Cutting The Cable

[SHOCKvalue]

What are the upload speeds like when in BFE? If they are reasonable, this might be a great solution for my uncle's ranch near Independence.

What are upload speeds for price-comparable AT&T or Cox services?

Like I've said, I'm not really into this stuff. I'm attracted to Starlink for reasons not associated with internet speeds.

This convo did just get me to look into Google Fiber. It is available in KS, but outside of KC metro, just in seemingly-random, tiny, rural/suburban blocks of service. Kinda bizarre.

[Kung Wu]

What are upload speeds for price-comparable AT&T or Cox services?

Like I've said, I'm not really into this stuff. I'm attracted to Starlink for reasons not associated with internet speeds.

Comparable.

[1972Shocker]

ESPN LOST 8 MILLION SUBSCRIBERS IN 2021, 10% OF ITS OVERALL SUBSCRIBER BASE

https://www.outkick.com/espn-lost-8-million-subscribers-in-2021-10-of-its-overall-subscriber-base/

The loss of those eight million subscribers will cost the network roughly a billion a year in recurring revenue across all ESPN network properties.

Six years later, if anything, ESPN’s future as a standalone cable entity is even more dire. Even if most still haven’t realized it yet. Why? Because streaming isn’t going to save ESPN’s business either, no matter how much bragging to the contrary company executives attempt.

If cordcutting hadn’t happened then ESPN would still have 100 million subscribers and they would have done $12 billion in revenue in 2021. But cordcutting has happened in a big way and instead ESPN will do roughly $9 billion in cable and satellite revenue instead. And that $9 billion is heading down in a big way.

How low will it go? We don’t know. There seems to a consensus that sports is helping to set a floor in the number of cable and satellite households out there and that consensus appears to be that around 50 million subscribers is the floor. Assuming that’s right then in the space of about twenty years ESPN’s business will have been cut in half, from 100 million cable and satellite subscribers to 50 million subscribers. That is, what projected to be a $12 billion a year business will become a $6 billion a year business in the next five years.

The smartest play, honestly, would be to spin ESPN off as a standalone business, potentially to a sports gambling company. But given the drastic declines in sports gambling company values Disney may have missed that window.

Second, to the extent there is a plan, it’s mostly tied up in a totally outlandish idea that no one with a functional brain should believe. Which is, not surprisingly, why so many in sports media buy it. That idea? That ESPN will just transition from a cable and satellite network to a streaming service, ESPN+, and make money that way instead.

Why is streaming not a viable option for ESPN? First, ESPN’s existing cable contracts don’t allow them to move their top programming — the college football playoff, Monday Night Football, and the NBA playoffs for instance — off cable and on to streaming.

That is, you can only stream these big events by first having a cable and satellite subscription.

The cable companies would revolt if they attempted to do so. What would that revolt look like? They’d put ESPN in a premium pricing tier and overnight tens of millions of subscribers would vanish.

...the second major issue here is ESPN makes far less off ESPN+ subscriptions than they do off ESPN cable and satellite subscriptions.

How much less? Last week ESPN released their ESPN+ subscriber numbers so far through the second quarter of 2022. And those numbers while growing, are a pittance, just 22.3 million subscribers currently have ESPN+. And those subscribers are only paying an average of $4.73 a month. (Many of these “subscribers” aren’t real subscribers either, they are included in rolled up bundled streaming options that are providing ESPN+ at virtually no cost.) And the streaming business in general is still producing a massive deficit, Disney lost nearly a billion dollars in the second quarter on all its streaming offerings.

But the problem is Netflix, which announced subscriber declines last month, appears to have reached the full extent of its addressable streaming audience. And they did it far sooner than anyone expected. So will Disney+. Which is why Disney stock is trading lower today than it was five years ago in 2017.

...increasingly it’s looking like there are two sinking boats instead of one, both cable and streaming are taking on water. And all you’re doing as you attempt to step from one boat to the other is changing your view as you go down.

A lot more in the lengthy article. Quite an effort by OutKIck's Clay Travis.

