Sports Illustrated Falls to the Internet

[DropKickFlutie]

I have truly fond memories too of going to the local store to peruse the latest Blockbuster movies.

.

 

[Tunescribe]

So my point is buy bitcoin.

I did and it's sucking.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

This one was on the opposite wall.
View attachment 24520

next to this one..

View attachment 24521

My folks didn't know what to make of my musical tastes....

You too had Heather Thomas in the pink bikini on one wall, Maiden on the other wall? We must have hired the same interior decorator.

 

[RobertWeathers]

You too had Heather Thomas in the pink bikini on one wall, Maiden on the other wall? We must have hired the same interior decorator.

Eddie the Head enjoyed the view.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

when I was a lil kid, I thought the first 3 letters of “Illustrated” were all “L’s”

 

[njpatsfan]

Get woke - go broke.

 

[Nikolai]

My biggest pet peeve is how often the "news" is just an advertisement for a network's other divisions. ABC/Disney is the worst. It's amazing how often the "news" on ABC is just a report on the latest Marvel movie that opened, the newest ride at WDW or the goings-on at ESPN.

Coming back from being deployed and suffering through AFN commercials, this was the first thing that stuck out to me about American television. Most "news" is an ad for something someone is selling. And most commercials are for food or pills.

 

[TheFlyingWedge]

When I worked at ESPN back in 2009, I heard from a lot of folks over there in Marketing how their website is not all that important. They were also dismissive about online sports competitors like Bleacher Report, Yahoo sports, etc. Such Fools!

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Here's the kind of "quality" writing you'll be seeing on SI going forward... (read thread)

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Hah! It was so bad they deleted the tweet!

 

[fnordcircle]

I really just can't deal with how people wait until a thing is dead to suddenly romanticize it.

It's like the people who act like reading something bound in leather and printed on paper is so much more meaningful than reading it on a kindle.

Sports Illustrated doesn't ****ing matter. I'm glad it's dead.

 

[maust]

Sports Illustrated doesn't ****ing matter. I'm glad it's dead.

And yet they always spoke so highly of you

 

[IcyPatriot]

I really just can't deal with how people wait until a thing is dead to suddenly romanticize it.

It's like the people who act like reading something bound in leather and printed on paper is so much more meaningful than reading it on a kindle.

Sports Illustrated doesn't ****ing matter. I'm glad it's dead.

Can't say that I care either ...
sad to see good people lose their jobs but it is what it is - they will find a spot.

 

[IcyPatriot]

And yet they always spoke so highly of you

Fnord was on the list for the next body issue?

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

When I worked at ESPN back in 2009, I heard from a lot of folks over there in Marketing how their website is not all that important. They were also dismissive about online sports competitors like Bleacher Report, Yahoo sports, etc. Such Fools!

Well they're in good company. From some of the "experts" laughing at the potential of TV when TV was first introduced, to Steve Balmer(I believe) the exec at Microsoft who dismissed the potential of the Smartphone to compete with the desktop OS (ouch! Microsoft was the iron fisted ruler of tech until the smartphone, Google and Apple, ate their lunch). But 2009 is pretty late in the game to still not have some realization of what might be on the horizon.

Any media company that relies on paper print for large chunks of their revenue are up a remote waterway in a flotation craft that has no means of propulsion. This same underlying complexity also applies to companies like ESPN that rely on forced subscription revenue for a huge amount of their revenue. While print was an easier path of migration to reading online and tanking print media companies, the cable/satellite sub forced dues death will/is taking longer because the change for the average consumer is much more involved (and to an extent thanks to government's protection), But it is coming and ESPN, among others, see it, now it, and there isn't much they can do about it. They'll get some subs online but many people when given the option will not pay for a subscription. Their fees revenue will continue to drop. And, just IMHO, it can't come soon enough. Forced sub fees that many people pay for channels they don't watch is a laughable waste of money in the Internet streaming age. Next time you're channel surfing and you go by ESPN and a number of other channels, try to think of it this way: ESPN costs me 4$, channel A costs me 50 cents, Channel B costs me 30 cents etc etc. Add up the costs of those channels you don't watch then multiply by 12. That's just a crazy annual waste of money.

 

[Nikolai]

It's like the people who act like reading something bound in leather and printed on paper is so much more meaningful than reading it on a kindle.

I generally agree with your post, but on this one point, I'm a brontosaurus. I still like the feel of a book in my hands and read 2-3 a month when in civilization.

I have a study with many leather bound books

(packed in a storage unit right now...but still)

 

[fnordcircle]

I generally agree with your post, but on this one point, I'm a brontosaurus. I still like the feel of a book in my hands and read 2-3 a month when in civilization.

I have a study with many leather bound books

(packed in a storage unit right now...but still)

So I don't think it's wrong to prefer a book any more than it is wrong that I prefer to use a computer than a phone.

But I don't sit around kvetching about kids being all about phones nowadays and neglecting PCs but you see a good number of book lovers who want to try to paint pervasive phone (and to a lesser extent PC) usage as the death of thought. I guarantee you my young adult children have spent more time reading, albeit on their phones, than I did and I was a voracious book reader in my youth.

So love books but as long as you don't think reading the same thing as an ebook on a digital screen is a lesser activity then you and I have as much beef as a pair of vegans.

 

[Nikolai]

So I don't think it's wrong to prefer a book any more than it is wrong that I prefer to use a computer than a phone.

But I don't sit around kvetching about kids being all about phones nowadays and neglecting PCs but you see a good number of book lovers who want to try to paint pervasive phone (and to a lesser extent PC) usage as the death of thought. I guarantee you my young adult children have spent more time reading, albeit on their phones, than I did and I was a voracious book reader in my youth.

So love books but as long as you don't think reading the same thing as an ebook on a digital screen is a lesser activity then you and I have as much beef as a pair of vegans.

Agreed on all counts.

My kids definitely read more now than I did as a kid.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Yup. Totally doomed, as @Ian said:
https://deadspin.com/inside-themavens-plan-to-turn-sports-illustrated-into-a-1838756286