You are assuming that people will be willing to pay those increases; that is not a certainty.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
CU has rejoined the Big 12 and broken college football - talking out asses continues
- Thread starter InTheBuff
- Start date
Of course it is a certainty.
All monthly premium items continue to rise. 1) Media companies are convincing people that they’re spending less by breaking up the payments into absurd, monthly premiums. In reality they’re spending $100 for internet and $10-$15 per streaming service on top of all their other monthly premiums. 2) There’s a hardcore base of people who are going to watch sports on TV regardless of cost. Super rich people need sports on TV to get richer and placate the masses. Sports will be there. They will find a way to get average folks to pay - especially as the media landscape first decentralizes and then consolidates.
fact. i have cable, netflix, prime, hulu, mlb, nil, disney, paramount, and more. this was the expected outcome. and it is why live sports are such a battlefield. once the next NFL deal gets done, there will be even more consolidation and price increases. they pretty much know i want access to all live sports and am willing to pay for it.
in the last 3 days for example--- Dodgers game was on espn, fox cable, and MLB network-- 3 different subscriptions. i predicted this **** job years ago.
where espn and fox are possibly mistaken however is whether someone like me will pay a premium for college football that has absolutely zero impact on CU. i will not. i will just watch more NFL games and whatever random service our Buffs end up on.
Worth considering as well.
Anytime after early October would you rather take a 1 1/2 hour flight to Lincoln or a 4 hour flight to LA (Based on flight time from Detroit in the middle of B1G.)
Considering the weather in much of the B1G a lot of them will look forward to a road game in SoCal.
I appreciate that people consider traveling to games, but that—sadly—has no bearing on the present realignment decisions, which are entirely media driven—re people watching who are NOT at the stadiums.
Even student-athlete travel and inconvenience has no bearing on any of this—re USC/UCLA have committed their students in every sport to cross-country flights for every away game. And CU would/should accept an SEC (even prob ACC) invite in a heart beat without any concern for anyone’s travel or suckie destination.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
Do you live in the LA market? I get MLB.tv every year to watch the Rangers. Its a 20 dollar add on to my youtube tv subscription, but easy to add in the spring and get rid of the in the fall.
Your last take is a good one-and its why I think the Big 2 will expand to make sure they have at least somewhat of a presence in every major market in the country.......like the B1G being able to argue "We have a presence in Denver because we have Nebraska" already.
My point is that if you pay say $60 for internet only, and $40 for streaming services it's stupid to say you're "saving" $70 a month because cable TV would cost $110.
That $110 includes internet, so you're only "saving" $10 a month by going with the streaming services.
What people should talk about is the marginal cost of adding a cable TV package to their internet vs the streaming services.
When you do that, you usually do save some money each month, but it's often not nearly as much as people like to claim.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
I have YTTV so the only conference network I don't have is the P12N (**** this conference), but aren't the conference nets still somewhat of still some sort of add-on?
Last edited:
i hate this on so many levels. but, hey, if you can make a case that this drives eyeballs, then sure i am all in.
Thisuniversityisf’ed!
Well-Known Member
I know what you meant and i agree, anyone pretending they don’t have internet cost is dumb. I was merely saying the cost of a bundle cannot be broken down so I’m not sure why you wonder why people use the full cost.
Thisuniversityisf’ed!
Well-Known Member
He edited- Its $804m
Wait, monthly fees amount to a boat load of $$$$$$$$?
Theyre fighting this trend. Cord cutters are costing them.
ESPN's grip on cable TV loosens as streaming strategy surges
ESPN was once America's largest cable network.
www.axios.com
Im sure, there is an assumption hope/fear that they dont lose subscribers with this move.
I never signed up.
Last edited:
Disney Earnings are 8/10. My suspicion is they will have good numbers and are raising prices in an environment of strength which probably boosts stock prices. There is no way they would be doing that if they were shedding subscribers.
Disney stock is a bargain right now as they get nuked by investors when inflation was hitting and Netflix had that melt down quarterly report.
There is a pricing delta where people will and will not sign up. I guess they will be testing where sustained revenue is with the fewest subscribers possible. The risk is ending up like DirecTV where people just drop you because the price got too high relative to the value.
