- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
What I Don't Understand about ESPN's Strategy
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:02 am
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:02 am
This has nothing to do with the SJW/political stuff.
I don't understand why ESPN has gone purely to talk shows. I know people say highlights are so easily available online that Sports Center became dated, but people talking sports is just as easy to find online. Seriously, I could get some of my friends together and make a sports talk YouTube channel today. Anyone can replicate what ESPN is doing now, and I, from a business perspective, don't understand their logic.
They must think their personalities are so good that people are going to tune in solely to watch them which is laughable. If I was a major share holder of Disney, I'd be demanding some answers.
I don't understand why ESPN has gone purely to talk shows. I know people say highlights are so easily available online that Sports Center became dated, but people talking sports is just as easy to find online. Seriously, I could get some of my friends together and make a sports talk YouTube channel today. Anyone can replicate what ESPN is doing now, and I, from a business perspective, don't understand their logic.
They must think their personalities are so good that people are going to tune in solely to watch them which is laughable. If I was a major share holder of Disney, I'd be demanding some answers.
This post was edited on 2/17/17 at 10:04 am
24
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:03 am to TomRollTideRitter
ESPN is going to have to fire their big name guys as revenue gets cut
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:04 am to TomRollTideRitter
It's not just ESPN's strategy....
Also, what other options do they truly have during a work week daytime schedule?
Also, what other options do they truly have during a work week daytime schedule?
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:06 am to JBeam
I'm guessing espn can live off of the established brand name and people would still turn it on by pure muscle memory.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:07 am to TomRollTideRitter
It's easy and cheap to produce these shows, which is essential in the 24 hour news cycle. They can't get away with showing the same highlights for 8 hours straight, so they need to put out original content. This is probably the cheapest, most efficient way to do it, I'd imagine.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:07 am to TomRollTideRitter
quote:
sports talk YouTube channel today
too late
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:08 am to TomRollTideRitter
What if they took two of their channels and made one ESPN Talk and the other ESPN Live. ESPN talk will essentially be what ESPN 2 has become throughout the day. It's just a talking heads show 24 hours a day. ESPN Live will be nothing but live sports all day. It's 2 in the morning on a Wednesday. Well, ESPN Live has an Australian Rules football match. Don't even send talent over there. Just pay whatever TV company that is actually broadcasting the game to have the feed go through ESPN. I realize this is way less simple than I am making it out to be, but I think it would be cool.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:09 am to JBeam
I'd recommend generating some inside content think like Hard Knocks or Last Chance U. I'd also try to build the brands of some less popular sports in order to expand the customer base. If you could generate even a small following by women of a women's sport, all of those people won't be able to cord cut without giving up on watching the sport.
Basically, I'd generate content that is a lot harder for people to copy (live or reality)
Basically, I'd generate content that is a lot harder for people to copy (live or reality)
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:10 am to TomRollTideRitter
quote:and who comes on their shows? people who talk about sports online
but people talking sports is just as easy to find online
quote:you dont see the difference in having someone like adam schefter on to talk about NFL rumors and you and your buddies shooting the shite?
Seriously, I could get some of my friends together and make a sports talk YouTube channel today.
quote:no matter how badly people on here want it to be false, there is a large portion of this country that still views ESPN as the worldwide leader in sports and they go to ESPN to listen to the people that ESPN brings in to discuss the current topics in sport
and I, from a business perspective, don't understand their logic.
This post was edited on 2/17/17 at 10:13 am
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:12 am to TomRollTideRitter
quote:or maybe they should just stick with producing their 30 for 30 series, you know, the series that currently has an academy award nomination
I'd recommend generating some inside content think like Hard Knocks or Last Chance U.
quote:kinda like what they do with the WNBA, womens college basketball, the womens college world series?
If you could generate even a small following by women of a women's sport, all of those people won't be able to cord cut without giving up on watching the sport.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:12 am to TotesMcGotes
But they pay a lot of their personalities a ton of money. Berman was making like $4/5 million, and I bet he had some stock options on top of that.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:15 am to WestCoastAg
Damn WCA just went in 
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:15 am to WestCoastAg
I can follow Adam Schefter on Twitter.
I still view ESPN as the leader in sports. I don't know how anyone couldn't. That doesn't mean their trajectory isn't heading downwards.
I still view ESPN as the leader in sports. I don't know how anyone couldn't. That doesn't mean their trajectory isn't heading downwards.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:17 am to JBeam
quote:
Also, what other options do they truly have during a work week daytime schedule?
Just game shows. Get ready for 8 hours of Stump the Schwab M-F.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:17 am to TomRollTideRitter
First take pulled in big numbers for a day time tv spot. That is what people were watching. This is a democratic process, the same reason MTV stop showing videos, the ratings sucked.
All espn cares about is if they stay here
In cable ratings for the week ended Feb. 12:
Top five networks in primetime (18-49s): AMC, USA, TBS, ESPN, TNT.
All espn cares about is if they stay here
In cable ratings for the week ended Feb. 12:
Top five networks in primetime (18-49s): AMC, USA, TBS, ESPN, TNT.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:18 am to TomRollTideRitter
quote:or you can also watch him on TV or listen to him on ESPN radio while he provides context to the stuff he has been tweeting out during the day
I can follow Adam Schefter on Twitter.
quote:and that has frick to do with their content or having "talk shows". every single sport network is trending this way because the old notion of just showing highlights is outdated. it is what it is. these things are cheap and easy to produce and they need to fill programming schedules
That doesn't mean their trajectory isn't heading downwards.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:18 am to TomRollTideRitter
point-counterpoint style talk shows keep opportunities for controversial/viral videos and what not
trying to stay relevant
trying to stay relevant
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:20 am to WestCoastAg
Yeah like 30 for 30, and they don't really build the brand of any sports. They just show them. They don't give you a reason to care. Introduce us to the athletes.
Which do you think would get more women to tune in to a Women's basketball game- a pregame show or a series that goes inside UConn basketball?
Which do you think would get more women to tune in to a Women's basketball game- a pregame show or a series that goes inside UConn basketball?
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:20 am to TomRollTideRitter
quote:
But they pay a lot of their personalities a ton of money. Berman was making like $4/5 million, and I bet he had some stock options on top of that.
They could fire their top 10 live personality earners and it wouldn't make a drop in the bucket. They literally owe billions of dollars a year to various sports leagues for the rights to broadcast their games. They paid 100 million for the right to broadcast the Texans/Raiders playoff game. Think about that! 100mm to air the worst playoff game in the last 20 years
Edited to add these figures
quote:
Presently ESPN is on the hook for the following yearly rights payments: $1.9 billion a year to the NFL for Monday Night Football, $1.47 billion to the NBA, $700 million to Major League Baseball, $608 million for the College Football Playoff, $225 million to the ACC, $190 million to the Big Ten, $120 million a year to the Big 12, $125 million a year to the PAC 12, and hundreds of millions more to the SEC. At an absolute minimum it would appear that ESPN presently pays out nearly $6 billion a year to sports leagues just in rights fees.
This post was edited on 2/17/17 at 10:23 am
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:21 am to TomRollTideRitter
ESPN used to be re-runs of SportsCenter all day long.
I guess that doesn't get good ratings because if you've seen one episode, you don't need to keep watching.
When they have their talk shows, they can show something new and current that could keep eyeballs on ESPN.
I'm assuming that's why.
I guess that doesn't get good ratings because if you've seen one episode, you don't need to keep watching.
When they have their talk shows, they can show something new and current that could keep eyeballs on ESPN.
I'm assuming that's why.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News