HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

ESPN's John Skipper: "We are doing hockey highlights."

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-22-2013, 02:37 PM
  #51
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,802
vCash: 500
Anecdotal, but I sat next to Linda Cohn during a Rangers game last year and egged her on about the lack of NHL coverage on ESPN. She laughed, rolled her eyes, and agreed, saying it's unfortunately out of her hands.

Crease is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 02:40 PM
  #52
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 31,685
vCash: 500
If they want to make themselves irrelevant to me as a consumer, that's fine. I'll continue to take my money elsewhere.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 02:42 PM
  #53
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 24,690
vCash: 10592
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
If they want to make themselves irrelevant to me as a consumer, that's fine. I'll continue to take my money elsewhere.
Yep, simple as that.

coldsteelonice84 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 02:42 PM
  #54
Lost Horizons
Crying Waiting Hopin
 
Lost Horizons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Everywhere
Country: United States
Posts: 7,912
vCash: 500
Espn only covers the sports and events they own the rights to. During the lockout the WNBA got more time on Sportscenter then the nhl/nhlpa negations. Deadspin does a good job of tracking espn's crap everything from them stealing other news sites scoops and passing them off as their own to hiring scam artists to blog for them etc etc.
http://deadspin.com/espn/

then again you do get things like:

Falcons Safety Thomas DeCoud Played The Meow Game During An Interview On SportsCenter

Lost Horizons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 04:07 PM
  #55
Tone King
Atomic Punk
 
Tone King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Uranus
Country: United States
Posts: 8,528
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
Anecdotal, but I sat next to Linda Cohn during a Rangers game last year and egged her on about the lack of NHL coverage on ESPN. She laughed, rolled her eyes, and agreed, saying it's unfortunately out of her hands.
She is a big fan of Hockey. Just that ESPN is a Disney Co. that markets and shoves things down your throat until you just give up an take it like a *****. That is what 90% of US consumers do with that company.....sheep. In all honesty, I have not watched them in quite some time. Just the EPL on weekend mornings when I am hung over and still in bed. i hate the NBA so it does me no service.

Tone King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 04:36 PM
  #56
Faidh ar Rud Eigin
Modhnóirí Claonta
 
Faidh ar Rud Eigin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Transcendent
Country: Guernsey
Posts: 15,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 View Post
About a year ago there was a PTI segment where the two bozos were going over the opening faceoff brawl between the Rangers and Devils.

The first thing the two idiots were saying is that's not what the game is about... Umm... What the hell do you know about the game.

The second thing was a prediction that the time is coming where the players were going to stand up and demand for a ban on fighting.

That second part was funny, because they were claiming that about a month after the players poll came out... The one where 98% of players said they were in support of fighting.

They (ESPN anchors and analysts) also went on a rant about it a month ago after the AHL brawl happened.
PTI is one of the few ESPN programs that consistently talks about hockey and while their opinions for the most part conform to typical ESPN doctrine on hockey they're no worse than some full time hockey analysts.

Besides, Kornheiser is a baseball/football guy, not a basketball. Wilbon is a basketball guy but he's actually a big Chicago fan. Goes to quite a few Blackhawks games (When he's not working either). They're not good hockey analysts but it's far worse when ESPN's other guys talk about it.

I hate ESPN but PTI I'll watch.

Faidh ar Rud Eigin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 05:22 PM
  #57
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,802
vCash: 500
I watch PTI as well. Kornheiser and Wilbon give their genuine opinion, unlike many other talking heads on the network who try to one up each other in the shock value department. I do find it funny that PTI and Around the Horn have pretty much the exact same agenda as each other. The content is absolutely chosen by higher ups and by 11pm you've heard just about 20 different people's take on the same 10 topics.

Crease is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 05:45 PM
  #58
ehockey
Registered User
 
ehockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 48
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
Anecdotal, but I sat next to Linda Cohn during a Rangers game last year and egged her on about the lack of NHL coverage on ESPN. She laughed, rolled her eyes, and agreed, saying it's unfortunately out of her hands.
I shutter everytime I hear Voldemort mentioned. I'll be the first one to admit we are all somewhat bias to our favorite teams (and rightly so being a true fan of whomever it is), but she is incapable of reporting hockey without bias.
Last year when ESPN did their once yearly report on the NHL during the playoffs, She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named picked both the Flyers and Rangers to sweep the Devils out of the playoffs then figures well maybe the Kings will sweep I guess..


Repeat after me: NHL Network

ehockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 05:53 PM
  #59
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,023
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gobias Industries View Post
Counterpoint from a Canadian NBA fan:

TSN is probably guilty of the opposite, only to a higher degree.
Yes, but there is only one NBA team in Canada to 7 NHL teams. And the overall NBA viewership in Canada is probably less than a tenth of overall NHL viewership. On the other hand, MLS has three franchises in Canada - how come they don't get more coverage?

