ESPN loses the NHL....Go OLN!

[WrongWay]

I just don't understand. I know ESPN has been losing market share to all the local sports channels popping up on everyone's TV, but damn they have just lost a huge sport. I guess this will give them some air time for another Playmakers type series or ESPN Hollywood 2.

ESPN last night dropped out of bidding for NHL games for this season, refusing to match an offer made by Comcast's Outdoor Life Network. OLN now seems likely to televise hockey games nationally when the season starts in October.

I don't get it?

[spleen1015]

You need to change your subject.

I am quite glad that the NHL isn't going to be on ESPN anymore. Thank the maker!

I don't even know if I have OLN.

[WrongWay]

Done and done.

[Critch]

There's been rumors that Comcast were trying to turn OLN into a sports network to attempt to challenge ESPN, there's been rumors that OLN will try to get NFL coverage starting in the 2006 season. That would be a good bargaining chip for Comcast if they try to lower ESPN's $2.60 per subscriber fee.

$100mil over 2 years for NHL coverage doesn't seem very much to pay, though.

(edit, OLN are paying $100mil over 2 years for the coverage, not $100 as I first put )

[JonInMiddleGA]

Mark it down -- Comcast will lose money on the deal when all is said & done.

(that's not meant as a knock on the NHL, it's really a shot at Comcast)

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Mark it down -- Comcast will lose money on the deal when all is said & done.

(that's not meant as a knock on the NHL, it's really a shot at Comcast)

and that would make it different from all the other broadcasting deals how? they ALL lose money.

[Critch]

OLN is apparently available in 61mil households compared to 80mil for ESPN, so it's pretty widespread and it's expanding.

I know direcTV has it as part of it's sports package, every year I start to watch the Tour de France on OLN for the first 3 or 4 stages before I lose interest and skip the rest of it.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

and that would make it different from all the other broadcasting deals how? they ALL lose money.

Let's just say that if anybody can manage to screw this up, I believe it'll be Crapcast.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by Critch

OLN is apparently available in 61mil households compared to 80mil for ESPN, so it's pretty widespread and it's expanding.

I know direcTV has it as part of it's sports package, every year I start to watch the Tour de France on OLN for the first 3 or 4 stages before I lose interest and skip the rest of it.

OLN is part of of all their packages, not just the sports one.

[CraigSca]

Originally Posted by Critch

$100 over 2 years for NHL coverage doesn't seem very much to pay, though.

Dang, I would have given them $110 for the rights. How come no one called me?

[JeffR]

Originally Posted by Critch

$100 over 2 years for NHL coverage doesn't seem very much to pay, though.

It isn't. The old ESPN/ABC deal was $600 million over 5 years. But there apparently still may be a secondary contract with another network, probably Spike or TNT, to be worked out.

[Critch]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

OLN is part of of all their packages, not just the sports one.

I didn't know that, I just assumed it was part of the sports package because it was stuck in the 600-range with the rest of them.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Let's just say that if anybody can manage to screw this up, I believe it'll be Crapcast.

oh I agree, and, don't forget, the NHL is involved as well, increasing the "we're going to fuck this up" quotient exponentially. Not that Comcast needs help - the speed with which they utterly destroyed TechTV is quite impressive.

[JonInMiddleGA]

NEW YORK (AP) - NHL games will air on Outdoor Life Network for at least the next two seasons.

The league finalized a two-year deal with Comcast Corp. - the owner of OLN - late Wednesday night after ESPN declined to match the agreement that will pay the NHL $65 million this season and $70 million in 2006-07.
...
The new deal can be extended up to six years. For the 2007-08 season, Comcast would pay the NHL $72.5 million but that number could go higher based on contingencies.

Okay, so it's $135m for 2 years then. Anybody know what the average spotload in a hockey game is? (I've never had to buy spots in hockey & have never really stopped to figure it out while watching).

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by JeffR

It isn't. The old ESPN/ABC deal was $600 million over 5 years. But there apparently still may be a secondary contract with another network, probably Spike or TNT, to be worked out.

they already have a deal in place with NBC

[Kodos]

Bah. It's hockey. Put it on HSN for all I care!


ESPN is crap though.

[JeffR]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

they already have a deal in place with NBC

No, on top of that. The NBC one was announced a while back, and it's just for a few Saturday games late in the year, plus everything after game 2 of the finals. What I'd heard implied there'd be a second network handling a weekly (or thereabouts) broadcast.

