Cont'd - NHL makes 12-year/$5.2 billion Canadian TV deal w/ Sportsnet, CBC, TSN out

[PensFanSince1989]

So much chicken little in this thread.

I'm not a huge fan of this deal, I like TSN better than Sportsnet, and yes, Sportsnet will likely use it as leverage to sell its secondary channels, to both other cable providers and consumers themselves.

But it's not all that different from TSN. Yes, they have more control than TSN every did with their exclusive National cable contract. But HNIC is guaranteed to exist for at least another 4 years. Rogers just made an absolutely gigantic investment in the NHL. It is in their best interest to have the NHL thrive as much as it can, so the worries that they will shuttle Leaf playoff games, or Canucks playoff games to be split between 4 or 5 of its obscure stations is just paranoia. They get the revenue from HNIC, so they have incentive to keep that brand strong.

And hopefully, and I strongly suspect they will, Sportsnet will get better hockey analysts.

 

[Stanley Cup]

So much chicken little in this thread.

I'm not a huge fan of this deal, I like TSN better than Sportsnet, and yes, Sportsnet will likely use it as leverage to sell its secondary channels, to both other cable providers and consumers themselves.

But it's not all that different from TSN. Yes, they have more control than TSN every did with their exclusive National cable contract. But HNIC is guaranteed to exist for at least another 4 years. Rogers just made an absolutely gigantic investment in the NHL. It is in their best interest to have the NHL thrive as much as it can, so the worries that they will shuttle Leaf playoff games, or Canucks playoff games to be split between 4 or 5 of its obscure stations is just paranoia. They get the revenue from HNIC, so they have incentive to keep that brand strong.

And hopefully, and I strongly suspect they will, Sportsnet will get better hockey analysts.

Exactly, they put so much money into this contract that they will have to make sure hockey is growing in popularity to get profits out of this deal. That means good analysts, good coverage and good quality.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Exactly, they put so much money into this contract that they will have to make sure hockey is growing in popularity to get profits out of this deal.

How much crazier about hockey can Canada get?

I think it is much more likely they will just find ways to nickel and dime the already passionate fans.

It works for the Leafs!

 

[DyerMaker66*]

This is the key point. Any other cable provider is now subservient to Rogers, because almost nobody is going to subscribe to a cable provider that doesn't televise hockey. Rogers can bend over other providers to pay for the right to air the Sportsnet channels, and those costs will naturally be passed on to their customers.



Yeah its fantastic, you get tons of games. Except you now have to pay more for it. Unless we're going to operate under the assumption that the egalitarians at Rogers will be content with modest profits.

Now you may say nobody has to buy the upper tier channels like 360 and Sportsnet One if they don't want to. Very true. Except there is absolutely nothing that prevents Rogers from sticking 20 (insert your favorite team) games on 360, another 20 on SN One, another 20 on a team's specialty channel, and the other 20 on the basic regional channel.

Rogers has paid a huge sum of money for these rights. It is very clear that they are banking on a lot of people subscribing to all the different channels they operate. The best way to make this happen is to spread each Canadian team's games out onto multiple different stations.

Yeah, it's not unfair that you'll have to pay more to get a whole bunch more games, but this will be set up to ensure that you have to pay that much JUST to get all of your own teams games as well. There is not the slightest chance you're going to be able to get 60+ Oilers/Flames/Sens/Canucks games with a lower tier package. You will need to get high end cable packages. But hey, you'll get to watch a whole bunch of teams you don't care about as well with that high end package.

Basically if you're a hockey junkie that doesn't care who is playing and just wants to see as many games as possible, this is a good deal for you. For the other 95% of consumers, not so much. I know a lot of people that watch every Oilers game but might only watch 10 games all year that don't involve them. These are typical fans/viewers. The people on this forum that closely follow the entire league are exceptions, not the norm.

I pay for those channels already, but right now they're blacked-out when a game is on, so I'm pretty happy. I've also almost never been able to watch my team on tv, so again, this seems like it's a positive for me.