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 05:58 PM
  #60
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,225
vCash: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose Munch View Post
I like the other sports so this does not bother me at all.
Don't you not live in the US?

IU Hawks fan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 06:16 PM
  #61
WildGopher
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
If they want to make themselves irrelevant to me as a consumer, that's fine. I'll continue to take my money elsewhere.
That's it exactly. ESPN is so irrelevant and off my radar screen that I couldn't even tell you for sure what channel they're on my cable system. As far as their hockey coverage goes, out of sight = out of mind.

WildGopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 06:59 PM
  #62
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan View Post
Don't you not live in the US?
Oh sorry, my bad, man. I thought they were talking to everyone.


Last edited by Melrose Munch: 02-22-2013 at 07:07 PM.
Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 07:01 PM
  #63
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by berklon View Post
I'm having a good laugh at all the anti-ESPN comments.

ESPN is covering what the viewers want them to cover, otherwise no one would be watching ESPN. Simple supply and demand.
Exactly. The majority wants to see this. NBC sports is getting crumbs
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gobias Industries View Post
Counterpoint from a Canadian NBA fan:

TSN is probably guilty of the opposite, only to a higher degree.
TSN is not as bad. Remember they have to cover 7 teams now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
NHL and NBA national and local TV ratings are not as far apart as ESPN's news coverage of NHL and NBA.

ESPN has a TV deal with NBA. Through 2015-2016, ESPN and ESPN2 air 75 regular season games per season as well one of the conference finals. ABC airs 15 regular season games per season and the entire NBA finals. Beyond ratings for Sportscenter, PTI, and Around the Horn, ESPN sells ad time during their NBA broadcasts. It's in their financial interest to use their shows to boost interest in upcoming NBA games. Obviously they don't have this double-pronged motivation with the NHL. That said, they didn't do the best job promoting the game while they did have NHL broadcasting rights. So who knows.
National Ratings. The NHL fails there. That's the issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by berklon View Post
Right.

Why aren't there complaints that they don't cover cricket? You think it may have something to do with the amount of people who watch ESPN who aren't interested in it?

If you don't get your hockey fix from ESPN, change the channel. Those who don't care about the lack of hockey coverage on ESPN will continue to watch. Judging by the number of people who watch ESPN, the lack of hockey coverage is a non-issue.

No use crying about it.
I agree. These people could get NBC sports or yahoo.com or whatever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
If you watch their highlight shows and talk shows regularly, it's fairly obvious that viewer demand is not the only driver of content. The other major factor is marketing.

For example, ever since ESPN took over broadcasting rights to Monday Night Football, they pretty much dedicate highlight and talk shows to drum up interest for the game in the 24-48 hours leading up to it.

During college bowl season, ESPN is even more obvious about their intentions. During the Fiesta Bowl, ESPN kept reminding viewers to tune into the BBVA Compass Bowl, while completely ignoring the existence of the much bigger Cotton Bowl, which was going to be aired on Fox. Surely you don't have to guess which game the average sports fan cared more about.
Very true. Marketing. But NHL is primarily responsible for that.

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 07:12 PM
  #64
ilikeblocks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 555
vCash: 500
ESPN caters to a different demographic. People at home all day who want to listen to people argue.

ilikeblocks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 07:31 PM
  #65
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,225
vCash: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose Munch View Post
Oh sorry, my bad, man. I thought they were talking to everyone.
Well if you can't access the channel...

IU Hawks fan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 07:53 PM
  #66
Tawnos
Moderator
BoH Mod Only
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,239
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hipster Doofus View Post
ESPN's appeal is in its simplistic analysis. Every loss is a lack of hard work. Every win is inspirational. Any moron can then talk about sports by just sticking to hard work, grit, heart, ect.
Read post game threads or game day threads on this board for teams that lose. The majority of people here believe exactly the same thing.

Tawnos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 09:19 PM
  #67
IceAce
HEY BUD, LETS PARTY!
 
IceAce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,986
vCash: 300
ESPN was great in its hey day, yet even then when they were broadcasting hockey it was still a red-headed stepchild. (To this day i still geek a liitle when i hear the ESPN NHL theme music and miss Gary Thorne as a commentator.)They had personalities on the air but they never tried to overshadow the games themselves.

In the past decade, they became "merchants of cool" and sell more style than substance. They cater to celebrity and make the highlights and discussions more about the hosts than the athletes or coaches.