[ISiddiqui]

Didn't ESPN have an option for broadcasting the NHL, but decided to cut it loose? I don't think they want the NHL because it doesn't get them enough in ratings.

[henry296]

This decision was as much ESPN's as the NHLs. In April the NHL declined their option for this season but had a right to match any other offer. Then OLN/Comcast submitted an offer and ESPN declined to match it. Now the NHL didn't have to accept the OLN offer and could have negotiated a lower rate with ESPN.

[Anthony]

seriously, you mean to tell me ESPN has better things to air than a hockey game? i mean, there's only so much poker you can watch. to be honest, poker is just a passing fad. i can't see ESPN putting their chips (pun intended) in the poker basket and shunning a top 5 sport.

i can't see why Fox Sports didn't take advtange of this.

[kcchief19]

ESPN didn't match because last year they scored higher ratings with more college basketball, "original" programming and other odd-ball sports. I think bassmasters outdrew the NHL on ESPN.

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Mark it down -- Comcast will lose money on the deal when all is said & done.

(that's not meant as a knock on the NHL, it's really a shot at Comcast)

I'll take the over on this. If you're looking at the straight bottom line of revenue generated only through advertising on hockey games versus cost of coverage, it might be a loss leader. But it will likely help OLN boost households and promote other programming. People tune in for hockey and find out Survivor and reruns of Little House and the Prairie or something or other are on OLN and suddenly they have more viewers and and more revenue through higher ad rates for non-NHL programming.

The average hockey game on ESPN drew low ratings for ESPN, but those low ratings would still be better for OLN than program they have ever aired aside from some Tour de France coverage.

That said, I think this is a bad deal for the NHL. This is the SCA deal all over again, just not as bad. For you young pups, the NHL set itself back 25 years back in the late 1980s when they struck a deal to put all their games on a cable network available on 12 television sets in parts of Maine and nowhere else in the country.

The NHL is not the fourth major sport anymore. I'm not sure it's even sixth. Auto racing and golf have surpassed it for sure. It might be battling with tennis right now. They need national prominence and lots of it. I think this deal is good for OLN only if they get a ton of games on -- at least three nights of hockey a week, at least one doubleheader and playoff games every night possible.

[Mr. Wednesday]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Anybody know what the average spotload in a hockey game is? (I've never had to buy spots in hockey & have never really stopped to figure it out while watching).

If the question is how many ads they have, they do a TV timeout on roughly the same schedule as college basketball (16/12/8/4). I'm not sure of the length... might be one minute or two. Lots of commercials during the intermissions. No TV breaks in OT, which isn't a big deal during the regular season but can be during the playoffs.

[WrongWay]

Originally Posted by Hell Atlantic

i can't see why Fox Sports didn't take advtange of this.

The OLN deal was only for a National Broadcast contract. The local broadcasts deals with area stations (Ex. your local FSN) are still in place.

[WrongWay]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

I'll take the over on this. If you're looking at the straight bottom line of revenue generated only through advertising on hockey games versus cost of coverage, it might be a loss leader. But it will likely help OLN boost households and promote other programming.

Bingo. Anyone here remember FOX before the NFL?

I look for OLN to really take a crack at filling the ESPN Sports Programming Void. Let ESPN continue to fill their lineup with talk show after talk show and give OLN all the actual Sports Programs.

[Anthony]

Sports Illustrated could always start their own network and give EPSN a run for their money. CNN/SI didn't work, cuz back then ESPN was still an all sports news network, but it could be argued that the climate is right for competition.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

The NHL is not the fourth major sport anymore. I'm not sure it's even sixth. Auto racing and golf have surpassed it for sure. It might be battling with tennis right now. They need national prominence and lots of it.

I was just going to post this - almost verbatim - especially regarding the fact that NASCAR and golf have surpassed the NHL. This hurts the NHL. OLN is not a channel that most people click to like ESPN is. When I'm flipping channels, I always check and see what's on ESPN. Not so with OLN. The NHL is going to lose a lot of that type of traffic because of this move.

[Daimyo]

XFL had better ratings than the NHL... its not like we're talking about a huge loss here.

[Superman=#54]

Looks like a lot of Chicago will not be watching hockey on television this season. Local games are blacked out, because of the ownership. I would guess most people do not have OLN. It is nice the Blackhawks made some big signings, but not many people will be watching.

[Superman=#54]

BTW

I hate Comcast. Once during a Cubs game on the Comcast channel, the station went blank for the entire 9th inning. Comcast seems to always have problems with their live game broadcasts.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wednesday

If the question is how many ads they have, they do a TV timeout on roughly the same schedule as college basketball (16/12/8/4). I'm not sure of the length... might be one minute or two. Lots of commercials during the intermissions. No TV breaks in OT, which isn't a big deal during the regular season but can be during the playoffs.

