A Spirited Perfect Ten

[Cesar R M]

Have you seen the Revenant? Point being, it's not the wündercinema people are making it out to be.

neither was "Gravity" and still won a lot of oscars.
I wonder if in the future, there will be idiocracy levels of oscars.. where a man farting for 30 minutes is oscar material.

 

[BrerJon]

I wonder if in the future, there will be idiocracy levels of oscars.. where a man farting for 30 minutes is oscar material.

That pretty much describes Mad Max, and that got lots of nominations.

 

[ford91exploder]

I don't pretend to know how the ESPN thing will turn out, but there will be some balance coming in the cost vs. revenue side in the future. They pay a ton of money for rights to their live sports, but those packages are only worth what someone is willing to pay for them. If ESPN doesn't have the same subscriber base, if advertisers don't keep handing over the cash, then those packages will most likely come down in price. I don't see anyone in a better position than ESPN to turn live sports (which are special, because they draw live viewing) into $$$ on the revenue side of the balance sheet. The biggest threat to ESPN, I'd say, is if someone like Fox takes on some of these packages as a loss leader to try and shake ESPN off their lofty perch.

Fox with FSN1 is already doing so and gaining eyeballs by the day. ESPN has overpaid for the rights because they COULD not because it made business sense. They would have been much better advised to let MNF go to someone else and kept that 1.9 B in their pocket

 

[ford91exploder]

Disney is in a unique situation. If you look at ESPN and ABC (the networks)....there is an inherent issue. And that is..the networks don't own the product. They are merely conduits in distributing a product. A product they do not own. As distribution channels evolve (i.e. streaming, VOD, etc) that piece of the business gets exposed. With Disney Studios, Parks, Disney Channel...they do own the product and directly control the manner in which it is distributed. I wouldn't be surprised to see Disney offload ESPN and ABC sometime in the near future.

Disney's problem is they with the exception of A&E and ESPN is they have very little compelling content which appeals to a broad spectrum of the audience and when they DO get a hit they kill it off for reasons unknown 'Phineas and Ferb' and 'Gravity Falls' two shows which were legitimate hits with kids AND their parents Disney killed those. I coach a robotics team and the kids (late teens) ALL watch both shows.

Disney whacks those and amps up crap like 'Mighty Med' and others and creates a faux CW network (Freeform). The CEO's lack of creativity is trickling down to the rest of the company which at the moment is creatively bankrupt.

 

[ford91exploder]

Given what is going on with the stock market Disney should buy TWX and sell part so the Feds will aprove it. With the extra networks they can completely by pass cable and offer a great Intertnet based TV package. There is no doubt once a network determine how to direct advertising to viewers individually that they will make a ton more money than they do now. Content is king and always will be. Further it is only a matter of time before the FCC regulates the rates charged for internet.

That's not a bad idea and it would fix one element of Disney where they are significantly weaker then their competition in that they own no distribution assets.

 

[PhotoDave219]

That pretty much describes Mad Max, and that got lots of nominations.

This is where you should have been prepared to back up your assertion.

No one farts in Mad Max. For you will not be greeted in valhalla all shiney and chrome if you fart.

 

[Bairstow]

Disney's problem is they with the exception of A&E and ESPN is they have very little compelling content which appeals to a broad spectrum of the audience and when they DO get a hit they kill it off for reasons unknown 'Phineas and Ferb' and 'Gravity Falls' two shows which were legitimate hits with kids AND their parents Disney killed those.

I could have sworn both Gravity Falls and Phineas and Ferb ended because their creators chose to wind them up in the time/manner that they wanted to.

 

[Tigger1988]

I could have sworn both Gravity Falls and Phineas and Ferb ended because their creators chose to wind them up in the time/manner that they wanted to.

You would be correct. He's just spewing falsehoods again.

 

[flynnibus]

Disney is in a unique situation. If you look at ESPN and ABC (the networks)....there is an inherent issue. And that is..the networks don't own the product. They are merely conduits in distributing a product. A product they do not own. As distribution channels evolve (i.e. streaming, VOD, etc) that piece of the business gets exposed.

Ehh... while the networks do not own ALL of the content... they do own the rights to most (and are the producers of most). These are not pure distribution partners. ABC and ESPN are producers and studios as well. The comments that they don't 'own' any of the product is naive and incorrect.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

Ehh... while the networks do not own ALL of the content... they do own the rights to most (and are the producers of most). These are not pure distribution partners. ABC and ESPN are producers and studios as well. The comments that they don't 'own' any of the product is naive and incorrect.

ESPN is not going to make it relying solely on 30 for 30, outside the lines, or PTI. The majority of their advertising revenue comes from their SEC Football rights, NBA, and Monday Night Football. I'll stand by my original comment. Though I will modify it to state they don't own the product that derives the majority of their revenue.

 

[flynnibus]

I think the alternate forms of distribution are ESPN's biggest threat. Yahoo had a deal with the NFL to stream a single game and it brought back record numbers

Record numbers compared to what? It was the NFL just dipping their toes in where everywhere else they forbid their partners from streaming games. It has very little to compare with since NFL keeps such a tight lid on it.

And the NFL can't simply go 'we'll just use Yahoo' - the idea of producing games, content, and everything that goes with it is part of the expertise that people like ESPN have. It's not just wires and distribution...

The challenge for ESPN will be shifting where they distribute, while having to ween off the bundled subscriber fee teet. ESPN is already very far along with digital distribution, off-air content, and more. This is a fiscal shift... just like record companies had to face... it's not the sign of the end of something like ESPN.

 

[flynnibus]

ESPN is not going to make it relying solely on 30 for 30, outside the lines, or PTI. The majority of their advertising revenue comes from their SEC Football rights, NBA, and Monday Night Football. I'll stand by my original comment. Though I will modify it to state they don't own the product that derives the majority of their revenue.