IceAce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 09:20 PM
  #68
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,643
vCash: 500
I could say I hate ESPN so much but that's already been covered. I just hope the NHL never go back to that channel forever.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 12:04 AM
  #69
joelef
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 378
vCash: 500
Look at ESPN NASCAR coverage. They spent millions of nascar and only show ten minutes of highlights on anaylas on SC. Also you never hear NASCAR talked on any of there shows. In fact tv ratings have been down tremondly since they went to ESPN so its a myth that being on ESPN makes you somehow revelent.

joelef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 12:05 AM
  #70
IU Hawks fan
They call me 'IU'
 
IU Hawks fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: No longer IU
Country: United States
Posts: 18,225
vCash: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelef View Post
Look at ESPN NASCAR coverage. They spent millions of nascar and only show ten minutes of highlights on anaylas on SC. Also you never hear NASCAR talked on any of there shows. In fact tv ratings have been down tremondly since they went to ESPN so its a myth that being on ESPN makes you somehow revelent.
Obviously you haven't seen how much coverage they've given to Danica winning the poll.

IU Hawks fan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 12:07 AM
  #71
joelef
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 378
vCash: 500
with NBCSN you get a pre game show , post game show , NHL overtime show, college hockey, hockey day in america, NHL winter classic. ESPN wanted on game a week on ESPN2 .

joelef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 12:11 AM
  #72
sh724
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Missouri
Country: United States
Posts: 2,045
vCash: 500
For those that say it is supply and demand for non over the air channels it is no where near that simple. ESPN is by far more expensive than any other channel, but it is in every basic tv package there is. You do not get to pick and choose what channels you get. Every one that has cable or satellite in the US has ESPN and pays for ESPN regardless if they watch it.

I did a quick google search of 'how much does ESPN cost http://www.sportsgrid.com/media/espn...ubscriber-fees This Article is a little over a year old so its probably a little bit different now but ESPN cost $4.69 a month the second most expensive national channel is TNT at $1.16.

In 2010 ESPN reached about 100 million households. That is $469 million dollars a month ESPN brings in assuming it is only on 1 tv in a house but that is far from the case. Also this is just ESPN it does not include ESPN2, ESPNNews, ESPNU, and whatever other ESPN properties there are.


Last edited by sh724: 02-23-2013 at 12:17 AM.
sh724 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 01:44 AM
  #73
knorthern knight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,767
vCash: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan View Post
Obviously you haven't seen how much coverage they've given to Danica winning the poll.
So maybe the NHL needs another Manon Rhéaume in order to get more ESPN coverage

knorthern knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 02:16 AM
  #74
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sh724 View Post
I did a quick google search of 'how much does ESPN cost http://www.sportsgrid.com/media/espn...ubscriber-fees This Article is a little over a year old so its probably a little bit different now but ESPN cost $4.69 a month the second most expensive national channel is TNT at $1.16.
SNL Kagan showed a $5.06/mo avg in early 2012.

TWC will be paying $5.40/mo this year - increasing to $7+/mo 4 years.

http://www.mediapost.com/publication...e-in-2017.html

Quote:
ESPN Set To Pass $7 Sub Fee In 2017
by David Goetzl, Feb 19, 2013, 5:37 PM

For help with its massive NFL rights bill and likely re-upping with the NBA, ESPN can continue to count on hefty per-subscriber fees that look to cross the monthly $7 mark in 2017. Based on distribution in 100 million homes, that $7 amount would give it an annual take of about $8.4 billion in affiliate fees alone within five years.

ESPN’s current deal with Time Warner Cable calls for it to receive more than $5.40 a sub a month starting in the middle of this year; then passing the $7 mark in 2017; and closing in on the $7.50 mark the following year. The deal calls for an annual increase in the 6.5% range.

By the end of this decade, ESPN is set to collect just about $8 a sub a month.

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 04:27 AM
  #75
wildthing202
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Douglas, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 602
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to wildthing202 Send a message via Yahoo to wildthing202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djp View Post
House of cards arguemnt....Are they superstars because ESPN says they are with their coverage?

In terms of coverage...ESPNNEWS is different---it does do much more NHL highlights. Its more diven by this is what happening now.

With Sportscenter its about cross pollination/promoting what is on their network.

On Wed nights show there was no coverage of Lindy Ruff being fired and there also was no coverage of the snow in tuscon causing the postponement of the PGA. If they didnt own cable rights to some of the majors, and exclusive US rihgts the the british open they wouldnt cover golf either.
House of cards? Your kidding right? Outside of Broduer who exactly was a superstar aka one of the best players in the league in the finals? The NBA had 2 of its best going at it in the finals with Lebron and Durant, of course it's going to get ratings just like Penguins-Red Wings did with Crosby & Co..

wildthing202 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 11:40 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.