DIRECTV unlikely to keep NFL Sunday Ticket

[Bruce]

It is amazing how whatever you like or don't like is what everybody should do.

Has nothing to do with what I like or do not like, has everything to do with trends and where the business is going.

By being able to follow trends, it allowed me to be able to retire by age 50 ( waited until I was 52, wish I didn’t wait).

The local baseball team is generally the single highest rated show in a market, every night. Well worth the money.

Prove it, ratings for MLB are down this year, even the Field of Dream game had low ratings-
Thursday’s Cubs-Reds Major League Baseball “Field of Dreams” game from Dyersville, Iowa, averaged a 1.7 rating and 3.10 million viewers on FOX Thursday night — down nearly half from last year’s Yankees-White Sox game from the same site (3.2, 5.9M*). Viewership peaked at 3.46 million viewers from 8:15-8:30 PM ET.

Steep drop, but still season-high, for "Field of Dreams" sequel

MLB's "Field of Dreams" II simply could not live up to the original in the box office, but still outdrew the other MLB games this season.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

That is nice. But most Detroit fans live in, umm, Detroit. Where they cannot see the team on mlbei or mlb.tv. The system is broken when some guy in Florida has an easier time of watching a team in Michigan than a guy in Michigan does.

Not hard to watch in Michigan, either Traditional TV or online (the RSN is available online in Metro Detroit).

 

[Juan]

Again that was limited to Verizon subs and only local.

Now, every game is available to streaming, only one game per week is on Cable ( and available to both Cable and Streaming) or Broadcast (OTA, Cable and Streaming), the rest are streaming, some games are streaming only (Prime and one ESPN+ game) and a lot depending on where you live(NFLST).

This is a dramatic shift from just 2-3 years ago.

Imagine what it will be like in 5 years, after another 30-40 million, at least, have left Cable/Satellite TV.

College Football is next.

Whoopeee

 

[TheRatPatrol]

I believe you are thinking of ESPN 3

From this link-

ESPN will continue to be the home of Monday Night Football, while ESPN+ subscribers can stream one International Series contest on an exclusive national basis each season. ESPN can also simulcast all ABC and ESPN games on ESPN+.

NFL announces new broadcast deals running through 2033 season

The NFL announced Thursday it has signed long-term agreements with media partners Amazon, CBS, ABC/ESPN, FOX and NBC to distribute NFL games across television and digital platforms, along with additional media rights.

www.nfl.com

Says nothing about what you posted, this is a new contract, also from the link-

The agreements will commence at the start of the 2023 season and run through the 2033 season, broadening the league's digital football to a larger audience while preserving its custom of keeping all NFL contests on over-the-air-television.

If you go to the schedule on ESPN, it shows the lock symbol for ESPN 3 and it show ESPN+.

Yes, simulcast, which means at the same its being shown on the ESPN/ABC linear channels, just like it always has been, you need a cable/satellite/streaming service provider credentials in order to watch it on ESPN+. I can’t see ESPN allowing MNF to be on ESPN+ without that, they would lose a lot of money from their cable/satellite/streaming contracts, aka, people bailing to get ESPN+ alone.

But I could be wrong, they did raise the price of ESPN+ recently. We shall see on the 12th.

 

[Bruce]

Yes, simulcast, which means at the same its being shown on the ESPN/ABC linear channels, just like it always has been, you need a cable/satellite/streaming service provider credentials in order to watch it on ESPN+.

ESPN+ does not require a service provider credentials, ESPN 3 does, which did have MNF on last season.

I can’t see ESPN allowing MNF to be on ESPN+ without that, they would lose a lot of money from their cable/satellite/streaming contracts, aka, people bailing to get ESPN+ alone.

They have already lost 30 million households paying per sub fees and they lose 2 million more every quarter, they have to start making it up.

They, because of reduced revenue, are starting to have issues with new rights agreements.

They wanted to keep and expand the Big Ten content, but could not even compete with NBC/Peacock, CBS/Paramount+ and Fox.

But I could be wrong, they did raise the price of ESPN+ recently. We shall see on the 12th.

Only for some, the bundle with Commercial Free Hulu, Disney+ and ESPN+ is the same price at $19.99, that is what ‘I have.

 

[Juan]

Users with an ad-free Disney Plus subscription along with an ad-supported plan for Hulu and ESPN Plus will increase from $13.99 to $14.99 / month. Disney's also introducing a bundle that includes Disney Plus and Hulu with ads for $9.99 / month.Aug 10, 2022

Disney Plus and Hulu are getting steep price hikes

The Disney price hike hits as streaming division losses pile up.

www.theverge.com

 

[Juan]

Users with an ad-free Disney Plus subscription along with an ad-supported plan for Hulu and ESPN Plus will increase from $13.99 to $14.99 / month. Disney's also introducing a bundle that includes Disney Plus and Hulu with ads for $9.99 / month.Aug 10, 2022

Disney Plus and Hulu are getting steep price hikes

The Disney price hike hits as streaming division losses pile up.

www.theverge.com

Correction August 10th 5:40PM ET: A previous version of the article stated Disney Plus, Hulu, and ESPN Plus without ads will cost $19.99 / month, when ESPN Plus will actually have ads in this bundle. We regret the error.

