-giant-bubble-about-to-burst-071215
Fascinating article, including the brief ESPN response at the end in which they claimed that something like half of all subscribers tune in to ESPN at some point during the month (instead of the 25% that Travis guessed). I wonder how true that is?

 
Maybe. I assume selling ad space for every airing of every event they have would require significantly more infrastructure. Otherwise, it's just a different middle man you're talking about.

And to be honest, they probably won't make it up. Many times these deals don't result in profits directly for the networks. It's used as a loss leader for their other programming. Think of how much CBS #### Nantz and co are plugging during the NCAA tourney.
I agree. I think it's not just an ESPN bubble, I think it's a sports' revenue bubble. Get ready to see declining salary caps and player salaries.
Or get ready to see the Detroit F150s and other similarly named teams

 
Why don't leagues just cut out the middle men (ESPN/locals/TNT/etc.) and have their own channels?
Like the NFL network?
Like the NFL network + all the Sunday ticket channels (minus the Direct TV crap) without selling games to ESPN or Fox or CBS, yes.
Outside the US, and that's exactly what I do. 1 fee for the year, every game every week right through to the Superbowl with Condensed and All 22 versions of each available afterwards. Pretty sure it's the same as the Rewind package except I can stream live.

 
Why don't leagues just cut out the middle men (ESPN/locals/TNT/etc.) and have their own channels?
Like the NFL network?
Like the NFL network + all the Sunday ticket channels (minus the Direct TV crap) without selling games to ESPN or Fox or CBS, yes.
Outside the US, and that's exactly what I do. 1 fee for the year, every game every week right through to the Superbowl with Condensed and All 22 versions of each available afterwards. Pretty sure it's the same as the Rewind package except I can stream live.
I do the same (Canada - Game Pass). I'm trying to figure out why they don't sell that to the cable companies and cut out the other channels.

 
Why don't leagues just cut out the middle men (ESPN/locals/TNT/etc.) and have their own channels?
Like the NFL network?
Like the NFL network + all the Sunday ticket channels (minus the Direct TV crap) without selling games to ESPN or Fox or CBS, yes.
Outside the US, and that's exactly what I do. 1 fee for the year, every game every week right through to the Superbowl with Condensed and All 22 versions of each available afterwards. Pretty sure it's the same as the Rewind package except I can stream live.
I do the same (Canada - Game Pass). I'm trying to figure out why they don't sell that to the cable companies and cut out the other channels.
If my math is correct, the NFL currently makes:

5 billion from the networks

1.5B DirectTV (and FWIW my guess is Hausfeld is going to win this lawsuit...they know what they are doing)

1.16B NFL Network

Total is now 7.66 billion in national TV revenue. So to get back to that figure they would either need to get cable systems to have each subscriber pay ESPN like fees of $6.60 a month (which won't happen) or charge each of its 19 million or so weekly viewers an astonishing $403 a year. It's figures like $403 that makes the networks and the leagues want these products bundled as long as possible.

 
Why don't leagues just cut out the middle men (ESPN/locals/TNT/etc.) and have their own channels?
Like the NFL network?
Like the NFL network + all the Sunday ticket channels (minus the Direct TV crap) without selling games to ESPN or Fox or CBS, yes.
Outside the US, and that's exactly what I do. 1 fee for the year, every game every week right through to the Superbowl with Condensed and All 22 versions of each available afterwards. Pretty sure it's the same as the Rewind package except I can stream live.
I do the same (Canada - Game Pass). I'm trying to figure out why they don't sell that to the cable companies and cut out the other channels.
If my math is correct, the NFL currently makes:

5 billion from the networks

1.5B DirectTV (and FWIW my guess is Hausfeld is going to win this lawsuit...they know what they are doing)

1.16B NFL Network

Total is now 7.66 billion in national TV revenue. So to get back to that figure they would either need to get cable systems to have each subscriber pay ESPN like fees of $6.60 a month (which won't happen) or charge each of its 19 million or so weekly viewers an astonishing $403 a year. It's figures like $403 that makes the networks and the leagues want these products bundled as long as possible.
That makes sense. So what does a network make in advertising revenue? From the Super Bowl alone, networks get $250M~.