[shoxlax]

So I guess my question to Clay is where will our entertainment and sports viewing options come from if both cable and streaming are both in the shitter? I understand there is some political motives behind this article, but numbers don’t seem to lie. Were there any alternatives addressed?

[Kung Wu]

Are player salaries ultimately causing subscription rates to be too high?

[1972Shocker]

So I guess my question to Clay is where will our entertainment and sports viewing options come from if both cable and streaming are both in the shitter? I understand there is some political motives behind this article, but numbers don’t seem to lie. Were there any alternatives addressed?

So what does that mean? In the years ahead ESPN, at least if it isn’t purchased by someone like Amazon or Apple who can handle the losses thanks to offsets elsewhere, is going to have to give up top sports rights. (Why would Amazon or Apple buy ESPN when they can just buy the rights instead of ESPN? Maybe to get the existing rights ESPN already has? I think that’s probably the best case scenario for ESPN). Because otherwise at the same time that ESPN is going to become the most desperate to get the best sports rights, they’re going to have less and less money to be able to buy them with. Which means it’s going to be harder and harder to get people to subscribe to ESPN+.

Another question this raises is the if ESPN's future is as bleak as Mr. Travis suggests what will that do the the TV revenue stream for the AAC down the line?

[SubGod22]

I think you're going to see a decline in some of the deals at the top level as they adjust to costs. Or they're simply going to charge more for advertising to try and make up for it. You might also see more competition pop up in a more legit way as ESPN/Disney may not be willing to throw the same kind of money around. If they lose market share on sports broadcasting, non P5 conferences may be a little more in demand to fill out schedules and may benefit. Not expecting huge increases, but some of the lower levels may get bumps. The AAC and MWC should both still be in demand and might maintain or get a slight bump if this plays out.

Or, nobody buys the rights to non power conferences so they can keep vastly overpaying for them. But again, another network somewhere is going to pick up content. With that said, schools that have success and can establish themselves at least regionally, would probably have more control over their rights and might be able to make more selling those games to whoever they want. And you still may be able to sell some of your product to the bigger networks who would still want to broadcast hot teams and big games outside of the power conferences.

[Ted Lasso's Neighbor]

Saw this online and thought I'd put it here since it was part of a streaming channel called FITE. They showed a PPV of guys fighting on skates - basically hockey fights without hockey :)

https://twitter.com/FiteTV/status/1528209555775266816

[WstateU]

Saw this online and thought I'd put it here since it was part of a streaming channel called FITE. They showed a PPV of guys fighting on skates - basically hockey fights without hockey :)

https://twitter.com/FiteTV/status/1528209555775266816

[SubGod22]

FITE has a lot of PPV options, and some free things as well. A lot of wrestling, boxing and MMA options. I'm not sure what Ice Wars is classified as. Boxing?

[wichshock65]

Welp, I just ordered the T-Mobile home internet for the house. I'll see how it works out. Only $50 a month, going to save me a ton over Cox.

[Kung Wu]

Oof, this thread reminded me that now that WSU baseball is over, it's time to cancel espn+ for awhile.

[wichshock65]

Welp, I just ordered the T-Mobile home internet for the house. I'll see how it works out. Only $50 a month, going to save me a ton over Cox.

I received my equipment from T-Mobile yesterday. Was literally just plug in and go. One slight glitch tho, had a hard time connecting my Roku to the T-Mobile wifi. After a bit of research online, ended up just plugging in my old wifi router to the T-Mobile router and everything works great. In fact, this ended up much easier as I didn't have to sign in all my devices to the new network. Anywho, just did a speed test and am getting 89 Mbps download. Plenty for our needs, and at $50 per month, damn sure beats the $150 I was giving cox every month.

Oh yeah, and for those who are into RVing, this device is portable and, as long as you have reception, you can take it camping with you. Kinda cool!

[atlwsu]

Anyone have YtubeTV? Do you get all the sports channels?

[SubGod22]

Anyone have YtubeTV? Do you get all the sports channels?

I used to, and you get pretty much everything but Bally's. I switched to Hulu when YT dropped it because Hulu still had it, but that only lasted a few months.