- 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
re: What I Don't Understand about ESPN's Strategy
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:21 am to TomRollTideRitter
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:21 am to TomRollTideRitter
quote:what in the world are you talking about?
and they don't really build the brand of any sports. They just show them
one of the biggest things people cry about when it comes to ESPN is how they continually shape the narrative around sports, teams, and players
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:23 am to TomRollTideRitter
The business strategy I don't understand is targeting young and sometimes uneducated minorities... are they really buying up the products on commercials? It's all about money. Good ratings equals higher prices for commercial spots. But at some point the company paying for commercials won't buy ad time if no one is buying product
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:28 am to WestCoastAg
It does have to do with their content though. They are generating content that is so easily replicated there's no reason for people to have to keep the channel. There's a reason Netflix and Amazon Prime produce exclusive content. ESPN has done nothing to expand its customer base in this age of cord cutting.
Also, don't pretend everything is perfect at ESPN. If it was they wouldn't keep changing things around. They clearly are in panic mode.
Also, don't pretend everything is perfect at ESPN. If it was they wouldn't keep changing things around. They clearly are in panic mode.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:32 am to TomRollTideRitter
If those old school shows were still getting the ratings, they'd air them
This post was edited on 2/17/17 at 10:33 am
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:33 am to TomRollTideRitter
Well just like any company, there's a cost benefit analysis. If they deem talent is worth it, you have to pay them what they'd get on the market. And if they're not worth it, you apparently let FS1 pay them to do verbatim the same thing for more money.
Very few of the espn personalities are paid well, I bet. They're so easily replaceable that they can't have any real leverage over ESPN.
Very few of the espn personalities are paid well, I bet. They're so easily replaceable that they can't have any real leverage over ESPN.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:37 am to Cap Crunch
I'm not saying they should go back to the days of 24/7 highlights. What I'm saying is they have swapped one easily accessible form of content for another form of easily accessible content. That doesn't solve anything.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:42 am to TomRollTideRitter
quote:You do realize ESPN did this back in the early 2000's with "Playmakers", "Sportscentury" and that reality show that got Mike Hill hired.
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)
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:44 am to TomRollTideRitter
quote:once again, they are literally producing acadamy award nominations right now
hey are generating content that is so easily replicated there's no reason for people to have to keep the channel.
quote:as long as we put OTL, E60, and 30 for 30 aside, that is what they are doing right now. the most valuable demographic wants debate and talk shows. it is what it is. so they are giving it to them
ESPN has done nothing to expand its customer base in this age of cord cutting.
quote:as is literally all of fricking broadcast television
They clearly are in panic mode.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 10:48 am to JBeam
Playmakers was very popular, but the NFL pressured ESPN to take it off air
Posted on 2/17/17 at 11:18 am to WestCoastAg
You're sort of agreeing with my idea, but they only produce 1 or 2 30 for 30's a month. My point is that is the type of content they really need to move towards. Sports talk shows are just as dated as sports highlights shows.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 12:47 pm to TomRollTideRitter
quote:
I'd be demanding some answers.
Honestly, there's nothing ESPN or Disney can do here. Here's the problem:
Thanks to the internet and smartphones in particular, next day or even hours later results are not needed. People know instantly if their teams won or lost and they can get the highlights on the spot. This has killed the need for shows like Sportscenter, which built ESPN.
ESPN is an unsustainable business model and can only be marginally profitable from showing actual sporting events. Contract rights to broadcast those events is extremely costly. To make matters worse, they have ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, ESPNNews and other channels, they have to fill them with something. The most common way (after live sports themselves) is through talk shows. What else can they do? Problem is, today's generation isn't all that interested in discussion-based, topical sports discussions. It doesn't move the needle and younger folks don't watch these hour long shows with enough regularity to achieve solid ratings.
This, in turn, has led to the "hot take" era of ESPN, where they encourage brash points of view delivered in absolutes, like "The Cleveland Cavaliers CAN NOT win the NBA Finals this season" or "Alabama will beat Clemson, I GUARANTEE it." These shock jock-style soundbites are designed to spread across the airwaves and generate clicks and views. (Think Skip Bayless.) But now even those aren't working anymore.
The political stances have alienated many views and this has helped bring about the endgame quicker but the model was doomed the minute smartphones started rolling off the assembly line.
This post was edited on 2/17/17 at 12:53 pm
Posted on 2/17/17 at 12:52 pm to TomRollTideRitter
quote:its not just that. the whole idea of cable television is outdated. there is nothing ESPN can realistically do to change that. they could turn into netflix or amazon, but those companies take on debt like its going out of style. they are just different businesses and what netflix and amazon does would not work for someone like ESPN or fox sports. it just wouldnt. all of their debt is tied up in live sports and that is what is going to keep these companies going. they cant do both. they cant spend the damn near 1 billion dollars in broadcasting rights to live sports while also turning around and spending billions of dollars in producing movies and original television content
Sports talk shows are just as dated as sports highlights shows.
their mistake was just assuming that this massive TV cable bubble was going to keep growing while they aggressively bought up as many rights to live sports that they could get their hands on. that was their mistake. not what they are doing now with their content
Posted on 2/17/17 at 1:11 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:LeBatard talks about it all the time. They had a perfect business model for years, if you wanted cable you paid for ESPN whether you watched it or not.
its not just that. the whole idea of cable television is outdated. there is nothing ESPN can realistically do to change that
Now people actually have options. They're definitely behind in the game and didn't get out in front of this one, but what were their options?
Posted on 2/17/17 at 1:12 pm to JBeam
quote:
Also, what other options do they truly have during a work week daytime schedule?
How about show sportscenter replays all day like they did before?
Posted on 2/17/17 at 1:15 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:this is the next step, IMO. If they offered a monthly subscription service to WatchESPN that was completely free from Cable/Satellite companies, millions would subscribe. I'll go as far as saying that ESPN, and maybe HBO, could completely destroy cable for good if they offered this outside of Cable subscriptions.
the whole idea of cable television is outdated. there is nothing ESPN can realistically do to change that. they could turn into netflix
There are a ton of people who just want to watch games. A live game subscription service with the collection of games that ESPN has would do awesome. And they wouldn't have to have filler shows eating budget. Just show live sporting events.
Posted on 2/17/17 at 1:15 pm to TomRollTideRitter
quote:
ESPN's Strategy
Do these two words go together?
Posted on 2/17/17 at 1:17 pm to hashtag
yes. that is the next step with someone like ESPN. we will eventually start paying for games on a nightly basis or we will eventually start buying season packages for a single team/league. it is what it is. but we arent going to start seeing ESPN start throwing a shite ton of money into original programming because right now all of their money is tied up into live sports
This post was edited on 2/17/17 at 1:19 pm
Posted on 2/17/17 at 1:20 pm to JBeam
quote:Did people just start working?
Also, what other options do they truly have during a work week daytime schedule?
Posted on 2/17/17 at 1:26 pm to TomRollTideRitter
Like people wouldn't bitch if espn showed hours of baseball and hockey highlights on a replay throughout the day
Posted on 2/17/17 at 1:31 pm to TomRollTideRitter
Based on what I watched this morning (including the commercials for the new 6 PM SC), it appears they are 100% invested in growing their "urban" viewership.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News