MSG Plus (the Fox regional network that used to be Fox Sports New York) gets Champions League (which Fox lost the rights to) and Bundesliga replays from Fox. Will the regional channels still have access to replays from FS1 and FS2?
And Fox Soccer Plus channel must also be one of those staying w/ Fox. Seems odd that Fox would give up those Regional Sports Channels. And I wonder what Disney wants them for... to somehow expand their ESPN product(s) or to refashion them into something else, less sporting?
Good point. And I doubt the programming would continue the way it has been, e.g. the UCL replays, highlights shows, etc.
Since the regional channels will no longer be owned by Fox, they will not be able to show Champions League replays, highlights, etc. The timing of the merger actually minimizes losses for Champions League fans in that the knockout stages, which begin in February, were never slated to show on the Regional channels (not live anyway); and two, next season Turner takes over the Champions League rights so again the merger has no affect on those specific channels that were not going to show CL anyway. SA www.soccertvblog.com
We might see the return of Sky Sports programming to the US as Disney gets at least a stake in BSkyB, or maybe all of it depending on UK regulators
Fox Sports Networks has regional rights to Sporting Kansas City, Atlanta United and New York City. As for Latin America, ESPN+Fox Sports would be a monopoly except for Televisa, Globo and DirecTV.
Whoa, Turner gets UCL rights next year? So what channels are gonna show matches then??? He says with trepidation.
Happy to tell you but please remember - I'm only the messenger - don't kill me! At first glance, it's ugly: Starting with the playoff round, 2 matches on Tuesday and 2 matches on Wednesday on TruTV (helps that UEFA are changing the kickoff times to a staggered 1pm ET and 3pm ET). That's it. All other matches on a streaming service Turner will launch in August 2018 and yes, it will be a paid service (like NBC Gold). Once the knockout stage begins, it will only be 1 game on Tuesday and 1 on Wednesday on TruTV. The Semifinals and Final will be on their other channels - TBS and/or TNT. I said at first glance it was ugly. The second glance is...ugly! +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Now if you think that is bad, they also take over the Europa League. For that competition, NO GAMES will be televised (all behind the newly created streaming service). Only the Final will be broadcast on TBS or TNT. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ If you want to find a silver lining amongst these dark dark clouds, it could be that the streaming service is affordable and the video quality is tremendous. Something even beyond ESPN. Just trying to be optimistic. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Final point - Univision take over the Spanish-language rights. Rather than going the Turner route, I would think they will try to show as many matches as possible away from a pay wall. Just to be different from Turner and get more eyeballs. SA www.soccertvblog.com
Regarding all that streaming stuff, part of me says that millennials and cord-cutters did this to theirselves. EPL is behind a paywall. UEFA CL and Europa League will soon be behind a different paywall. Yes, a traditional package is expensive (especially when it seems like there is a lot of "unnecessary stuff" on there), but let's see what happens if more stuff goes a la carte. If one month of a traditional TV package is $70, compared to one month of NBC Sports Gold, one month of ESPN streaming and one month of the Turner streaming, it makes me wonder what the better value is... especially since you don't need a faster internet package to stream all that video. Personally, give me a traditional TV package. It may be expensive, but I get more variety, including things I may stumble upon and certainly wouldn't deliberately pay for.
So-called "Traditional TV" is dying. The future is streaming but we currently find ourselves in an era where all the kinks are being worked out. It's free content vs streaming providers making a profit. It will take just a few more years and what will happen is that one streaming provider is going to provide that "perfect package" that will grab a big amount of subscribers and the others will copy that. In the end we will end up with 3-4 major providers offering bundles not unlike what we have now (DirecTV, Dish, Comcast, Verizon, etc.). With satellites we bitched about the rain; with cable we bitched about bad customer service. With streaming we will bitch about pixelation & stuttering. The more things change, the more they stay the same. My only fear is the failure to put together that 'perfect package'. We have that now as its impossible to get "everything" with a single provider. We could end up with individual networks offering their services themselves exclusively. That would be bad. Example, ESPN's new streaming service coming next year not available via other providers but stand-alone. If every network does that, it would be expensive for the customer. One thing that cannot be predicted is the direction of technology. The recent past gives us a lot of hope as we have seen advances in speed, cloud technology, video and audio quality. Finally, the whole discussion of Net Neutrality could have a role in how all of this plays out. On the negative side, content providers (networks) may link up with streaming providers (Comcast/AT&T) that would favor speeds to some services while hurting others. On the other hand, you don't want the gov't hands on the internet as it will slow down technological advances which at this point is the most important part (companies not going to invest in R&D and new equipment if profits are capped). Only 1 thing is sure, if you hold on to wanting "traditional TV", whether its via satellite or cable, you will end up being disappointed. Its going the way of the dodo bird or pubic hair in porn. It just won't be there. Streaming is the future and the future is now. SA www.soccertvblog.com
NYCFC is on YES, which Fox bought after years after YES started, but I don't know if it would be sold along with the rest of the regional channels. The Yankees may still have a say in some things. Fox Sports Go includes YES but not the rest of the regional channels.
