ESPN Profit Plummets As Network Turns Left

#277
#277
zjcvols said:
By that point individual leagues are going to do that most likely.
Click to expand...

Not sure. The NFL certainly won't. They make way too much money off their network deals. They'd never make that up in direct streaming subscriptions. And the networks are doing fine and are happy to pay the NFL because it allows for optimum advertising for the rest of their products. Disney screwed up big time by getting suckered into that awful Monday Night Football deal, but the over-the-air networks are good with the current model.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#279
#279
bamawriter said:
Fox has also been firing their existing talent to make up for the ludicrous contracts they've give the likes of Bayless and Cowherd. FS1 is not in any better shape than ESPN right now. Probably worse, honestly.
Click to expand...

and then there is that idiot Jim Rome making more than any of them at CBS
 
#281
#281
zjcvols said:
How does John Skipper still have a job?
Click to expand...

These layoffs are part of an attempt to save his job, no doubt.

They are hurt by cord cutting obviously, which is a trend they cannot do anything about and must adjust to. However, they can control how much they pay for broadcast rights, and they spent waaaaay too much on those over the last several years. And that isn't clear only in hindsight...those contracts raised eyebrows as soon as they were signed. They'd still be faced with challenges even if they paid more reasonable prices for those packages, but their problems are more acute because of the cash they shelled out for them.

I think these layoffs are confirmation of what they are wanting to do, which is double down on the turning of ESPN into just an NFL/NBA network with heavy coverage of what goes on on social media and TMZ-type coverage and social interest stories. Most of the people who have been announced to have been laid off so far are NHL, college sports, and MLB people. I've seen one NFL guy (Ed Werder) and no one who covers the NBA. Makes sense, because they are already paying billions to cover those two leagues.

They know that SportsCenter and the rest of the non-live sports programming are irrelevant in their original formats as highlights shows, so that is why they have given these shows the current bent they have. ESPN's target demo (18-35) leans left and is extremely active on social media, so they have shifted their programming in a way that they believe caters to that crowd.

People aren't cord cutting because ESPN is liberal (that makes no sense anyway because people are getting rid of all cable channels, not just ESPN). More accurately, ESPN is liberal because of cord cutting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#282
#282
bamawriter said:
Not sure. The NFL certainly won't. They make way too much money off their network deals. They'd never make that up in direct streaming subscriptions. And the networks are doing fine and are happy to pay the NFL because it allows for optimum advertising for the rest of their products. Disney screwed up big time by getting suckered into that awful Monday Night Football deal, but the over-the-air networks are good with the current model.
Click to expand...

Especially with how many terrible games they get. I cannot remember the last non Lions MNF game I watched from start to finish.
 
#283
#283
zjcvols said:
Especially with how many terrible games they get. I cannot remember the last non Lions MNF game I watched from start to finish.
Click to expand...

Disney got suckered so hard on that deal. They thought they were going to get the best game of the week like they did on ABC. But the NFL not only gave the premium game to NBC and allowed NBC to flex late-season games for better matchups, they let CBS and Fox protect better games. So ESPN was left with the 4th or 5th best games in some weeks. And the NFL charged Disney even more for the rights to broadcast weaker games.
 
#285
#285
Maybe they wouldn't need to make cuts if they weren't ramming an elitist leftist agenda down our throats. To say that it is not a factor is pure denial.

bamawriter said:
I know that horse has been beaten way too many times, but the political stuff isn't why these layoffs are happening. This is about cord-cutting, plain and simple.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#286
#286
gordonr24 said:
A lot of outlets will pick up some of these personalities. I'd watch for FS1. They've been picking off ESPN.
Click to expand...

Yet their ratings are in the sewer. Espn ratings for non events isn't great, but it continues to blow away FS1 no matter how many espn castaways go over there
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#288
#288
McCat said:
Maybe they wouldn't need to make cuts if they weren't ramming an elitist leftist agenda down our throats. To say that it is not a factor is pure denial.
Click to expand...

The extent to which it's a factor is so small that it's not worth much discussion. People are not cutting the cord because of ESPN's leftward bent. They are cutting the cord because the don't value the content, which in this case means live sports.

This thread has been going for quite a while. Unless I missed it, not a single poster has said that he or she actually cut the cord because of ESPN's politics. They may not watch all of ESPN's programming, but they still have ESPN, which means ESPN is still getting their money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#289
#289
bamawriter said:
The extent to which it's a factor is so small that it's not worth much discussion. People are not cutting the cord because of ESPN's leftward bent. They are cutting the cord because the don't value the content, which in this case means live sports.

