Rejoice: Since 2011, ESPN has lost 3.2 million subscribers
- Thread starter ChiTownLion
- Start date
The espn family of networks and BTN is the only reason I keep my cable. What really bugs me is I pay for the "sports package" thru Xfinity and it doesn't include the SEC Network! Talk about a money grab, it's only included on their top tier package.
Yea I think you have to live in a state with an SEC team before it comes off their top tier package.
At least thats how Comcast was here in MD until University of Md was admitted to the Big 10.
The whole TV sports business business is facing a very uncertain future. Think about it -- only about one-third of cable households actually watch cable sports, but 90% of subscribers are paying for them. That is not sustainable. Ultimately it is going to affect teams (including college teams) but especially it is going to affect athlete salaries -- which right now are subsidized by cable TV.
Right now it's the 20-somethings -- my kid's generation -- that is a lot less attached to sports programming than my generation was. They would rather watch sports in a bar with their friends -- and they're just not going to do the $150 cable bill. Some will, but the numbers are very small compared with my generation.
But as we move toward a la carte TV it's a much broader trend. My mother in law is living on Social Security, has very little to spend -- but her Comcast bill is $140 a month even though all she watches is local TV and the DIY channel. It is crazy unfair that she is forced to pay ESPN $6 a month, BTN $3 a month or whatever it is so that she can get the DIY network.
At some point somebody is going to offer her the DIY channel a la carte and then that will be that.
She's kind of an extreme example, but there might be 40 million cable subscribers in a somewhat similar situation -- they don't watch much, they don't watch any sports, so if they get the choice, they'll drop ESPN and BTN in a heart beat.
I think it will even affect PSU eventually. The BTN is paying out crazy money right now -- $20 million? But that will not continue indefinitely.
Right now it's the 20-somethings -- my kid's generation -- that is a lot less attached to sports programming than my generation was. They would rather watch sports in a bar with their friends -- and they're just not going to do the $150 cable bill. Some will, but the numbers are very small compared with my generation.
But as we move toward a la carte TV it's a much broader trend. My mother in law is living on Social Security, has very little to spend -- but her Comcast bill is $140 a month even though all she watches is local TV and the DIY channel. It is crazy unfair that she is forced to pay ESPN $6 a month, BTN $3 a month or whatever it is so that she can get the DIY network.
At some point somebody is going to offer her the DIY channel a la carte and then that will be that.
She's kind of an extreme example, but there might be 40 million cable subscribers in a somewhat similar situation -- they don't watch much, they don't watch any sports, so if they get the choice, they'll drop ESPN and BTN in a heart beat.
I think it will even affect PSU eventually. The BTN is paying out crazy money right now -- $20 million? But that will not continue indefinitely.
Pride, go to Direct, they have what you need. I cut the cord last week and cut my bill in half.
My folks are the same way. Not only do they not watch the BTN, they don't even know they get it, and the same is true of a bunch of other channels. And yet they pay for them all. Between older folks being more into TV than younger folks and cable companies making people buy 200 channels just to watch the 10 they actually want, old folks are getting screwed big time and it's sad to see.
I got rid of cable last year and got a Roku and it was liberating. The cable company was still charging me to rent a modem though, since I still have Internet, but I recently ordered a modem from Amazon and when it comes in and I hook it up I'm going to take the cable company's modem back to them and at that point I'll have nothing at all...no modem, no cable box, nothing...that belongs to the cable company in my house. And my monthly bill will be over $100 less per month than it would be if I hadn't abandoned cable. After about 11 months I'll re-coup the money I spent on the modem and from then on the $9 or so per month I used to pay for modem rental will be pure profit. And I spent a little more on a nicer modem so it wouldn't go obsolete for a long time.
That said, the only real killer for me in the year without cable was football in the fall. I may give in and buy Sling TV for $20 per month for football season since it includes ESPN and ESPN 2 along with about 10 other channels. I can do without all the idiot talking heads like Corso and Herbstreit and I can do without annoying Sports Center but it's the football games themselves that are hard to miss.
Most of these stations are part of a package. So how can the statistics vary from those in a common package? You can't opt out of individual programs. Is this based on feedback?
Nobody should EVER rent a modem from the cable companies. You can buy the same model modem for $40 online or god forbid to to best buy and pay 75. Take it out of the box and unhook the aux cord and plug it into the new one. Paying 12-15 bucks a month to rent a piece of junk is outrageous.
Count me in as one of them. Other than PSU games, espn has not gotten one second of time from me since November 2011. Don't miss it even a little....
Since no PSU games espn radio has been totally cut off as well since Nov11 and life is all good!
Time Warner Cable is providing my Internet service. And yes, I'm worried about exactly that, namely that as people drop cable TV Time Warner Cable will make it up by jacking up their Internet bill. Maybe if the Internet becomes important enough it will be considered a public utility. Right now the service I get from the electric and water companies greatly surpasses that I get from TWC.
Same here. Other than psu games, i never, ever watch. Love that soccer left the station as well so they don't have me hooked there either. Also, if it's a PSU home game, then i don't watch that either. I'm at the game 
Eat my a$$, ESPN.
Eat my a$$, ESPN.
Like so many, there was a time that the 4 letter family of networks was a go to in our household...now only PSU and Villanova games....oh, and golf (I keep the volume down so I don't have to listen to Berman or Tirico, et al). So close to cutting the cord...maybe someday.
with ESPNs financial predicament I wonder what that may portend for the following:
The BTN and the Big Tens next TV contract?
The Longhorn network, which seems like a huge waste of money for ESPN?
I'd be curious on Art's take on the above and the future of cable and a company like Comcast?
The BTN and the Big Tens next TV contract?
The Longhorn network, which seems like a huge waste of money for ESPN?
I'd be curious on Art's take on the above and the future of cable and a company like Comcast?
Wrong. When ratings and viewership goes down, so do the sponsors and advertisers. That's their meal ticket. I couldn't even tell you who advertises on their networks. Company's paying millions must love to hear that. It's all about advertising dollars.
I agree with your sentiment, but the viewership going down is reflected in cancelled subscriptions. You are a subscriber, and espn sells ads based on the number of subscribers. You may not physically be watching, but espn is still getting paid as if you do. It's not like they know whether or not you have your tv on their channel. Advertisers are the only ones losing out here, and people who pay $7 a month for espn but watch it 7 times a year.
