Cox Cable vs. ESPN

[JRstriker12]

I was surfing the ESPN site when this site popped-up:

http://msn.espn.go.com/gen/espncablestanceindex.html

Apparently Cox is considering moving ESPN to one of thier "sports tiers". Anyone have any insight into the situation?

I thought this would be relevant for this forum since a fair amount of DC fans in the North VA area have Cox cable.

It would suck if ESPN is moved to a "sport tier" that you have to pay extra to get, then again I already pay for a sports tier to get FSW (It used to be a part of basic). I just hope ESPN becomes part of the same package as it would cut back on my ability to see MLS Soccer Saturdays on ESPN, ESPN2 as well as USNMT games.

[onefineesq]

Originally posted by JRstriker12
I was surfing the ESPN site when this site popped-up:

http://msn.espn.go.com/gen/espncablestanceindex.html

Apparently Cox is considering moving ESPN to one of thier "sports tiers". Anyone have any insight into the situation?

I thought this would be relevant for this forum since a fair amount of DC fans in the North VA area have Cox cable.

It would suck if ESPN is moved to a "sport tier" that you have to pay extra to get, then again I already pay for a sports tier to get FSW (It used to be a part of basic). I just hope ESPN becomes part of the same package as it would cut back on my ability to see MLS Soccer Saturdays on ESPN, ESPN2 as well as USNMT games.

no insight, but this fight with cox has been going on for at least a month. espn is actually showing commercials concerning this in NoVA. the bottom line is that it shouldn't affect people like you or I anyway, because to get FSW, we have to get the sports tier anyway, so we are gonna get Espn regardless.

[Wolves_67]

Another bad thing about this "trend" is that there would be less people seeing soccer here who are not the "big fans". In other words, less exposure for the sport to win those fans who learn to like the game bit by bit from exposure when they watch from curiosity. I hope my point is understood. :)

Other cable companies have stated an interest in doing the same thing with ESPN stating how much more ESPN charges than others for the size of the viewership ESPN gets on their systems. That 3 times the cost of other channels for the same number of interested customers is too much for them to pay.

[JRstriker12]

Originally posted by onefineesq
no insight, but this fight with cox has been going on for at least a month. espn is actually showing commercials concerning this in NoVA. the bottom line is that it shouldn't affect people like you or I anyway, because to get FSW, we have to get the sports tier anyway, so we are gonna get Espn regardless.

Thanks for the info onefineesq. I'll be okay as long as they include ESPN in the sports tier. I just hope the greedy bums at Cox don't try to create a seperate "ESPN" tier.

Think about it. They could easily put ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN News, ESPN Classic and ESPN Deportes in a seperate tier from FSW.

Oh well, I'll keep my fingers crossed.

[JRstriker12]

Originally posted by Wolves_67
Another bad thing about this "trend" is that there would be less people seeing soccer here who are not the "big fans". In other words, less exposure for the sport to win those fans who learn to like the game bit by bit from exposure when they watch from curiosity. I hope my point is understood. :)

Other cable companies have stated an interest in doing the same thing with ESPN stating how much more ESPN charges than others for the size of the viewership ESPN gets on their systems. That 3 times the cost of other channels for the same number of interested customers is too much for them to pay.

I was also thinking that putting ESPN on a seperate tier would give MLS on ESPN less exposure, but I also think that ESPN is such a huge draw for most folks that most people would shell out the extra cash for the channel. We would definitely lose some eyeballs but I just wonder how many.

[onefineesq]

Originally posted by JRstriker12
Thanks for the info onefineesq. I'll be okay as long as they include ESPN in the sports tier. I just hope the greedy bums at Cox don't try to create a seperate "ESPN" tier.

Think about it. They could easily put ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN News, ESPN Classic and ESPN Deportes in a seperate tier from FSW.

Oh well, I'll keep my fingers crossed.

i know that this may be selfish on my part, but i'm not that concerned about that happening. think about it Striker .......... why would Cox every put FSW, ESPN, ESPN News, and ESPN2 on different tiers? they are currently on the sports tier. what other tier would they possibly be put under? I don't work for either Cox or Espn, but ESPN is not blameless in this fight either. Cox is complaining that ESPN is charging so much more money for them to carry the channel, that they have no choice but to put it on the tier to defray some of the costs. basically, both parties are trying to maximize their dollars, and they both blame the other to justify it to the consumer. the bottom line is that if you have the sports tier, you are gonna be safe. of course, Cox might increase the price of the sports tier, but i don't see them separating sports channels from each other by putting them on different tiers. consumers would go nuts.

