-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
ESPN driving up the cost of cable, now averaging $4.69 per household per month
- Thread starter Ripclawe
- Start date
- Status
Unfortunately millions disagree. Even in this thread there are people saying they'd pay double just for espn and nothing else!
There really isn't anything that can be done either. As long as espn continues getting the big sports events, there is no competition to be had. If you want to watch certain games then you need espn or go somewhere else that has espn. They know this, so they can easily screw the cable companies and your wallets. No sign of this ever changing either, unless we get some mainstream competition in airing sports events
Pretty much this.
Only thing that you miss out on in this situation is HBO. To watch HBO (legally) you HAVE to have a cable subscription. Or wait 10-12 months after the season airs and watch the shows via iTunes or DVD/Blu-Ray. Screw that.
The day HBO GO becomes available to everyone will be a great day indeed.
Angry Fork
Member
AndresON777
shooting blanks
pretty much this. just give me the espin channels, fox sports channels, goltv and hbo and can all the other shit.
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
To be fair to ESPN, they are covering and creating many things with the money. Their sports coverage is excellent and the radio is top notch. I also like their entrance into the BIG10 and SEC networks. Smart and ahead of the game on those ventures.
Yep. I stopped watching ESPN about two years ago, cut the cord last fall and haven't looked back. There is nothing on the network that I absolutely have to watch. And their talking heads could not possibly be any worst. I can stream Monday night football online.
Its ok bro, you'll be able to switch off at the end of April because after that the NBA wont be relevant to Lakers fans either.
Syracuse022
Member
The takeaway from this, to me, is that cable pricing is busted. Until cable launches an a la carte service and lets me grab the channels I need (HBO, AMC, Showtime, ESPN, FX, locals, and literally nothing else), I don't need to go anywhere near their service. Let me pay the premium for ESPN's live sports contracts since I actually want to watch ESPN. Let Grandma pay for whatever the hell channel her soaps are on. Everybody's happy and nobody has to flip through 150 channels worth of pure crap that holds no appeal.
that doesnt work for me when i try it at home.
luckily im at school 8 months out of the year so it isnt an issue.
Not legally, ESPN3 Isn't even allowed to stream it
So what do you do if you're a sports fan, though? I hear people all the time saying, "I cut the cord." "I stopped paying for cable and never looked back."
Were you a fan of sports to begin with? If you were, what do you do now if you like the NBA or your hometown sports team is locked onto Comcast?
Did you just quit being a fan?
Were you a fan of sports to begin with? If you were, what do you do now if you like the NBA or your hometown sports team is locked onto Comcast?
Did you just quit being a fan?
Fox Mulder
Member
Espn is full of shitty, grating personalities and I found myself watching it less and less over the years. I don't have cable/dish anymore, so watching sports in hd on broadcast tv is fine with me. I still get a bunch of live games, and can read about the rest online.
Sports bars, friend's house, radio or following the play-by-play on Gamecast or something similar.
There is also online streaming, both legal and illegal.
The vast majority of College sports are on ESPN as well.
Depends on your sport preference, really, and whether or not you care about out of market teams. I can watch nearly every NFL game on OTA channels, and my local teams are on NESN and Comcast Sports Net, which despite its name is available from any cable provider. ESPN doesn't play hockey, and I'm ambivalent towards NCAA/NBA/MLB stuff so the network doesn't really do much for me.
They play soccer games sometimes, but with the MLS rights mostly falling to NBC Sports, and the only premier league games being on at 8:00AM I could take it or leave it.
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
I really wish you could buy channels individually and save money. But I figure cable would make it so that bundles would be cheaper and force you into them that way.
SatelliteOfLove
Member
They have no rivals other than for live game coverage, and ABC Sports no longer does that.
Yeah, most of his examples were wrong for lateness. They need to be called out on their yellow journalism, too.
Yeah, most of his examples were wrong for lateness. They need to be called out on their yellow journalism, too.
jamesinclair
Banned
Yup. So good.
Because so few companies are involved.
As the article says, if you opt out of ESPN, youll be forced to opt out of the 10 sister networks, including things like ABC family and Disney channel. They want to punish you for not giving them the maximum amount.
Right now, the only way to get cable without ESPN is to buy the spanish package, which includes the much cheaper espn deportes.
