OT: Non-Hockey Sports Thread XII - Heeeeeeressss JJ! (Percy Harvin Edition)

[BagHead]

Which is funny because streaming companies saw this opportunity and jumped at it BUT most streaming companies also lose money. There’stoo much maybe saturation. I believe I counted, at one point, 18 different streaming services -this does not including TV streaming such as YoutubeTv or Sling.

There’s not THAT much good content to support 18+ streaming services, plus who can afford that? Most people ditched cable because it was/is in the $100+/month.

If they, the companies, were smart, they would consolidate to maybe 5 streaming services max. But instead of content companies each having their own streaming services, they would license out the content to (numerous different) streaming services.

Much like how you used to be able to (can you still?) watch The Office on Netflix. Instead of having to purchase a subscription to PeacockTv or whatever it’s called.

As a side note, before the boom of streaming platforms, online piracy was at an all-time low. After the boom, or currently, piracy is, or is close to, an all-time high. In short, people don’t want to be nickel and dimed.

See the outrage over BMW trying to charge for seat warmers as a subscription.

Good post!

Economies of scale is the key to profitability in streaming. Netflix began their streaming business early enough that they were able to hoover up subscribers by borrowing TV shows like The Office for a song, which allowed them to spin up their own TV show and movie creation, and build a better library than the rest while being able to continually add to it. It's become a flywheel, where the new content gains new subscribers, and new subscribers bring in enough money to create new content, which gains them even more new subscribers.

The legacy networks got into streaming about 20 years late, have a small subscriber base, and so cannot fuel new creations that way. People watch what they want in the library, then unsubscribe. They're learning the hard way that you need to reach a certain scale to make streaming profitable. I think one or two non-Netflix streamers may survive long enough to reach scale, but not many more than that. My money is on Disney and Amazon, and only because they have other sources of revenue that aren't actively dying. Then again, Bob Iger sucks at running Disney, so we'll see what happens there.

 

[Minnewildsota]

Good post!

Economies of scale is the key to profitability in streaming. Netflix began their streaming business early enough that they were able to hoover up subscribers by borrowing TV shows like The Office for a song, which allowed them to spin up their own TV show and movie creation, and build a better library than the rest while being able to continually add to it. It's become a flywheel, where the new content gains new subscribers, and new subscribers bring in enough money to create new content, which gains them even more new subscribers.

The legacy networks got into streaming about 20 years late, have a small subscriber base, and so cannot fuel new creations that way. People watch what they want in the library, then unsubscribe. They're learning the hard way that you need to reach a certain scale to make streaming profitable. I think one or two non-Netflix streamers may survive long enough to reach scale, but not many more than that. My money is on Disney and Amazon, and only because they have other sources of revenue that aren't actively dying. Then again, Bob Iger sucks at running Disney, so we'll see what happens there.

I see 4 staying in the long run; Netflix, Disney, Amazon, and Apple.

Netflix because they have the market share.
Disney because of the IP they own.
Amazon and Apple because they already have the infrastructure for it.

 

[BagHead]

I see 4 staying in the long run; Netflix, Disney, Amazon, and Apple.

Netflix because they have the market share.
Disney because of the IP they own.
Amazon and Apple because they already have the tech specs for it.

Sure, I could see that! After consideration, I think you could also lump YouTube in here, though it's obviously a different type of streaming service. It's also got a big parent company in Alphabet that really makes it's bulk of money in other ways, which seems to be a theme with all of them but Netflix.

 

[Wabit]

Which is funny because streaming companies saw this opportunity and jumped at it BUT most streaming companies also lose money. There’stoo much maybe saturation. I believe I counted, at one point, 18 different streaming services -this does not including TV streaming such as YoutubeTv or Sling.

There’s not THAT much good content to support 18+ streaming services, plus who can afford that? Most people ditched cable because it was/is in the $100+/month.

If they, the companies, were smart, they would consolidate to maybe 5 streaming services max. But instead of content companies each having their own streaming services, they would license out the content to (numerous different) streaming services.

Much like how you used to be able to (can you still?) watch The Office on Netflix. Instead of having to purchase a subscription to PeacockTv or whatever it’s called.

As a side note, before the boom of streaming platforms, online piracy was at an all-time low. After the boom, or currently, piracy is, or is close to, an all-time high. In short, people don’t want to be nickel and dimed.

See the outrage over BMW trying to charge for seat warmers as a subscription.

I pay ~$18 a month for iptv and I get about everything I could ever want, but it's in the grey area of cable streaming services.

We've cut down to, at most, one other service a month depending on what series just finished. The wife probably has one or two $5 channels she keeps a sub to.

Piracy was still there, it was actually really easy to find everything; once you found the steaming sites.

I would prefer if there were no sports blackouts and every channel have their own sub cost. Then I would just get the NHL and maybe MLB packages and pay for maybe 3 other channels (syfy, history, and grit). I have an antenna for the local channels.

