4 ms·

ESPN has huge issues lately. They've lost over 4 million subscribers and are cutting jobs. http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/is-es

by mitchty 11y ago

ESPN has huge issues lately. They've lost over 4 million subscribers and are cutting jobs. http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/is-espn-a-giant-bubble-about-to-burst-071215 http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-covera... If only everyone realized that if you subscribe to cable, you're paying for about $6.61/mo for espn to be on your bundle. This is for everyone, not just the sports fans. I read somewhere that espn alone if only paid by fans would come out to about $34/mo Which if true really throws a wrench into the sports world. If they keep losing viewers there will be an interesting situation regarding advertisements. Honestly I can only hope, the only reason I have cable tv is so that comcast can still count me as a viewer with their "your bill will be cheaper if you just get a basic package" bs.

exelius 11y ago
> Honestly I can only hope, the only reason I have cable tv is so that comcast can still count me as a viewer with their "your bill will be cheaper if you just get a basic package" bs. Look for that to disappear in the next few years. Cable companies have traditionally been ruled by the video business unit, but they're starting to realize that of the $120/mo triple play, consumers only value the video service at about $30-40/mo. That's more than it costs in licensing fees - so it would be a better profit move to charge $70-80/mo for straight Internet access. They're increasingly willing to sacrifice low-margin (with relatively high marginal cost) video revenue for high-margin broadband revenue. I've always wondered why the cable companies haven't partnered with Netflix to sell subscriptions. Give the cable companies a cut in exchange for interconnects and cross-promotion. If Comcast were to offer a $100/mo Internet + Netflix + HBO bundle, it would sell like hotcakes. Also, remember that the target customer for a cable company is a 50-year-old head of household. While "cord nevers" will be a drain on revenue in the future, big cable is still making a good profit targeting people who are far behind the technology curve.

by mitchty 11y ago

exelius 11y ago

> Honestly I can only hope, the only reason I have cable tv is so that comcast can still count me as a viewer with their "your bill will be cheaper if you just get a basic package" bs. Look for that to disappear in the next few years. Cable companies have traditionally been ruled by the video business unit, but they're starting to realize that of the $120/mo triple play, consumers only value the video service at about $30-40/mo. That's more than it costs in licensing fees - so it would be a better profit move to charge $70-80/mo for straight Internet access. They're increasingly willing to sacrifice low-margin (with relatively high marginal cost) video revenue for high-margin broadband revenue. I've always wondered why the cable companies haven't partnered with Netflix to sell subscriptions. Give the cable companies a cut in exchange for interconnects and cross-promotion. If Comcast were to offer a $100/mo Internet + Netflix + HBO bundle, it would sell like hotcakes. Also, remember that the target customer for a cable company is a 50-year-old head of household. While "cord nevers" will be a drain on revenue in the future, big cable is still making a good profit targeting people who are far behind the technology curve.