OT - Karma baby - ESPN is losing subscribers by the millions

I'm not in the US but I heard ESPN is part of the base package? Does that mean people are cutting the cord?

Wheelman said:

I'm not in the US but I heard ESPN is part of the base package? Does that mean people are cutting the cord?

Click to expand...

Kinda sorta! They're either canceling their sports packages or finding alternative methods of sports programming transmission.

It just tears at the Heart strings doesn`t it? Nope..no it doesn`t, eff you ESPN!

fourhour said:

My DTV contract is due in January. Currently looking into internet tv with Roku and Amazon so I can cut the cord. My roadblocks involve the DVR aspect of the Genie that my Bride heavily favors.

I'm not too internet savvy so I need some guidance but it is going to happen. The sooner the better.

But on a sidenote, I watched the Monday game on Channel 5. It was still an ESPN broadcast on a local channel. Can't get away from it.

Click to expand...

I am in petty much the exact same situation. Plus, I don't know about you, but I'm not within range of pats home telecast. So unfortunately, I HAVE to have Sunday ticket somehow. I heard you can get it thru xbox one or ps4. I figured i could buy both for the price of 6 months of dtv. I also wonder about the dvr issue.

If you figure it out, let me know.

Schmo said:

If you figure it out, let me know.

Click to expand...

There's no easy answer, especially if you aren't in the Pats TV coverage area.

This thread:

OT: Good Read on 'Cord Cutters' Watching the NFL | New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard

gave a good summary of where things stood as of the beginning of this season.

In my case, I'm making things work with a TV antenna (since I live in Pats coverage area) and a Verizon smart phone (just happen to be a VZW customer and they provide coverage via the NFL Mobile app) for the few non-OTA games I care to watch.

Nikolai said:

It's definitely a good point, but here's the lowdown. Back in 2003, I applied for and was offered a low-mid management position at ESPN. When I saw their salary offer, I almost laughed. ESPN pays their lower employees peanuts, almost literally. When I confronted them about the salary offer, the reply was that having ESPN on your resume was worth the 50% below market pay.

I know someone who worked as a programmer there. He did have student loans, but on his salary there, he couldn't afford an apartment in Bristol that wasn't in the ghetto, so he lived with his parents in Southington.

Click to expand...

They have also had "hires" from Husson College's media program. They got paid next to nothing, and were used in the trucks outside the stadiums doing the broadcast and various camera angles. Their rationale (which the college kids bought into) was that it would look good on their resumes, that they had interned at ESPN. It's true that they got real-world experience, but ESPN got some actual talent (the Husson program is VERY good) for next to nothing, and how many full time employees lost out on those jobs because of that?

I only watch ESPN when the Patriots or Alabama is playing. Otherwise, they're a "no-go" channel for me.

ESPN's subscriber base continues to shrink - Fortune

Matthew Ingram is usually pretty solid. His take, although he got it straight from one or more Wall Street analysts, is that ESPN is out $650 million in subscription revenue plus $250 million in ads (with little or no offsetting cost reduction, so that's straight out of pre-tax profits). He further thinks that ESPN didn't see this coming.

And he says that ESPN is a large fraction of Disney's overall perceived value. I don't know the numbers well enough to judge whether that makes sense -- but if losing $900 million from annual profit is an annoyance rather than catastrophe, then they're probably indeed making numerous billions of dollars per year ...

Can't nose dive fast enough for me.

Fencer said:

ESPN's subscriber base continues to shrink - Fortune

Matthew Ingram is usually pretty solid. His take, although he got it straight from one or more Wall Street analysts, is that ESPN is out $650 million in subscription revenue plus $250 million in ads (with little or no offsetting cost reduction, so that's straight out of pre-tax profits). He further thinks that ESPN didn't see this coming.

And he says that ESPN is a large fraction of Disney's overall perceived value. I don't know the numbers well enough to judge whether that makes sense -- but if losing $900 million from annual profit is an annoyance rather than catastrophe, then they're probably indeed making numerous billions of dollars per year ...

Click to expand...

ESPN is the largest percentage of 'company value' for Disney according to a recent estimate. From memory I believe it was something approaching 40% (ESPN is considered the third highest valued media company). Keep in mind this is an estimate as ESPN is not a standalone company, however, they would be ranked approx. 80th most valuable company using that estimate.

No doubt whatsoever ESPN's value is based on its insanely sweet subscriber fee revenue. Consider: 100 million subs at 72$ per year. That's 7.2 billion in gross revenue (i believe everything ESPN is 12 billion in revenue).

ESPN has been a major beneficiary of politics and lobbying. They have a major stake in keeping things exactly the way they are. Changes have been attempted (unbundling) but ESPN and a whole bunch of others have called out the hounds to stop it. Cord cutting is in effect consumers doing a roundabout on the bundling cabal.

ESPN while still riding very high is, arguably, in a bit of trouble. They have huge contractual monies invested in the NFL and just recently paid an insane amount of money to carry the NBA (as well as others). I believe it was something in the area of 5.5 billion per year just for the carry rights. So you take away a billion in revenue and they feel the heat. And the good news for people like me who hate almost everything ESPN stands for is their sub numbers are almost surely to keep going down. As they do/as cord cutters keep happening, the unbundling will be forced to happen (D Day for ESPN).

Side note: for those wondering how will they watch NFL and other stuff from cord cutting. Don't worry, that train will be arriving in the station soon. The NFL and all the rest will be coming for you out their in cord cut land one way or another. This time, however, they middle man won't necessarily be ESPN.

Good. When I see a headline like " Golden States 17-0 start is the best start to a season tied only with St. Louis Maroons of baseball in ALL FOUR MAJOR SPORTS....." They can't go away soon enough.

Fencer said:

He further thinks that ESPN didn't see this coming.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying it's the reason, but BSPN figuring they can alienate the seventh largest TV market in America (Boston) is a pretty big sign of hubris.

betterthanthealternative said:

If that's the ESPN management model, to have a dramatic class distinction inside their organization, with a handful of very highly paid celebrities paired with legions of poorly paid people who do 99% of the work, then they don't really have a chance at long term success anyway. The marketplace needs to replace them; perhaps that's what is going on.

It fits that the NFL offices would build their business model to be tightly wound up with ESPN. They have a similar set of lenses and beliefs.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that model is used by more organizations than just ESPN.

NormZauchin said:

Unfortunately, that model is used by more organizations than just ESPN.

Click to expand...

I have a reporter friend who turned down a job at the Wall Street Journal because he found the pay unacceptably low.

Eh, it's the low level blue collar schlubs that are paying the piper for this. As mentioned before, the true scum are still employed there. Also, a walking penis with bifocals is hosting his own night time version of "SportsCenter".

espn made a name for itelf when no one felt 24-7 sports news was feasible. Now that espn built its market, everyone wants a portion of its market, even the teams themselves. The end game is cable t.v. dies. The top 3 sports will, team up under one banner, and will controll all revenue under a subscription based internet network, "National Sports"

ESPN is unwatchable. The idiots running that circus have destroyed the brand. Perhaps if they paid mid-management better, they'd be able to attract some real talent. Instead they just get a bunch of follower-type personalities that cater to whatever angle the "name" talent suggests. There's no leadership there.

Everything that comes out of there is shallow, ignorant, or misinformed.

PYPER said:

Everything that comes out of there is shallow, ignorant, or misinformed.

Click to expand...

With one exception, when they are being the (advanced or supportive) mouthpiece of Goodell's NFL* office.

"I applaud ESPN.

Wait... what... they fired me?!?!

F*** 'em."