Thanks Mr.W, I really never gave that question much thought until now.
So let's see here ...

Figure an average of 70 games per year (based on "58 to 78" wording).
There's roughly 4 break per period X 3 periods = 12 breaks
Minus at least 1 break per hour that belongs to the local system, not the network = 9 breaks
Plus 2 breaks in the pre-game + 2 in the post-games (might be too high for post, but close enough for this exercise) = 13 breaks X 2 mins each (I'm guessing here) = 26 mins X :30 spots = 52 spots per game.

52 spots X 70 games = 3640 spots/season
$65m rights this year / 3640 spots = $17,857 per spot to break even

(at this point, I'm chuckling to myself because I know where this is going to end up now)

This is from October 2003
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...15802#continue

Last year, with a combined 71 games on the two networks, ratings continued to plunge, pulling a .23 on ESPN2 (down from .25) and a .46 on ESPN (down from .49).

So let's split the difference & say there'll be an average 0.35 rating on OLN (which I believe is high, but I can afford to be generous)

That's an audience roughly equal to what the 5am Mon-Sun Sportscenter draws ... but to break even, OLN needs a unit rate roughly 4x what those viewers cost with that pre-dawn SC gets.

And, just for translation purposes -- that 0.35 is roughly equal to 380,000 households, (guessing a little here) 218,000 M25-54, and maybe 310,000 A18+.

Don't get me wrong, there'll be some advertisers willing to pay 4x the going rate for the same basic viewer ... but even with the low opinion I have of the average media buyer's respect for cost efficiency, I'm having a tough time seeing how they can sell out the hockey ad inventory for enough to break even.

If I'm a Comcast stockholder, I'm at least moderately pissed off right now.

[JeffR]

Originally Posted by KWhit

I was just going to post this - almost verbatim - especially regarding the fact that NASCAR and golf have surpassed the NHL. This hurts the NHL. OLN is not a channel that most people click to like ESPN is. When I'm flipping channels, I always check and see what's on ESPN. Not so with OLN. The NHL is going to lose a lot of that type of traffic because of this move.

Yup. Somebody on another board just posted a list of OLN local channel numbers around New York:

New York City: 122
Rochester: 69
Syracuse: 55
Buffalo: 140

Not exactly prime channel-surfing territory.

[ISiddiqui]

Why? It's a great deal in an attempt to have the OLN channel take off. FOX definetly lost money when it originally bought the NFL (probably still losing money), but the benefits that arose from the purchase made it worthwile. IMO, without getting NFL Football, there is no FOXNews, as FOX wouldn't be 'big' enough to make it work.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by JeffR

Yup. Somebody on another board just posted a list of OLN local channel numbers around New York:

New York City: 122
Rochester: 69
Syracuse: 55
Buffalo: 140

Not exactly prime channel-surfing territory.

it's better than 608!

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Why? It's a great deal in an attempt to have the OLN channel take off. FOX definetly lost money when it originally bought the NFL (probably still losing money), but the benefits that arose from the purchase made it worthwile. IMO, without getting NFL Football, there is no FOXNews, as FOX wouldn't be 'big' enough to make it work.

Did you really just compare the NHL to the NFL?

I mean, I've personally got about as much interest in a random hockey game on tape-delay as I do in a random NFL game, but even I recognize the difference in the overall appeal and impact of the two.

[sovereignstar]

What the flying fuck is OLN? Is ESPN just gonna roll with their faggoty strongest men competitions? Well woohoo

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by sovereignstar

What the flying fuck is OLN? Is ESPN just gonna roll with their faggoty strongest men competitions? Well woohoo

I wouldn't be too upset with ESPN, given the figures that are being quoted & the historical ratings of the NHL, turning down this "opportunity" was the only choice they could make. I see no way they could even hope to break even on this "deal".

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Did you really just compare the NHL to the NFL?

I mean, I've personally got about as much interest in a random hockey game on tape-delay as I do in a random NFL game, but even I recognize the difference in the overall appeal and impact of the two.

Yes, I did. It's a similar concept. Also Fox is a network, while OLN is trying to break through in cable. The impact will be similar on the intent of the channel (ie, Fox was trying to become part of the Big 3, making it the Big 4; OLN is trying to become as big as Comedy Central and Fox Sports Channel).

