• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT - ESPN To Start Streaming Service

A

andyt

Canes Moderator
Staff member
Disney will pay $1.58 billion for an additional 42% stake in BAM Tech. They had previously owned 33% after MLB Advance Media spun it off. They will leverage their majority ownership to create a proprietary streaming service beginning in 2019. It will allow consumers to pay for ESPN content without a cable or satellite package.

It will reportedly include about 10,000 sports events including content from MLB, NHL, MLS, etc. The NHL content will presumably be the games that the NHL Network broadcasts, since the NHL Network and all their digital rights are controlled by BAM Tech. All of the sport packages...MLB.TV, NHL.TV, MLS Live will also be available. So in 2 years, you won't need a cable subscription to watch the Canes, depending on blackout rules.

http://www.sportsvideo.org/2017/08/...l-launch-new-streaming-service-in-early-2018/

In an unrelated move, Disney will pull of its movies from Netflix and launch a separate streaming service in 2019.
 
andyt said:
In an unrelated move, Disney will pull of its movies from Netflix and launch a separate streaming service in 2019.
Click to expand...

Unrelated financially perhaps, but I'm pretty sure they plan to use the same platform for entertainment streaming. They currently have a side-along deal with iTunes on their Disney Movies streaming service, which actually works pretty well. But I'm sure that Disney always wanted to get to a stand alone setup for all of their streaming. This deal gives them the tech capacity in house. And considering the size of their house, that's something they really should be doing themselves.

Now if they'll just fix some persistent issues on their parks and resorts sales systems, I'd be happy ...

And as for ESPN, this kind of move to allow a la cart streaming income was pretty much required given how many cable subscribers they are shedding every month. I'm sure parent Disney would be happier if they could somehow sprinkle their pixie dust and get it going in 2018 instead of 19, but a fix down the road is better than no fix at all.
 
CarolinaPen said:
Disney is already managing to screw this up, well in advance of deployment. As more details emerge you WON'T be able to watch NFL or NBA games without a TV package and the pricing is likely going to be higher than $10 per month. This service is just looking to be another fragmented offering of content that continues to frustrate consumers looking to cut the cord.

http://variety.com/2017/digital/new...tion-streaming-disruptive-netflix-1202520600/
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised that they won't be streaming the NFL. The NFL has separate deals for streaming games, they're not going to let ESPN stream something they're not paying for. If they can currently broadcast MNF on ESPN3, they should be able to include that in the service. But they don't currently have rights to the other games, so the NFL is well within their rights to deny them the rights to broadcast. The NBA decision seems short sighted to me. They're an NBA right's holder, for a bigger package than what they have with the NFL. If they streamed all their games on ESPN3, I don't know why they couldn't move that to the new site.
 
Since I went with Sling Blue three months ago I haven't had ESPN. I have not missed it. The NFL Network, The NHL Network, NBC Sports and Fox Sports South handle all my sports' viewing needs.

That and the Bulls on MeTV. I've been watching a crapload of minor league baseball on over the air TV this summer. And I have Hulu, Netfilx and YouTube.

And riddle me this Batman, how come Braves baseball games are blacked out on Fox SportsSouth? I live in Raleigh.
 
andyt said:
I'm not surprised that they won't be streaming the NFL. The NFL has separate deals for streaming games, they're not going to let ESPN stream something they're not paying for. If they can currently broadcast MNF on ESPN3, they should be able to include that in the service. But they don't currently have rights to the other games, so the NFL is well within their rights to deny them the rights to broadcast. The NBA decision seems short sighted to me. They're an NBA right's holder, for a bigger package than what they have with the NFL. If they streamed all their games on ESPN3, I don't know why they couldn't move that to the new site.
Click to expand...

This is all new territory for a HUGE inventory of televised sporting events. I think maybe giving them a little time to work out the details and kinks might be in order.
 
jeffbear said:
This is all new territory for a HUGE inventory of televised sporting events. I think maybe giving them a little time to work out the details and kinks might be in order.
Click to expand...

The only problem with this approach is while Disney/ABC/ESPN is trying to understand what the heck they are doing, there is likely some startup working on a "Netflix of Sports" approach that will turn ESPN into the next "Blockbuster". As traditional powerhouses like ESPN, Cable companies, Networks, etc continue to lose subscribers which will end up resulting in lower rights fees at some point, the leagues will figure a way to maximize revenue by selling directly to the consumer and that may cut the middle man (like ESPN) out of the picture.

