Disney/ESPN & DIRECTV Reach Deal

[Joe The Dragon]

Now if that new Chicago sports network gets all of it's games on OTA that may be an shift.

 

[Juan]

Yes I think this is going to cause a shift. DTV does not appear to want to give in to the status quo. They know once ESPN has it's own service up, DTV is not needed for most people. The distributor becomes useless other than making it easier to use in 1 app and potentially some price discounts.

Disney doesn't want to do that yet. It would take their guaranteed revenue away and make them earn their money.

With the shift to remove original programing, other than cheap reality shows, from all cable channels, most of these channels are worthless. Sports is the only thing people cannot get elsewhere at this moment. I may suspend my DTV account in a few weeks when the Youtube TV trial is up and not ever come back to Satellite. DTV knows people won't be coming back if they are happy with Youtube / Hulu live. It is a lot cheaper without the RSN fees, DVR, receiver, taxes, etc.

If you need RSNs, unfortunately you are going to be fleeced.

You really think most people will pay $25 + a month for ESPN?... some will but the vast majority don't care enough about ESPN...it's nice to have as part of a package but not as a stand alone service

 

[Bruce]

You really think most people will pay $25 + a month for ESPN?... some will but the vast majority don't care enough about ESPN...it's nice to have as part of a package but not as a stand alone service

I pay about $70 a month now for HBO(MAX), Paramount+ with Showtime, Peacock, Hulu/Disney/ESPN+, Netflix, all at the highest tier ( except Peacock).

With ESPN, I will have everything I care about from Traditional Paid Live TV, plus all the streaming stuff, that will still be a lot less than the average Cable/Satellite Monthly Bill.

I will sign up when available.

 

[prushing]

You really think most people will pay $25 + a month for ESPN?... some will but the vast majority don't care enough about ESPN...it's nice to have as part of a package but not as a stand alone service

Right now you have to pay for cable plus all the individual streaming services if you want to watch new shows. Very little is being put on cable that is new. ESPN packaged with Disney+, Netflix, Paramount+, Peacock, Amazon, MAX will be cable going forward.

I don't want to pay the higher price for ESPN but that's what they will charge. Overall it will save money without the other costs added in though.

 

[Juan]

Right now you have to pay for cable plus all the individual streaming services if you want to watch new shows. Very little is being put on cable that is new. ESPN packaged with Disney+, Netflix, Paramount+, Peacock, Amazon, MAX will be cable going forward.

I don't want to pay the higher price for ESPN but that's what they will charge. Overall it will save money without the other costs added in though.

It will be more expensive than cable...people won't subscribe to everything all the time...they will pick and choose when they want watch..that's drop and resubscribe...it's a disaster just waiting to happen for ESPN

 

[AZ.]

You really think most people will pay $25 + a month for ESPN?... some will but the vast majority don't care enough about ESPN...it's nice to have as part of a package but not as a stand alone service

Why the worry? If it doesnt work for $25, they either lower the price or close their doors. Its that simple

 

[Juan]

Why the worry? If it doesnt work for $25, they either lower the price or close their doors. Its that simple

It's gonna be ugly...they can't give it away..too many sports contracts...when ESPN goes...it will create a domino effect with the sports leagues

 

[Bruce]

It's gonna be ugly...they can't give it away..too many sports contracts...when ESPN goes...it will create a domino effect with the sports leagues

You do know, ESPN charges providers $11 for ESPN 1 and 2 combined, for the per sub fees, if they charge $25 direct, that is $14 more then what they get from the providers.

Plus, they will get extra revenue from Advertising and Sports Betting-

Disney Chief Executive Bob Iger says the forthcoming standalone ESPN streaming platform will allow users to bet on sports.

"There'll be the opportunity to bet on sports basically right off the app," he says in an interview on CNBC.

He says the app will also have fantasy sports features and other customer-engagement opportunities.

He says those kinds of offerings will differentiate the app from the combined sports-streaming offering that Disney is working on with Warner Bros. and Fox.

https://www.barrons.com/livecoverag...tting-ceo-bob-iger-says-Nh7jncmfid76ozyWnEZ3#

 

[Bruce]

Disney has put out a response-

https://espnpressroom.com/us/press-...lt-disney-company-and-espn-regarding-directv/

My guess, they offered the same deal they gave to Charter/Spectrum last September, DirecTV did not find that to their liking.

 

[savarese04]

that's drop and resubscribe...it's a disaster just waiting to happen for ESPN

actually that's to ESPN's benefit. netflix and all the other services do suffer from that based on people subscribing to binge their two shows and then canceling again. However, ESPN is "binge proof." Even if someone subscribes only for a specific sports season, thats in the range of 4-6 months. If they're getting someone for half year at $25/month, that's basically more money than what they are getting from selling via the video providers. $11x12=$132 << $25x6=150 + advertising revenue

 

[telstar_1]

But if ESPN goes alacarte and drops off of millions of cable/sat packages it was mandated into, it'll never be able to charge enough to make up the revenue loss. A majority of those losing it from their packages won't care, especially if they're given a significant rate cut or other goody to go along with it. Those wanting it will be willing to pay, but how much? Would enough go for it at $25 to plug the hole? Doubt it, and going any higher would only further reduce viewership.

