All those fiber and copper lines that they have to run to every inch of the city underground weren't cheap, as well as all the hardware to make those lines work weren't cheap either.
This is true... In addition, most providers are required to pay franchise fees that are used to pay "rent" for the public land they are using to run the infrastructure needed to distribute their product(s). This cost is not going away... and neither is the idea that private companies will have to pay for the use of public property (rights-of-way, airwaves, etc.) to distribute services.
One interesting side note... I can see how ESPN might be more favorable to this idea earlier than everyone else. If you think about it, their infrastructure to deliver their product 100% online is pretty much already there. The Watch ESPN app, ESPN3 stream, along with streams of their other networks are already in place. You would have to assume that while there would be significant investments needed, ESPN is far ahead of anyone else if the decision were to be made today.
This post was edited on 8/22 at 10:08 am