I guess you'll try to sweep your ABC comments under the rug then?

And you forget that games don't just show up on TV by themselves... that compentency and expertise is huge. And why other startup networks partner with the likes of ESPN, etc.. and that's not free.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

I guess you'll try to sweep your ABC comments under the rug then?

No sweeping. The major networks (As in ABC,NBC,CBS, and Fox) are a dying breed. Sure they have a few shows here and there, but they're nowhere near as relevant as where they were even a decade ago. The viewership deteriorates and moves...to things like Netflix. Network TV is going the way of newspapers. And yes, it is still holds some relevancy today. And it will probably hold some relevancy for the foreseeable future. But it is not as relevant as it once was and there is no disputing that. Newspapers own their content too, and look where they are. To base a business model and invest in something that is deteriorating makes no sense.

 

[PhotoDave219]

Record numbers compared to what? It was the NFL just dipping their toes in where everywhere else they forbid their partners from streaming games. It has very little to compare with since NFL keeps such a tight lid on it.

And the NFL can't simply go 'we'll just use Yahoo' - the idea of producing games, content, and everything that goes with it is part of the expertise that people like ESPN have. It's not just wires and distribution...

The challenge for ESPN will be shifting where they distribute, while having to ween off the bundled subscriber fee teet. ESPN is already very far along with digital distribution, off-air content, and more. This is a fiscal shift... just like record companies had to face... it's not the sign of the end of something like ESPN.

You can stream any NFL game. Its part of the NFL Sunday Ticket package with Direct TV. The premium package of course.... so you have to sub to Direct TV first (so $75+ a mo) & buy the top tier ($350+ i think) to get the ability to watch online.

 

[flynnibus]

No sweeping. The major networks (As in ABC,NBC,CBS, and Fox) are a dying breed. Sure they have a few shows here and there, but they're nowhere near as relevant as where they were even a decade ago. The viewership deteriorates and moves...to things like Netflix. Network TV is going the way of newspapers. And yes, it is still holds some relevancy today. And it will probably hold some relevancy for the foreseeable future. But it is not as relevant as it once was and there is no disputing that. Newspapers own their content too, and look where they are. To base a business model and invest in something that is deteriorating makes no sense.

You're such a visionary... meanwhile, I'll hang out over here and collect my nearly 8 BILLION in revenues a year... while we wait for your grand scheme to go from a decline to dead.

'...moves to things like netflix' - that is hysterical. Don't confuse people's choice of consumption model with their choice of content producers.

Stop acting like a shift in the model means something is going to go from billion dollar industries to dead in the near term. Sliding revenues now does not mean you extrapolate that to the end, and that just because the company isn't pivoting now, that they will never pivot.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

And you forget that games don't just show up on TV by themselves... that compentency and expertise is huge. And why other startup networks partner with the likes of ESPN, etc.. and that's not free.

No. Games don't show up by themselves. Yes. The competency and expertise is huge. Other networks like NFL Network, NBA TV, NHL, MLB, and SEC do partner with ESPN and Fox for that matter. But to think that they won't cast those partnerships aside once they feel they can cut out the middle man (which is exactly what ESPN is) is naive. I'm not advocating it's happening tomorrow, but to cast aside that at some point in the future the NFL will take back all rights and choose to broadcast them themselves (wherein they would keep all advertising revenue -- which would more than offset the cost of the production) is foolish.

 

[flynnibus]

You can stream any NFL game. Its part of the NFL Sunday Ticket package with Direct TV. The premium package of course.... so you have to sub to Direct TV first (so $75+ a mo) & buy the top tier ($350+ i think) to get the ability to watch online.

I know what you are saying.. and there is a hole in my statement as well.. because Verizon allows streaming through their NFL Now package too.. but what I was really referring to is they block all their normal distribution from streaming it as part of their normal streaming. For instance, you can get live TV streaming from Verizon or Comcast... but they will blackout the NFL games. My point being, the games are blocked from the normal streaming that most television/cable already do. (yes, there are specific programming packages you can buy like DTV's).

 

[flynnibus]

No. Games don't show up by themselves. Yes. The competency and expertise is huge. Other networks like NFL Network, NBA TV, NHL, MLB, and SEC do partner with ESPN and Fox for that matter. But to think that they won't cast those partnerships aside once they feel they can cut out the middle man (which is exactly what ESPN is) is naive. I'm not advocating it's happening tomorrow, but to cast aside that at some point in the future the NFL will take back all rights and choose to broadcast them themselves (wherein they would keep all advertising revenue -- which would more than offset the cost of the production) is foolish.

And in that next __DECADE__... the old guard will pivot and move onto other business models. If you think ESPN will sit on its and die like Kodak.. ok, then say that.. but to make the argument that 'the world is a changin...' and hence companies like ABC and ESPN are doomed.. is just over simplified garbage.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

'...moves to things like netflix' - that is hysterical.

Really? So no one has ever watched "House of Cards". I guess every network was over reporting on "Making a Muderer" because absolutely no one saw it. You probably thought delivering mail via pony express was a solid business practice and would stay in place for a thousand years.

No one ever said near term. It is evolutionary. It will continue to diminish until the need for it no longer exists.

 

[flynnibus]

Really? So no one has ever watched "House of Cards". I guess every network was over reporting on "Making a Muderer" because absolutely no one saw it. You probably thought delivering mail via pony express was a solid business practice and would stay in place for a thousand years.

No one ever said near term. It is evolutionary. It will continue to diminish until the need for it no longer exists.

And anyone who thinks an inflection point has been reached because of two shows making it a total of three seasons... is drunk on the kool aid. You're following the hype vs following the actual business.