• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

ESPN has investors really worried

Malone's comments are indeed opinions, and not just that, does he have a say in what Disney or Hearst (who own 20% of ESPN and 50% of the A&E Networks with Disney owning 80% of ESPN and the other 50% of the A&E Networks), nope, not unless Liberty Media merged with Disney or Hearst).

plus if the Walt Disney Company was to spin off ESPN, they would have to either spin off ABC with ESPN or keep ABC and reestablish ABC Sports and take some of the ESPN sports rights to events covered by ABC though the ESPN on ABC banner.

i really don't see Disney wanting to spin off ESPN, not unless Hearst wants to buy the 80% ownership of ESPN.

So most likely, Disney may end up pulling a NBCUniversal (merged with cable giant Comcast) or Time Warner (merge with telecommunication and cable TV giant AT&T, they became a cable TV giant when they bought out DirecTV and not to mention their soon to be shut down U-Verse service) and merge with a cable giant (which would be either Charter Communication or Dish Network).

again, it's all opinion and i said my own personal opinion too, i don't work for Liberty Media or Disney or Hearst or any other media companies.
 
Last edited:
My gut feeling if they keep losing subscribers, then some changes will have to be made. The fact they own 80% for all these years, when it should've been an ALL Disney property. I think they should spin ABC off at this point. It's completely useless outside of selective sporting events. All of them can be on the MAIN ESPN platform, but they chose to give the alphabet network a bone for some selective venues.
 
This is an old story that really affects all of the media companies who are heavily invested in cable. Viacom's MTV Networks have also experienced a huge loss this year, and consequently their stock has dropped by 30% and there's talk of them merging with CBS. The fact that Time-Warner's cable channels have lost audience made them a ripe target for a company like AT&T. The conclusions in this article are still valid, that all of these companies have to develop new platforms for their content, and find new sources of revenue, because cable fees are starting to dry up.
 
yeah, the Cable TV is in big trouble due to the growth of internet streaming in the last 10 years.

right now, in order to survive, these companies like Viacom and Disney need to adapt to compete against streaming services.

also, the sports TV rights bubble is in the process of busting big time, and the sports tv right bubble is the blame for why Cable TV in general has gotten to expensive in a age where cord cutting is cheaper then staying with Cable.
 
also, the sports TV rights bubble is in the process of busting big time, and the sports tv right bubble is the blame for why Cable TV in general has gotten to expensive in a age where cord cutting is cheaper then staying with Cable.

I predict the cost for sports is going to shift from being included to being an extra. But as an extra, it will be almost as much as the cost of basic cable now. Why? Because there are a lot of people who watch live sports on TV. There are hundreds of thousands who subscribe to things like Extra Innings and the NFL package. I pay $5 a month for a sports tier that includes several small sports channels including my regional. That price has doubled in the past few years, and could jump to $20 or more a month. The whole ESPN tier, if it was sold separately from basic, would be about $35 a month. So my expectations is there will be a shift in how sports TV is sold, and as a result, the price for it will jump.
 
If ESPN and other sports channels are getting hammered because of cord-cutting, the sports teams themselves could see some blood-letting in their future.
 
If ESPN and other sports channels are getting hammered because of cord-cutting, the sports teams themselves could see some blood-letting in their future.

Most of those long term contracts are already paid to the leagues. So the teams won't see any hit until 10 years from now. The NFL and MLB got their money from the latest deals.
 
Lets say Disney does offload ESPN, would the SEC even allow Fox or Comcast to buy it?

What issue would the SEC have? When was the last time they stood in the way of a media merger?

You may be asking about DOJ, and I'd see no reason for them to object.

But it's a moot point because Disney ain't selling.
 
Just maybe, the conferences will offer their games again to Free, over the air TV stations, which can air on both their main channels and their digital subchannels.
 
Just maybe, the conferences will offer their games again to Free, over the air TV stations, which can air on both their main channels and their digital subchannels.

Highly unlikely, other than the current ACC effort. The ACC syndicates its football games, but they're 2nd- and 3rd-tier Noon ET games that air mostly on x.2 channels or smaller independent/My/CW stations. I doubt any other major college football conference will do this, ever.
 
We have lived with this reality in radio for at least ten years. Now it's coming to cable TV.

Cable companies are already seeking to diversify, knowing their gravy train is over. That's why Comcast bought NBC Universal. Why AT&T bought DirecTV and Time Warner.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom