Todd Golden ESPN+ Article

Discussions of all the Aces sports
Aceup13
Ford Center Regular
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 11:32 am
Fan Since: 1998

Re: Todd Golden ESPN+ Article

Postby Aceup13 » Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:52 am

Yikes...

If you like the content someone is putting out you should pay them for it. You wouldn’t work for free would you?

PurpleWhiskers
Road Tripper
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 9:35 pm
Fan Since: 1977

Re: Todd Golden ESPN+ Article

Postby PurpleWhiskers » Tue Aug 07, 2018 10:20 am

Ad1770 wrote: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.


As an actual bootstrapper rather than the far more common fake one and as someone who has wanted a la carte TV for years I will never complain about paying for those things I truly want. Like you, I don't have a clue what is contained in the details of the agreement between ESPN and the MVC or whether or not the agreement was struck with the understanding that a paywall was in the works. What I do know is that if you receive ESPN in your home you have never gotten it for free; it was rolled into the price of your cable. Burrowing down on your complaint, when the agreement needs to be renewed between ESPN and the MVC, would you encourage the MVC to reject the arrangement and discontinue allowing ESPN to televise conference games unless the paywall is taken down? In an age when a single cup of coffee can cost 5 dollars I can only be thrilled that 5 dollars will get me a whole month of MVC games. Raising the national profile of the MVC makes dollars and sense. All ten member schools understand that. I doubt that they feel cheated or all that concerned that a small handful of people would rather watch Duke and UK for "free" than pay 10 dollars for the entire MVC schedule. And if 10 dollars wrecks a budget that person shouldn't have "free" cable TV either.

User avatar
E-Villan
Head Cheerleader
Posts: 691
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:33 am
Fan Since: 1967
Location: Under the Ohio River

Re: Todd Golden ESPN+ Article

Postby E-Villan » Tue Aug 07, 2018 10:44 am

PurpleWhiskers wrote:
Ad1770 wrote: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.


As an actual bootstrapper rather than the far more common fake one and as someone who has wanted a la carte TV for years I will never complain about paying for those things I truly want. Like you, I don't have a clue what is contained in the details of the agreement between ESPN and the MVC or whether or not the agreement was struck with the understanding that a paywall was in the works. What I do know is that if you receive ESPN in your home you have never gotten it for free; it was rolled into the price of your cable. Burrowing down on your complaint, when the agreement needs to be renewed between ESPN and the MVC, would you encourage the MVC to reject the arrangement and discontinue allowing ESPN to televise conference games unless the paywall is taken down? In an age when a single cup of coffee can cost 5 dollars I can only be thrilled that 5 dollars will get me a whole month of MVC games. Raising the national profile of the MVC makes dollars and sense. All ten member schools understand that. I doubt that they feel cheated or all that concerned that a small handful of people would rather watch Duke and UK for "free" than pay 10 dollars for the entire MVC schedule. And if 10 dollars wrecks a budget that person shouldn't have "free" cable TV either.


Agreed completely, not to mention now it is available for cord cutters as well. The market is much larger at a very affordable price.


Return to “The Aces”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], SemRush [Bot], Yandex [Bot] and 3 guests