Story On Conference Realignment Has Iowa State In The MAC

[bhawk24bob]

It's going to be interesting for sure. Help me understand how cutting the cord is really going to reduce revenue long term? There's no way the owners of the product are going to give it away for free. So this means either the individual subscribers who really want the product over any streaming medium are going to pay a great deal more for it or live game attendance is going to rise again or possibly both. The money will be made one way or the other.

I'm on mobile right now and don't have the article in front of me - but I read something earlier this week that over 50% of cable subscribers would drop ESPN for an $8/month savings on their cable bill. The point was that the majority of subscribers don't care about sports.

A minority of us do care, but I'm certainly not paying a la carte for anything outside of what I want to watch, ie I'm not paying for the NBA, college basketball, the SEC/PAC10/B12, etc

The reason these media contracts are so large is that cable subscribers are forced into paying for channels that they don't want in order to get channels they do want.

 

[bhawk24bob]

Pay Per View is an interesting story. I would spend $10 to watch my team at home. I watch a lot of football at home while I work. But if I paid $10, I would see more people getting together, splitting the cost of the $10 fee...especially if it was $19.95, which wouldn't surprise me, especially if they have multiple camera angle views. But would the revenue stream pay out above the current cable system?

I'd pay for a handful of big games, but I'm certainly not paying for an Iowa/UNI matchup - which is one of the points of the blog post

 

[Lone Clone]

I'm on mobile right now and don't have the article in front of me - but I read something earlier this week that over 50% of cable subscribers would drop ESPN for an $8/month savings on their cable bill. The point was that the majority of subscribers don't care about sports.

A minority of us do care, but I'm certainly not paying a la carte for anything outside of what I want to watch, ie I'm not paying for the NBA, college basketball, the SEC/PAC10/B12, etc

The reason these media contracts are so large is that cable subscribers are forced into paying for channels that they don't want in order to get channels they do want.

Exactly. That's why it was such a battle to get BTN added to some networks.

 

[And1Hawk]

I'm on mobile right now and don't have the article in front of me - but I read something earlier this week that over 50% of cable subscribers would drop ESPN for an $8/month savings on their cable bill. The point was that the majority of subscribers don't care about sports.

A minority of us do care, but I'm certainly not paying a la carte for anything outside of what I want to watch, ie I'm not paying for the NBA, college basketball, the SEC/PAC10/B12, etc

The reason these media contracts are so large is that cable subscribers are forced into paying for channels that they don't want in order to get channels they do want.

I get your points here and these are not in question. The real question is why does anyone think that cutting the cord is going to mean the loss of revenue for the owners of the live sporting content? I'll say again they are not going to give it away for free unless they have a way of replacing that revenue. That means those of who want the content are going to pay a lot more for that individualized content we want over any medium. It's simple math.

BTN has 100 subscribers at 10 = 1000

Now with cord cutters / ala carte BTN now has 10 subscribers

-> 1000 revenue / 10 = 100 fee per person

 

[cidhawkeye]

Where is the cut off of what you want, what you really want and what you would pay for it? They may not want to give it away but there is some price resistance that will occur. Making a revenue stream a little tenuous.

 

[bhawk24bob]

I get your points here and these are not in question. The real question is why does anyone think that cutting the cord is going to mean the loss of revenue for the owners of the live sporting content? I'll say again they are not going to give it away for free unless they have a way of replacing that revenue. That means those of who want the content are going to pay a lot more for that individualized content we want over any medium. It's simple math.

BTN has 100 subscribers at 10 = 1000

Now with cord cutters / ala carte BTN now has 10 subscribers

-> 1000 revenue / 10 = 100 fee per person

I think it's safe to say that if your argument is correct, the BTN would already be a la carte only. The math must not work out like that

 

[And1Hawk]

I think it's safe to say that if your argument is correct, the BTN would already be a la carte only. The math must not work out like that

There's no reason to go ala carte when you have a large subscriber network until you have to. A time will come as we all know that this model will disappear though. The issue is for live sports the owners of the content are not stupid. They will make their money one way or another otherwise there is no point. My hunch is it will cost more to get the opportunity to view it live over any medium.

What this means for the college landscape will be interesting. There will be enormous pressure on schools to bring markets and viewership to the table under an ala-carte system. This could be tough for schools in smaller markets like ISU, Iowa, etc as well as ramp up the emphasis on winning that much more because that often will correlate to maximizing viewership. No different than selling season tickets when you are losing. See Purdue now and 5-10 years ago under Tiller.

 

[And1Hawk]

Where is the cut off of what you want, what you really want and what you would pay for it? They may not want to give it away but there is some price resistance that will occur. Making a revenue stream a little tenuous.

Agree and that will be the interesting part to see. How much more is winning going to be paramount for programs to maximize interest as well as market / fan base sizes.

 

[bhawk24bob]

There's no reason to go ala carte when you have a large subscriber network until you have to. A time will come as we all know that this model will disappear though. The issue is for live sports the owners of the content are not stupid. They will make their money one way or another otherwise there is no point. My hunch is it will cost more to get the opportunity to view it live over any medium.

What this means for the college landscape will be interesting. There will be enormous pressure on schools to bring markets and viewership to the table under an ala-carte system. This could be tough for schools in smaller markets like ISU, Iowa, etc as well as ramp up the emphasis on winning that much more because that often will correlate to maximizing viewership. No different than selling season tickets when you are losing. See Purdue now and 5-10 years ago under Tiller.

If they would make more money a la carte, they would do it. The question is never whether the money will be equal, it's whether it'll be more or less - and they must have data that it'll be less with a la carte

 

[SoDakHawk]

Funny, whenever the subject of a la carte comes up people always say it is the sport entities that should be worried. Actually, it is quite the opposite. It's all the crap-ass stations that put out nothing but reality junk and celebrity tabloid crap that should be worried. When the world goes a la carte which channels are going to be in higher demand from not only consumers but also ADVERTISERS? When I watch a non-sporting event television show that I like I always have the DVR set and then starting watching it 20 minutes into the program if not later in the week. Why? Because I fast forward through commercials. Live sporting events, no such luck, I am a captive audience. Advertisers will pay a premium for live sporting events because it is a way to reach a captive audience.

In the end all that a la carte will do is give us less programming for about the same amount of money. The cable industry has the public pretty much slotted into what we are willing to pay for television. They will get that percentage of our disposable income one way or another.

 

[amahawk]

If it costs too much and the product sucks I will just go watch local college and juco sports.

I still think it might be time to take major college athletics back to the amateur student athlete model.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

I still think it might be time to take major college athletics back to the amateur student athlete model.

I agree. But, I'm afraid the genie is out of the bottle.

 

[amahawk]

It might go the way of NASCAR, Over blown and over hyped.

In the last couple of years , where I live, it went from Daytona 500 parties to I wonder who won.