Satellite (and cable) death spiral

[cptjeff]

Nvm.

 

[tarheelhockey]

This logic is akin to Kodak not investing in digital cameras, you dont double down on old tech because it's more profitable in the short term.

ESPN has lost tons of money over the past few years due to cord cutting and their high fees are a big part of the reason that cable packages were/are uncompetitive with streaming sites. They are never going to be the juggernaut they were 10-20 years ago, but a Disney+ subscriber is better than nothing and will keep them in a lot of homes.

That's a pretty deadly bundle though, we will see if Netflix can respond with some sort of sports content deal. I have Netflix and Hulu and Amazon currently, I might cancel Netflix when this becomes available.

The bolded is not to be overlooked in all of this. ESPN has been a driver of cord cutting... this is their first and best attempt at shifting their model so they don't end up on the verge of extinction in a few years.

 

[LeHab]

Subs are going to be going down as people cut the cord generally. There's no turning back on that. At some point, there's going to be a major sport that does one of their big "tv" deals online. Ideally ESPN would be able to secure a package that would allow them broadcast via the network as well as streaming, but I'm not sure how the leagues will want to handle that.

Google is testing waters by broadcasting MLB games. One game per week via youtube, today at 3pm ET Cards @ Dodgers is one of them. YT actually has its own broadcasting crew so they are not simply streaming one of major sport networks. Great potential way to capture a younger audience.

 

[b1e9a8r5s]

Google is testing waters by broadcasting MLB games. One game per week via youtube, today at 3pm ET Cards @ Dodgers is one of them. YT actually has its own broadcasting crew so they are not simply streaming one of major sport networks. Great potential way to capture a younger audience.

Right, it's happening in small increments but eventually a major package is going to go to a streaming service. Like anything else it will take some time. It was the same way the transition from broadcast to cable. "You can't put X event on cable because not everyone has it." Now look at how much is on cable. MNF, NBA playoffs, NCAA tournament, etc. It's not an issue at all. The same thing will happen. I'm just not sure when. It feels like under 30s would be ready for it now, but the older crowd would probably complain and struggle with it. But it when the broadcasting rights start coming up again, I wouldn't be surprised to see a streaming services make a big play. By putting a big sports package on a streaming service would be a way to accelerate that change in terms of society, which would obviously benefit the streaming services.

 

[LeHab]

Right, it's happening in small increments but eventually a major package is going to go to a streaming service. Like anything else it will take some time. It was the same way the transition from broadcast to cable. "You can't put X event on cable because not everyone has it." Now look at how much is on cable. MNF, NBA playoffs, NCAA tournament, etc. It's not an issue at all. The same thing will happen. I'm just not sure when. It feels like under 30s would be ready for it now, but the older crowd would probably complain and struggle with it. But it when the broadcasting rights start coming up again, I wouldn't be surprised to see a streaming services make a big play. By putting a big sports package on a streaming service would be a way to accelerate that change in terms of society, which would obviously benefit the streaming services.

Internet has the potential to offer a more personalized and engaging experience for fans. For advertisers better targeting.

Amazon, FB, Twitter and Google have all started experimenting with sports broadcasting. Amazon in particular is an interesting case since they can use it as a loss leader to draw fans to many of its other services. Then you have a service like DAZN already making a splash. Will be harder and harder for traditional cable to compete although in the short term both could coexist. Looking forward to upcoming broadcasting bidding wars.

 

[Daximus]

Internet has the potential to offer a more personalized and engaging experience for fans. For advertisers better targeting.

Amazon, FB, Twitter and Google have all started experimenting with sports broadcasting. Amazon in particular is an interesting case since they can use it as a loss leader to draw fans to many of its other services. Then you have a service like DAZN already making a splash. Will be harder and harder for traditional cable to compete although in the short term both could coexist. Looking forward to upcoming broadcasting bidding wars.

Our local government owned cable company in Saskatchewan, SaskTel, is rolling out a TV Box that is pretty much like a Roku/Kodi box but with streamed cable on it. Also comes pre-loaded with Netflix, HBO and Crave. The box itself costs $140 to buy and the basic sub is $20 a month which gets you access to all the Canadian sports channels (CBC, City, Sportsnet and TSN). They also have pick and pay options for other channels at $2.99/month. I think we will see a lot of cable providers trying to go this route but like you said all it takes is for Amazon, Disney, Google or YouTube to get a contract with one of the major leagues and roll out a sports streaming package and I think cable is going to die out rather quickly. DAZN has already made a huge splash and the other major players have seen how many cut the cord just to head over there. The only issue Canadians face is the regional blackouts with hockey and Bell/Rogers having such a firm grip on the way things are done. Doesn't help that they own two of the biggest market teams in the league either and can influence the way things are done here. Plus our contract doesn't expire until like 2025.