This thread has been going for quite a while. Unless I missed it, not a single poster has said that he or she actually cut the cord because of ESPN's politics. They may not watch all of ESPN's programming, but they still have ESPN, which means ESPN is still getting their money.
Click to expand...

The total irrelevance of their non-live sports shows has the most to do with it. ESPN thrived and became the media juggernaut they once were because if you wanted to know what happened earlier in the day or the night before in sports, you watched SportsCenter. There was no internet, social media, or the smartphones. If you only marginally value the live sports programming or want to watch only something like MNF, you'll also cut the cord. The only reason I still have cable is because of live sports.

ESPN went all social justice warrior on us because of cord cutting, not the other way around. They think that is a way to make the non-live sports programming relevant again (they are wrong about that and totally misreading their target audience, IMO, but that's another conversation).

There has undoubtedly been an obvious socially leftist/progressive bent to their programming in recent years, but it has nothing to do with their struggles. Just think about it - do you really think a single person has eliminated their entire cable package because they thought ESPN was too liberal? Makes no sense.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#290
#290
05_never_again said:
The total irrelevance of their non-live sports shows has the most to do with it. If you only marginally value the live sports programming or want to watch only something like MNF, you'll also cut the cord. The only reason I still have cable is because of live sports.

ESPN went all social justice warrior on us because of cord cutting, not the other way around. They think that is a way to make the non-live sports programming relevant again (they are wrong about that and totally misreading their target audience, IMO, but that's another conversation).

There has undoubtedly been an obvious socially leftist/progressive bent to their programming in recent years, but it has nothing to do with their struggles. Just think about it - do you really think a single person has eliminated their entire cable package because they thought ESPN was too liberal? Makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more.

Honestly, I may be the wrong person to discuss ESPN's politics. I honestly do not notice it because I don't really watch anything other than games and the occasional 30 for 30. I don't even know how far left they've gone because I stopped watching Sportscenter and their commentary programs years ago.
 
#291
#291
05_never_again said:
There has undoubtedly been an obvious socially leftist/progressive bent to their programming in recent years, but it has nothing to do with their struggles. Just think about it - do you really think a single person has eliminated their entire cable package because they thought ESPN was too liberal? Makes no sense.
Click to expand...

This. No one is quitting cable because of ESPN's non live sports programming.

On the flip side no one is watching ESPN regurgitate 5 hour old news over and over. They barely care about it ten minutes later since they can pull all the information they could ever need off of espn.com or mostly from social media. While opinionated pieces may not be the most exciting, it gets better ratings than alternatives
 
#292
#292
bamawriter said:
The extent to which it's a factor is so small that it's not worth much discussion. People are not cutting the cord because of ESPN's leftward bent. They are cutting the cord because the don't value the content, which in this case means live sports.

This thread has been going for quite a while. Unless I missed it, not a single poster has said that he or she actually cut the cord because of ESPN's politics. They may not watch all of ESPN's programming, but they still have ESPN, which means ESPN is still getting their money.
Click to expand...

Problem is that if you don't watch their live sports, then they've got nothing else. And rather than trying to diversify their base they've chosen to narrow their focus to one demographic. The more they cater to that demographic the easier it is for other demographics to justify the cord cutting. Looks like a downward spiral to me. They focus on one group which causes more people to leave which causes them to focus more on that one group which causes more people to leave... Couple that with their price going up and it's obvious what'll happen.

We recently switched from full up satellite to Sling. I had the choice of packages with and without ESPN. With ESPN I could only use one device and without I could use three. Cost difference was only $5 and the packages were very similar other than ESPN. I don't care for ESPN non-live programming so it was very easy to say no thanks to ESPN and go with the other option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#293
#293
bamawriter said:
Couldn't agree more.

Honestly, I may be the wrong person to discuss ESPN's politics. I honestly do not notice it because I don't really watch anything other than games and the occasional 30 for 30. I don't even know how far left they've gone because I stopped watching Sportscenter and their commentary programs years ago.
Click to expand...