Another concern is by hiding all this stuff behind subscription services you will not brand the next generation and youll end up like boxing. Someone will fill that vacuum with the next UFC sport
I agree. I have reduced my sports watching to just those specific events I want to see and can record for when I want to watch them: the Tour, Shiffrin’s races, CU games, Warriors Playoff games, maybe a Broncos game if I can find it for free here in LA—which is super rare now that LA has a team, and I’ll never watch that.
I used to sit and watch whatever was on, especially CFB Saturday, but there are just too many better options I can now CHOOSE from, and CFB has mostly stopped being interesting, aside from watching my team. Why do I care which of the same rich teams year after year are in the playoffs? I will actively avoid watching any of that.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
One thing to keep in mind with ESPN+: The Disney bundle (Disney+, Hulu, ESPN+) is staying at $13.99. I'd wonder if the vast majority of people who have ESPN+ by itself will change to the bundle.
ESPN isn’t the only player. Leagues are getting money from several networks AND providers.Theyre fighting this trend. Cord cutters are costing them.
View attachment 52979
ESPN's grip on cable TV loosens as streaming strategy surges
ESPN was once America's largest cable network.
Im sure, there is an assumption hope/fear that they dont lose subscribers with this move.
I never signed up.
edit: this part of the summer is also a really bad time for live TV watching. Seeing cancellations now makes sense when people can come back to watch football in the fall.
Last edited:
Worthless f***ing elitists. if you want to be an elitists, you better be elite
www.heartlandcollegesports.com
Colorado Administration Views the Big 12 as a 'JUCO League'
With conference realignment back in full swing, there has been plenty of speculation as to whether or not the Pac-12 could fall apart in the near future. If it does, could teams end up in the Big 12? One team that has come up as a possible future Big 12 team is Colorado, who of […]
www.heartlandcollegesports.com
Last edited:
nolabuff
Club Member
Personally, there’s no way I don’t continue to save money by cord cutting. I pay for internet ($55/mt), HBO ($15), Prime ($15). My girlfriend pays for Netflix ($15), Hulu not live ($13). Obviously the services are trying to cut down on it, but for now I also have a rolodex of other logins from family and friends that I exclusively use for sports. The one cable provider I could get currently has the bundle priced at $130 before taxes and fees so generously, $140. Even if I combined with my girlfriend, which thankfully she doesn’t read allbuffs, that’s $113 vs $140, which assumes we also don’t want the services we currently have.
Admittedly I don’t know much about media rights, but it seems to me that these remaining conferences should be paying close attention to the NFL Sunday Ticket deal, which I imagine will be announced by around the start of the season. Apple, Amazon, and Disney are competing for it. If it goes to one of the first two, I would feel better about focusing on streaming as the PAC, BIG12, or ACC. Given Apple’s foray into sports with becoming the exclusive MLS broadcaster, increasing MLB games, and now possibly Sunday Ticket, I think it becomes almost imperative to try to get content on there asap. The media landscape will probably look much different in 10 years and l think it’s worth the gamble to bet on streaming now, especially if it gets the big exposure nudge through Sunday Ticket.
Admittedly I don’t know much about media rights, but it seems to me that these remaining conferences should be paying close attention to the NFL Sunday Ticket deal, which I imagine will be announced by around the start of the season. Apple, Amazon, and Disney are competing for it. If it goes to one of the first two, I would feel better about focusing on streaming as the PAC, BIG12, or ACC. Given Apple’s foray into sports with becoming the exclusive MLS broadcaster, increasing MLB games, and now possibly Sunday Ticket, I think it becomes almost imperative to try to get content on there asap. The media landscape will probably look much different in 10 years and l think it’s worth the gamble to bet on streaming now, especially if it gets the big exposure nudge through Sunday Ticket.
ESPN+ has so much content that even the new $9.99/mo deal could appear to be a steal. You can watch any out of market MLB, MLS, and NHL games. You get every Big 12 school except Texas plus you could watch a ton of FCS football. The MAC & AAC are also on ESPN+. Of any of those games are on the main ESPN channels, you will have to have a separate cable subscription for that.
NBA isn’t on ESPN+ perhaps until it’s next contract and there will be a few NFL games including this years Broncos game in London.
There is a ton of college basketball games depending on your taste and you can watch a ton of mens & womens lacrosse as well.
There’s also ESPN+ articles that can be read. I just think it’s a great deal as long as you are comfortable with not watching some local teams.
ESPN+ has really good golf coverage as well. Featured group coverage, featured hole coverage and pre-network coverage. Generally better announcers and fewer commercials.