If NBC sports gets powerful, it will be the same thing. Dont want the sports channel? Say bye bye to 20 other networks.
And its getting worse.
Remember how comcast said buying NBC would NEVER hurt the consumer, and the FCC was all like "well, if the mega corporation promises it, is must be true! "
Two weeks ago, Comcast took the longstanding Universal Sports network off free over the air TV. Now if you want it, you have to pay them. And by pay them, I mean they will force every cable subscriber to add another 50 cents to their bill for a channel that used to be free. Those without cable must subscribe if they want to keep watching the channel.
My local channel 32-1 which used to air that network now is a picture of a lighthouse.
bigtroyjon
Member
Pac 12 coaching staffs are thanking you cable subscribers for the extra money!
Unknown Soldier
Member
I only watch ESPN's networks for live sports broadcasts. ESPN's quality of sports journalism has fallen to the point where SportsCenter is a waste of time unless you really love highlights for sports you don't even watch or care about. I for one am grateful to the millions of cable customers who don't watch sports because they help subsidize my cable subscription which includes ESPN's networks. Please continue to pay for my ESPN. Thank you.
Ninja Scooter
Member
Because the entire cable industry as we know it is build on the idea of bundling channels. Lesser shit like G4, Spike, HGTV, TruTV, ect...wouldn't exist unless it was just forced into a package with more popular stuff. If people were allowed to just pick and choose channels ala cart, there'd only be like 25 to choose from.
jamesinclair
Banned
Where do you live? Youre being raked over the coals.
By basic cable you mean 13 channels in SD right? Thats the biggest ripoff of all time.
With an antenna, you get those same 13 channels in HD plus a good 10-20 other local channels (most you wont ever watch, but still).
Then theyll try and say "well, the internet price is x with cable, but without cable, its x+20"
Thats how they play the game. Thats fine. Call them and say youre switching to DSL and want to cancel. Theyll ask how much your DSL rate will be (make something up). Theyll say "well match it".
We went from paying $60 a month for basic cable + internet
Cancelled basic cable (as I said, its highway robbery) and went to $50
Next month, called to cancel internet, and they doubled our speed and charges us $36
Then I bought my own modem, cancelled their rental (when we started it was $3 a month, now its $7)
Final cost: $29 a month.
doktorpeace
Banned
Unless I end up living a block away from an awesome bar, sports is the only thing I need cable for anyway. I've got MLB.tv for my Orioles, but I still need to access my Georgetown basketball.
I love good scripted television, but I'm content to wait for Netflix or DVD nowadays.
I love good scripted television, but I'm content to wait for Netflix or DVD nowadays.
One coaching staff is. I dunno about all of them.
speculawyer
Member
I have pretty much no interest in professional sports and I cut the cable about 5 years ago. Never regretted it.
8BitsAtATime
Member
I havent had cable in 3 years, I dont miss it one bit.
bigtroyjon
Member
WSU, Zona, UCLA, ASU
Leach alone is getting paid more than WSU's entire staff last year.
From what I've read, I guess in Cal's case the school itself should be thanking cable subscribers since there money is going towards eliminating the AD's subsidies.
brianjones
Member
cable is such a ripoff
i watch like 5 different channels and pay for hundreds
i watch like 5 different channels and pay for hundreds
Unknown Soldier
Member
Their intros for the BCS bowl games this year were some high-budget badassery so this doesn't surprise me much.
I got really tired of Nelly by the end of bowl season.
bigtroyjon
Member
lols.
I'll grant you Wazzu and Zona.
I was under the impression that UCLA is spending more money on coaches with the new staff but since I only go to bruin websites to troll I'm not that well informed.
Fair enough >_<
Even though the game was awful I though the National Championship intro was great. Well there were two of them... The first one was great.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqBQqUqFaLY
Second intro:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDX9cmVBQSQ
Not surprised that ESPN and local sports broadcast stations rake in the majority of our (my) cable subscription fees.
They are literally the only reason I still have cable. Hell, I only turn on my television for live NBA games. NFL as well, but considering your team will be on your local CBS/FOX/NBC station, except on that one Monday night, you don't really need cable to consume football. Basketball has me by the nuts.
