10 ms·
I would pay ESPN $10 a month for an ESPN streaming app that had access to all the college football games (no blackouts), alone, as long as it didn't require a c
by Phlow 10y ago
I would pay ESPN $10 a month for an ESPN streaming app that had access to all the college football games (no blackouts), alone, as long as it didn't require a cable subscription. The current ESPN streaming app is garbage, compared to Netflix, and other on-demand interfaces. It's not available on my Smart TV. The quality of the streaming is terrible. It's slow to bring up video. The ads are repetitive and annoying, and it's a second class citizen with wait screens while local ads are up on broadcast.
Comcast recently decided to institute a 1TB/month cap in my area, with a charge of $10 per 50GB after up to $200, or $50 for unlimited (opt-in, by the sounds). There are no technical reasons why they did this, it was entirely to gain more revenue to make up for the cord cutters. Their own streaming service doesn't apply to their data cap.
The whole thing is garbage and needs to be completely changed. The moment Google Fiber or something better comes along in my area, I'm going internet only, and I'll just go without until they realize how badly they've managed to move with the trends and start fixing it.
- mbloom1915 10y agoI think you nailed it here - cord cutting is part of it (I've done it myself) but ESPN is failing to deliver internet content effectively. The 'watchespn' site/app is clunky, slow, and sometimes takes multiple provider logins to work. When you see how simple it is to watch the NFL on Twitter vs. the 5 step broke process of ESPN online - the choice is clear. It's too bad they won't upgrade basic site functions since they cover the most sports globally, including games with expected low viewership...YouTube has been an easier outlet for some to broadcast live.
- johndubchak 10y agoWell, at least now they have the perfect marketing spin, "We no longer have the subscriber base to support cost effective investment in this market segment. We'll need to increase our subscriber rates significantly in order to offset any investment in a new streaming platform." In short, consumers, once again, get screwed for the shoddy investments in technology by the behemoths.
- randall 10y agoIt's still a changing biz model at the core, not shoddy tech.
- mbloom1915 10y agoI'd agree - but right tech will pave way for right biz model in this case
- johndubchak 10y agoMy main point, buried in hyperbole I'll admit, is the quality of our infrastructure or perhaps more accurately the inconsistency of it. We've been promised high quality bandwidth for years, which would help expand the business opportunities for companies like ESPN, but that hasn't really been delivered and us consumers suffer with higher prices, lower quality services and growing entrenchment of the monopoly model (thinking more of the ISPs at this point, which is slightly off-topic).
- jfoutz 10y agoonly if they can actually keep the broadcast rights. Twitch and netflix could probably swipe a region if they really wanted to. Or maybe just somebody with money who partners with MLBAM.
- sseagull 10y ago> The moment Google Fiber or something better comes along in my area I've got some bad news - Google has "paused" its fiber rollout. With that on life support and Verizon FIOS rollout seemingly dead, I don't see much changing anytime soon.
- colejohnson66 10y agoBecause rolling out fiber (alongside competitors) to everyone (including those who won't join your network) is a big investment that may not pay for itself. What needs to happen is cities roll out their own fiber and lease it to the ISPs. Then Google won't have to deal with the problems moving pole wires or digging has. What Google is doing is ditching fiber for wireless. That way they don't have to bother rolling fiber to people who don't want it. And before someone says wireless is slower than fiber, a directional antenna can get you pretty fast speeds. I don't know the actual numbers, but I think you can still get gigabit over wireless if done right.
- kruptos 10y agoI work at a fairly large WISP and we have 10 Gbps wireless point to point backhauls. We also provide customers 1000/1000 Mbps fiber like wireless point to point WAN connections.
- hanklazard 10y agoSounds great. I'm trapped in an apt building with Comcast as the only broadband option. As soon as there's a reasonable point-to-point wireless that I can put in my 10th story window, I'm in.
- narrowrail 10y agoDon't these wireless signals eventually go to cables? Can you imagine if everyone in your building had point-to-point connections? How many dish antennas is that? I hope more municipalities pursue their own fiber in the future.
- IBM 10y agoWould you spend $25-35 per month for ESPN? Because that's what it would probably cost if it wasn't subsidized by the bundle. Your answer to that question may in fact be yes, but the economics don't work out. Disney would make more money getting $6 from every cable subscriber than try to scratch and claw to scale up an OTT service like Netflix that would inevitably cannibalize their current business. The only thing that will change the economics is when the market forces their hand, which is what this story is about.
- brightball 10y agoThe only reason I have a TV package is for ESPN. The problem is live broadcasts are hard to do streaming. Netflix is comparatively easy.
- stinkytaco 10y agoMajor League Baseball would like to talk to you about that. Frankly, the fact that I can almost always find an illegal stream of quality as good as ESPN's streaming, I find it difficult to believe it's that hard to do. And the fact that several major professional sports are doing it, mostly using MLB Advanced Media, tells me that ESPN can do this if it wants. The problem is the economics of scale and advantages of bundling, not live broadcasts. EDIT: I should add that not only is MLB's streaming as good as TV, it's better. I can pause, rewind, see multiple angles or even watch more than one game at once. If it weren't for draconian blackouts (see, there's economics getting in the way again) it would be the only way to watch baseball.
- brightball 10y agoHow many people are watching those MLB games at one time nationally? Games like the Super Bowl where you are talking millions of individuals trying to stream the same thing, from the same source at the same time. Same with college football with Saturdays.
- jon-wood 10y ago
- ezequiel-garzon 10y agoDoes "cord cutters" refer to people that go mobile-only? Criminals that steal the metal in the cords? Thanks!
- sliverstorm 10y agoPeople who ditch cable TV, specifically. Used to be people who stopped watching TV entirely, now it mostly seems to be people who watch TV online.
- mikeryan 10y agoCord cutters is a term of art for folks who forego traditional terrestrial cable or satellite TV instead opting for internet delivered options.
- CoolGuySteve 10y agoAt Apple we demo'ed live streaming MLB over rtsp using Akamai's infrastructure. This was 7 years ago. The technology is there and it's a turnkey solution. its really just politics at the executive level holding it back at this point.
- beedogs 10y agoThat's a strange example to use, because MLB has been offering live streaming for almost a decade now.
- erickhill 10y ago> Google Fiber They just announced last week they're not expanding anymore. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/10/26/why-google-fiber-is-no-longer-rolling-out-to-new-cities/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/10/26...
- oxide 10y agoSomeone in my local government is talking about making the internet a city utility, like the similarly city owned electricity. They got my vote this election cycle. It seems that's the only way. Either your city competes with ISP's or ISP's have uncontested regional monopolies.
- smsm42 10y agoI have hard time my city would be able to compete on either quality, price or customer service. Unless they do a cheap trick of charging me less upfront while subsidizing it on the back from my own property taxes. Maybe your city is different. But I don't see any advantage for them except that they have taxes to fall back on, which private company would have to stand on their own.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- paulddraper 10y ago$10 a month during college football season of course...
- fapjacks 10y agoFuck Comcast.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- prirun 10y agoThe CEO of Google Fiber just resigned, and they had a layoff. I don't think Google will be saving us from the cable and AT&T monopolies anytime soon.