 

[Bilbo1]

Yes, the way the MLS deal looks is what we'll see with most sports ultimately (although most will just distribute the service themselves rather than partnering with an outside company like MLS did with Apple).

MLB created sports streaming and sold the business. At best, leagues will outsource the tech part if not continue the selling of rights model. Selling the rights reduces their risk and they don’t have to do anything but cash the checks.

 

[vazhog]

I know D*TV will Keep Sunday ticket --REASON: because They gave Sunday ticket MAX to me Free this year And Lots of others as well--so next year hoping none will call in and cancel it so they will unwittingly be billed for it the next year.

 

[Bruce]

I know D*TV will Keep Sunday ticket --REASON: because They gave Sunday ticket MAX to me Free this year And Lots of others as well--so next year hoping none will call in and cancel it so they will unwittingly be billed for it the next year.

They gave it away to cut down on churn ( people leaving) this year, but all that will do is increase how many people leave next year, when people, including the new ST subscribers that receive it for free this year, realize that cannot get it with DirecTV anymore.

 

[TheRatPatrol]

ESPN+ does not require a service provider credentials, ESPN 3 does, which did have MNF on last season.

I think we are saying the same thing in different ways. 🙂

Only for some, the bundle with Commercial Free Hulu, Disney+ and ESPN+ is the same price at $19.99, that is what ‘I have.

Correct. ESPN+ on it’s own is going from $6.99 to $9.99 a month, or $69 a year to $99 a year. The Hulu combo is staying the same.

 

[NashGuy]

MLB created sports streaming and sold the business. At best, leagues will outsource the tech part if not continue the selling of rights model. Selling the rights reduces their risk and they don’t have to do anything but cash the checks.

Most of the leagues already run the tech part themselves (probably licensing it from others). NFL, MLB and NBA all have their own streaming apps. NHL used to but then they licensed that out-of-market content out to ESPN+.

As for selling the rights and cashing the checks, the only league in a position to do that is the NFL (which just renewed such a deal for both broadcast and streaming through the early 30s). What the less popular MLB, NBA and NHL are seeing is that they can sell national rights for only a portion of their regular season games, plus playoffs/championships, to major broadcasters/streamers. But the vast majority of regular season games, which appeal to the hard-core fans, have for years now been tied up by RSNs. And that's a model that's now failing. So what to do with all those games if there are no longer third parties willing to pay what the leagues want for the rights? MLB has already signaled their intention, which is to sell DTC in-market games via their own streaming app, same as they've done for years with out-of-market games.

 

[NashGuy]

They gave it away to cut down on churn ( people leaving) this year, but all that will do is increase how many people leave next year, when people, including the new ST subscribers that receive it for free this year, realize that cannot get it with DirecTV anymore.

Yep. But I think what DTV (and their 30% owner TPG) is hoping is that a merger deal will be worked out with Dish by early next year (if not this year), before all those NFLST fans leave. No deal will be announced before the mid-terms due to anti-trust concerns. (Remember that they tried to merge years ago and the government stopped it.)

 

[Bruce]

I think we are saying the same thing in different ways. 🙂

No we are not, ESPN 3 has always required a sign in from a Provider.

ESPN+ has not because it is a separate service from their Traditional Channels.

Last Season, ESPN 3 had MNF with the alternative feed.

This year, based on the schedule at ESPN, it will be on ESPN 3 ( need a log in) and ESPN+.

It shows the lock symbol, which is for ESPN 3 ( log in) and it shows ESPN+.

Also on regular ESPN and WATCH ESPN TV Everywhere app.

 

[Bruce]

Yep. But I think what DTV (and their 30% owner TPG) is hoping is that a merger deal will be worked out with Dish by early next year (if not this year), before all those NFLST fans leave. No deal will be announced before the mid-terms due to anti-trust concerns. (Remember that they tried to merge years ago and the government stopped it.)

Scott said in another thread a few days ago, that a merger is about 3 years away because, basically, Charlie is cheap.

It will happen but still at least 3 years away.

And that’s what I believe is EXACTLY what is happening.

With no Sunday Ticket Directv is not worth much.

Charlie is cheap. So why pay more?

Considering that the merger talks started back in January, we have heard nothing since, no rumors at all, so the 3 years might be correct.

Even if it happened today, it would take a least a year from now to be finalized, because of how long it would take to be approved.

 

[Bruce]

Yes, simulcast, which means at the same its being shown on the ESPN/ABC linear channels, just like it always has been, you need a cable/satellite/streaming service provider credentials in order to watch it on ESPN+. I can’t see ESPN allowing MNF to be on ESPN+ without that, they would lose a lot of money from their cable/satellite/streaming contracts, aka, people bailing to get ESPN+ alone.

But I could be wrong, they did raise the price of ESPN+ recently. We shall see on the 12th.

ESPN+ added next week’s Monday Night Football Game to it’s main page, previously it was just on the schedule page.

 

[TheRatPatrol]

No we are not, ESPN 3 has always required a sign in from a Provider.

