WSJ: ESPN direct streaming to cord-cutters

[catdude]

Hi Bogleheads -

The Wall Street Journal has an article on their website regarding ESPN laying the groundwork to directly stream to cord-cutters:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/espn-lays- ... _lead_pos2

This can't happen soon enough as far as I'm concerned. I'm a sports nut, and if TBS/TNT also go standalone, I could get by without a cable or streaming package (such as YouTube TV). Maybe save a few $$$. It would likely kill off a lot of TV channels that nobody watches, but everyone has to pay for as part of a package. Maybe TV will become less of a "vast wasteland."

Thoughts?

[dukeblue219]

It's not going to be cheap.

[runner3081]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

[normaldude]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

I eliminated all TV sports, TV shows, and movies from my life.

This means no more physical TV, no more cable TV service, no more streaming media services.

I talked about this on another thread: viewtopic.php?p=7255443#p7255443

[brawlrats]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

I cut cable and saved $80 per month. I pay $10 per month for Disney+ (i have kids), Hulu and ESPN+ (I am an NHL fan of an out of town team, so I can now watch almost every regular season game) via my Verizon bill. We get a PBS passport membership via our annual donation to the local classical music station. So yes, cutting cable was a significant monthly savings.

[Random Musings]

Cable is still around? I dumped that back in '96 and never looked back.

Frank Zappa's song "I'm The Slime" rings truer each and every day.

RM

[TomatoTomahto]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

Sure it’s progress. I get to watch great shows from around the globe, without commercials, when I want to (I know about DVRS, but no thanks). I didn’t do this to save money.

[LadyGeek]

I removed an off-topic interchange regarding Disney (political aspects).

Please stay on-topic.

[stoptothink]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

Not for the majority of TV watchers. I like it because we have a lot more options at a reasonable price, but we play all the games with family accounts with extended family members (I believe all our family accounts are "legal") and never would have had cable to begin with. If all the family plans were to be outlawed tomorrow, we'd probably only keep Hulu, which is added on our Spotify student account which is like $6/month.

I think it's progress, but not really from a cost standpoint.

[Xrayman69]

Hi Bogleheads -

The Wall Street Journal has an article on their website regarding ESPN laying the groundwork to directly stream to cord-cutters:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/espn-lays- ... _lead_pos2

This can't happen soon enough as far as I'm concerned. I'm a sports nut, and if TBS/TNT also go standalone, I could get by without a cable or streaming package (such as YouTube TV). Maybe save a few $$$. It would likely kill off a lot of TV channels that nobody watches, but everyone has to pay for as part of a package. Maybe TV will become less of a "vast wasteland."

Thoughts?

Fox sports? CBS and nbc also have sports.

[averagedude]

In reality, most young people are getting away from satellite or a cable company. They are subscribing to streaming services, which IMO is what most people are going to be purchasing in the future. This doesn't mean that we will all be saving money, but the media companies know that content is king, and this is what is desired by the public. Ever wonder why all the shows that everyone is talking about is on a paid streaming service that isn't readily available on a satellite or cable package that you purchased years ago.

[runner3081]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

I eliminated all TV sports, TV shows, and movies from my life.

This means no more physical TV, no more cable TV service, no more streaming media services.

I talked about this on another thread: viewtopic.php?p=7255443#p7255443

We only use free streaming services, but that is mostly for our daughter. I can't stand TV these days.

[Bama12]

Hi Bogleheads -

The Wall Street Journal has an article on their website regarding ESPN laying the groundwork to directly stream to cord-cutters:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/espn-lays- ... _lead_pos2

This can't happen soon enough as far as I'm concerned. I'm a sports nut, and if TBS/TNT also go standalone, I could get by without a cable or streaming package (such as YouTube TV). Maybe save a few $$$. It would likely kill off a lot of TV channels that nobody watches, but everyone has to pay for as part of a package. Maybe TV will become less of a "vast wasteland."

Thoughts?

I'm a sport nut! I still pay for cable but might change to YouTube tv soon. I would love for someone to put together just a sport streaming package.

[catdude]

Hi Bogleheads -

The Wall Street Journal has an article on their website regarding ESPN laying the groundwork to directly stream to cord-cutters:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/espn-lays- ... _lead_pos2

This can't happen soon enough as far as I'm concerned. I'm a sports nut, and if TBS/TNT also go standalone, I could get by without a cable or streaming package (such as YouTube TV). Maybe save a few $$$. It would likely kill off a lot of TV channels that nobody watches, but everyone has to pay for as part of a package. Maybe TV will become less of a "vast wasteland."

Thoughts?

Fox sports? CBS and nbc also have sports.

Good point. I'm not sure Fox sports has that much that I want to watch. Maybe the baseball playoffs... For those I could probably listen to the radio broadcasts. Regarding CBS and NBC, I could take a stab at putting an over-the-air antenna in the attic.

[quantAndHold]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

We cut the cable back in 2011, when our cable bill went over $100. I don’t think we’ve spent more than $30 or $40 any month since then. Most months have been less. Most people with cable pay $150+ now.

[Broken Man 1999]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

The cable boxes and DVR added a lot to the bill. Lots of boxes = lots of $$$$$. With streaming, a one-time purchase of a Firestick or other device for each TV sets you up for real ongoing savings.

Broken Man 1999

[mrmass]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

I'll add that creating content is extremely costly. So, prices will either go up more for streaming, or there will be less content created.

