Todd Golden ESPN+ Article

[pafan]

Find investors, buy the digital broadcast rights to MVC and whatever other niche sport leagues you want, offer them to whomever wants them free of charge.

The MVC is in this deal through 2025 IIRC. ESPN negotiates with the MVC saying "ESPN3 is available in 80 million homes", and then drastically reduces that potential audience by un-bundling from the cable bill. I always understood that ESPN3 was paid for by my cable provider. My cable bill went up by 10% this spring, and now it does not include a substantial portion of the programming I watch in January and February.

I definitely will not be paying ESPN their extra $5 a month. Listening to road games on radio was just fine in the past, and will be fine in 2019.

[UE11]

Find investors, buy the digital broadcast rights to MVC and whatever other niche sport leagues you want, offer them to whomever wants them free of charge.

The MVC is in this deal through 2025 IIRC. ESPN negotiates with the MVC saying "ESPN3 is available in 80 million homes", and then drastically reduces that potential audience by un-bundling from the cable bill. I always understood that ESPN3 was paid for by my cable provider. My cable bill went up by 10% this spring, and now it does not include a substantial portion of the programming I watch in January and February.

While I understand your point, I'm not sure the current length of the MVC/ESPN media deal is the main deterrent to AD1770 purchasing the rights and distributing them. And while ESPN3 may be available in 80 million homes, my guess is the number that actually know it is available and has ever used it has significantly fewer 0s. Also, don't forget when the MVC was negotiating their side, they had a member that put many more eyeballs on screen than anyone in the conference now. Finally, small but I think important point, ESPN3 was paid for by your internet provided. Granted, in many cases that is the same as your cable provider, but some ISPs (such as TimeWarner/Spectrum) would not grant access unless you received regular ESPN from them as well. In some rare cases, the ESPN+ move could save people money by allowing them to drop regular ESPN or put more eyeballs on screen (like mine) that didn't have access to ESPN3 before but are willing to subscribe to ESPN+

I definitely will not be paying ESPN their extra $5 a month. Listening to road games on radio was just fine in the past, and will be fine in 2019.

Such is your right and what makes capitalism great. Cheers!

[COUTEAU]

I don't have cable or use an internet provider.
So, don't know much about "Sling" or extra fees to ESPN.
What I do know is, I have several friends here following in my lead on how I view broadcasted TV, for entertainment and sporting events.
No fees for HBO, Netflix, Hulu, Showtime....ect.
I can watch any program (granted on a delay) without commercial interruptions, anytime I care to.
Yesterday evening, while grilling fresh Triggerfish, my lady friend and binged on the first four episodes of "Yellowstone", using the FMOVIES site.
No commercials and the ability to pause at will.
I enjoy any sporting event broadcasted or streamed live.
No idea what, "sticking it to the man", is supposed to mean.
What I do know is, I'm not a slave to when a program is aired.
I can also watch a rebroadcasted ACES game or other team's games.
I'm not a UE grad.
Wasn't able to afford that tuition.....not used to living large and spending money frivolously.
So as a bonus to using my method for television viewing and internet access, I also save over a grand annually and personally I kinda like that idea.

[AcesHigh]

Here’s the way I see it. If ESPN wants to charge an additional access fee to view content especially the MVC basketball games I will pay it because they own the content and have the right to grant access in any way they want including denial.

As for those who believe they have a right to view that content without the expressed permission of the owner of the content this is my view. I have a pool in my backyard I own the pool and my property is private. Occasionally I invite friends or neighbors to my house to enjoy an afternoon around the pool. Even though I assume the total cost of owning and operating the pool I do not charge my guests for their participation.

Now one afternoon I come home and find my neighbors and some of their friends in my pool enjoying a hot afternoon without my permission or contribution toward the cost of operation of the pool. They have robbed me of my privacy, they have taken financial consideration from my pocket and they have trespassed. I could have them prosecuted but I won’t. However I will choose to deny access in the future to all even to those who did not violate my trust.

The bottom line is that theft of intellectual property or owned property is a crime and we should get over ESPN and pay the fee or simply move on.

[Atlanta Ace]

This upcoming basketball season, I'll be "living large." I'll be a subscriber to ESPN Plus.

[211N-69]

I am not completely clear on how this works but for 5 bucks a month to watch Valley games seems like a reasonable deal to me. I don't subscribe to cable so my TV watching is kind of -- what's it worth to see a program?

[riverboat_gambler]

I am not completely clear on how this works but for 5 bucks a month to watch Valley games seems like a reasonable deal to me. I don't subscribe to cable so my TV watching is kind of -- what's it worth to see a program?

I think it’s a good deal. It’s not just all Valley games - it’s a slew of other conferences if you just like CBB in general. There’s also NCAAF, 1 NHL/day, 1 MLB/day, 30/30’s, a bunch of other random stuff.

Subscribe in November, cancel in February, and it’s a lot of content for 4 months, even just sticking to CBB. The games are archived too so you don’t have to watch everything live.

[purpleredbird]

I am not completely clear on how this works but for 5 bucks a month to watch Valley games seems like a reasonable deal to me. I don't subscribe to cable so my TV watching is kind of -- what's it worth to see a program?

I think it’s a good deal. It’s not just all Valley games - it’s a slew of other conferences if you just like CBB in general. There’s also NCAAF, 1 NHL/day, 1 MLB/day, 30/30’s, a bunch of other random stuff.

Subscribe in November, cancel in February, and it’s a lot of content for 4 months, even just sticking to CBB. The games are archived too so you don’t have to watch everything live.

I agree that $5 a month is a very, very small price to pay for all the games you will receive. Yes it may have been "free with ESPN subscription" last year, but times change. If this is what I have to pay to keep these games available, I'm more than willing to pay it.

[acecard]

I am not completely clear on how this works but for 5 bucks a month to watch Valley games seems like a reasonable deal to me. I don't subscribe to cable so my TV watching is kind of -- what's it worth to see a program?

I think it’s a good deal. It’s not just all Valley games - it’s a slew of other conferences if you just like CBB in general. There’s also NCAAF, 1 NHL/day, 1 MLB/day, 30/30’s, a bunch of other random stuff.

Subscribe in November, cancel in February, and it’s a lot of content for 4 months, even just sticking to CBB. The games are archived too so you don’t have to watch everything live.

I agree that $5 a month is a very, very small price to pay for all the games you will receive. Yes it may have been "free with ESPN subscription" last year, but times change. If this is what I have to pay to keep these games available, I'm more than willing to pay it.

I see no problem with it. Will gladly pay 5 bucks a month to see my Aces, since I can no longer to see them in person.

[Ad1770]

Allow me to clear up what I was stating earlier, as it seems to have flown over some heads. My rant was not about customers having to pay $5 a month to see MVC basketball on ESPN+. Truth, I could care less if anyone on this forum did or not. Your money and how you spend it is not my call, and does not affect my money and how I spend it. That being said, that brings me back to what my original post was about. The schools of the MVC.

They agreed to basically pay ESPN and do their own filming and announcing of games to be shown on ESPN3. The payoff, no matter how misguided it was or was perceived, was that ESPN would show the games on ESPN3 at no additional cost so that the schools could get “additional eyes” on the programs, and hopefully, by extension of this, more walk up gate traffic at home games.

This shift of moving the games behind the paywall from “free” TV, will it also include dropping the costs involved that the schools have to pay since ESPN is now making money from these games off of the customers? I highly doubt it.