Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
bird watcher

MASN Solvency?

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, esmd said:

Or they could always just get their stuff together and offer a streaming service.

I think most O’s fans would like that option. There is a reason though that they haven’t yet gone that route; it’s not as profitable as the current situation.  It also would make situations like this even more economically devastating because they would lose all of their subscriber money. At least with cable they diversify by getting money from subscribers that stay on despite no sports. 
 

This could go the other way too, where many people cancel Cable because there is no baseball and cable gets to see how many people really were only having cable for the baseball.  But will the casual fan realize they can live without it and not miss it. To be honest, it’s not really at the forefront of my mind these days. I’ve kind of just moved on to other things to occupy my time. Easier to do too when the O’s are going to be terrible too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Eric-OH said:

I’ve also had similar thoughts and I believe that we’ll see advertisers of companies who simply can’t afford to promote themselves slow to a halt and also affect the circle of revenue tied into broadcast rights.  Tony Romo getting 17 mil to talk football may be a thing of the past and broadcasters getting 7 figure salaries to sit in a studio or a desk will get canned.  ESPN specifically was benefiting less and less like you outlined and live sports was the only connector between frustrated sports package paying customers and the college hoops, NBA, NFL games they crave watching live.

My main wonder is ‘will this be the event that convinces billionaire owners to shop their assets in an attempt to move them instead of just gauging their value?  Will it make the younger Angelos’ hold tighter or think sell?  These long term liabilities that you see as a larger risk may just stop being worth it.  I’m afraid of this process occurring and before I was confident it wouldn’t.  Very good talking point 

There will be many new norms learned from this by businesses.  I was reading about how workflows have streamlined in some industries because they’ve been forced to move everything between depts electronically. The article was specifically about tv show production (writers, producers, editors, graphics, animators, etc). It noted how much cheaper and time efficient things are now without the need for physical space. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/28/2020 at 7:53 AM, bird watcher said:

There will be many new norms learned from this by businesses.  I was reading about how workflows have streamlined in some industries because they’ve been forced to move everything between depts electronically. The article was specifically about tv show production (writers, producers, editors, graphics, animators, etc). It noted how much cheaper and time efficient things are now without the need for physical space. 

I like the Dan LeBatard show and they’ve barely missed a beat being quarantined at their own houses.  Is that the new way?  
Fancy, expensive studios are always a waste of resources to me, regardless of who fits the bill, network or sponsors.  
I forgot where I read it, but ESPN/Disney has already had to convince itself that there’s no content coming around the corner and they’ve strategized by emptying out their 1980’s/1990’s half assed sports movies file.  The next step down will be downsizing and or job loss.  It’s around the corner. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Eric-OH said:

I like the Dan LeBatard show and they’ve barely missed a beat being quarantined at their own houses.  Is that the new way?  
Fancy, expensive studios are always a waste of resources to me, regardless of who fits the bill, network or sponsors.  
I forgot where I read it, but ESPN/Disney has already had to convince itself that there’s no content coming around the corner and they’ve strategized by emptying out their 1980’s/1990’s half assed sports movies file.  The next step down will be downsizing and or job loss.  It’s around the corner. 

 

Fancy, expensive studios allow for many highly sophisticated technical things to happen in real time - especially important for live programming.  They also allow people to work together face-to-face which is something qualitatively very different and more exciting than any electronic quasi-conversation.  Perhaps more importantly, I don't think Disney, ESPN, Fox Sports and others of that caliber want their look (brand) to be confused with 20-something YouTubers "broadcasting" from mom's basement, so looked at that way, the fancy, expensive studio is worth many multiples of the purchase price.

No doubt current norms will evolve over time.  They always do and the current pandemic will add enough spin so that nobody can predict where the new normal will end up.  But I think it's safe to say that in entertainment, those with the resources to rise above the pack will alway spend them to do just that.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/27/2020 at 12:21 PM, Redskins Rick said:

Personally, I would rather watch with my own eyes the sporting event, and require less talk from the dudes in the booth that are rambling about everything but what we just seen.

 

I spent a decade listening to Chuck Thompson and three listening to Vin Scully.  No regrets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, weams said:

 

They could still be viable, they would just have to lock the players out until a massive restructuring of athlete salaries took place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

They could still be viable, they would just have to lock the players out until a massive restructuring of athlete salaries took place.

Exactly.  Baseball was the most popular team sport in America for a century before MLB signed their first TV deal.  But it was different.  In another thread I estimated that the 1936 St. Louis Browns probably had total revenues for the year of a few hundred thousand dollars, and a payroll under $150k.  Even after factoring in inflation that's a total payroll of about what the O's paid for Jose Iglesias, and total revenues of what they might bring in for attendance revenue in a week in 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But when you talk about the desperation of sports leagues, don't forget the symbiotic relationship between satellite/cable and major sports leagues.  If not for live sports there would be seven people, all 88 years old, who wouldn't have cut their cord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

But when you talk about the desperation of sports leagues, don't forget the symbiotic relationship between satellite/cable and major sports leagues.  If not for live sports there would be seven people, all 88 years old, who wouldn't have cut their cord.

