Disney pulls ESPN/ABC off DirecTV over carriage costs UPD resolved after ~2 weeks

[Blackhawkswincup]

MSN

MNF dropped over 2M viewers from last years wk 1 amid Disney blackout of 11M Direct TV/Uverse viewers

Bills vs Jets was matchup last year (This year 49ers vs Jets)

 

[tarheelhockey]

Um, rabbit ears? The ABC station itself?

One thing I find truly astounding (seriously) is that in 2024, TVs don’t just pick up OTA stations on their own without a pain-in-the-ass antenna.

Not long ago I looked into getting an antenna for my wall mounted TV and was surprised to find that there was no option that didn’t include an eyesore external component that would give me shitty reception on a good day.

Why should ESPN be included on base plans?

Because I’d guess that more people buy cable specifically for ESPN than any other channel, and making it an add-on forces all those people to buy a bunch of crap they don’t want.

I get that this is the cable model, but it’s also the reason cable is dying at the speed it is.

 

[varsaku]

One thing I find truly astounding (seriously) is that in 2024, TVs don’t just pick up OTA stations on their own without a pain-in-the-ass antenna.

Not long ago I looked into getting an antenna for my wall mounted TV and was surprised to find that there was no option that didn’t include an eyesore external component that would give me shitty reception on a good day.



Because I’d guess that more people buy cable specifically for ESPN than any other channel, and making it an add-on forces all those people to buy a bunch of crap they don’t want.

I get that this is the cable model, but it’s also the reason cable is dying at the speed it is.

ESPN is probably one of the more expensive channels that cable providers pay to get rights to. They probably did the math and realized it is better to get people who want the channel to pay for it than people who don't need it also paying for it. Like you said if people are paying to get ESPN they are going to pay the price regardless.

 

[tarheelhockey]

ESPN is probably one of the more expensive channels that cable providers pay to get rights to. They probably did the math and realized it is better to get people who want the channel to pay for it than people who don't need it also paying for it. Like you said if people are paying to get ESPN they are going to pay the price regardless.

Speaking only for myself, ESPN is the one cable channel I would pay for. If it were available as a standalone subscription, I would buy it.

Butttt… it’s not available in the basic tier, so I dropped cable altogether rather than pay out the nose for basic + upgrades just to get one channel. That in turn means I no longer watch nor care about a LOT of sports content that was previously important to me. It’s not just that I no longer pay for cable, but my potential to buy future product has withered away. With each passing year, I’m a little less likely to ever buy ESPN again, even if the model changes. If I lose interest in ESPN, there are now zero cable channels that I would consider buying.

If I’m not an outlier and this is what their model does at scale, I expect they’ll go full Blockbuster soon.

 

[SirJW]

I have barely watched ESPN, since the NHL network was created.

 

[LadyStanley]

DirecTV, Disney settle network dispute, will restore service Saturday after signing new long-term deal

The two companies have settled the dispute that led to a two-week blackout — just in time for college football.

sports.yahoo.com