 

[TheFactor]

Does the new contract kick in before next draft, or after? RDS' draft coverage was disgusting, however TSN's was great.

After

 

[Stanley Cup]

How much crazier about hockey can Canada get?

I think it is much more likely they will just find ways to nickel and dime the already passionate fans.

It works for the Leafs!

Time will tell. I don't know about Sportsnet, but knowing TVA they will start creating similar shows to HBO's 24/7 or 24CH. Quebecor, which owns TVA, also owns most of the newspapers and magazines in Quebec so we're not done hearing from the NHL haha.

 

[Stanley Cup]

After

aw, so next draft will be RDS' last. Thank you for the answer.

 

[Macman]

Does the new contract kick in before next draft, or after? RDS' draft coverage was disgusting, however TSN's was great.

I believe TSN has the 2014 draft and then it goes to Sportsnet.

 

[cbcwpg]

Exactly, they put so much money into this contract that they will have to make sure hockey is growing in popularity to get profits out of this deal. That means good analysts, good coverage and good quality.

Or they can just charge the existing viewing audience more to watch.

What's easier.... putting time, effort, and money into improving the product which in Canada won't really affect how many people watch hockey OR just charge everyone way more to watch what you are already putting out.

Not to be cynical, but Rogers is not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts.

 

[Stanley Cup]

Or they can just charge the existing viewing audience more to watch.

What's easier.... putting time, effort, and money into improving the product which in Canada won't really affect how many people watch hockey OR just charge everyone way more to watch what you are already putting out.

Not to be cynical, but Rogers is not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts.

You seriously believe that they will raise prices to get their 400M/year back?

These broadcasting rights mean higher ratings, therefore higher value of advertising on their channels. It's simple. It's not like it'll instantly cost 25$/month to have Sportsnet.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Saw a rumor on Igor Eronko's twitter that says TSN / KHL are close to terms on a 2 year deal that will let TSN broadcast any and as many KHL games as they want.

That would be cool obviously, TSN won't die. International hockey, hopefully some CHL, maybe some KHL, plus football (CFL and NFL), basketball, some regional hockey.
They'll be fine

 

[powerstuck]

Or they can just charge the existing viewing audience more to watch.

What's easier.... putting time, effort, and money into improving the product which in Canada won't really affect how many people watch hockey OR just charge everyone way more to watch what you are already putting out.

Not to be cynical, but Rogers is not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts.

While the first option won't change much, the second will certainly do a lot of damage to viewer base.

I know I won't pay more, I might just watch less on TV and more on Internet for free.

 

[Melrose Munch]

And what if rogers shuts down all the internet pirate streams? What will you guys do then?

 

[PensFanSince1989]

And what if rogers shuts down all the internet pirate streams? What will you guys do then?

They are free to try. I'm sure the NHL and all other broadcasters have been trying for years. Good luck to them on that.

 

[Rocko604]

That would be cool obviously, TSN won't die. International hockey, hopefully some CHL, maybe some KHL, plus football (CFL and NFL), basketball, some regional hockey.
They'll be fine

Only if Paul Romanuk overdubs the play by play.

 

[LadyStanley]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/glob...l-just-got-stable/article15617778/?cmpid=rss1

Those money-losing U.S. teams once at risk of being relocated north? They’re getting a big cash infusion. NHL teams compete on the ice, but they equally share national TV revenues – and since 23 of the league’s 30 teams are American, most of Rogers’s money is heading south.

Rogers says it will pay just over $300-million in the first year, rising to “mid-$500 million” in the last year of the contract. That works out to roughly $10-million per franchise in Year 1, climbing to nearly $20-million by Year 12.
...
But the deal has the opposite effect on the NHL’s foundation: It solidifies what had been a shaky status quo. After the Atlanta Thrashers moved to Winnipeg in 2011, ditching a money-losing U.S. market for a money-making Canadian one, there were hopes in Canada that more teams might be on the way. ...

But with all the $$ supporting the US teams, that's shoring up the existing team franchises.

