ESPN's old model business plan was simple. Cable (or dish or whatever) is mostly a pass through. You pay the cable company so much, it keeps a profit, but passes most of your money on to the various networks. "Everybody" had cable and thus "everybody" paid. And the prices for the sports channels are HUGE. Between ESPN, the other sports networks, and the local RSN, maybe $20 a month. And "everybody" paid. And ESPN, et al, then passed that money on to the leagues, conferences, and ultimatly the players (and anybody paying for college for themselves or their children understands that college athletes are paid) via huge multi-year contracts.
But, and this is hard for people on a sports board to understand, but it is true nonetheless, not everybody likes sports. Lots of people, given the choice would not pay two cents for all the sports channels. And now new technology is giving people a choice.
So ESPN is in a quandry. If only the people that actually want it pay for it, the price will have to be much much much more. Like $50 or $60 a month. Prices many people simply cannot afford.
So there is one solution. The payments to the leagues have to go down. Disney will have to suffer through until these contracts run out and then bid $$ that work out to a monthly price that ordinary people can afford. That means the P5 gets less, poor Lebron gets less, even the vaunted NFL and its prima donna players get less.
And it trickles down to its massive over-bid contracts with non-things like THE AMERICAN!!!!!!!! and the lowly MAC. Tick-tock.
If you listen closely you can hear the world's smallest violin playing. Boo hoo.
As to ESPN's particular sins, they are many:
- ESPN pays its "talent" too much money. Blunt fact is 99.9% of the value in ESPN is weeknights and all weekend. It could show Bugs Bunny during the day and no one would care. But it spends millions on these arguers.
- ESPN is too focused on the NBA. What will all these arguers argue about? Talking most sports is hard. Really hard. To be smart about even one complex sport takes real work. So argue about the NBA. Easy. It is covered like a female soap opera. This one likes that one, this one is mad at that one. That and a few conclusory statements like "CARMELLOOOOOOOO!!! is the MANNNNNNN!!!! and other idiocy. Knowing something about a real sport is hard.
- ESPN plays favorites. Yes, it does. If it can get by with it (some things it cannot) if it is not on ESPN, ESPN does not cover it. That simple. Did it to CUSA. Does it to the NHL, NASCAR, so on.
- ESPN is too focused on "social issues" and far-left preaching. People go to sports to escape. But not on ESPN, where born middle class or upper middle class coastal non-white elites preach about a supposed situation they have never even expierenced. The only time race should be mentioned in a sports cast is if both boxers are wearing the same color trunks.
- ESPN screws over the minor conferences. CUSA, and eventualy (tick-tock) the other G5ers have to choose taking small or no money from ESPN or getting a livable wage from networks that fans bitch they cannot get (even though most can, they just are too dumb to read the TV listings or too cheap to pay for the right package).
In not that far of the future, people will come close to true pay per view for everything. And, hey, with a loyal fan base spread out across the country due to the WV economy, I like MU in that world way more than about any G5 you can name.