YES Network is part of the deal and will be in the hands of ESPN. The only sports networks not included in the deal are: FS1, FS2, FSPlus, Fox Deportes & Big Ten Network. From SportingNews: Disney’s ESPN appears to be the early winner by far. Under the proposed deal, ESPN would get its mitts on Fox’s 22 regional sports networks (RSNs) across the country. The group includes the crown jewel YES Network, jointly owned by Fox and the Yankees, which broadcasts Yankees and Nets games. Led by John Litner, YES has ranked as the most-watched RSN in the U.S. for 12 of the past 13 years. ... Look for YES Network in New York to become “ESPN New York,” Prime Ticket in Southern California to become “ESPN Los Angeles,” Fox Sports Carolinas to become “ESPN Carolinas” and so on down the line. SA www.soccertvblog.com
Well Disney may win on the balance sheet but us footy fans seem to be losing. Less channels/times to catch Fox's soccer content. And the UCL moving to Turner, that's looking to be ugly indeed.
Losing compared to the last couple seasons? OK, maybe a little. But remember it was less than 20 years ago that you had to pay $14.99 for the pleasure of watching Premier League matches live in the US. Now that amount of money buys you months of PL content. I don't love the Turner situation either but they bid more for an attractive sports package so here we are. Again, not that long ago it was one or two live Champs League matches a week via ESPN2 and that was it. We have access to more content than ever now. If I have to pay a couple hundred bucks a year to see every match in the world that I care about, I'm really not going complain too much.
Sorry Kev, you're just not gonna convince me with that argument. I don't tend to look at upcoming changes in services or prices, and compare them to what things were like 20 years ago, or even 5 years ago. And I suspect there are quite a few others out there who think similarly. It's not that I've forgotten what things used to be like in the old days. I frequently notice the English league table and scores in my local Sunday paper, and remember back to the 80's when that was literally the ONLY information I had, once a week, to "follow" my team. Those were truly the dark ages, where I really lost contact with my club. And as questionable as Rupert Murdoch is as a human being, I will always be grateful to him for revolutionizing English football coverage in the 90's via Cable TV. Things have generally gotten steadily better year in, year out, since then. Except now, with the impending trend towards fragmented streaming behind disparate paywalls. I think we're in for a few years of some backwards steps. And I would count 2017 as Year 1, with the big shift towards NBCGold. And 2018 will be interesting with Disney/Fox deal, and then the Turner/UCL rights, and who knows what else beyond that. I've seen this in quite a few industries or products which get reinvented. The new "designers" seem to lose track of what worked well in the past, as they reinvent the wheel. But with time, and some public outcry perhaps, they often get those products right, while offering greater modern features that were not possible with the previous technology. I'm slightly optimistic that the new world of streaming TV will follow that pattern. But like I say, I think we're in for a few bumpy, annoying years, while that's being worked out.
Keep in mind what's behind paywalls -- the bottom half/two-thirds of matches that aren't being broadcast. A few Arsenal matches per season and a ton of Brighton games. There is still a huge amount of soccer available via broadcast and cable TV. Why is Turner bad in and of itself? They will show some matches on cable, they will stream others. Similar to what happens now. I think you're right in being peeved about NBC's bait and switch with unlimited PL access in the first three years. But they admitted that model was a loss leader and they wanted to recoup some cash. They upset some super fans but now they're making a little money back while their OTA ratings are still good. There were some hard feelings in August but there's no mass fan movement against their programming in '17-'18. It's a loss in net neutrality you should be worried about, not networks keeping soccer programming from you.
That's what we've got today. And maybe tomorrow. But I'm assuming that that trend will creep. More and more content shifting from cable channels we've already paid for, to streaming platforms they'll require extra payments for. Not to mention the hassle & mess of managing multiple separate accounts for each company's platform. Comparing Turner to Fox, I'm assuming they're just won't be as many channels with UCL content as I get now: Fox, Fs1, Fs2, Fsp, Msg, Msg+, Yes. I'm bummed out about the loss of net neutrality too. But I hadn't yet factored that into my short-term pessimism for streamed footy. Now that you mention it, it's one more aspect of the argument… that conventional TV distribution has nothing much like that. All the channels are pretty much equal quality, except for a very minor amount of SD channels. I.e. Only 1 out of 7 of the above Fox channels is in SD for me. Without net neutrality, the potential for lesser-quality streamed "channels", as determined by the ISP and its partners, is greater it seems.
The Y in YES is for Yankees, and I think changing the channel name would antagonize fans, just like it would antagonize fans to change Yankee Stadium to ESPN Stadium. Furthermore, if ESPN gets YES and MSG Plus they can't have the same name, so ESPN could change MSG Plus to ESPN New York while keeping the name YES.
FOX opening their third round FA cup talking endlessly about the romance of the FA cup, but then they don’t show the Newport v Leeds Utd match. Too busy previewing the Arsenal match and other ones featured EPL sides, while FS+ is showing some old CL match. Want a bunch of fakers!
In there defense, I can imagine some legit excuses: * They may not have had a quality feed? (I doubt they get all 3R matches beamed to them in HD over satellite... 32 of them?) * Maybe some matches are poorly covered even by the UK TV companies? * It's hard to predict which matches will catch fire?
The best excuse is that an Arsenal pre-game and CL rebroadcast probably get better ratings than a Newport Leeds game.
That’s no excuse. What if an NFL replay gets better ratings than a low-profile WC match? Skip the world cup then? The CL replay can be shown anytime. Its not that hard. There’s a reason the match got its own time slot.
Apples and oranges. I have no problem with the decisions they made. And I am sure they won't hear that many complaints from the few fans of those teams clamoring to see their teams.