HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

ESPN to experience massive layoffs of on air talent

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-12-2017, 06:48 AM
  #126
Radical Realignment
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: The Empire State
Country: United States
Posts: 13
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by XX View Post
Boycotting them until Stephen A goes away. I'm guessing he'll be the absolute last person out the door.
Why so?

I find Stephen A to be one of the more entertaining personalities left at ESPN.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BattleBorn View Post
If we're going to discuss the ESPN thing from a business sense, we've almost got to touch on the fact that they have spread themselves pretty thin from a business standpoint.

The number of networks Disney has under the umbrella is one thing, the number that ESPN has under their specific charge is something completely different.

They're working with the mothership network, ESPN2, ESPN3/WatchESPN, ESPNU, ESPN Classic, The Longhorn Network, SEC Network, I'm pretty sure they've got a piece of the ACC's Network, plus they've got all the Spanish coverage as well on ESPN Deportes.

They've got all that infrastructure, all those channels to program, the need for more and more content with which to fill the networks, and then they've got to fight the changing landscape of how people are consuming sports events.

While this whole thing may have a little to do with the content of their sports commentary, I think a lot of it just has to do with the changing world of television. That's the real discussion that should take place when things like this happen, at least from a business perspective. The fact that they have determined they'd like to provide some additional commentary that could be perceived as politics may be a poor business decision since they're running the risk of alienating a portion of an already shrinking potential viewership group, but I doubt it's the main reason these things are happening. The world is changing.
This is an insightful analysis. And I have no problem with a network/company shifting its priorities to a new footing in an ever-changing media landscape. But the explicit focus on sponsored (or invested) content (e.g. the near ubiquitous coverage of, say, basketball at the expense of almost everything else) means that the entire enterprise is inherently limited and biased. And as entertaining as its personalities might be ... with their voices and content shackled to sponsored (or invested) content, means diminishing returns, IMO.

Radical Realignment is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2017, 11:19 AM
  #127
SCBlueLiner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BattleBorn View Post
If we're going to discuss the ESPN thing from a business sense, we've almost got to touch on the fact that they have spread themselves pretty thin from a business standpoint.

The number of networks Disney has under the umbrella is one thing, the number that ESPN has under their specific charge is something completely different.

They're working with the mothership network, ESPN2, ESPN3/WatchESPN, ESPNU, ESPN Classic, The Longhorn Network, SEC Network, I'm pretty sure they've got a piece of the ACC's Network, plus they've got all the Spanish coverage as well on ESPN Deportes.

They've got all that infrastructure, all those channels to program, the need for more and more content with which to fill the networks, and then they've got to fight the changing landscape of how people are consuming sports events.

While this whole thing may have a little to do with the content of their sports commentary, I think a lot of it just has to do with the changing world of television. That's the real discussion that should take place when things like this happen, at least from a business perspective. The fact that they have determined they'd like to provide some additional commentary that could be perceived as politics may be a poor business decision since they're running the risk of alienating a portion of an already shrinking potential viewership group, but I doubt it's the main reason these things are happening. The world is changing.
With all of these channels in need of programming it is pretty stupid of ESPN to alienate, and basically not cover, one of the major sports. While I wouldn't expect them to pay a premium for the NHL they could still cover the sport of hockey with a weekly studio show, broadcast NCAA hockey (more than they already do) on the cheap, and maybe even broadcast CHL games for a small contract. Instead they give us basketball, and more basketball, and commentary, and more commentary.

It's not just hockey either. There are other sports that ESPN could pick up the broadcast that probably wouldn't cost too much to do so as the league would simply be happy to be broadcast on ESPN.

Stick to sports. Broadcast a wide range of sports. Keeps a broad base of customers engaged.

SCBlueLiner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2017, 06:57 AM
  #128
Bluefan75
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,295
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCBlueLiner View Post
With all of these channels in need of programming it is pretty stupid of ESPN to alienate, and basically not cover, one of the major sports. While I wouldn't expect them to pay a premium for the NHL they could still cover the sport of hockey with a weekly studio show, broadcast NCAA hockey (more than they already do) on the cheap, and maybe even broadcast CHL games for a small contract. Instead they give us basketball, and more basketball, and commentary, and more commentary.

It's not just hockey either. There are other sports that ESPN could pick up the broadcast that probably wouldn't cost too much to do so as the league would simply be happy to be broadcast on ESPN.

Stick to sports. Broadcast a wide range of sports. Keeps a broad base of customers engaged.
Sure, but rightly or wrongly, the same mindset that has TSN showing a mid-season draft preview over a number of other options is the same one that has ESPN showing 72 hours in a day of "slightly-different but pretty much the same NFL show." They figure the ratings are better(and/or the cost for those ratings) than showing something else.

Sounds like the sports arena of the TV industry has absorbed some of those Michael Crichton was discussing. He said once, "these are really dumb people running TV." Of course, Crichton is a Ph. D. so everyone would seem stupid. "No, I mean 2+2=5 stupid." Yep.

Bluefan75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-14-2017, 07:06 AM
  #129
AtlantaWhaler
Moderator
Thrash/Preds/Sabres
 
AtlantaWhaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 15,249
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnashville View Post
Great news! Hope it shows people are sick of politics being shoved down their throats during their sports programming. Also it would be nice if they discovered there are other sports besides basketball and football.
Agreed with this. (Except for the "great news" part. There are layoffs ya know).

ESPN is garbage and it's funny to watch them continue to be stubborn and continue to raise their cost of access. I haven't had ESPN for over a year now.

AtlantaWhaler is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:58 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.