 

[Sad People]

So how do y’all watch Twins games now?

 

[Wabit]

So how do y’all watch Twins games now?

In the all you can eat sections of the stadium? At least that's how I would do it.

 

[Minnewildsota]

I pay ~$18 a month for iptv and I get about everything I could ever want, but it's in the grey area of cable streaming services.

We've cut down to, at most, one other service a month depending on what series just finished. The wife probably has one or two $5 channels she keeps a sub to.

Piracy was still there, it was actually really easy to find everything; once you found the steaming sites.

I would prefer if there were no sports blackouts and every channel have their own sub cost. Then I would just get the NHL and maybe MLB packages and pay for maybe 3 other channels (syfy, history, and grit). I have an antenna for the local channels.

I never said it wasn't. I just said it was at, or near an all time low. With the introduction of NUMEROUS streaming services, piracy has kicked back up - I think to record levels. Just further proves that people aren't finding the value for what they are/could be paying.

 

[MuckOG]

So how do y’all watch Twins games now?

I stream DirectTV.

 

[Minnewildsota]

I stream DirectTV.

Look at money bags over here

 

[Wabit]

I never said it wasn't. I just said it was at, or near an all time low. With the introduction of NUMEROUS streaming services, piracy has kicked back up - I think to record levels. Just further proves that people aren't finding the value for what they are/could be paying.

The tv being pirated isn't basic cable channels. It's the HBO, Max, Disney, and Anime (that you can't easily get full seasons of).

Nerds are going to be nerds (my wife) and have been pirating their stuff for years.

You can go back years and it was Game of Thrones, Rick and Morty, and the CW superhero shows making up a lot of the top-10 pirated things. Then Disney put up a lot of good shows in a short time and they took over a bunch of the top spots.

It's not the ESPN, "news" channels, Bally Sports, HGTV, History channel, Syfy, etc channels that pirating is hurting any more than other years.

 

[TaLoN]

The regional networks are failing due a drastic shift in what and how people get their entertainment. People aren't subscribing to cable/sat dish anymore. Current total subscriber numbers are on on par with the late 80's/early 90's and steadily dropping. Cable blew up in the in the late-90s/early 00s and that's when channels start popping up out of the woodwork. Now with subscriber numbers dropping channels will start shutting down.

Netflix is going to kill cable the same way it killed Blockbuster. Well Netflix alone won't do it, but they gave the blueprint on how to make make streaming successful.

Yet, to get the same amount of of options in streaming, you spend more on streaming now than on cable as well, and people just can't afford more than just a few services, yet everyone thinks they can charge an arm an a leg for those, then wonder why their service is losing money.

We need to get local sports back over the air. The NFL never left free TV.

 

[MuckOG]

Look at money bags over here

I used to stream YouTube TV, but when they lost Bally's I switched to DirecTV.

 

[Wabit]

Yet, to get the same amount of of options in streaming, you spend more on streaming now than on cable as well, and people just can't afford more than just a few services, yet everyone thinks they can charge an arm an a leg for those, then wonder why their service is losing money.

We need to get local sports back over the air. The NFL never left free TV.

The over the air sports was AM radio. Free tv wasn't showing full seasons of baseball or hockey, it was a cable subscription. There was the weekend regional baseball game on during the summer on a major network, that was about it. The regional sports channel in S WI (like most other places) in the 80s was a premium network. If I wanted to watch baseball it was either the Cubs (WGN) or the Braves (Turner) when I was in town (basic cable). If I was at the farm (antenna on the roof) radio was the only option for baseball. ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, and later FOX were the only channels available.

Baseball was mostly still day games then and the tv stations weren't going to change their tried and true lineup: gameshows in the morning, Soaps midday, some kid programs after school hours, and local news was on at 5 or 6 and MASH reruns either was before it or after it. Then it was prime time TV, News at 10, then late night Carson show late night.

 

[BagHead]

The tv being pirated isn't basic cable channels. It's the HBO, Max, Disney, and Anime (that you can't easily get full seasons of).

Nerds are going to be nerds (my wife) and have been pirating their stuff for years.

View attachment 863598

You can go back years and it was Game of Thrones, Rick and Morty, and the CW superhero shows making up a lot of the top-10 pirated things. Then Disney put up a lot of good shows in a short time and they took over a bunch of the top spots.

It's not the ESPN, "news" channels, Bally Sports, HGTV, History channel, Syfy, etc channels that pirating is hurting any more than other years.

What a time 2021 was. Imagine risking fines or jail time just to watch Marvel shows and the worst season of GoT.

 

[Digitalbooya]

How many other streaming services do you have?

