[BostonCard]

What could possibly go wrong?

https://www.axios.com/2023/08/08/espn-ga...ce=twitter

The bottom line: ESPN has wanted to get into betting for years, but hasn't wanted to itself operate a sports book, out of fear of editorial conflicts of interest.

A licensing deal gives it access to betting-related business opportunities, including developing a stronger relationship with younger audiences, without having to directly facilitate bets.

Does ESPN not realize how absurd it is to be in the gambling business even indirectly, and does the NCAA not realize how utterly out of sync the allure of TV dollars are with its professed "values"?

BC

[BostonCard]

What could possibly go wrong?

https://www.axios.com/2023/08/08/espn-ga...ce=twitter

The bottom line: ESPN has wanted to get into betting for years, but hasn't wanted to itself operate a sports book, out of fear of editorial conflicts of interest.

A licensing deal gives it access to betting-related business opportunities, including developing a stronger relationship with younger audiences, without having to directly facilitate bets.

Does ESPN not realize how absurd it is to be in the gambling business even indirectly, and does the NCAA not realize how utterly out of sync the allure of TV dollars are with its professed "values"?

BC

[M T]

ESPN will promote the sportsbook to its massive audience across platforms.

Hmmm...  They'll probably just wink when someone asks them what's an SEC team paying their players on any particular week...

[M T]

ESPN will promote the sportsbook to its massive audience across platforms.

Hmmm...  They'll probably just wink when someone asks them what's an SEC team paying their players on any particular week...

[StanfordMatt]

ESPN is desperate to improve their bottom line. That involves slashing on-air talent and succumbing to the allure of getting into gambling. It’s also why they’re unlikely to chip in enough money to make it worth the ACC’s while to add Stanford and Cal.

[StanfordMatt]

ESPN is desperate to improve their bottom line. That involves slashing on-air talent and succumbing to the allure of getting into gambling. It’s also why they’re unlikely to chip in enough money to make it worth the ACC’s while to add Stanford and Cal.

[Maple Leaf]

ESPN is desperate to improve their bottom line. That involves slashing on-air talent and succumbing to the allure of getting into gambling. It’s also why they’re unlikely to chip in enough money to make it worth the ACC’s while to add Stanford and Cal.

What happens if Disney (and Hearst Corp) decide that espn is not pulling its weight and tries to sell it, there are no takers and just close espn down and Disney doesnot stream any college football games, is Disney on the hook for the monies owed to the big10, big12, sec, acc?

[Maple Leaf]

ESPN is desperate to improve their bottom line. That involves slashing on-air talent and succumbing to the allure of getting into gambling. It’s also why they’re unlikely to chip in enough money to make it worth the ACC’s while to add Stanford and Cal.

What happens if Disney (and Hearst Corp) decide that espn is not pulling its weight and tries to sell it, there are no takers and just close espn down and Disney doesnot stream any college football games, is Disney on the hook for the monies owed to the big10, big12, sec, acc?

[2006alum]

ESPN is desperate to improve their bottom line. That involves slashing on-air talent and succumbing to the allure of getting into gambling. It’s also why they’re unlikely to chip in enough money to make it worth the ACC’s while to add Stanford and Cal.

What happens if Disney (and Hearst Corp) decide that espn is not pulling its weight and tries to sell it, there are no takers and just close espn down and Disney doesnot stream any college football games, is Disney on the hook for the monies owed to the big10, big12, sec, acc?

The answer to your question, taking all premises as valid, is that Disney remains on the hook unless it could defend its breaches under some sort of force majeure argument. (In theory, it could also try to spin off ESPN into a standalone subsidiary to offload ESPN's liabilities, but that is very tricky legally, and even J&J hasn't been able to pull it off to unload all its Talcum Powder jury verdicts.) I think the likelier outcome is all the stakeholders get together and revise the payouts.

Incidentally, this is why I was so intrigued by the Pac-12's deal with Apple. While it's true that the deal came about half a decade to soon to be superior to the Big 12's deal with Fox/ESPN, over the long term, it's not unrealistic to think Disney spins off ESPN and it lands in the lap of Apple, or another company more familiar with monetizing recurring subscriptions. I think Apple was willing to lose money on the Pac-12 deal to get more experience in the live sports space, and with the Pac-12 Networks bringing their own production teams, it would be seamless on Apple's end. It's just too bad we weren't in 2029...