Ironically, it'd be cheaper for me to move out of my home state and then get NBA league pass streaming for $130 per season, and use an HD antenna/Roku for any other television needs. Although, I've read that there are workarounds to NBA league pass blacking out your hometown team, ie. masking your IP.
They are literally the only reason I still have cable. Hell, I only turn on my television for live NBA games. NFL as well, but considering your team will be on your local CBS/FOX/NBC station, except on that one Monday night, you don't really need cable to consume football. Basketball has me by the nuts.
Ironically, it'd be cheaper for me to move out of my home state and then get NBA league pass streaming for $130 per season, and use an HD antenna/Roku for any other television needs. Although, I've read that there are workarounds to NBA league pass blacking out your hometown team, ie. masking your IP.
DonasaurusRex
Online Ho Champ
you mean they wont be able to transmit 1's and 0's thru a single connection, then charge me 3 times for it on the bill and call it a triple play????
i like diz newz
They are, I'm just mocking their choices.
My father-in-law just arrived for a visit, and brought some rabbit ears that he bought from a friend of his back home. We hooked it up to my television and watched Hockey Night in Canada, high-definition on CBC with an outstanding picture. I've got NetFlix for movies, the pub for non-hockey sports (like those matter LOL) and friends' homes for the HBO/Showtime/FX stuff when it comes right down to it. My wife and I can control the kids' viewing habits with the DVDs we want them to watch, and not worry about it.
Getting rid of satellite TV three years ago was the best decision ever.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Streaming through a public VPN should let you avoid regional blackout restrictions.
I lost interest in Formula 1 after the scandals of the past few years as well as the rule changes. NFL I can watch via Sunday Ticket on my PS3. ESPN 3 on XBox Live has a decent number of college games.
freenudemacusers
Member
I canceled cable about six months ago and the very first question I was asked on the phone regarding this decision was "do you have Hulu or Netflix?"? So yeah data is being gathered.
People say they want a la carte but don't understand that if espn is charging 4.69 to the provider they will sell to you for > 7, etc etc. so in the end you're going to be paying ~70-80 for 10 channels anyway and at that point why not just get the bundle for $99??
A la carte pricing would never be affordable or more convenient unless it came straight from the networks. The providers are the middle man. And they are actually giving you a good price per channel if u break it down.
A la carte pricing would never be affordable or more convenient unless it came straight from the networks. The providers are the middle man. And they are actually giving you a good price per channel if u break it down.
So basically, everyone that dropped cable doesn't watch sports or goes to do so in a bar. When you have kids and can't go out like that anymore, drop by this thread and let me know how you feel about it then.
Those just aren't realistic responses if you enjoy sports. You need ESPN if you like the NBA, the NFL, NCAA or even the Premier League. You need cable if your local teams are locked into Comcast. There should be a way to pay for those without taking on a pile of channels you don't want.
Those just aren't realistic responses if you enjoy sports. You need ESPN if you like the NBA, the NFL, NCAA or even the Premier League. You need cable if your local teams are locked into Comcast. There should be a way to pay for those without taking on a pile of channels you don't want.
acheron_xl
Member
I enjoy some sports and dumped my cable years ago. Also, I don't go to bars.
Now I just read boxscores, recaps and game threads instead of watching games.
Harry Dresden
Member
I don't watch sports.
I canceled my cable at the beginning of October. And I built a media-pc for my living room.
Between Hulu, NetFlix and the Network Web sites I am still highly entertained.
Cable can suck it.
It's 2012. There is no reason every channel shouldn't offer high-speed HD streaming from their web-site or a 3rd party provider. In my perfect world every TV channel has an HD stream.
I canceled my cable at the beginning of October. And I built a media-pc for my living room.
Between Hulu, NetFlix and the Network Web sites I am still highly entertained.
Cable can suck it.
It's 2012. There is no reason every channel shouldn't offer high-speed HD streaming from their web-site or a 3rd party provider. In my perfect world every TV channel has an HD stream.
GodfatherX
Member
Your provider doesn't get that option, since espn's parent company forces them to carry and in most cases charge you for espn's and probably 30-40% of the channels in the lineup most don't care about. People are always quick to blame the cable companies when the real fault lies with the 5 content providers that control over 90% of the total content out there. They control the market, and are the reason your bill increases every year
- Status