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Yes, I did. It's a similar concept. Also Fox is a network, while OLN is trying to break through in cable. The impact will be similar on the intent of the channel (ie, Fox was trying to become part of the Big 3, making it the Big 4; OLN is trying to become as big as Comedy Central and Fox Sports Channel).

Perhaps ... but therein lies the rub ... getting to the level of CC or FSC doesn't justify the expense that they're looking at; the gain in revenue isn't enough to balance the cost.

[ISiddiqui]

In the short run, maybe not, but in the long run, it may make perfect sense. If OLN becomes a competitor to ESPN, the acquisition of the NHL could be the thing that started the ball rolling. I'm sure Comcast is looking at this from a long run perspective. It wants OLN to become a player. I'm sure that shortly in the future, they'll create their own "SportsCenter" like show and try to transform the network.

[rkmsuf]

Outdoor Life Network? Hockey is played indoors fools.

[Pumpy Tudors]

If people want to watch the NHL and have access to it, they'll find it. I just want to watch hockey, and although I'll get Penguins games on Fox Sports Pittsburgh, I would want the national games, too. I don't care if I have to set the TV to ESPN or OLN. Hell, they could put the games on Oxygen and I'd watch.

I figure that I'm probably in the minority about the NHL as it was, but I didn't mind the style of play that the NHL became known for. I had no problems with the neutral zone trap or the 2-1 scores. I also won't mind the game with the new rules that are in for this season. For many hockey fans, though, if these rule changes really do what they're supposed to do, won't the fans start watching more games? I'm not going to pretend that OLN is going to draw a million viewers for each broadcast, but the interactions I've had with other hockey fans suggest that the ratings were down because the game had become "unwatchable." So what if it becomes "watchable" again?

[bronconick]

If there ever was a time for competition to ESPN to rise, now is it.

I mean, if this isn't karma, I don't know what is.

The Monday premiere of ESPN2's much-hyped ESPN Hollywood, a sort of Access Hollywood for sports, drew 0.08% of cable TV households. That translates to 75,000 households, which happens to be the standard industry projection for the number of homes where viewing levels are determined by pets accidentally hitting TV remotes

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/colum...stand-tv_x.htm

[Anthony]

if hockey increases it's scoring so that 5-4 games are considered an average nite as opposed to an offensive explosion, i'll watch even more. i always said if hockey truly wanted to be a major sport it'd have to do away with goalies. that'd be fun. defense is for winning, offense is for entertainment. pro sports are in the entertainment business.

but regardless, if the new changes results in higher scoring games i'll watch with more regularity, for sure.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

Outdoor Life Network? Hockey is played indoors fools.

OLN is now...just OLN. Not the Outdoor Life Network anymore (a la ESPN)

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally Posted by Hell Atlantic

...if the new changes results in higher scoring games i'll watch with more regularity, for sure.

Counting myself, that's now 2 down, 999,998 to go.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

If people want to watch the NHL and have access to it, they'll find it.

True. The problem is that due to the lockout, there are fewer people who want to watch it. And due to the move from ESPN, there are now fewer people who have access to it.

That's a big double-whammy to the NHL.

And to my earlier point, you will now have less people stumble across it and decide to watch now than you did before, due to the fact that for most sports fans, OLN isn't on their radar like ESPN is.

[rkmsuf]

I seriously doubt many people are going to take the time to find this channel for hockey. Who wants to sit and watch a national hockey broadcast anyway. If it's not your local team it's just not appealing no matter what channel it's on.

Football has that great avantage. It's probably the leader of people tuning in for other than a home team game. Hockey has no star power so they can't even get the people the turn on the NBA for Shaq or Lebron. It's just a bunch of doods out there.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

I seriously doubt many people are going to take the time to find this channel for hockey. Who wants to sit and watch a national hockey broadcast anyway. If it's not your local team it's just not appealing no matter what channel it's on.

Football has that great avantage. It's probably the leader of people tuning in for other than a home team game. Hockey has no star power so they can't even get the people the turn on the NBA for Shaq or Lebron. It's just a bunch of doods out there.

I'm not much for sarcasm, but...

Yeah, there's no way any hockey fan outside of Pittsburgh is going to want to see Sidney Crosby.

[rkmsuf]

Perhaps the 12 fans left with get a charge out of it.

Never even seen the guy. He could be sitting right next to me and I wouldn't even know it.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

If it's not your local team it's just not appealing no matter what channel it's on.

Speak for yourself. It was great watching Detroit play Colorado with the hate between both teams, even though I'm not a fan or either.