 

[Bruce]

But if ESPN goes alacarte and drops off of millions of cable/sat packages it was mandated into, it'll never be able to charge enough to make up the revenue loss.

Just because it will be available separately, does not mean it will be dropped off Paid Live TV.

CBS is available separately via Paramount+, nobody has even suggested it being dropped, it even has 68 Million subscribers, the vast majority here in the United States.

Same for NBC and Peacock.

 

[Juan]

actually that's to ESPN's benefit. netflix and all the other services do suffer from that based on people subscribing to binge their two shows and then canceling again. However, ESPN is "binge proof." Even if someone subscribes only for a specific sports season, thats in the range of 4-6 months. If they're getting someone for half year at $25/month, that's basically more money than what they are getting from selling via the video providers. $11x12=$132 << $25x6=150 + advertising revenue

Not really...ESPN made their money from people forced to subscribe with cable...too many variables with streaming to count cash...ESPN can be seen in most sports bars and such...so rather than forking over $25 a month to watch a bunch of crap so someone could watch a few games...many will just go to bar and watch there

 

[prushing]

Not really...ESPN made their money from people forced to subscribe with cable...too many variables with streaming to count cash...ESPN can be seen in most sports bars and such...so rather than forking over $25 a month to watch a bunch of crap so someone could watch a few games...many will just go to bar and watch there

It depends on where you live but generally you will spend more than $25 if you are going to a bar to watch 1 college football game. That bar is also paying by capacity. Unless you just want to go to the bar for the atmosphere, it's better to pay the $25 and watch a full day at home, plus 3 more Saturdays.

I'm sure ESPN is worried about losing the guaranteed money though, so they won't give that up unless they have to. They have to figure out their price point that they can charge all cable customers and a price cord cutters will pay directly.

I don't know when the dispute ends but if it goes past Monday night, DTV will lose a lot more than Disney is. DTV doesn't want to lose its high value customers and most of those want ESPN.

 

[Juan]

It depends on where you live but generally you will spend more than $25 if you are going to a bar to watch 1 college football game. That bar is also paying by capacity. Unless you just want to go to the bar for the atmosphere, it's better to pay the $25 and watch a full day at home, plus 3 more Saturdays.

I'm sure ESPN is worried about losing the guaranteed money though, so they won't give that up unless they have to. They have to figure out their price point that they can charge all cable customers and a price cord cutters will pay directly.

I don't know when the dispute ends but if it goes past Monday night, DTV will lose a lot more than Disney is. DTV doesn't want to lose its high value customers and most of those want ESPN.

Very few people will pay that $25...it's on the internet now...that's not a good thing...

 

[KyL416]

It looks like DIRECTV's appeal to the Big 12 and other conferences backfired:

View: https://twitter.com/Big12Conference/status/1831479824461738064

The SEC and ACC already made their stances clear earlier this week:

View: https://twitter.com/SEC/status/1830411632297562465


View: https://twitter.com/theACC/status/1830661768898826378

 

[prushing]

It looks like DIRECTV's appeal to the Big 12 and other conferences backfired:

View: https://twitter.com/Big12Conference/status/1831479824461738064

Not sure what they expected. Their contracts are signed, ESPN is paying them. If they get any additional money for total viewership, then it's just asking them to push people to other providers so they don't lose any viewers.

 

[slice1900]

Not sure what they expected. Their contracts are signed, ESPN is paying them. If they get any additional money for total viewership, then it's just asking them to push people to other providers so they don't lose any viewers.

Yeah the SEC and ACC are wholly owned by ESPN, of course they are going to back them in this fight. The Big Ten doesn't care, because they don't have any of their games on ESPN or ABC (unless it is a non conference game played at the away site)

 

[AZ.]

Not sure what they expected. Their contracts are signed, ESPN is paying them. If they get any additional money for total viewership, then it's just asking them to push people to other providers so they don't lose any viewers.

I agree. But I guess they never heard of solidarity? So who will be next? This is more like hurray for me and F you way of thinking. Till it happens to them? The more eyes they lose, the more money they will need from the next provider.

 

[meStevo]

https://www.fastcompany.com/91184535/directv-disney-blackout-cancel-subscription-useless-dispute

Edit, since there was no summary:

In the thick of a contentious contract battle with the Walt Disney Company, DirecTV this week is sending a surprisingly forthright message to some customers who are threatening to cancel their subscriptions and switch TV providers: Sorry, but things are tough all over.​

​

“Switching isn’t the answer,” the company is telling angry social media users who have expressed their displeasure after Disney-owned channels, including ESPN and ABC, went dark this week. “The loss of sports, shows, and movies affect the entire industry, including streaming services.”​

​

DirecTV’s official X account has been tweeting similar messages over and over and over in response to a firehose of customer complaints, which have been almost constant since the standoff began. Viewers across social media have displayed increasingly greater urgency as the start of the new NFL season draws near, with many saying they will jump ship if the situation is not resolved by then.​

​