|
|
Post by bennyskid on Oct 16, 2023 7:53:48 GMT -8
We've seen this story play out before. You might recall that during the twilight of broadcast TV, the networks paid ridiculous sums for shows like Friends and Seinfeld. They were desperate for content that cable didn't have and couldn't copy. This lasted for a few years before the advertising revenues eroded to the point that it didn't pencil out. The era of network TV was over. Today the networks pay a fraction as much for what few sitcoms they still air. The star of "Young Sheldon" earns roughly a tenth of what supporting cast members made for "Big Bang Theory".
Now it's cable's turn. We're somewhere near the peak of that process, with cable channels (and the networks, which are really the same thing) paying ridiculous prices to have something that the streaming services don't have and can't copy. But this won't last for more than a few years until the cable numbers decline to the point where the subscription revenues no long support the huge fees. The price for sports rights will crash.
Maybe it already has.
|
|
|
|
Post by fishwrapper on Oct 16, 2023 8:15:49 GMT -8
Just like how in a few states, car companies made it illegal to buy a car (ahem, a tesla) over the internet. Or the larger picture of any company lobbying congress to pass laws that protect their business. Streaming is the future and a major threat to networks. they are doing everything they can to hold on, and their top priority is to monopolize sports. Sports is basically the only reason anybody maintains cable subscriptions these days. The future is now. Streaming is the present. The major networks have already bought in to streaming (Hulu, Peacock, etc.). They are hanging on by streaming. Yes, sports offer event like the Superb Owl and the "World" Series that still bring large audiences...but in case you missed it, since London in '12 the Olympics were streamed. NBC broadcast (traditional over-the-air TV) about 250 hours of the Tokyo games. NBC/Universal/Comcast's cable footprint (USA, CNBC, etc.) carried five times as much coverage. But over 5,500 hours of coverage was streamed via the NBC platform. Yes, much of the streaming content from Tokyo were lesser-tier matchups, preliminaries, and esoteric sports. More folks are interested in the soccer finals than the kayaking medal round. But where is that content now? Streaming. I started my career in broadcasting over four decades ago, before the explosion of cable offerings. Since then, cable brought the major networks down several notches. Over-the-air broadcasting will not die - but it will never be what it was. For that matter, neither will cable. OTT services offer a greater variety and convenience than the traditional cable box, and that's where the market has been moving for some time. Nobody will ever watch a movie on an iPhone. Right? Just like nobody will ever watch a hockey game or a football game or a baseball game on their pocket computer, either. Right? Streaming is now. It's happening. It is not going to shrink - that's what over-the-air and wired cable is doing. |
|
|
|
Post by fishwrapper on Oct 16, 2023 8:28:51 GMT -8
We've seen this story play out before. You might recall that during the twilight of broadcast TV, the networks paid ridiculous sums for shows like Friends and Seinfeld. They were desperate for content that cable didn't have and couldn't copy. This lasted for a few years before the advertising revenues eroded to the point that it didn't pencil out. The era of network TV was over. Today the networks pay a fraction as much for what few sitcoms they still air. The star of "Young Sheldon" earns roughly a tenth of what supporting cast members made for "Big Bang Theory". Now it's cable's turn. We're somewhere near the peak of that process, with cable channels (and the networks, which are really the same thing) paying ridiculous prices to have something that the streaming services don't have and can't copy. But this won't last for more than a few years until the cable numbers decline to the point where the subscription revenues no long support the huge fees. The price for sports rights will crash. Maybe it already has. We're past that peak. Netflix ( The Crown, Ozark, House of Cards) Amazon's Prime ( Fleabag, Marvelous Mrs. Maisel) - two companies that are not rooted in traditional broadcasting - changed the marketplace. Not saying it's good or bad, but it has changed. The genie ain't going back into the bottle. The investments that have been made by traditional broadcast companies in the streaming marketplace are significant. Cable channels have been shown that you other companies can, and will, pay ridiculous prices to create content, or to take content from the cable companies. Others, like NBC/Universal/Comcast leverage the synergies of their footprints to push the process further, faster, than normal market evolution would perhaps have happened. Then, too, the pandemic changed the way many watched - as well as created a huge demand for content to fit within that viewing change. Yes, it already has. We're in the future now. This is the twilight of cable as a video/content medium. Those coax cables are a more valuable asset bringing data streams into houses than broadband video content. I mean, let's face it: more and more people with cable are no longer able to hook it up to their TV directly - they need the set-top box because the companies are delivering data, not video, via the cable plant. |
|
|
|
Post by irimi on Oct 16, 2023 15:09:03 GMT -8
Well, do you have a subscription to Pac 12 Network? The Beavs have been on that network once this season. What are you paying for? There are a lot more sports than football that are carried on PAC-12 Network, which is one of the reasons we are with Dish. We’ve had a Dish Tailgater for years to take on trips in the RV. Even used it in the parking lot at Goss to watch WBB before baseball games. Yes, we pay a wad but it’s been worth it. This may all change in the future but we’ll worry about that when it happens. I'm pretty sure that the networks and conferences are mostly considering Football, not men's soccer or gymnastics. So, while you are correct that the Pac 12 Network carries a lot of the little sports, I've been surprised this year by how few Pac 12 games end up there.
I think the streaming model would be better, though. Right now, you're stuck watching the rerun of whichever game the Pac 12 Network wants to show. But with streaming (I'm assuming based on other models), if the game is not live, you can simply click it to watch it anytime. Anywhere you can get an internet signal. I have no idea how you get your Dish into your vehicle, so if you can master that, I'm pretty sure you can master a streaming service.
|
|
