ESPN Has Lost 7 Million Subscribers The Past Two Years

[bing101]

http://offthemonstersports.com/2016/05/report-espn-is-losing-subscribers-by-the-millions-and-millions/


Heres an update of the ESPN fiasco. Wow Comedy Central did a segment about ESPN Pundits.

[ctsignguy]

"You know, television is called a new medium, and I have discovered why they call it a Medium — because nothing is Well Done." - Fred Allen, who would only gag at what TV is like today

[bing101]

http://www.fhm.com.ph/lifestyle/sports/stephen-a-smith-predicting-the-nba-finals-a00028-20160623


And Stephen A. Smith gets the gotcha treatment here.

[Stephane Dumas]

I bump this thread by adding a bit more on the table about ESPN lost subscribers.
http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-loses-621-000-subscribers-worst-month-in-company-history-102916

Would ESPN became one day irrelevant like MTV?

[jeffandnicole]

Is MTV irrelevant, or simply not the music station it was 20 or 30 years ago? They still have numerous viewers.

Also, it's not like ESPN itself lost those subscribers. If someone dropped their cable/satellite subscription, 200+ channels lost a subscriber, not just ESPN.

Again, Media: Intentionally misleading everyone.(Sidenote: Media has lost millions of subscribers. They are basically hanging on by a thread, and clickbate headlines like this are about the only thing that keeps people reading their crap and forming misguided opinions)

[74/171FAN]

Is MTV irrelevant, or simply not the music station it was 20 or 30 years ago? They still have numerous viewers.

They mostly show crappy reality shows though I have lost track of which ones they air these days.  (I know of 16 and Pregnant, Real World, Next, etc.)

Also MTV still has the VMAs, which people only care about to see Miley Cyrus try to shock people.

[jeffandnicole]

Is MTV irrelevant, or simply not the music station it was 20 or 30 years ago? They still have numerous viewers.

They mostly show crappy reality shows though I have lost track of which ones they air these days.  (I know of 16 and Pregnant, Real World, Next, etc.)

Also MTV still has the VMAs, which people only care about to see Miley Cyrus try to shock people.

Yeah, I know, but as long as they get those teenage viewers I guess they're happy.

[Max Rockatansky]

Is MTV irrelevant, or simply not the music station it was 20 or 30 years ago? They still have numerous viewers.

They mostly show crappy reality shows though I have lost track of which ones they air these days.  (I know of 16 and Pregnant, Real World, Next, etc.)

Also MTV still has the VMAs, which people only care about to see Miley Cyrus try to shock people.

Yeah, I know, but as long as they get those teenage viewers I guess they're happy.

Well aren't there a lot more choices nowadays for sports coverage?  You have Yahoo, Fox, and NBC all running some pretty large stuff on TV or online.  I tend to watch Mike and Mike in the morning on weekdays still when I'm eating breakfast and whatever game happens to catch my interest.  Back in the 1990s and even early 2000s ESPN really had the market cornered on sports coverage and really even broadcasting.  It seems like a lot of the former powerhouse media and entertainment outlets are losing their market share due to infinitely higher amounts of competition.  Even the NFL is finally seeing a ratings decline after all these years.

Now MTV....good god what the hell happened there?  I remember it was just music videos and at worst Beavis and Butthead.  Do they even show music anymore?

[SP Cook]

IMHO,

98% of the value in ESPN is in live games.  Fat, dumb, and happy, ESPN management has spent millions on these talking head arguers during the weekday.  They could show infomercials all day on weekdays and no one would care.

Fox could have done with FS1 re ESPN what it did with FNC re CNN, which is BE DIFFERENT.  Rather it just duplicated ESPN's NBA obsessed sports center and talking head shows.  No one has noticed. 

The TV model is changing.  In the past "everybody" paid for all channels, and sports were a big part of the bill.  Soon people will pick and choose channel by channel, and many, probably most, people do not watch sports.  Since most of those $$ pass through ESPN (et al) to the teams and to the players, they will all have to make do with only $40M/year rather than $50M.  Who cares?

[US 41]

IMHO,

98% of the value in ESPN is in live games.  Fat, dumb, and happy, ESPN management has spent millions on these talking head arguers during the weekday.  They could show infomercials all day on weekdays and no one would care.

Fox could have done with FS1 re ESPN what it did with FNC re CNN, which is BE DIFFERENT.  Rather it just duplicated ESPN's NBA obsessed sports center and talking head shows.  No one has noticed. 

The TV model is changing.  In the past "everybody" paid for all channels, and sports were a big part of the bill.  Soon people will pick and choose channel by channel, and many, probably most, people do not watch sports.  Since most of those $$ pass through ESPN (et al) to the teams and to the players, they will all have to make do with only $40M/year rather than $50M.  Who cares?

I just watch games on ESPN3 for free via my internet. If a game was on ESPN or ESPN2 I can just watch the replay later if I want to. Other than that I can also watch games on ABC, CBS, and FOX.

The so called "experts" are wrong half the time anyways, just like the weatherman. It's pretty well pointless to listen to anything they say.

[bing101]

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-loses-621-000-subscribers-worst-month-in-company-history-102916

Update

[roadman]

What's the over/under on ESPN debuting some sort of house-hunting show? That's when you'll know the decline is accelerating.