If you are a general sports fan, you find yourself gravitating to ESPN for reasons other than to watch their non-live sports stuff. Despite their problems they still are a big center of gravity in the sports media world. I play fantasy sports on their site, read box scores on their site, etc. When you do that, in addition to watching live sports that air on the network, you still can't help but pick up the liberal social slant/commentary even if you aren't actively seeking out watching it (via promos during live sports, seeing headlines/titles of certain articles on ESPN.com, etc.).

For many years now, live events and 30 for 30s are the only reasons to tune in.
 
#294
#294
3rdDegreeVol said:
Problem is that if you don't watch their live sports, then they've got nothing else.
Click to expand...

If you don't watch live sports, what programming could ESPN introduce that would make you watch ESPN? If you don't watch live sports, why would your TV ever be tuned to a sports network?
 
#295
#295
3rdDegreeVol said:
The more they cater to that demographic the easier it is for other demographics to justify the cord cutting. Looks like a downward spiral to me.
Click to expand...

It is. These layoffs and other forms of cost cutting are an attempt to buy time to figure out their pivot (i.e., how they can be profitable in an age of cord cutting/on digital platforms while still paying through the nose for programming rights).

ESPN is just falling victim to the same thing other big fish in the sea have. The dominate for a long period of time until the nature of the business changes, and by the time they start reacting to it, it is too late.
 
#296
#296
bamawriter said:
The extent to which it's a factor is so small that it's not worth much discussion. People are not cutting the cord because of ESPN's leftward bent. They are cutting the cord because the don't value the content, which in this case means live sports.

This thread has been going for quite a while. Unless I missed it, not a single poster has said that he or she actually cut the cord because of ESPN's politics. They may not watch all of ESPN's programming, but they still have ESPN, which means ESPN is still getting their money.
Click to expand...

You are right. There is no indication that the 12% loss in subscribers that ESPN has seen over the last 6 years has had any impact on their viewership for their live sporting events. Business Insider detailed this pretty well today, ESPN's ratings have remained strong and steady for live sporting events during these 6 years so although their subscription revenue is down, their advertising revenue is still very good. The problem that they are facing is that their signature program (SportsCenter) is now obsolete. These layoffs show a network scrambling to adjust to a changing consumer who no longer needs television for sports highlights. The people here who are whining about politics are misguided. That has nothing to do with this.
 
#297
#297
BowlBrother85 said:
The problem that they are facing is that their signature program (SportsCenter) is now obsolete.
Click to expand...

Ding ding ding. I don't think it can be overstated how much of their problems have to do with this one single reason.

SportsCenter made ESPN what it is, even more than any live sports they aired. That show is totally irrelevant now. They were in a sweet spot for years because they had a funny, entertaining show hosted by anchors people liked and if you wanted to know what happened before the morning papers came out, SportsCenter was a one-stop-shop. There is zero need for such a show anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#298
#298
05_never_again said:
The total irrelevance of their non-live sports shows has the most to do with it. ESPN thrived and became the media juggernaut they once were because if you wanted to know what happened earlier in the day or the night before in sports, you watched SportsCenter. There was no internet, social media, or the smartphones. If you only marginally value the live sports programming or want to watch only something like MNF, you'll also cut the cord. The only reason I still have cable is because of live sports.

ESPN went all social justice warrior on us because of cord cutting, not the other way around. They think that is a way to make the non-live sports programming relevant again (they are wrong about that and totally misreading their target audience, IMO, but that's another conversation).

There has undoubtedly been an obvious socially leftist/progressive bent to their programming in recent years, but it has nothing to do with their struggles. Just think about it - do you really think a single person has eliminated their entire cable package because they thought ESPN was too liberal? Makes no sense.
Click to expand...

This is absolutely spot on.
 
Last edited:
#299
#299
Not to mention they overpaid for tennis --- throw in garbage like poker, drone flying contests and no name boxers etc. The NFL seems to schedule bad games for ESPN also -- Other than live NCAA sports, the 30 for 30 films are pretty decent though
 
#300
#300
508mikey said:
Not to mention they overpaid for tennis --- throw in garbage like poker, drone flying contests and no name boxers etc. The NFL seems to schedule bad games for ESPN also -- Other than live NCAA sports, the 30 for 30 films are pretty decent though
Click to expand...

Bamawriter was spot on earlier in the thread when he was talking about how badly they got hosed on the new NFL deal. They are paying more than their competitors for a crappier package. That ultimately is on John Skipper.

It is speculated they did that because FS1 entered the market and they pushed the price way up to keep them from getting it, but regardless of the reason it has certainly made their problems worse.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top