More Cuts at ESPN

Outside his family, I honestly don't think there are 10 people in America who said, "I can't wait to watch Greeney's next project".

People bring up money here because ESPN's cuts - to save money - have been so well publicized.

 

Now THAT’S a fakakta stat.

 

Yep.

And "Today" has had the biggest year-to-year ratings decline of the three morning shows.

 

And yet, the success of "Mike and Mike" over the years suggests that there are plenty of people who like him. Disney had even flirted with moving him to "Good Morning America" a few years ago. I don't really get it, but he's a logical pick here.

Yes, but the answer to that is not to go cheap on the most important component of a major new project.

 

While not entirely apples to apples (my atation doesn't get $7 a month in carriage fees per subscriber!), as a morning news anchor, this is absolutely correct.

We deal in volume. Just like this new espn morning show.

I anchor four hours a day. That's about 80 minutes of commercial time - 160 :30 slots. Half of them are low viewership. But the other two hours -- one hour is equal to a late afternoon newscast. Another hour beats all of our evening newscasts.

That means the station makes a truck load of money every day. Not because of me. They made the same truckload before I came here. And they'll make it whenever I leave/get fired for someone cheaper.

When I'm there, I oversee news around 80 minutes of commercial time. The evening team does 90 minutes of news a night. That is about 22 minutes of ads.

Wait. I need a raise now that I'm doing the math.

Back to espn, are the salaries pretty high for Greenberg, Beadle and Rose? Yes. However - they're giving three hours of LIVE content every day. They're also three people with high levels of visibility.

Greeny is bland. Beadle tries to have hot takes but is only interesting when she's offended by some tweet at her. Rose is best swapping Fab 5 stories.

But they're also not Stan Verritt and Sarah Spain trying to be interesting. That's why these three make serious money. Volume and Q rating.

 

To me this is no different than Alabama football having revenue of $110 million a year (guess). If that's the case, paying Saban $10M or some so so coordinator $2M to be the head coach does make a difference. If that coordinator goes 8-4 two straight years, the revenue also declines.

As for Today, the Feb book was shocking. Today plunged here. Lost 40 percent from the year before and this was WITH the damn Winter Olympics. My amateur theory is they being punished for either firing Lauer or being punished for NBC allowing that environment for decades.

If only Josh Elliott could have waited two years, he would be in Lauer's chair. Unless the movement would have gotten "him too".

 

If only they had 2003 Thea Andrews on it. Smoke show.

 

I think they did learn on a morning show. I was excited about Cold Pizza when it started - as it was awful. Nobodies. One anchor couldn't even read. A terrible first impression.

When it stabilized to Jay Crawford and Thea Andrews, it was okay. Kit Hoover and Leslie Maxie shouldn't have been on television in market 176.

 

Good question. This is the Value Over Replacement Host issue.

 

There's probably some value in continuity, right? You could keep bringing in hosts as good or better than Lauer, but if it is somebody new every nine months people wonder what is wrong with that show.

Maybe they don't lose money replacing Lauer once, but maybe its worth paying top dollar so they aren't rotating hosts all the time.

 

Would it be true that morning shows now gross more than late afternoon and evening newscasts? If this so why don't the highest paid anchors at the station work on mornings?

 

Yes. The newscasts I'm on make 59 percent of the money in the station.

Our gig is different than at night. Nearly all of our news is recycled from the night before unless there is crime overnight, European terrorism or Trump's 6:30 am tweets.

However, the evening team has an army of reporters. We don't. We actually do a lot more work than the evening anchors - most fixing scripts and reordering the stories.

A few years ago there was a morning job I was up for in a larger market.

News director: We like to think of our morning newscast as just as important, if not more, than our evening newscasts. That's where the growth is. Say... what is your salary range?

Me: Thanks for asking. This is your budget so, please, what is your high point?

News director: probably about 60. Maybe 65. (I was making 75 at the time forty markets smaller.)

Me: Do your evening anchors also make this salary of 60, maybe 65? An evening job in your market should pay about 160. Mornings are just as important.

News director: not on this part of it.

Me: Well, I think we're probably all set and I hope you find the right person!