This whole move seems like a "Me Too" strategy. If you have the content, you have the power in this play and ultimately that is the major pro sports leagues and college conferences. Disney/ESPN should be pretty nervous.
 
CarolinaPen said:
This whole move seems like a "Me Too" strategy. If you have the content, you have the power in this play and ultimately that is the major pro sports leagues and college conferences. Disney/ESPN should be pretty nervous.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm being dense but I don't understand this argument at all. Disney/ABC/ESPN are the content providers in this scenario. Yeah, ESPN wouldn't have content without the leagues and schools, but they have rights contracts that stretch out until the 2020s with most of those those entities. In the case of Disney/ABC they are simply providing their own IP in a different way under this setup.

Again .... I'm seeing a lot of negative reaction to something that I don't think anyone has any real details about just yet. I'm gonna wait and see how it plays out.
 
The general consensus among the entertainment reporters is pretty much what CarolinaPen described. JeffBear is correct that ESPN is safe until the contracts run out. But soon, it will be more profitable for the major sport's leagues to broadcast their product. If ESPN can pay big dollar and still make money, think what cutting out the middle man would do. Thank you internet!

Content providers who own/control their own studios are the current trend. Sports leagues are content providers. First there will be more and more apps to buy to get the programs you want. Then they'll be bought or merged with other successful companies. Then holograms will happen and then there will be a whole new industry with a whole new business plan. And when sports goes completely to virtual reality, they won't even need to pay high salaries to players anymore.
 
HockeyPat said:
But soon, it will be more profitable for the major sport's leagues to broadcast their product.
Click to expand...

But the leagues that had a stake in BAM Tech essentially decided they didn't want to broadcast their own product. With their majority interest, ESPN essentially controls broadcast rights at the national level for MLB, NHL and MLS. They'd have to start from scratch if they wanted to keep their broadcast rights in-house. The NFL has had their own in-house media company for years, even before the NFL Network. The NBA also has its own in-house network. But the colleges don't, at this point. All of the college "networks" are partnered with a media company, be it Fox or ESPN. So if ESPN essentially owns the SEC and ACC networks, that's more content for the channel.
 
Hence the, "But soon" part. It's all a matter of realizing the best way to reach the most people. It's what the smart people say will eventfully happen.
 
HockeyPat said:
Hence the, "But soon" part. It's all a matter of realizing the best way to reach the most people. It's what the smart people say will eventfully happen.
Click to expand...

Hence a big part of my confusion over the negative reaction to this news. Smart people seem to be upset that Disney is setting up some intermediate step between now and the free-for-all a la cart life they see coming at some point down the road. To me it's patently obvious that the leagues with products that need to be delivered simply aren't ready to take the step that the so-called smart people are wanting them to take ... and maybe there's a reason for that. IE, they are professional sports leagues, NOT broadcasters. They just want somebody to pay them money in return for delivering their product to the masses.

And on the entertainment side I just see a bunch of Netflix/Streaming service fanboys whining that Disney is getting in the way of the streaming options that they've gotten used to over the last 3-5 years.
 
What I think when I see stuff like this is that the anti-cable-billions-of-channels-you-don't-want a-la-carte dream was to only pay for the "entertainment data" that you want to consume, yes.... but not to have to pay 40 different providers for it. The pendulum seems to be sliding right past that sweet spot.
 
Yeah ... but there's sooooooo much money in advertising attached to all those traditional IP delivery systems that I feel like this was all inevitable. I think the dreamers were just that ... dreaming. For some reason the concept of free content is compelling enough to make people suspend common sense. Somebody has ALWAYS been paying the bills for your content.
 
NBC Sports is reporting that ESPN will get one MLB game per night for the new streaming service. It will be in addition to the games they already have on Sunday, Monday and Wednesday. They will be non-exclusive, so the local markets will still be able to broadcast. They also report that ESPN had to pay a "substantial" fee above what they already pay MLB and what they paid for BAMTech.

http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2017/08/09...al-will-give-espn-one-game-a-night-to-stream/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top