 
Why don't leagues just cut out the middle men (ESPN/locals/TNT/etc.) and have their own channels?
Like the NFL network?
Like the NFL network + all the Sunday ticket channels (minus the Direct TV crap) without selling games to ESPN or Fox or CBS, yes.
Outside the US, and that's exactly what I do. 1 fee for the year, every game every week right through to the Superbowl with Condensed and All 22 versions of each available afterwards. Pretty sure it's the same as the Rewind package except I can stream live.
I do the same (Canada - Game Pass). I'm trying to figure out why they don't sell that to the cable companies and cut out the other channels.
If my math is correct, the NFL currently makes:

5 billion from the networks

1.5B DirectTV (and FWIW my guess is Hausfeld is going to win this lawsuit...they know what they are doing)

1.16B NFL Network

Total is now 7.66 billion in national TV revenue. So to get back to that figure they would either need to get cable systems to have each subscriber pay ESPN like fees of $6.60 a month (which won't happen) or charge each of its 19 million or so weekly viewers an astonishing $403 a year. It's figures like $403 that makes the networks and the leagues want these products bundled as long as possible.
That makes sense. So what does a network make in advertising revenue? From the Super Bowl alone, networks get $250M~.
The Fox article says ESPN makes 25% of its total revenues from advertising, so that's another 1.65 billion....so I guess you'd back out the 403 to 300...point still stands though...how many of the 19 million would pay that much especially since that's on the viewer level, not household/point of watching level.

Plus that doesn't include the extra costs involved in setting this up. Can they do it sure, but as of today the economics don't make sense. They will if ESPN gets de-packaged (for lack of a better term), but that's probably a good 5-10 years still out (though it's probably closer to 5 than 10 these days).

 
Crap, my math was all wrong. I was thinking cable fees only accounted for 25% of revenues and advertising the rest. But if advertising accounts for only 25%, then losing 7% of your subscribers -- your biggest revenue flow -- every year will really hurt. Their margins must already be really tight with those giant annual rights fees. Guys holding down those nice talking head jobs there must be getting a little nervous.

 
Deadspin cites numerous unnamed Grantland writers who fear for the site's existence, and/or think Connelly's wrecking the shop. Also noted that a lot of writer's contracts are up at the end of this year, and Wesley Morris is already in talks with the NYT.

 
Deadspin cites numerous unnamed Grantland writers who fear for the site's existence, and/or think Connelly's wrecking the shop. Also noted that a lot of writer's contracts are up at the end of this year, and Wesley Morris is already in talks with the NYT.
Shame...

I don't care for the site much but I love the podcasts.

Hollywood Prospectus, the Jacoby and Juliette reality tv one (I don't watch reality tv shows, but get all my news from the podcast)...

Also Food News on Mondays is pretty funny and good - it's 15 minutes.

The Game of Thrones recaps were great too.

The NFL Podcast is really good

If they put the hammer on those, I'm not going to be happy.

 
Deadspin cites numerous unnamed Grantland writers who fear for the site's existence, and/or think Connelly's wrecking the shop. Also noted that a lot of writer's contracts are up at the end of this year, and Wesley Morris is already in talks with the NYT.
Shame...

I don't care for the site much but I love the podcasts.

Hollywood Prospectus, the Jacoby and Juliette reality tv one (I don't watch reality tv shows, but get all my news from the podcast)...

Also Food News on Mondays is pretty funny and good - it's 15 minutes.

The Game of Thrones recaps were great too.

The NFL Podcast is really good

If they put the hammer on those, I'm not going to be happy.
They'll just pop up somewhere else in a different form. Maybe a couple of the voices change but you'll basically be able to get the same content.

About the only person who is a lock to stick around is Jalen. He's an ABC guy through and through.

 
Did not have Wesley Morris pegged as the crown jewel to steal away from the Grantland staff. I find most of his stuff predictable.

Hope Lowe and Keri don't get absorbed into 538 as a merger. That site destroyed everything that was interesting and insightful about Neil Paine's writing.

 
A lot of the site's contributors are fine in their blogging roles but aren't major talents. Zach Lowe is the only guy I will follow to a new site (I'd probably feel the same about Keri if I had the same active interest in baseball as I do the NBA). I get the sense that Lowe is enjoying his increased access to the league through ESPN although I'm sure he could go write for any sports outlet he wanted.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top