ESPN+ has not because it is a separate service from their Traditional Channels.

Last Season, ESPN 3 had MNF with the alternative feed.

This year, based on the schedule at ESPN, it will be on ESPN 3 ( need a log in) and ESPN+.

It shows the lock symbol, which is for ESPN 3 ( log in) and it shows ESPN+.

Also on regular ESPN and WATCH ESPN TV Everywhere app.

ESPN+ added next week’s Monday Night Football Game to it’s main page, previously it was just on the schedule page.

View attachment 158327

Thank you. I think we agree on the same thing though. I know MNF was not available in past seasons, but it looks like that might be changing this season. We will find out on the 12th.

I wonder if we’ll hear anything at tomorrows Apple event on NFL Sunday Ticket?

 

[meStevo]

Here's a nice clear page about ESPN's broadcast arrangements for the NFL this year.

NFL: How to Watch Monday Night Football Games Live Without Cable

ESPN's Monday Night Football will feature a slate of 23 games during the 2022 NFL season and cord cutters can stream live games without cable by subscribing to a streaming service

www.tvguide.com

tl;dr re: ESPN+: All 21 of their NFL games will be on ESPN+, with the London game exclusively on the service.

 

[SamCdbs]

Has nothing to do with what I like or do not like, has everything to do with trends and where the business is going.

If only it were a trend, and not just every single person who wanted the third option taking it as soon as it was made available.

Prove it, ratings for MLB are down this year, even the Field of Dream game had low ratings-
Thursday’s Cubs-Reds Major League Baseball “Field of Dreams” game from Dyersville, Iowa, averaged a 1.7 rating and 3.10 million viewers on FOX Thursday night — down nearly half from last year’s Yankees-White Sox game from the same site (3.2, 5.9M*). Viewership peaked at 3.46 million viewers from 8:15-8:30 PM ET.

Steep drop, but still season-high, for "Field of Dreams" sequel

MLB's "Field of Dreams" II simply could not live up to the original in the box office, but still outdrew the other MLB games this season.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

Have proven it many times. Once again you confuse the national ratings for the handful of baseball games that are shown nationally, and for which the ratings are well publicized, and which are down, and what we were actually talking about, which are the local ratings for local games, which are tremendous. Baseball is far more regional than other sports. The ratings for the local games in the local markets are just awesome.

Which brings us to:

Not hard to watch in Michigan, either Traditional TV or online (the RSN is available online in Metro Detroit).

Yes, linear TV is awesome, but, again you miss the point. If you live in the Tigers area, the cost of following the Tigers is $20/month for streaming or getting cable or DirecTV. The cost of picking any other team to follow is pretty much free, since mlb.tv is free with T-Mobile or 10 other promotions.

Well, seems its a little easier to watch the Tigers in Florida, than in Michigan. Like I said.

And this is a new problem. MLB.TV is the internet version of MLBEI, which getting that was predicated upon first having cable or DirecTV, which included the local RSN. Now, people can bypass the local team, in this the most regional of sports, and follow all the others for pretty much nothing.

That is a problem, even MLB execs admit that, and it has to be solved. Raising the price of mlb.tv substantially and including the local teams seems the only solution. No one should have access to far-away teams without first paying for the local teams.

The dark secret of all of this is, well, none of these things really make money. That is the trend worth understanding.

 

[Yespage]

Here's a nice clear page about ESPN's broadcast arrangements for the NFL this year.

NFL: How to Watch Monday Night Football Games Live Without Cable

ESPN's Monday Night Football will feature a slate of 23 games during the 2022 NFL season and cord cutters can stream live games without cable by subscribing to a streaming service

www.tvguide.com

tl;dr re: ESPN+: All 21 of their NFL games will be on ESPN+, with the London game exclusively on the service.

Sweet, now I don't even need to Flex it on Dish for them.

 

[NashGuy]

Scott said in another thread a few days ago, that a merger is about 3 years away because, basically, Charlie is cheap.

This seems to imagine that Charlie's Dish would be buying DTV. I don't think that will happen. Can't really see why either business would want to buy the other. Only deal that makes good sense is the two coming together as a merger of (near) equals, with a joint venture holding company formed in which Dish has X% and AT&T has Y% (i.e. very much like the current structure for DTV in which TPG has 30% ownership and AT&T has 70%). That would eliminate each other's direct satellite TV competitor, reduce costs and increase economies of scale.

In three years' time, both Dish and DTV will be ghosts of what they are now as more and more consumers dump cable TV, especially cable TV delivered via rooftop dishes that come with a 2-yr up-front contract. DTV at least has a viable streaming replacement with DTV Stream into which some of their sat customers are migrating. Meanwhile Dish only has a low-margin streaming alternative in Sling, which isn't something that can replace Dish and which now appears to be losing subs too. By mid-2025, I fully expect both satellite services to have only half the number of customers they have now, maybe fewer.

I keep thinking of the metaphor of two guys in a knife fight, with both of them cut and bleeding. Only thing that putting off the eventual merger will do is ensure that both of them spill a lot more blood on the ground. Both would be better off calling a truce sooner rather than later.