ESPN announces layoffs - Printable Version

ESPN announces layoffs - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: ESPN announces layoffs (/thread-15089.html)

Pages: 1 2

ESPN announces layoffs - TreesAndBirds - 11-29-2017

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/espn-lays-off-150-employees-read-boss-john-140144735.html

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - cardcrimson - 11-29-2017

And who said politics and sports don't mix?

Whoever it was, they apparently knew what they were talking about.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - 2006alum - 11-29-2017

Not sure this has much at all to do with politics, unless you think people are canceling their entire cable subscription because of something political said on ESPN?:

Quote: Last month, TheWraps ESPN sources said that what ended up as todays round would be all about efficiency and cutting down on duplication. After all, the media landscape is nothing like it used to be, and few places are feeling the effects as much as ESPN.

Its been a rough couple of years for the Worldwide Leader in Sports, and cord-cutting has disproportionately impacted the priciest non-premium cable channel. That subscriber loss has been hard to absorb, particularly with the pricey talent contracts and sports rights ESPN had compiled over the years.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - TreesAndBirds - 11-29-2017

The issue for me is the affect cord cutting has on the amount espn will bid for broadcast rights and the resulting effect on the content providers (pro teams, universities athletic depts, etc). I assume these organizations are doing some planning for a decline or change in structure in amounts espn pays. My concern is that one outcome is more disparity in what the different ncaaf conferences make, resulting in more revenue based advantages for some conferences/teams. But if someone is more expert here I'd be interested in projections on how this trend plays out.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - cardcrimson - 11-29-2017

(11-29-2017, 11:18 AM)2006alum link Wrote:Not sure this has much at all to do with politics, unless you think people are canceling their entire cable subscription because of something political said on ESPN?:

Quote: Last month, TheWraps ESPN sources said that what ended up as todays round would be all about efficiency and cutting down on duplication. After all, the media landscape is nothing like it used to be, and few places are feeling the effects as much as ESPN.

Its been a rough couple of years for the Worldwide Leader in Sports, and cord-cutting has disproportionately impacted the priciest non-premium cable channel. That subscriber loss has been hard to absorb, particularly with the pricey talent contracts and sports rights ESPN had compiled over the years.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - CTcard - 11-29-2017

(11-29-2017, 11:38 AM)TreesAndBirds link Wrote:I assume these organizations are doing some planning for a decline or change in structure in amounts espn pays.

Yep, you can see that everywhere.

Athletic departments are reining in high coaches' salaries, they're holding onto to competent but not spectacular coaches who might be expensive to dump, they are halting the frenzy on facilities.
Economy is on the march.

[Please tell me I don't need any emoticons to make clear the sentiment here. ]

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - DC 86 - 11-29-2017

(11-29-2017, 11:50 AM)cardcrimson link Wrote:[quote author=2006alum link=topic=18210.msg215619#msg215619 date=1511979533]
Not sure this has much at all to do with politics, unless you think people are canceling their entire cable subscription because of something political said on ESPN?:

Quote: Last month, TheWraps ESPN sources said that what ended up as todays round would be all about efficiency and cutting down on duplication. After all, the media landscape is nothing like it used to be, and few places are feeling the effects as much as ESPN.

Its been a rough couple of years for the Worldwide Leader in Sports, and cord-cutting has disproportionately impacted the priciest non-premium cable channel. That subscriber loss has been hard to absorb, particularly with the pricey talent contracts and sports rights ESPN had compiled over the years.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - washingtonismoney - 11-29-2017

Right. Historically the source of ESPNs might isnt ads, its the cable subscription fees. So the cord cutting is whats screwing with their model, not necessarily fewer people watching.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - 2006alum - 11-29-2017

(11-29-2017, 12:08 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Right. Historically the source of ESPNs might isnt ads, its the cable subscription fees. So the cord cutting is whats screwing with their model, not necessarily fewer people watching.

Yeah, I think the red state politics thing is just a talking point. It may explain NFL ratings, but it doesn't explain cable cutting and reduced revenue for cable sports across the board.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - cardcrimson - 11-29-2017

(11-29-2017, 12:04 PM)DC 86 link Wrote:[quote author=cardcrimson link=topic=18210.msg215626#msg215626 date=1511981435]
[quote author=2006alum link=topic=18210.msg215619#msg215619 date=1511979533]
Not sure this has much at all to do with politics, unless you think people are canceling their entire cable subscription because of something political said on ESPN?:

Quote: Last month, TheWraps ESPN sources said that what ended up as todays round would be all about efficiency and cutting down on duplication. After all, the media landscape is nothing like it used to be, and few places are feeling the effects as much as ESPN.

Its been a rough couple of years for the Worldwide Leader in Sports, and cord-cutting has disproportionately impacted the priciest non-premium cable channel. That subscriber loss has been hard to absorb, particularly with the pricey talent contracts and sports rights ESPN had compiled over the years.

