1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

ESPN can't afford Monday Night Football any longer

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Neutral Corner, Nov 1, 2017.

  1. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    ESPN Can’t Afford Monday Night Football Any More


    "But if you think the cable and satellite companies are going to keep paying $7 a month to ESPN without the NFL package, I’ve got a bridge to sell you. This final sentence is hysterical ESPN spin: “Sure, distributors would be aghast, demanding to negotiate lower fees probably immediately, but the point is, there would be negotiations, enabling ESPN to do everything it could to keep those numbers as high as possible.”

    Another way to put this would be as follows: ESPN’s business is collapsing so rapidly that they are now trying to figure out which would be more destructive — losing billions on the NFL or losing billions in cable and satellite revenue because they don’t have the NFL."
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2017
  2. Hermes

    Hermes Well-Known Member

    It took Clay this long to realize that it's this, not its politics, that will sink it?
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2017
  3. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    So where is the NFL going to replace that $2 billion per year? That's roughly 15% of the league's annual revenue.
     
  4. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    From the comments:

    "Disney will be like Paulie and ESPN will be the restaurant owner in Goodfellas. Can't afford MNF? F**k you, pay me. Business is bad? F**k you, pay me. Studio got hit by lightning? F**k you, pay me. And then finally when you can't borrow another buck from the bank or buy another WNBA contract, you bust the joint out, you light a match."

    Cue "Layla".
     
  5. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Television and the NFL have each other in a death grip. If one goes, so does the other. Their business relationship is more complex than that post realized. So would be the rules of hopscotch.
     
  6. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    The article posits that the rights are bought by Facebook, Netflix, some tech who is flush and needs content.
     
  7. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    The whole model depends on this -- one network, cable or broadcast, is desperate to overpay because nothing it has comes close to the NFL for drawing an audience. NBC was the one before Sunday Night Football. Guaranteed some network would feel the same way about Monday night.
     
  8. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Every game on cable that's in a local market also goes to a local broadcast station. Same would happen with those entities.
     
  9. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    I don't buy it. $2 billion a year for a continual string of Tennessee games.

    ESPN fucked up bigtime when they overbid. I don't see someone else doing it.
     
  10. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    I couldn't follow all of that on a quick read. But he just sort of stated that the NFL will want more money for MNF in 2021, and then writes a column about how ESPN can't afford to pay more, and so on and so on. As if that is definitely a fait accompli.

    Of course the NFL will want more money. It doesn't mean it is necessarily going to get it. First off, ESPN drastically overbid last time. Will it do that again? On top of that, ratings are down. I don't know for sure how ad revenues have held up, but let's assume that with fewer viewers, ad revenues are down.

    The NFL opens up their broadcast rights to competitive bidding. If the MNF games are worth less to the networks in 2021 because viewership is down and ad revenues are down from when the previous contracts were signed, presumably the bids for the games are going to be lower . If ESPN can get the package for less, perhaps there is a way that it fits within their economic parameters. If they have to shell out less for broadcast rights, let's say it brings down the subscriber fees they charge, which helps them stop bleeding subscribers, etc.

    Whether it works out that way or not, it's not what the NFL demands for their broadcast rights. It's what they can get someone to pay to broadcast games. The whole premise of what he wrote was flawed.
     
    Vombatus likes this.
  11. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Ragu's post is the complement to mine. NFL has always prospered because of the desperation of its rightsholders. If they go in a different direction, pattern changes. This being TV, I'd bet on the NFL before I'd bet on broadcasters changing their "how do I keep my job until the end of the month?" business model.
     
  12. playthrough

    playthrough Moderator Staff Member

    Until there's a true a-la-carte system, ESPN is still a bundle with all the other channels in cable/satellite systems. Someone on the verge of cutting the cord on their $100 monthly bill isn't going to stay around because it's $97.50 after ESPN cuts its fees. And even if ESPN does shell out less for broadcast rights, I'm not so sure it will bring down its fees. Would be like newspapers cutting their subscription rates after chopping up their product -- they should, but they don't. And to hell with the consumers.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page