Getting the NHL on Amazon Prime or Disney+ with zero blackouts would be a massive win for the fans. But YouTube would be even bigger to target the younger audience. Plus with the way they can track your data and accurately predict you based on their algorithms they can target you specifically with ads.

 

[ijuka]

Cable, satellite and whatnot are outdated mediums anyway. I've not watched any TV on my own in years. NHL should focus on online streaming, and should also remove blackouts - if you need such heavy-handed methods to try and force people to buy cable, cable probably isn't a very good idea anyway.

 

[GuelphStormer]

lots of new players in this whole equation, and some new factors too. i look forward to the first time a team breaks the traditional model and signs its local broadcast contract with Amazon Prime who then delivers it to anyone anywhere. expect vegas to become america's team.

 

[Daximus]

Cable, satellite and whatnot are outdated mediums anyway. I've not watched any TV on my own in years. NHL should focus on online streaming, and should also remove blackouts - if you need such heavy-handed methods to try and force people to buy cable, cable probably isn't a very good idea anyway.

I think when the US rights expire what transpires will determine the future of the way the NHL broadcasts. DAZN and Disney will both want to get in on it. If the NHL can get a bidding war going then when their rights in Canada expire it could lead to an asbolutely massive deal.

 

[LadyStanley]

So many folks are counting their chickens before the eggs are even laid, must less hatched.

Of course, the NHL feels that they should get "more" for broadcast deals, but the TV and streaming deals could be totally different.

(I just got email from cable company as I'm coming up on my service anniversary. Current "bundled" package is $185; future unbundled combination $322; proposed new bundle $229. Other than about 25% of the channels they carry and the internet, I really don't "need" all the extras. May walk if I can't get a decent a la cart plan.)

 

[Daximus]

So many folks are counting their chickens before the eggs are even laid, must less hatched.

Of course, the NHL feels that they should get "more" for broadcast deals, but the TV and streaming deals could be totally different.

(I just got email from cable company as I'm coming up on my service anniversary. Current "bundled" package is $185; future unbundled combination $322; proposed new bundle $229. Other than about 25% of the channels they carry and the internet, I really don't "need" all the extras. May walk if I can't get a decent a la cart plan.)

The future will rest on who gets which deal and can outbid other services to keep them
DAYZN is hopefully who gets all the sports as I can just sub to them and get every sport I need but in reality it will all likely be spread out among multiple services where people will have to pick and choose based on what shows and sports are offered.

 

[Lions67]

So many folks are counting their chickens before the eggs are even laid, must less hatched.

Of course, the NHL feels that they should get "more" for broadcast deals, but the TV and streaming deals could be totally different.

(I just got email from cable company as I'm coming up on my service anniversary. Current "bundled" package is $185; future unbundled combination $322; proposed new bundle $229. Other than about 25% of the channels they carry and the internet, I really don't "need" all the extras. May walk if I can't get a decent a la cart plan.)

Wow!!!

And I’m the one getting called criminal!
Can I ask what you get for that bundle?
The cable guys are greedy sob’s!

 

[robertocarlos]

I did not go through with cutting the cable this week. I wanted to cut the cord but for 66 dollars I get all the sports channels except SN World. I'm weak.

 

[robertocarlos]

Google is testing waters by broadcasting MLB games. One game per week via youtube, today at 3pm ET Cards @ Dodgers is one of them. YT actually has its own broadcasting crew so they are not simply streaming one of major sport networks. Great potential way to capture a younger audience.

I was not happy that the Blue Jays game was on Youtube only. It turned out to be way better than the network idea of a baseball game. I enjoyed it and will watch more of the games of the week. No ads, so it was wonderful.

 

[SJSharksfan39]

I was not happy that the Blue Jays game was on Youtube only. It turned out to be way better than the network idea of a baseball game. I enjoyed it and will watch more of the games of the week. No ads, so it was wonderful.

The Giants were on youtube last week and I really enjoyed the experience. I missed the local announcers, but the in between innings stuff was really nice and the game felt like it flowed a lot better. I would love it if MLB.TV incorporated this somehow. It's better than hearing about that firefighter with ingrown hairs over and over and over again.

 

[Pilky01]

DAZN worked great for opening weekend of the Premiership.

I like it right now, but I still worry about what happens when "traditional" cable is killed off and all we have left are dozens of "premium subscription services". Do prices skyrocket once all competition is wiped out? Is it a good thing that local TV will be completely wiped out? I don't know the answers, but I think they're worth thinking about beyond just the initial "Yeah! f*** Bell/Rogers! DAZN is the best thing ever!!!"

 

[Grudy0]

DAZN worked great for opening weekend of the Premiership.

