USA Today: NHL TV Contract Deadline is June 1st

[kdb209]

Can anyone confirm if this is an official ESPN press release? it was posted on breakingsports.blogspot.com (which always links its stories, but this one is not linked, but it is said that ESPN released this to members of the media)

"ESPN has decided not to exercise its $60 million option to telecast National Hockey League games, regardless of whether professional hockey returns after a lockout scrapped the entire 2004-05 campaign.
ESPN hasn’t closed the door on pro hockey altogether, reporting in its statement that it “remain interested in a multimedia agreement that provides us with appropriate value.â€
In a statement released this morning, ESPN said that while it “would like to continue its long-term relationship with the NHL,†it was not interested in carrying games even if a new collective bargaining agreement can be hashed out.
The league had already been operating from a position of weakness before the cancellation of last season, as the network opted to shuffle its slate of NHL games over to ESPN2.
ESPN executive vp, programming and production Mark Shapiro is expected to offer further comment on the decision later today."

If that is true, it means that ESPN will not being showing the NHL on TV in the future.

Yes, there have been official ESPN press releases and yes ESPN did decline to pick up the $60M option for next year, but I have not seen any definitive statements saying they would not be interested in re-negotiating.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=2070927

While ESPN will not pick up the option on the deal it agreed to in May 2004, the longtime NHL broadcaster could try to retain the rights for less money.

It's only an AP piece on the ESPN site, but it's not likely they would post that if they had closed the door to future negotiations.

The "regardless of whether professional hockey returns after a lockout" was in the context of picking up the $60M option, not whether they will pick up the NHL at all. The same quote in a more clear context:

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=804897

ESPN to drop NHL broadcasts
Reuters

May 31, 2005 — By Paul J. Gough

NEW YORK (Hollywood Reporter) - ESPN said it had declined an option for the right to broadcast National Hockey League games next season, even if they resume after a yearlong lockout.

The deadline for the $60 million option is Wednesday. An ESPN spokesman said Monday that the network would have more to say about the matter Tuesday. The two sides have continued to talk.

But, no it does not mean "that ESPN will not being showing the NHL on TV in the future". It means that if ESPN will be showing the NHL on TV in the future it will be for a lot less than $60M.

I fully expect ESPN to come back with a low ball offer that the league will have little choice but to accept.

More definitive statements from ESPN are expected this week.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

ESPN ends NHL negotiations

By ALLAN KREDA
BLOOMBERG NEWS

ESPN said it has stopped negotiations with the NHL and that the sport isn't worth half of the $60 million rights fee the cable network agreed to pay last season, even if a new labor contract is reached and play resumes in October.

The move, announced in a media conference call by Mark Shapiro, ESPN's executive vice president of programming and production, leaves the NHL without a national cable television partner for the first time since the late 1970s. ESPN announced three days ago that it wouldn't pick up its $60 million option for the 2005-06 NHL season but would keep negotiating until tomorrow's deadline, which had been extended from April 15.

The NHL this year became the first North American professional sports league to lose an entire season to a labor dispute. Shapiro said hockey would be worth a "modest" rights fee when it returns, one "well below half of $60 million."


http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/hockey/226541_espn01.html

 

[RangerBoy]

With no agreement between the NHL owners and the union, ESPN only wanted a revenue sharing deal, but the NHL declined. Shapiro is open to future negotiations.

"Of course, we will listen, but anything in the neighborhood of $60 million is a conversation we are not willing to have," Shapiro said. "The only deal we see ourselves doing is a no-rights-fee deal. The NBC revenue-sharing model, we believe, is the model that should be used for any partner of the NHL right now given it missed a season, and who is to know what long-term damage has been done for next season and beyond?"

In its revenue sharing agreement, NBC will broadcast seven regular Saturday afternoon games, six playoff games and the last five prime-time games of the Stanley Cup Finals. The NHL in uninterested in such an arrangement with a cable partner.

"When the $60 million option was being negotiated the fact that there could be a prolonged work stoppage was included in that option and we have no further interest to devalue the product," said Bernadette Mansur, an NHL spokeswoman.

http://www.nypost.com/sports/24635.htm

 

[RangerBoy]

"We're done negotiating," Mark Shapiro, ESPN's executive vice president of programming, said yesterday. "We looked at various models and came up with alternative suggestions, but at the end of the day, Gary was uncomfortable cutting the price tag of the rights fee to anything below $60 million."

http://www.newsday.com/sports/print...743jun01,0,4557818.story?coll=ny-sports-print

 

[Hasbro]

I think THIS is what gets Bettman axed. after next season when the league is begging hat in hand for a tv deal, the owners are going to focus on Gary's failures.

"Thanks for the cap. Say hi to David Stern."