[2006alum]

ESPN is desperate to improve their bottom line. That involves slashing on-air talent and succumbing to the allure of getting into gambling. It’s also why they’re unlikely to chip in enough money to make it worth the ACC’s while to add Stanford and Cal.

What happens if Disney (and Hearst Corp) decide that espn is not pulling its weight and tries to sell it, there are no takers and just close espn down and Disney doesnot stream any college football games, is Disney on the hook for the monies owed to the big10, big12, sec, acc?

The answer to your question, taking all premises as valid, is that Disney remains on the hook unless it could defend its breaches under some sort of force majeure argument. (In theory, it could also try to spin off ESPN into a standalone subsidiary to offload ESPN's liabilities, but that is very tricky legally, and even J&J hasn't been able to pull it off to unload all its Talcum Powder jury verdicts.) I think the likelier outcome is all the stakeholders get together and revise the payouts.

Incidentally, this is why I was so intrigued by the Pac-12's deal with Apple. While it's true that the deal came about half a decade to soon to be superior to the Big 12's deal with Fox/ESPN, over the long term, it's not unrealistic to think Disney spins off ESPN and it lands in the lap of Apple, or another company more familiar with monetizing recurring subscriptions. I think Apple was willing to lose money on the Pac-12 deal to get more experience in the live sports space, and with the Pac-12 Networks bringing their own production teams, it would be seamless on Apple's end. It's just too bad we weren't in 2029...

[Goose]

I think the likelier outcome is all the stakeholders get together and revise the payouts.

Absolutely. It makes no sense for the conferences to bankrupt the only organizations that want to buy the "product". However, that process of revising the payouts downward will generate pressure to shed less desirable (from a TV point of view) conference members. The big dogs will still want to be fed, and since it is all about the money forgoing some easy wins is very much preferable to getting less money. This is the point where IMO things will get ugly enough that sanity may actually return to college athletics, at least to many of the schools involved. The big money drying up will compel that outcome. I just hope it happens soon enough there is anything left to save.

[Goose]

I think the likelier outcome is all the stakeholders get together and revise the payouts.

Absolutely. It makes no sense for the conferences to bankrupt the only organizations that want to buy the "product". However, that process of revising the payouts downward will generate pressure to shed less desirable (from a TV point of view) conference members. The big dogs will still want to be fed, and since it is all about the money forgoing some easy wins is very much preferable to getting less money. This is the point where IMO things will get ugly enough that sanity may actually return to college athletics, at least to many of the schools involved. The big money drying up will compel that outcome. I just hope it happens soon enough there is anything left to save.

[chrisk]

ESPN is desperate to improve their bottom line. That involves slashing on-air talent and succumbing to the allure of getting into gambling. It’s also why they’re unlikely to chip in enough money to make it worth the ACC’s while to add Stanford and Cal.

What happens if Disney (and Hearst Corp) decide that espn is not pulling its weight and tries to sell it, there are no takers and just close espn down and Disney doesnot stream any college football games, is Disney on the hook for the monies owed to the big10, big12, sec, acc?

Closing ESPN does not rid Disney of the liabilities. They would have to be negotiated. Disney is looking for an investor in ESPN. If they could accomplish that, that would reduce the burden. Disney has to be very smart about the transition to streaming. They have to continue to make it worthwhile for cable companies to distribute their product even as subscribers dwindle while making it available on streaming for a profitable price. It is somewhat like phone companies milking land lines as cash cows while promoting mobile phone. They may try to come up with streaming package bundles that rival tranditional cable packages to obtain the maximum subscriber base.

[chrisk]

ESPN is desperate to improve their bottom line. That involves slashing on-air talent and succumbing to the allure of getting into gambling. It’s also why they’re unlikely to chip in enough money to make it worth the ACC’s while to add Stanford and Cal.

What happens if Disney (and Hearst Corp) decide that espn is not pulling its weight and tries to sell it, there are no takers and just close espn down and Disney doesnot stream any college football games, is Disney on the hook for the monies owed to the big10, big12, sec, acc?

Closing ESPN does not rid Disney of the liabilities. They would have to be negotiated. Disney is looking for an investor in ESPN. If they could accomplish that, that would reduce the burden. Disney has to be very smart about the transition to streaming. They have to continue to make it worthwhile for cable companies to distribute their product even as subscribers dwindle while making it available on streaming for a profitable price. It is somewhat like phone companies milking land lines as cash cows while promoting mobile phone. They may try to come up with streaming package bundles that rival tranditional cable packages to obtain the maximum subscriber base.