I like it right now, but I still worry about what happens when "traditional" cable is killed off and all we have left are dozens of "premium subscription services". Do prices skyrocket once all competition is wiped out? Is it a good thing that local TV will be completely wiped out? I don't know the answers, but I think they're worth thinking about beyond just the initial "Yeah! **** Bell/Rogers! DAZN is the best thing ever!!!"

I think that's the inflection point people are forgetting.

The concern I have is that these services will be spread of many subscription services and that many folks will end up paying a multitude of services (Netflix, Hulu, Disney, CBS All Access, etc) for more money than a traditional cable package in order to get what they want.

 

[Kamiccolo]

So for my experience, in Canada with Bell fibre op. I got sold a package with home phone and cable and internet for 130 a month (300mbps down/up). I got upset one day at a blackout and called to cancel. For cancelling both phone and cable, I would only save 12 dollars due to how they roll it all in together.

I said I want to watch all of the NHL games. Half the Leafs games are blacked out, and Canes games usually aren't but it's rare they are televised. They said I have to pay another 250 / month for some other package on top of this one to get all the games?

Are the NHL exec's dump or just out of touch? How do you think I watch the Canes and most Leaf games? Yup, on my tv being illegally streamed through HD quality. Only bad part is there is a slight delay when following GDT's.

I'd be willing to be 200/300 for all games no blackouts a season, but I am not pumping out 500 for 3 different services to see all the games I want to watch.

 

[David Dennison]

DAZN worked great for opening weekend of the Premiership.

I like it right now, but I still worry about what happens when "traditional" cable is killed off and all we have left are dozens of "premium subscription services". Do prices skyrocket once all competition is wiped out? Is it a good thing that local TV will be completely wiped out? I don't know the answers, but I think they're worth thinking about beyond just the initial "Yeah! **** Bell/Rogers! DAZN is the best thing ever!!!"

Yes and no. I agree that there will be further contraction and that rarely benefits the consumer. But I mean, cable was about as bad you can get from a consumer perspective, that you have to buy 100 channels when you might watch only a handful of them. And there is always the downward pressure on pricing because of free/cheap substitutes that are available or piracy.

And I'm not sure traditional cable is really going away anytime soon, my company still tries to sell me landline phone service despite not a single person on Earth ordering that in the last 15 years. For these large companies, they have high fixed costs associated with maintaining cable utilities and such, so just getting rid of a product like cable that uses those utilities doesn't necessarily make much sense.

 

[Pilky01]

It would be interesting if cable sort of faded away and television went back to OTA network broadcasting. Then everyone has their subscription services for only the content they really want to see, and they're supplemented by some "local", free, over the air, broadcast television.

I actually know quite a few people who do that right now actually. They have Netflix, DAZN and whatever else, and then use a digital antenna to pull in CTV, CBC, Global and sometimes a few others.

Sharing subscriptions is a nice perk (for now) as well. I get all the premium content because my parents still pay for the Cadillac cable package and almost everything has a very user friendly app now. The only holdout is useless TSN holding out on chromecast support. I would watch a lot more CFL if I could stream it to my TV just as easily as I stream the Blue Jays using Sportsnet's app.

DAZN is pretty sweet for right now though. Anybody interested in the Premiership or Champions League I recommend it 100%. It even does a great job of holding your spot in the match. I paused the United game to do a couple hours of yard work and when I started it back up again it was right where I left it.

 

[Jack Bauer]

It would be interesting if cable sort of faded away and television went back to OTA network broadcasting. Then everyone has their subscription services for only the content they really want to see, and they're supplemented by some "local", free, over the air, broadcast television.

I actually know quite a few people who do that right now actually. They have Netflix, DAZN and whatever else, and then use a digital antenna to pull in CTV, CBC, Global and sometimes a few others.

Sharing subscriptions is a nice perk (for now) as well. I get all the premium content because my parents still pay for the Cadillac cable package and almost everything has a very user friendly app now. The only holdout is useless TSN holding out on chromecast support. I would watch a lot more CFL if I could stream it to my TV just as easily as I stream the Blue Jays using Sportsnet's app.

DAZN is pretty sweet for right now though. Anybody interested in the Premiership or Champions League I recommend it 100%. It even does a great job of holding your spot in the match. I paused the United game to do a couple hours of yard work and when I started it back up again it was right where I left it.

What I worry about is how are the next generation going to find the content and fall in love with it like we did as kids?

I was fortunate to grow up with cable as a sports fan which essentially gave me my pick of what sports to watch and learn to love. But the 8yr old who has NetFlix and no TV beyond OTA is going to have pretty low percentages to grow up as a sports fan unless he/she is really thrown into it by their parents.

I have cable mainly so the wife can watch what she wants without hassle. I have more then enough knowledge and expertise in the IT world to find whatever I want to see. But there's still huge value in a cable package for many families who don't share common interests.