[McDougal]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

I'll add that creating content is extremely costly. So, prices will either go up more for streaming, or there will be less content created.

Less content? I may be in the minority, but for me there is too much content available.

[pizzy]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

I'll add that creating content is extremely costly. So, prices will either go up more for streaming, or there will be less content created.

People want no ads and low prices...

Oh, and quality content.

[Tycoon]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

I eliminated all TV sports, TV shows, and movies from my life.

This means no more physical TV, no more cable TV service, no more streaming media services.

I talked about this on another thread: viewtopic.php?p=7255443#p7255443

We did the same. NO TV for years. [OT comment removed by admin LadyGeek] Life is much more enjoyable when I filter out abject stupidity. I haven't watched a sporting event in many years; went cold turkey. I'll never pay to watch anyone hit, kick, or catch a ball again. I've discovered that time is too valuable to waste on non-value added tripe.

Give it a try, it's liberating.

[FrugalConservative]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

Agreed

[mrmass]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

I'll add that creating content is extremely costly. So, prices will either go up more for streaming, or there will be less content created.

Less content? I may be in the minority, but for me there is too much content available.

What I mean is that the streaming services Hulu, Netflix, Amazon, Disney will make less shows/movies. I guess in turn means the same movies/shows recycled. Basically reruns.

[ScubaHogg]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

They might be paying more, but the convenience and quantity (not to mention quality) of programming blows what cable was offering pre streaming out of the water

[Jags4186]

Maybe I misunderstood what the service is, but isn’t ESPN+ the streaming version of ESPN? Or is that only ESPN+ exclusive content?

[OnceARunner]

Maybe I misunderstood what the service is, but isn’t ESPN+ the streaming version of ESPN? Or is that only ESPN+ exclusive content?

It does not include live programming on the main cable espn channels (ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, etc)

[rich126]

I'm not sure where people get the idea that streaming costs more than cable tv unless they are fortunate to have a very cheap cable package. Most people I know pay $80-150 per month for their cable tv. I stopped getting cable/satellite back in 2019 and don't miss it since I'm not into sports that much anymore. I love that most shows I now watch have no commercials.

I think the small/lesser watched cable channels will be in trouble or will only exist in some ad-supported free streaming package so most people tend to watch only 10-20 channels out of the hundreds or more that are available.

The part that a lot of people don't like is that the sports channels tend to drive up the cable/satellite package prices and they rarely will let you opt out of them. I read that just ESPN charges cable companies $10 per month. That is a lot of subsidizing for people who don't watch sports.

Streaming, for now, is nice in that you aren't tied into longer contracts and can cancel or add at any time. I don't do much of that switching but some do. I kind of like not having to deal with dvrs and instead just pick a movie or a series to watch and can watch it whenever I want.

Will be interesting if ESPN provides same content to streaming viewers. I personally don't care but I'd be surprise if the content is the same and if it happens anytime soon unless the number of cable subscribers reach a level where they have no choice. I think I read the number of cable subscribers had dropped quite a bit.

https://techjury.net/blog/cable-tv-subs ... tatistics/

As of 2023, the number of cable TV subscribers has decreased to 72.2 million from 98.7 million in 2016.
Cable TV subscriber stats in 2022 indicate there will be a 28% fall in the number of paid TV subscriptions between 2013 and 2023.

And sure streaming prices haven't gone down but for now at least you have more choices than cable provides. Probably won't be true in a decade.

[tj]

Maybe I misunderstood what the service is, but isn’t ESPN+ the streaming version of ESPN? Or is that only ESPN+ exclusive content?

It does not include live programming on the main cable espn channels (ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, etc)

Some content gets simulcast on ESPN+. Just depends on the contract between ESPN and the league/conference.

[watchnerd]

I have a Disney subscription and got offered some ESPN and Hulu bundle with it.

[Maverick3320]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

I fall into this category, but that's only because before I paid $0 for cable and now I pay $15 for Netflix...

[thedaybeforetoday]

Hi Bogleheads -

The Wall Street Journal has an article on their website regarding ESPN laying the groundwork to directly stream to cord-cutters:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/espn-lays- ... _lead_pos2

This can't happen soon enough as far as I'm concerned. I'm a sports nut, and if TBS/TNT also go standalone, I could get by without a cable or streaming package (such as YouTube TV). Maybe save a few $$$. It would likely kill off a lot of TV channels that nobody watches, but everyone has to pay for as part of a package. Maybe TV will become less of a "vast wasteland."

Thoughts?

Sports fan here...

We have Disney+ package which includes ESPN+, many other ESPNs , Hulu, Hulu live and Disney for net of $68/month after monthly refund.
It's been our choice after exploring FUBO, Youtube tv, Paramount + and a few others for live sports.

Here's a list of the sports channels with Hulu live which are in addition to ESPN + content : https://www.hulu.com/live-sports

One could also purchase ESPN+ only directly from ESPN for $10/month or $100 for the year (https://www.businessinsider.com/guides/ ... -espn-plus).

[Maverick3320]

Has anyone really thought that this "cut the cable" movement has really saved money? Everyone I know is now paying more for multiple services than they were with cable before.

Granted, they are not Bogleheads, but still, I don't think this is progress.

I'll add that creating content is extremely costly. So, prices will either go up more for streaming, or there will be less content created.

We're talking ESPN, which means sports. The cost of producing sports is going to stay the same regardless of whether it's a cable package or streamed.