Smoke your cigars and enjoy the band while you can....

[ew2x4]

I guess I don't watch much tv compared to you guys? I still have every channel known to man, but I'd consider streaming.

[pissclams]

I love cable. having 40 different places to go to watch crap seems like a massive PITA and not worth it. I just tell cox to throw in everything and let god sort them out.

The operating systems inside of the boxes that will play your apps (i.e. Apple TV, Chromecast, Roku, etc.) will probably be able to eventually sort a lot of that out for you.

Roku already has something kind of like it in their system today.  You search what you want to watch, and it will find the app that has it and if you need to pay for it or if the service streams it for free.

For example, if you wanted to watch a movie, you search for it on Roku, then it will tell you if Netflix has it for free or if Vudu will charge you $1.99 to watch it.

google fiber boxes do that now

[pissclams]

i would bet  that 99% of "streamers"/cord cutters are also android people

[star seed 7]

Gfib is pfg (pretty rough ridin' good)

[MakeItRain]

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-loses-another-555-000-subscribers-per-nielsen-112916

I'll just leave this here.

I literally stopped reading after the lede because that 600,000 number was debunked. I also am confused why he feels this is an ESPN issue, as if he doesn't work for a competitor with an inferior product. It's like someone working for Godfather's Pizza mocking Pizza Hut because people are eating less pizza.

[Yard Dog]

DirecTV Now is AT&T's new streaming service and carries ESPN. . .not sure if this is a sign of what's to come from other providers.

[MakeItRain]

That launched today

[MakeItRain]

Cable is worth it just for the convenience and consistent quality of picture.

Blame me for cable companies being able to price gouge. I don't care, I'll pay.

There's a lot more of us than them. My Directv bill is north of $150. I'd give up internet before I'd give up my Directv. I find it odd that people wig out about the number of channels, I watch stuff in each channel category including the Spanish language tier.

[KITNfury]

I barely watch TV anymore.  Too busy crushing brews,  slayin' hoes,  and running marathons. 

[Panjandrum]

Cable is worth it just for the convenience and consistent quality of picture.

Blame me for cable companies being able to price gouge. I don't care, I'll pay.

There's a lot more of us than them. My Directv bill is north of $150. I'd give up internet before I'd give up my Directv. I find it odd that people wig out about the number of channels, I watch stuff in each channel category including the Spanish language tier.

My cable sub is good for four things:

My free HBO for three years gets me access to HBO Go for free, so I watch that all of the time.  Saves me a couple hundred a year from subscribing to HBO Now.

My sub gets me access to content on all of the network apps on my Apple TV.  The kids feast on PBS Kids, Disney Junior/Channel/XD. 

My cable sub gets me access for WatchESPN and FS Go, which is where I watch 90% of my sports (iPad or phone).

My wife watches shows on HGTV and other channels that she records.

Essentially, my AT&T bill is one umbrella payment that prevents me from spending money on subscriptions outside of Netflix.  Otherwise, I watch a handful of hours each week of live TV (usually news), and everything else is either on DVR or played through an app on Apple TV that uses my sub for access.

[Shooter Jones]

I barely watch TV anymore.  Too busy crushing brews,  slayin' hoes,  and running marathons. 

I'm the same, except for the 3rd part. That time is spent brunching, which also falls into the first two categories.

[POWL]

I barely watch TV anymore.  Too busy crushing brews,  slayin' hoes,  and running marathons. 

 

[WillieWatanabe]

Flipping around to multiple games on a Saturday afternoon is one of my life's great pleasures and cable/sat is the best way to do it.  I guess you could come somewhat close to replicating that with 3 or 4 streaming devices but it would still be janky.

pretty easy on sling. unless you are an idiot

no it sucks ass.

[ew2x4]

You guys need to get outside more often. Sheesh.

[ew2x4]

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-loses-another-555-000-subscribers-per-nielsen-112916

I'll just leave this here.

I literally stopped reading after the lede because that 600,000 number was debunked. I also am confused why he feels this is an ESPN issue, as if he doesn't work for a competitor with an inferior product. It's like someone working for Godfather's Pizza mocking Pizza Hut because people are eating less pizza.

You're right, sort of. Found this write up. http://fortune.com/2016/10/31/espn-subscribers/ Whether or not it's the right number is one thing, but they still have to be bleeding. My guess is he is bringing it up as a market wide issue, and people better get their crap together? No idea.

[nicname]

People who cord cut as a way to save money on the consumption of several media sources are huge dorks. It's basically the digital equivalent of extreme couponing.

[MakeItRain]

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-loses-another-555-000-subscribers-per-nielsen-112916

I'll just leave this here.

I literally stopped reading after the lede because that 600,000 number was debunked. I also am confused why he feels this is an ESPN issue, as if he doesn't work for a competitor with an inferior product. It's like someone working for Godfather's Pizza mocking Pizza Hut because people are eating less pizza.