Not cancelling subscriptions, just not turning in to ESPN. The cable and satellite companies know what you're watching. Peruse the comments on any article about the layoffs--they've lost the base they are supposedly trying to reach. They push the SEC, then award Kaitlyn Jenner the athlete of the year. That doesn't play well in the red states. They'll watch college football, but are turning everything else out.
[/quote]

Why are they also tuning out FS1 whose ratings are abysmal and declining for the most part?
[/quote]

FS1 has programming? Didn't know that.

As for subscriptions, doesn't viewership relate to the rates channels can demand from providers? Fewer viewers, lower rates, right? Or am I missing something. ESPN isn't the ratings gorilla it once was and I'd imagine the providers have figured that out and are cutting what they pay ESPN.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - 2006alum - 11-29-2017

(11-29-2017, 12:30 PM)cardcrimson link Wrote:As for subscriptions, doesn't viewership relate to the rates channels can demand from providers? Fewer viewers, lower rates, right? Or am I missing something. ESPN isn't the ratings gorilla it once was and I'd imagine the providers have figured that out and are cutting what they pay ESPN.

Ratings definitely affect ESPN's negotiating position with each of the cable companies when its fee is up for renegotiation. But it's not a 1:1 correlation, for lots of reasons. And those fees aren't changing by the minute - as far as I know, none of the major cable companies has renegotiated with ESPN in the past year. I am also not aware of ESPN's ratings falling across the board - I've only really heard that ratings for the NFL have, and that's been on every network, not just ESPN. For example, just today there was a news story saying that ESPN's NBA ratings are up 24% this year. I think the theory that ESPN's being punished for getting political is another fake news talking point.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - TreesAndBirds - 11-29-2017

I think the issue is more that a lot of people have been forced to pay for espn who didnt want it because it was part of their basic cable package. With more people cutting the cord and just streaming the networks they really want, espn ( and cable cos.)Â is getting less money. Its not necessarily that less people are watching espn, but rather they arent getting money from people who never were watching but were forced to pay anyway.

Kind of like the way the music business used to be...had to buy the album to get the few songs you wanted. Now you dont have to any more.

That said, I dont have stats to support this, its just my gut as to what is going on.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - gocard14 - 11-29-2017

(11-29-2017, 11:50 AM)cardcrimson link Wrote:[quote author=2006alum link=topic=18210.msg215619#msg215619 date=1511979533]
Not sure this has much at all to do with politics, unless you think people are canceling their entire cable subscription because of something political said on ESPN?:

Quote: Last month, TheWrapâs ESPN sources said that what ended up as todayâs round would be all about efficiency and cutting down on duplication. After all, the media landscape is nothing like it used to be, and few places are feeling the effects as much as ESPN.

Itâs been a rough couple of years for the âWorldwide Leader in Sports,â and cord-cutting has disproportionately impacted the priciest non-premium cable channel. That subscriber loss has been hard to absorb, particularly with the pricey talent contracts and sports rights ESPN had compiled over the years.

Not cancelling subscriptions, just not turning in to ESPN. The cable and satellite companies know what you're watching. Peruse the comments on any article about the layoffs--they've lost the base they are supposedly trying to reach. They push the SEC, then award Kaitlyn Jenner the athlete of the year. That doesn't play well in the red states. They'll watch college football, but are turning everything else out.
[/quote]

There may be some truth to this, but like others have said I believe the changing landscape of the cable business (to ESPNs detriment) is the driving factor.

For my money if I had to pick a âhot takeâ as to why ratings decline, itâs because of the proliferation of hot take and argument shows to the detriment of real journalism. For the price they pay one BS monger like Skip Witless or Stephen A they could hire 20 real journalists and editors that appear on TV periodically. One real insightful writer/analyst like Bill Barnwell or Zach Lowe is worth 10 talking heads to me, but costs much much less. Based on the layoffs, itâs clear which direction they prioritize.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - troyc - 11-29-2017

(11-29-2017, 03:21 PM)TreesAndBirds link Wrote:Its not necessarily that less people are watching espn, but rather they arent getting money from people who never were watching but were forced to pay anyway.

Ding ding ding!

Troy C

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - Snorlax94 - 11-29-2017

There's a lot of nonsense, wishful thinking, and fake facts on this thread. I don't know why people have to try to spin something that really does affect Stanford athletics (shrinking athletic budgets, greater disparities in revenues by conference) and try to make it about the culture wars, especially when there is no basis for the claims. The truth is more illuminating, and understanding the facts is more helpful for planning for Stanford's (and other institutions') future.