[JRstriker12]

Originally posted by onefineesq
i know that this may be selfish on my part, but i'm not that concerned about that happening. think about it Striker .......... why would Cox every put FSW, ESPN, ESPN News, and ESPN2 on different tiers? they are currently on the sports tier. what other tier would they possibly be put under? I don't work for either Cox or Espn, but ESPN is not blameless in this fight either. Cox is complaining that ESPN is charging so much more money for them to carry the channel, that they have no choice but to put it on the tier to defray some of the costs. basically, both parties are trying to maximize their dollars, and they both blame the other to justify it to the consumer. the bottom line is that if you have the sports tier, you are gonna be safe. of course, Cox might increase the price of the sports tier, but i don't see them separating sports channels from each other by putting them on different tiers. consumers would go nuts.

I think you're right on this one. I guess we'll all see how it turns out.

[Dave Brother]

I have the basic digital pacakge and I get FSW. If ESPN went to the sports package, it would totally suck. I don't see it happening. I think the two of them are in a pissing match, and in the end, it will remain on the basic package for both regular and digital. It's just the MAN trying to stick it to the consumer!! ;)

[nancyb]

Well, it could end up on the Sports Tier, with a rate increase.

[onefineesq]

Originally posted by Dave Brother
I have the basic digital pacakge and I get FSW. If ESPN went to the sports package, it would totally suck. I don't see it happening. I think the two of them are in a pissing match, and in the end, it will remain on the basic package for both regular and digital. It's just the MAN trying to stick it to the consumer!! ;)

Is that the truth? wow, how long has it been on the basic digital package? it was not too long ago that I had the regular basic package, and when i did, I certainly wasn't getting FSW.

[Wolves_67]

"Cox maintains that ESPN and FSN account for only 8 percent of its viewership audience while accounting for 32 percent of its programming costs. This is a result of ESPN charging Cox (and other cable distributors) $2.61 per month per subscriber, while most other channels charge the distributor no more than $1."

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/eat/2003/oct/15/515741254.html

[JRstriker12]

From ESPN's Site:

You probably pay Cox Cable around $40.00 for basic cable of 60 or so channels. After local advertising revenue, Cox's Cable programming costs are about $6 - 7.00 each month. ESPN's net cost is about $1.50 - 2.00 -- 1 or 2 cups of coffee a month.

http://msn.espn.go.com/gen/blamingespniswrong.html

[ravensjk]

Another bad thing about this "trend" is that there would be less people seeing soccer here who are not the "big fans". In other words, less exposure for the sport to win those fans who learn to like the game bit by bit from exposure when they watch from curiosity. I hope my point is understood.
I was actually thinking of it from the opposite angle. I currently have to pay extra to get FSW. If ESPN became part of that same package then it actually could bring new viewers to FSW, and soccer. I feel pretty confident saying that the majority of ESPN viewers would not pay extra just to have FSW. If it became available to them while they have to pay for their sports addiction to ESPN though, they may give it a shot.

[Wolves_67]

Originally posted by ravensjk
I was actually thinking of it from the opposite angle. I currently have to pay extra to get FSW. If ESPN became part of that same package then it actually could bring new viewers to FSW, and soccer. I feel pretty confident saying that the majority of ESPN viewers would not pay extra just to have FSW. If it became available to them while they have to pay for their sports addiction to ESPN though, they may give it a shot.
You have a point... But then what kinda numbers would we be talking that would actually get the tier as opposed to those who get it now but then again they would be a more sports oriented crowd so you point might be very good.
I can't get FSW on my cable anyway except the espanol version and everyone gets it on basic in my section of town so that thought never occured.

[nancyb]

Originally posted by Dave Brother
I have the basic digital pacakge and I get FSW. If ESPN went to the sports package, it would totally suck. I don't see it happening. I think the two of them are in a pissing match, and in the end, it will remain on the basic package for both regular and digital. It's just the MAN trying to stick it to the consumer!! ;)

I'm paying extra for the Sports Tier to get FSW. Also, that forces me to get digital and, since I don't want to shell out for digital for all TVs, I can only watch FSW on one TV.

[Sanguine]

Originally posted by JRstriker12
I was also thinking that putting ESPN on a seperate tier would give MLS on ESPN less exposure, but I also think that ESPN is such a huge draw for most folks that most people would shell out the extra cash for the channel. We would definitely lose some eyeballs but I just wonder how many.

If they put it on the same tier as FSW, it might actually be a net gain for soccer and MLS, as I'm not sure that very many people are getting the sports tier as it is now. I get it for FSW only. I occasionally (rarely) watch ESPN Classic.

[Daniel le Rouge]

This is a negotiating ploy.

Under current must-carry/retransmission consent laws and their current agreement, Cox MUST carry espn on its standard package. The reason is because Disney owns ABC (as well as espn), and ABC is subject to must-carry statutes. So they negotiated a settlement that puts espn on the standard tier.

We're coming up on another must-carry election cycle with all of its attendant negotiations. That means that there's going to be a lot of posturing ahead of time. It's a pretty safe bet that espn will stay on the standard package. But it's also a pretty safe bet that there will not be an increase in espn's per subscriber fees--and potentially a reduction.

What does this mean to the cable consumer? Not a damn thing. Your rates will never go down. This is simply a struggle over who gets your dollar.