Hoarders - ESPN Edition

[triplemultiplex]

What's the over/under on ESPN debuting some sort of house-hunting show? That's when you'll know the decline is accelerating.

Hoarders - ESPN Edition

NFL Network now has a "Pimp My Ride" rip off I see advertised during games on broadcast TV.

[bing101]

http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/dallas-mavericks/mavericks/2016/11/07/mark-cuban-thinks-espn-covering-mavericks


Mark Cuban suspends credentials to two ESPN writers and yes the explanation is crazier from here.

[jeffandnicole]

http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/dallas-mavericks/mavericks/2016/11/07/mark-cuban-thinks-espn-covering-mavericks


Mark Cuban suspends credentials to two ESPN writers and yes the explanation is crazier from here.

I often read stories in my newspaper that I swear were written on an iPhone while the reporter sat in bed. So not only do I believe this reasoning, but it's good reasoning. If you can't show up at the game, don't just take your story from someone else.

[bing101]

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/10/liberty-medias-malone-sees-disney-possibly-spinning-off-espn.html?__source=Twitter


Update for ESPN.

[bing101]

Makes perfect sense, since ESPN has borrowed the cable news model of having some talking heads blather about a "controversial" issue in sports for short, meaningless periods of time.  After a few talking points where no useful information is shared, it's on to the next subject.  Wash. Rinse. Repeat. Commercial.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/media/306724-the-new-political-battlefield-espn


Yes Politics is an issue at ESPN. and Amazon is considering to get sports coverage.


http://advanced-television.com/2016/11/22/amazon-eyes-live-sports-rights/

[SP Cook]

ESPN politics.  Yes.  Most of the older crowd follows Carson's Rule (don't p*** off half of your viewers).  But the younger group has a sneering and condecending attitude where they assume their opinions are the only ones which are legitimate.  What effect is this having on its ratings?  Don't know, but denying it exists or that it has some is delusion.

Amazon or whoever in sports or whatever.  This is bad for the consumer.  Today, if you want, you can have "all" the channels.  If this is on Amazon and that is on Netflix and the next thing is on Google and then three other things are on regular linear channels, and all of it in bundles and packages with lots of duplication, then no ordinary person can afford to subscribe to everything.  I like having access to everything.

[bing101]

ESPN politics.  Yes.  Most of the older crowd follows Carson's Rule (don't p*** off half of your viewers).  But the younger group has a sneering and condecending attitude where they assume their opinions are the only ones which are legitimate.  What effect is this having on its ratings?  Don't know, but denying it exists or that it has some is delusion.

Amazon or whoever in sports or whatever.  This is bad for the consumer.  Today, if you want, you can have "all" the channels.  If this is on Amazon and that is on Netflix and the next thing is on Google and then three other things are on regular linear channels, and all of it in bundles and packages with lots of duplication, then no ordinary person can afford to subscribe to everything.  I like having access to everything.

Well we also have youtube if you want to see sporting events that ESPN does not air such as these following games.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAEGBSvoGF0


And this.

[bing101]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/27/us/nfl-colin-kaepernick-castro-feud/


Well ESPN will have to continue talking about politics as long as Colin Kaepernick is still in the NFL and is using the NFL as a platform for a future political seat.

[bing101]

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/yes-nfl-ratings-ad-prices/


http://www.latimes.com/business/hollywood/la-fi-ct-sports-channels-20161128-story.html


Sports programming games + pundit shows are to allegedly to blame for high Cable TV bills.

[Stephane Dumas]

An audio exterpt in French talking of ESPN and the impact who might come in Canada on RDS and TSN. And analyst Luc Dupont think then the players salaries might had reached a roof. 
http://radioego.com/media/je-pense-quon-a-atteint-le-fond

[english si]

Well we also have youtube if you want to see sporting events that ESPN does not air such as these following games.

was this meant to be a joke set of sports no one cares about?

Not the best teams, but Netball is great fun. A bit anal retentive as to where players can go, but better than basketball to play and watch (not least as it needs more skill - a female netball team challenged an equivalent-quality (league position, etc) male basketball team to play a game each of both sports and kicked their asses).

If Clare Balding is presenting it, it is proper sport, the Olympics, or Horse Racing. Her 2012 Olympic and Paralympic coverage took her from the A-list British sports journalism, to be the biggest name in presenting non-football sports programs in the UK. This would have aired on non-subscription UK TV - all two glorious hours of it.

PS: you forgot snooker (Auntie BBC always provides extensive coverage of major tournaments)

and darts (again, the Beeb typically provides extensive coverage)

and don't forget cricket (although youtube is lacking in full on videos - so have some highlights grabbed from SkySports coverage of a one-day match between two of the best sides), though unlike Darts and Bowls, it is merely highlights without a subscription (though with Sky Sports it's fairly comprehensive wrt internationals).

Unless you are happy with TMS' excellent audio-only commentary (here provided by the son of the guy who went to Eton with Ian Fleming and gave the surname to James Bond's greatest enemy) that is.

[english si]

You wouldn't have got this on ESPN either, but mostly as NBC bought the rights to the Paralympics and squandered them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btti-SvLqBo

[bing101]

Well we also have youtube if you want to see sporting events that ESPN does not air such as these following games.

was this meant to be a joke set of sports no one cares about?

No if we really hate these pundits so much on ESPN why not watch some games or leagues that ESPN does not cover.