IOW, don't hold your breath there are new Canadian (QC) teams coming.

 

[PensFanSince1989]

While the first option won't change much, the second will certainly do a lot of damage to viewer base.

I know I won't pay more, I might just watch less on TV and more on Internet for free.

People on these boards seem to be under this impression that hockey is like Healthcare, or the energy market. People must have it regardless of cost! Inelastic demand schedules and all that.

If Rogers raises prices an unreasonable amount, they will lose business, the NHL that they just invested $5.2 billion in will be hurt.

 

[RangerBoy]

At NHL Network, count on major changes and, I'm told, future content upgrades as a result of today's broadcast deal with Rogers

https://twitter.com/ChrisBottaNHL/status/405443385286094848

Please keep Kathryn Tappan. She was wearing black leather pants last night and she looked really good.

The NHL network needs to take a page from the MLB and NFL networks.

 

[PensFanSince1989]

Anyhows, I always thought it'd be interesting if they split the tv contracts up by conference. Say Bell/TSN got the Western Conference, Rogers/Sportsnet got the Eastern.

Similar to how the NFL does it with the AFC (CBS) and NFC (Fox)

 

[MarkGio]

People on these boards seem to be under this impression that hockey is like Healthcare, or the energy market. People must have it regardless of cost! Inelastic demand schedules and all that.

If Rogers raises prices an unreasonable amount, they will lose business, the NHL that they just invested $5.2 billion in will be hurt.

Id argue that hockey fans in Canada are less price elastic than your average consumer in the entertainment industry. Hockey tickets are far more expensive than movie tickets, some concerts, live theater, comedy, theme parks, etc.

 

[Cant Kick On 1 Foot]

That would be cool obviously, TSN won't die. International hockey, hopefully some CHL, maybe some KHL, plus football (CFL and NFL), basketball, some regional hockey.
They'll be fine

If TSN does go with broadcasting KHL, the NHL has baically opened can of worms in that their biggest competition wll be that much more on display throughout Canada. NHL has just exposed their compeition, the KHL. TSN will not go down without a fight.

I certainly can't see the KHL becoming more popular than the NHL, however they will lose some of the fans money because of this... I know I for one would love to see the KHL's talent on more display, not to mentioned a different brand of hockey.

That is my take anyway

 

[DyerMaker66*]

Anyhows, I always thought it'd be interesting if they split the tv contracts up by conference. Say Bell/TSN got the Western Conference, Rogers/Sportsnet got the Eastern.

Similar to how the NFL does it with the AFC (CBS) and NFC (Fox)

But then I'm still stuck with ***tty Sportsnet.

Oh well, at least CBC is still kickin'.

 

[PensFanSince1989]

If TSN does go with broadcasting KHL, the NHL has baically opened can of worms in that their biggest competition wll be that much more on display throughout Canada. NHL has just exposed their compeition, the KHL. TSN will not go down without a fight.

I certainly can't see the KHL becoming more popular than the NHL, however they will lose some of the fans money because of this... I know I for one would love to see the KHL's talent on more display, not to mentioned a different brand of hockey.

That is my take anyway

Yeah, I can already see Severstal Cherepovets jerseys flying off the selves.

 

[Ducksforcup]

I agree with some others in this thread...Sportsnet just made a massive investment in the NHL. They have EVERY incentive to make sure their product is top notch.

Yes, it just monopolized hockey coverage in a sense in Canada, but they also realize that people won't necessarily find their current set-up (lower cost productions largely due to them only having regional games) very appealing. I think in a few years people will be very pleased with the product they see from Sportsnet.

 

[PensFanSince1989]

Id argue that hockey fans in Canada are less price elastic than your average consumer in the entertainment industry. Hockey tickets are far more expensive than movie tickets, some concerts, live theater, comedy, theme parks, etc.

And you'd probably be correct, but still not nearly enough, especially in the tv market (which relies much more on casual fans than gate prices do (which rely more on corporate and season ticket holders), to give Rogers anywhere near the monopoly power that some here are trying to exert.