IU Hawks fan
They call me IU
If you want to watch a specific team, it's not for you. Took a quick look at schedule and their next game on it isn't until December 2nd.
NHL back on ESPN?
- Thread starter gearharb
- Start date
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
It's funny how if you add all the subscriptions you get these days together, you're paying them as much as or more than you did before this supposedly cost-saving cord-cutting movement started.
46zone
Pass me the soft pretzels
I can attest to this. I cut cable in favor of Playstatin Vue in early 2016, and for a little while it was a much better deal than Xfinity or Verizon (main providers in the Phill area) since they had local news, NBCS Philly, and every sports channel minus NHL Network. After 2017 they began cutting channels and raising prices regularly. I started at $35 per month and when I ended my sub (after news broke they were shutting the service down in January) I was paying $55 with essentially the same package.
I have YoutubeTV now and it's a good service overall as I get 90% of what I want for a cheaper price than cable, but I do miss how cable centralizes everything and is more convenient to use still (in my opinion).
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
That would change dramatically if they carried NHL content on their cable channels.
that stopped after Vegas, now will ESPN cover Seattle the way Vegas was, that's the issue, not ESPN+ Content
YEM
Registered User
- Mar 7, 2010
- 5,718
- 2,697
Yep, I recently moved
Was eager to cut the cord, but internet alone is ~$60 a month. The "triple play" from my new provider is about $100.
I went with it. Sports/DVR/the massive amount of on demand offerings swayed me. Was pleasantly surprised to see that this new cable provider seems to get it.
ESPN is focusing on espn plus nowadays.
Sunday afternoons and Tuesday nights are the only slots I can see being available which is enough.
Sunday afternoons and Tuesday nights are the only slots I can see being available which is enough.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
You mean the time that ESPN regularly showed hockey, regularly showed hockey highlights on SportsCenter, and had an entire show dedicated to hockey?
Yes, been there, done that. Hockey wasn't central to ESPN like it has been to NBCSN, but the level to which they neglected the NHL is vastly overstated.
vegarover
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2015
- 296
- 236
It makes sense...the NHL isn't a moneymaker in the U.S. like the other leagues and sports. But if you have a free ESPN account and you pick the NHL as one of your favorites...NHL stories/links are on the main page.
Ernie
Registered User
- Aug 3, 2004
- 12,830
- 2,275
It makes a lot more money in the US than NCAAF, NCAAM, Soccer, and MMA. All of which are on ESPN's top level menu.
With the amount ESPN overpaid for the NBA and NCAA, it's not surprising. I can't say for sure on the college football, but I know the NBA has been a bloodbath for ESPN, they overpaid and the ratings are down. The NHL on the other hand was a steal of a deal for NBC. Pretty sure they pay their investment off before the playoffs start every season
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
It doesn't. Estimates for NCAAF are around $7-8B. That would put it ahead of all sports in North America except the NFL, MLB, and maybe the NBA.
DaveG
Noted Jerk
I think Ernie is thinking about how much money NCAA FB and BB make for the schools compared to how much the NHL makes for itself. Since the NHL is a 4B/yr prospect, there is a chance he might be right about that.
However, if we compare how much revenue is in it for the broadcasters, it is, of course, no comparison. NHL makes about 750M a year from its media partners. Assuming that the media partners break even (which might not be true), that number pales in comparison with what the networks of various types bring in from NCAA games.
Difference of perspective here, I think.
However, if we compare how much revenue is in it for the broadcasters, it is, of course, no comparison. NHL makes about 750M a year from its media partners. Assuming that the media partners break even (which might not be true), that number pales in comparison with what the networks of various types bring in from NCAA games.
Difference of perspective here, I think.
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
Well I can tell you that interest in college football significantly outweighs interest in the NHL pretty much all across the country. In fact I'd say based on what I observe only the NFL may actually be more followed nationally.
vegarover
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2015
- 296
- 236
I dealt with TV/radio advertising professionally a hand few of years ago and I can tell you without hesitation that the NHL is way less profitable for it's media rights holders in the U.S. compared to college football/basketball and soccer. The only markets that tune into NHL games in any measurable number are ones that are home to an NHL team, and even in those markets the ratings are usually well behind college FB/BB, and soccer when put up head to head.
On the other hand, college FB/BB are watched nationwide. As is soccer because of the large immigrant population.
If you need stats, the most watched NHL game last year (2018) was game 5 of the SCF with a 3.9 rating nationwide. In comparison, the college football championship pulled a 13.8 rating, and there were 20 other college football games that had better ratings than said game 5.
IU Hawks fan
They call me IU
You're missing half of the profit equation - COST!
NBC does really well off the NHL because the rights are so cheap, only $200mm annually.
ESPN is paying 2.35 times that just for the Playoff and NY6 - that's 9 games! ($435mm)
Let's say hypothetically, all 9 games drew that 13.8 (they didn't), that's 124.2 total ratings points. Do the math, that's $3.5mm per point! (Again, a low end estimate, as all the games didn't draw close to the Title game).
At that rate, all NBC would need from their 112 game slate is 57.14 points to match the investment. The Final averaged a 3.0, so there's 21 already. Clearly, NBC is getting a better deal.
As we have discussed NBC hit it big with the Blackhawks since this contract kicked in starting in 2011-12 and by the end of 2015 they had recouped their $2 billion investment.
The NHL has one thing in their favor - affluent demographics.
I still expect FOX to make a push - Bettman has conceded it was a mistake to leave that network after 1999.
The NHL has one thing in their favor - affluent demographics.
I still expect FOX to make a push - Bettman has conceded it was a mistake to leave that network after 1999.
vegarover
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2015
- 296
- 236
If you are strictly saying NBC has a better deal because they pay so little so it doesn't matter if the NHL gets poor ratings because percentage-wise they are getting a better bang with their buck (better ROI so to speak)...then you are correct.
But with all due respect, in the grand scheme of things the money the NHL generates through TV deals/advertising/viewership in the U.S. is a drop in the bucket when compared to college football/basketball, soccer, etc. That's why NBC's deal is so cheap to begin with and why ESPN didn't renew their contract with the NHL back in the day.
Agreed. Especially since the Disney sale. Fox has been pushing for live sports content. I wouldn't be shocked to see a Fox "Thursday Night Hockey" package on the main network, kicking in after the NFL regular season. Add a dedicated night on FS1, and that's probably enough of a contract to split the rights with NBC - rotating who gets the All-Star weekend, Conference Finals, and Stanley Cup Final.
FX/FXX Tried that in 2001, FOLKS LOOK it up the history of FX Networks, prior to FS1/FS2, then known as SPEED/Fuel, IT is now unlikely that Fox and its related networks will ever challenge the Disney owned ESPN, which swallowed ABC Sports in 2006