Although the NFL is hovering in its peak revenue years, its overall viewing base has been shrinking and ageing for more than a year. It precedes any of these culture war claims. The viewership for NASCAR is shrinking, as well. It's also difficult to separate football's ratings from news about the long-term effects of concussions, which seems to get worse each year. Also, and this can be a regional shift, I think football and sports are losing their primacy in social life. I just don't hear as much watercooler talk about it as I used to. But if what is ruining sports is Caitlyn Jenner (I don't know much about her, this choice was news to me), then why are the football stadiums in California so empty?

Not only does an ageing demographic mean a weaker future, and a continually shrinking viewer base (as boomers slowly pass on and are replaced by millenials and Gen Z'ers), as we all know, younger views command more advertising dollars per hour of viewing, so it's a double whammy for sports and its old viewers.

ESPN can't command the payments from cable companies that they used to. They used to get a large $$ per cable subscriber, and now they get a smaller share, and the cable base is threatened (I don't have any recent stats, but my guess is that it's shrinking, and it's definitely threatened).

One of the threats -- and I think the profoundest threat -- to cable companies and ESPN is the switch to streaming content from companies like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO Now, and soon, Apple and Disney/Marvel. Also, companies like Showtime and CBS are bulking up their streaming options. Not only are streaming companies taking viewers, they're contributing to a behavioral switch from live viewing (like sports events) toward whenever/binge viewing.

In the short term, the shift away from live viewing might help sports a little bit -- I think the NFL is tops for live viewing and the reality TV show America's Got Talent was the top-rated show over the summer -- so in the short term, sports are providing advertisers a more and more rare avenue to live viewers. But in the long term, live viewing will become smaller and less relevant as online content becomes more and more dominant and viewing patterns and expectations evolve.

Another threat is the emergence of conference networks. While some are partnering with ESPN now and are primarily viewed on cable now, this independence allows conference networks to be purchased a la carte and/or streamed in the future.

I wasn't even aware of this Caitlyn Jenner stuff and I imagine many people were not either. For me -- and I think many millions of Gen Xers, millenials, and Gen Zers, why flip on ESPN tonight when I have a backlog of Stranger Things and the Walking Dead to watch? (Although the Gen Zers are more likely watching Teen Titans Go! than the Walking Dead).

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - gocard14 - 11-29-2017

There likely is something to the idea that new content delivery has hurt the default status that Espn had for many viewers.

I used to come home and unless there wa something else compelling to watch would turn on sports center. Now Im going to Turn on the next episode of my current show (currently parks and rec)

Of course Im also one of the millennial cord cutters that doesnt get cable, uses the family Netflix account, and streams FS1 or ESPN when needed from my folks cable account.

One would think that the impending loss of more subscription fee revenue would cause ESPN to double down on expanding future revenue streams (online journalism, their insider offerings, original content, etc) rather then pull back to focus on a devaluing core product.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - cardcrimson - 11-29-2017

My post early on was to suggest folks look at the comment sections on many of the articles published about the layoffs at ESPN. Though not scientific, they're pretty interesting reads and a look beyond the cardinal colored lens of the Cardboard.

As many of the comments point out, ESPN has made a definitive turn from presenting sports news to providing commentary on it. Sports Center, once a staple of sports news and a cornerstone of ESPN, is now a lightning rod for controversy as it's hosted by "two angry African Americans", Michael Smith and Jemele Hill. Hill if you recall was suspended by ESPN for tweeting pretty derogatory comments regarding Trump then later continued rants against Jerry Jones and his stance that his players will stand for the flag. Maybe that will attract viewers on the left coast and the northern right coast, but it won't play well anywhere else.

As for me, I stopped watching ESPN years ago, except for some live football, random snippets of college game day and the occasional PTI. Berman and Patrick became completely insufferable and drove me away.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - washingtonismoney - 11-30-2017

The commentary shows were never a source of ratings though. The sports were, and are, their source of ratings. They haven't jettisoned those. Indeed, their ratings for the NBA -- hardly an apolitical sport -- have raised dramatically.

Like, if you don't watch ESPN because of the politics, why would you cancel...your entire cable package in response? It doesn't make any sense. It's a silly argument.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - Leftcoast - 11-30-2017

Not sure a strictly rational approach is the best filter here.Â There probably are a measurable cohort who dropped their cable package in an emotional response to the growing confluence of sports and politics.

For some groups I've found using an emotional lens is a better predictor of behavior than a rational, enlightened self interest approach.Â Crazy times.

We're probably skirting the Cardboard politics ban here.

Re: ESPN announces layoffs - stupac2 - 11-30-2017

(11-30-2017, 09:07 AM)leftcoast link Wrote:There probably are a measurable cohort who dropped their cable package in an emotional response to the growing confluence of sports and politics.

Sure, and there's probably a measurable cohort who dropped it because they don't like the color red. It's almost certainly not what's causing ESPN to lose millions of subscribers. There just aren't that many of those people.