My fear is the un-bundling of cable leads to more services with higher costs. I pay around $140/month for internet (500 down/100 up), cable (minus HBO basically) and home phone (not needed) but my math keeps telling me that even with a cheaper $60 internet package I'll end up around that $100+ marker just with Netflix and a Sportsnet OR TSN online sub. And that doesn't count whatever reality crap my wife is interested in that week.

In some ways cable isn't a bad deal. But it usually involves many peoples interests being met. I look forward to seeing where we go next. But if it's to a DAZN then I can already feel myself being pulled away from the content I used to want to check out as a casual fan (EPL/Champions League) and am already used to it being a non-factor. I can only imagine what the next generation will think of some of these services as I don't see kids who didn't grow up with any European soccer coverage caring about it with no exposure to it as kids.

As things like Red Zone and Boxing head that way I can see a huge bubble bursting in the sports world in 15-20 years as an entire generation is lost due to multiple streaming services trying to attract to their parents, the bread winners, but leaving zero exposure for that next generation. We're already seeing is slowly with the CFL and NHL moving to cable more and more over OTA to the point that the Grey Cup is only a cable product now and in the future maybe won't even be that and there's no guarantee the next TV deal for the NHL includes the CBC.

 

[Pilky01]

What I worry about is how are the next generation going to find the content and fall in love with it like we did as kids?

I very much wonder the same thing. Frankly I don't see how being on DAZN helps the Premiership or Champs League grow their fanbase. It will help them consolidate the audience they do have and get money directly from them much easier, but they do that at the cost of attracting new and casual audiences who will never 'stumble' upon a soccer game on TV.

I would have never become a fan of European soccer (and by extension MLS) had it not been for the massive uptick in games being broadcast on TSN and Sportsnet over the last 10-15 years. Which means DAZN will never make any money off of the hypothetical me who is a teenager right now.

 

[LadyStanley]

My fear is the un-bundling of cable leads to more services with higher costs. I pay around $140/month for internet (500 down/100 up), cable (minus HBO basically) and home phone (not needed) but my math keeps telling me that even with a cheaper $60 internet package I'll end up around that $100+ marker just with Netflix and a Sportsnet OR TSN online sub. And that doesn't count whatever reality crap my wife is interested in that week.

Just dealt with that this morning as my cable anniversary happened. My bundle is phone (don't use), internet and cable (250+ channels of which I watch about 20). Price up $30+/mo for this year, now over $200/mo. If I "just" got basic cable, the unbundled price is about 75% of the bundle. About 25% of cost for just "basic" cable, unbundled.

As my local team (VGK) is on a channel that has ZERO streaming options (blacked out on NHL.tv, not carried by sling, etc.), my choices to watch games are: buy ticket $70-200/game, DirectTV (and potentially lose service during wind events), lone cable company, or just listen to radio. (Don't have AT&T U-Verse, Verizon Fios options. Yet.)

Will be looking closely at Center Ice as I watch it for exactly one team. Sling Blue carries usual channel for my fav team at $25/mo. So I might be streaming those games and not doing CI at all (extra hardware charges notwithstanding).

 

[Dale Gribble]

With how split all of the digital options are, at least for me personally cable/satellite/iptv is still the way to go. I am currently a Rogers Ignite subscriber, and I worked it out that it's considerably cheaper for me than going with TSN Direct, Sportsnet now, DAZN, Crave, and Netflix.

 

[David Dennison]

I very much wonder the same thing. Frankly I don't see how being on DAZN helps the Premiership or Champs League grow their fanbase. It will help them consolidate the audience they do have and get money directly from them much easier, but they do that at the cost of attracting new and casual audiences who will never 'stumble' upon a soccer game on TV.

I would have never become a fan of European soccer (and by extension MLS) had it not been for the massive uptick in games being broadcast on TSN and Sportsnet over the last 10-15 years. Which means DAZN will never make any money off of the hypothetical me who is a teenager right now.

That's a very static view of things, no? Hypothetical you today is just on YouTube, watching endless highlights of wicked plays and condensed games. I think sports fandom usually goes a little deeper than catching some games on cable. And maybe it's a little different in Canada with TSN/Sportsnet, but ESPN has probably hampered the growth of soccer in the US as much as helped it.

What I worry about is how are the next generation going to find the content and fall in love with it like we did as kids?

I was fortunate to grow up with cable as a sports fan which essentially gave me my pick of what sports to watch and learn to love. But the 8yr old who has NetFlix and no TV beyond OTA is going to have pretty low percentages to grow up as a sports fan unless he/she is really thrown into it by their parents.
...

Like I am getting at, there is more content than ever before at a kid's fingertips. If a kid really likes soccer, they can find endless free soccer content online. I mean, I see what you are getting at in that soccer now must compete with shit like Fortnite and Instagram for kids' attention, but that was gonna happen regardless of cable going the way of the Dodo.