Throw in once the labor deal is gone he's back to being the most hated man in hockey.

 

[WC Handy*]

Fortunately for Bettman, the owners are more rational than you are.

 

[RangerBoy]

If the NHL secures a new CBA and conducts the draft two weeks later,will the 2005 NHL draft will televised in the U.S.?Whatever draft production the NHL puts on.Right now the answer would be no

 

[RangerBoy]

I think THIS is what gets Bettman axed. after next season when the league is begging hat in hand for a tv deal, the owners are going to focus on Gary's failures.

"Thanks for the cap. Say hi to David Stern."

Throw in once the labor deal is gone he's back to being the most hated man in hockey.

Why would the ESPN deal get him axed?If Bettman gets a cap,24% rollback and changes in QO,the NHL owners should extend him

There was no guarantee ESPN would have picked up their options on the NHL IF the lockout never had taken place

 

[RangerBoy]

Although each of the NHL's 30 clubs will lose $2-million in rights fees, because of ESPN's departure, two sources said the NHL might be better off without ESPN.

"Many of us felt that ESPN was more interested in promoting itself rather than hockey," a source said.

ESPN, for example, refused to carry any of the world hockey championship last month.

Said another source, "When ESPN acquired the NBA and started focusing on original content programming, such as dramas, the NHL, as well other sports properties, got squeezed in terms of promotion."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050601.wxespn01/BNStory/Sports/

Playmakers and Tilt

No more Gary Thorne

 

[PecaFan]

Although each of the NHL's 30 clubs will lose $2-million in rights fees, because of ESPN's departure

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050601.wxespn01/BNStory/Sports/

Which is technically wrong. Yes, they were *scheduled* to receive $60 million this year, but in reality, the last payment they received was for $120 million, in 03/04. So in reality, revenues are down $4 million a team from the last time we played.

Which is an extremely significant amount, despite many here blowing it off as nothing.

 

[FLYLine27*]

"We're done negotiating," Mark Shapiro, ESPN's executive vice president of programming, said yesterday. "We looked at various models and came up with alternative suggestions, but at the end of the day, Gary was uncomfortable cutting the price tag of the rights fee to anything below $60 million."

http://www.newsday.com/sports/print...743jun01,0,4557818.story?coll=ny-sports-print

Good work Gary! Now you have get $0!

 

[Beauty eh?]

No more Gary Thorne

Thank god.

 

[tantalum]

Good work Gary! Now you have get $0!

Well first you have to see how it plays out. Perhaps the BOG's have an alternative plan in mind. Perhaps a concetration on their own network or more local television to build up those bases.

 

[AM]

looks like

the max and min cap figures just dropped by 4 million US.

(strictly conjecture)

 

[Beauty eh?]

Source?

 

[Crazy_Ike]

Good work Gary! Now you have get $0!

If you hold yourself up as a two bit league, you will get treated like one. The NHL isn't a two-bit league, and ESPN wasn't giving it a fair shake. The NHL needs TV exposure, but not the sort ESPN would have given it in the future.

 

[mr gib]

Well first you have to see how it plays out. Perhaps the BOG's have an alternative plan in mind. Perhaps a concetration on their own network or more local television to build up those bases.

i think you're right - the radio in vancouver here says they want an nbc like deal - and they also brought up comcast - ( yup thats right - snyder's comcast )

 

[GirardIsStupid]

I'm intrigued by the fact the NHL doesn't want profit sharing amongst its owners and with ESPN, but is desperate to form a "partnership" with the NHLPA and NBC. That seems rather backward to me.

 

[Skk82]

"Many of us felt that ESPN was more interested in promoting itself rather than hockey," a source said.

ESPN, for example, refused to carry any of the world hockey championship last month.

if i ran espn, i don't think i'd want to show world hockey championships after such a long layoff of hockey. especially when most of the games played would have been televised on the east coast in the daytime hours.

besides, re-runs of poker and the fishing shows are beating stanley cup finals games in the ratings. what's one spring tournament that the average american sports fan is barely (if all) fimiliar with going to pull?

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

I'm intrigued by the fact the NHL doesn't want profit sharing amongst its owners and with ESPN, but is desperate to form a "partnership" with the NHLPA and NBC. That seems rather backward to me.

That's the way some franchise operations run. The competition between franchises in certain businesses is extremely high and they refuse to share anything with each other, yet still cooperate with the Head Office in certain matters. I've always thought the NHL was more of a cooperative anyways. They work in concert to do things that are beneficial to all teams, but prefer to keep their businesses operating and acting separately for the most part. While I agree that revenue sharing is beneficial mechanism, I do understand the model the league is using and why the individual clubs do not want to share the revenues they generate in their individual markets. I think it goes to that cooperative spirit that the majority of the owners have.