You're right, sort of. Found this write up. http://fortune.com/2016/10/31/espn-subscribers/ Whether or not it's the right number is one thing, but they still have to be bleeding. My guess is he is bringing it up as a market wide issue, and people better get their crap together? No idea.

He's absolutely made this an ESPN thing, all of the times he does this he never mentions FS1 or the industry. I don't know what they can do to "get their crap together." They are still offering a product their base wants. Framing this as "ESPN losing subscribers" is total bullshit anyway. It isn't like we have went to a la carte and people are dropping ESPN for other sports programming. This is people dropping cable, the entire industry is changing just like it did in the 80s and then again in the 90s, the entire conversation as it is currently framed is somewhat disingenuous.

[DQ12]

Bouncing around roku's watchespn and fsgo apps on Saturdays is really easy.   

[Dugout DickStone]

had a Roku for 7-8 years at least

[DQ12]

a little hot tip for you cool guys:  have watchespn or fsgo on the boobtube and put the other on your computer for maximum consumption and efficiency.

[kim carnes]

Who uses roku.  Wtf

[Panjandrum]

a little hot tip for you cool guys:  have watchespn or fsgo on the boobtube and put the other on your computer for maximum consumption and efficiency.

A very common thing for me is to have a Fox game on TV, a game on FS Go on my iPad, and then the four box screen on my laptop for WatchESPN.

It's pretty awesome, especially in the non-con.

[Skipper44]

Who uses roku.  Wtf

roku is the best at adding new apps and has the most

[Skipper44]

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-loses-another-555-000-subscribers-per-nielsen-112916

I'll just leave this here.

I literally stopped reading after the lede because that 600,000 number was debunked. I also am confused why he feels this is an ESPN issue, as if he doesn't work for a competitor with an inferior product. It's like someone working for Godfather's Pizza mocking Pizza Hut because people are eating less pizza.

You're right, sort of. Found this write up. http://fortune.com/2016/10/31/espn-subscribers/ Whether or not it's the right number is one thing, but they still have to be bleeding. My guess is he is bringing it up as a market wide issue, and people better get their crap together? No idea.

He's absolutely made this an ESPN thing, all of the times he does this he never mentions FS1 or the industry. I don't know what they can do to "get their crap together." They are still offering a product their base wants. Framing this as "ESPN losing subscribers" is total bullshit anyway. It isn't like we have went to a la carte and people are dropping ESPN for other sports programming. This is people dropping cable, the entire industry is changing just like it did in the 80s and then again in the 90s, the entire conversation as it is currently framed is somewhat disingenuous.

I agree Clay is an agenda driven [redacted] but he is right that ESPN is by far the most invested in the bundle system with all the long term rights deals. 

I remember 5 or 6 years ago when NBC and Fox started their cable channels and CBS seemed to be ramping theirs up that we would going to get some remarkable bidding wars but it never happened.  Did the execs at other places see the cord cutting/bundle falling apart coming or did they just get lucky? 

[MakeItRain]

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-loses-another-555-000-subscribers-per-nielsen-112916

I'll just leave this here.

I literally stopped reading after the lede because that 600,000 number was debunked. I also am confused why he feels this is an ESPN issue, as if he doesn't work for a competitor with an inferior product. It's like someone working for Godfather's Pizza mocking Pizza Hut because people are eating less pizza.

You're right, sort of. Found this write up. http://fortune.com/2016/10/31/espn-subscribers/ Whether or not it's the right number is one thing, but they still have to be bleeding. My guess is he is bringing it up as a market wide issue, and people better get their crap together? No idea.

He's absolutely made this an ESPN thing, all of the times he does this he never mentions FS1 or the industry. I don't know what they can do to "get their crap together." They are still offering a product their base wants. Framing this as "ESPN losing subscribers" is total bullshit anyway. It isn't like we have went to a la carte and people are dropping ESPN for other sports programming. This is people dropping cable, the entire industry is changing just like it did in the 80s and then again in the 90s, the entire conversation as it is currently framed is somewhat disingenuous.

I agree Clay is an agenda driven [redacted] but he is right that ESPN is by far the most invested in the bundle system with all the long term rights deals. 

I remember 5 or 6 years ago when NBC and Fox started their cable channels and CBS seemed to be ramping theirs up that we would going to get some remarkable bidding wars but it never happened.  Did the execs at other places see the cord cutting/bundle falling apart coming or did they just get lucky?

They're the most invested in the bundle system because they pretty much created it. Cable and satellite packaging is what it is today because of ESPN, HBO, MTV, and Ted Turner. If the bundling got blown up tomorrow ESPN would still far and away be the leaders in the industry because they have the best media contracts and streaming technology. For all of the money news corp has they've done little to nothing to disrupt ESPN's market share.