Hulu TV, big ten plus

 

[BagHead]

Yet, to get the same amount of of options in streaming, you spend more on streaming now than on cable as well, and people just can't afford more than just a few services, yet everyone thinks they can charge an arm an a leg for those, then wonder why their service is losing money.

We need to get local sports back over the air. The NFL never left free TV.

Ehh...

I ripped this from an article written in January, so the prices are quite up to date.

They're overall pretty competitive, especially if you're willing to watch ads, which usually makes the streaming service cheaper still. You also don't need to have all of the streaming services at once, and they bill monthly, so they're easy to churn into and out of. They do currently suck for spots fans, though. Then again, even cable sucks for sports fans now.

I think the complaint of streaming becoming too expensive stems from how inexpensive it was, not from thoughts of its profitability. Streaming services were purposely keeping the prices low enough that they were operating at a loss in order to land-grab the market. Now they're raising prices because of two reasons, 1) Netflix has already won so they can raise prices as they wish until someone comes along and disrupts streaming like Netflix disrupted cable, and 2) the rest of the streamers NEED to raise prices or die because interest rates went up enough that money isn't cheap anymore, and they suddenly need to be profitable.

They have raised prices, but the fact of the matter is that they're still not charging much, if any more than cable does, and they're still more versatile for those who are looking to save money.


*edit* Ok, I just read this back and part of it sounds almost accusatory. That was not my intent. It's not your fault for having sticker shock from the raising prices, it's the fault of the streaming services for conditioning us all to expect such low prices. Just to be clear.

 

[Wild11MN]

Yet, to get the same amount of of options in streaming, you spend more on streaming now than on cable as well, and people just can't afford more than just a few services, yet everyone thinks they can charge an arm an a leg for those, then wonder why their service is losing money.

We need to get local sports back over the air. The NFL never left free TV.

It's a huge reason why the NFL is as successful as it is. Anyone with a TV and rabbit ears can watch almost all day on Sunday.

Over-the-air isn't profitable in the short term, but these teams will recoup a lot of that lost cash over time. OTA should mean that you have a lot more people watching your product. That means more people talking about the team, more people paying attention all year, more people buying merchandise, and more people willing to spend a lot of money on playoff games.

I would absolutely watch a lot more baseball if it was easier to access. Vegas has this for the Golden Knights right now, and that seems to be working out pretty well for them. Not apples-to-apples, but in addition to icing a good team immediately, they're making it very easy for casual fans to jump in and watch a game. And a lot of them will stick around when there's a good product.

 

[TaLoN]

The over the air sports was AM radio. Free tv wasn't showing full seasons of baseball or hockey, it was a cable subscription. There was the weekend regional baseball game on during the summer on a major network, that was about it. The regional sports channel in S WI (like most other places) in the 80s was a premium network. If I wanted to watch baseball it was either the Cubs (WGN) or the Braves (Turner) when I was in town (basic cable). If I was at the farm (antenna on the roof) radio was the only option for baseball. ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, and later FOX were the only channels available.

Baseball was mostly still day games then and the tv stations weren't going to change their tried and true lineup: gameshows in the morning, Soaps midday, some kid programs after school hours, and local news was on at 5 or 6 and MASH reruns either was before it or after it. Then it was prime time TV, News at 10, then late night Carson show late night.

I Watched twins and Noth Stars on TV as a kid, without cable. The problem back then? NHL only showed road games on free TV. Home games were PPV.

Twins were completely on free TV back then.

 

[MuckOG]

I Watched twins and Noth Stars on TV as a kid, without cable. The problem back then? NHL only showed road games on free TV. Home games were PPV.

Twins were completely on free TV back then.

Do you remember Spectrum TV? We didn't have it, but I remember watching North Stars games at my friend's house that did have Spectrum.

 

[kfan22]

Wolves and Nuggets tip off tomorrow, I think Wolves in 6! thoughts?

 

[MuckOG]

Wolves and Nuggets tip off tomorrow, I think Wolves in 6! thoughts?

I haven't watched the Timberwolves (or the NBA, in general) since Kevin Garnett left. I watched the series against Phoenix and found it really entertaining. Anthony Edwards looks just like MJ in terms of his play (not comparing careers, just style of play).

 

[Northerner]

Wolves and Nuggets tip off tomorrow, I think Wolves in 6! thoughts?

I think Jokic will be too much, Den in 6.

But I could absolutely be wrong, I thought the Wolves would have a hard time advancing past Pho, but they did so easily.

 

[TaLoN]

Do you remember Spectrum TV? We didn't have it, but I remember watching North Stars games at my friend's house that did have Spectrum.

No, we didn't have cable or anything. Just an antenna on the roof.

 

[MuckOG]

No, we didn't have cable or anything. Just an antenna on the roof.

Spectrum was a subscription tv station KTMA, not cable. You could get sports and "adult" movies.

 

[Dakota Sioux]

Make it 12 in a row