I can get out of my cable subscription in May and thanks to the virus I’m 99% certain I’m ditching Fios. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Exactly.  Baseball was the most popular team sport in America for a century before MLB signed their first TV deal.  But it was different.  In another thread I estimated that the 1936 St. Louis Browns probably had total revenues for the year of a few hundred thousand dollars, and a payroll under $150k.  Even after factoring in inflation that's a total payroll of about what the O's paid for Jose Iglesias, and total revenues of what they might bring in for attendance revenue in a week in 2020.

You bring up a really good point. Even during the "golden years" of baseball - it was no where near as financially strong as it is right now.

There's a lot of thinkpiece articles about how sports are doomed because of cord-cutting, but I really disagree with it. People haven't lost interest in watching sports, the leagues just need to change their business model to reflect the changes in the market. No business can expect to have the same business model forever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr. Chewbacca Jr. said:

You bring up a really good point. Even during the "golden years" of baseball - it was no where near as financially strong as it is right now.

There's a lot of thinkpiece articles about how sports are doomed because of cord-cutting, but I really disagree with it. People haven't lost interest in watching sports, the leagues just need to change their business model to reflect the changes in the market. No business can expect to have the same business model forever.

There's an assumption across a lot of businesses that if you're not growing a lot, you're failing.  I don't think it's catastrophic if baseball and other sports sometimes have a period where they have to retrench and rethink how their models work.  They shouldn't expect weird market quirks like countless people who don't like sports paying $6 a month for ESPN to continue or even grow forever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DrungoHazewood said:

There's an assumption across a lot of businesses that if you're not growing a lot, you're failing.  I don't think it's catastrophic if baseball and other sports sometimes have a period where they have to retrench and rethink how their models work.  They shouldn't expect weird market quirks like countless people who don't like sports paying $6 a month for ESPN to continue or even grow forever.

But  that is not the way business work since they shifted from producing a popular product at a lower price than what it is sold for and finding a profit margin that can support R and D for future products. 

Somewhere it became known that public businesses had to have gains each quarter to keep the stockholders content.  

Staying the same at any point is failure in that later model. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, weams said:

But  that is not the way business work since they shifted from producing a popular product at a lower price than what it is sold for and finding a profit margin that can support R and D for future products. 

Somewhere it became known that public businesses had to have gains each quarter to keep the stockholders content.  

Staying the same at any point is failure in that later model. 

Just wait for 50 or 100 years from now when the world's population grown rate is negative.  If your business model is grow every year or quit you may be in for a bit of a shock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

There's an assumption across a lot of businesses that if you're not growing a lot, you're failing.  I don't think it's catastrophic if baseball and other sports sometimes have a period where they have to retrench and rethink how their models work.  They shouldn't expect weird market quirks like countless people who don't like sports paying $6 a month for ESPN to continue or even grow forever.

Yeah - ESPN has way more to worry about the changing landscape of cable subscriptions than MLB. MLB could easily pivot to streaming if needed, they've been leaders in that.

MLB's biggest problem is figuring out a way to keep kids engaged in the sport, so they have an audience in the future. That's far more difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • No, but the salary cap makes things very wonky in the NBA and NHL. While the NFLs system really screws over the players. The only way I see the MLBPA giving into a salary cap is if they cut the years of control right in half.  Which would basically change strategy away from developing home grown talent. 
    • I'm over the moon if Tork is available at 2. I get the defensive and athletic upside is limited, but that is such a special bat. .285 and 30 HR annually? Absolutely. Realistically, I wouldn't be upset with either Martin or Lacy at 2. Martin might not project the upside as a traditional 1-2, but there is something to be said for his tools across the board. Pitchers this high make me nervous as well, but a Rodriguez-Lacy-Hall top of the rotation sounds formidable, health permitting. 
    • So, former GM Jim Bowden is now writing for the Atlantic.  According to his research, there were 42 players taken among the 80 players selected in the first five picks of the 16 MLB drafts between 2000 and 2015 and only five of the 42 have justified the selection - Verlander, Price, Strausburg, Cole and Bauer.  Two of those pitchers, Verlander and Strausburg, were "no-brainer" decisions.  It is a hit rate far below WC's opening post.
    • Just keep chucking talent into the firebox and hope that coaching, video, personality tests, wearable tech, organizational philosophy, and the mysteries of the universe  squirt out some rare nuggets at a reasonable pace.
    • Thanks for posting this. I read this Monday and meant to comment to you. Drastically different from BA’s write up that I referenced. Not my critique, theirs. I’ve never seen the kid. I am two years removed from most of the HS kids. I know many of the college Sophomores and Juniors fairly well. I have some info on the Central Florida kids, but that’s about all I got as a personal knowledge base.    I like what MLB wrote about Halpin. If that is what Elias sees, then perhaps he’s higher on the board. I believe Elias May take 1-2 HS kids, at most. Just based on limited data and all. Quite polar reports, but that’s how it goes. One scout sees him on a bad few days. Another sees him on a good few games. What I take from that is inconsistency would make it tougher to draft him unless you are all in on him as an area scout and cross checker.
    • I wish my adhd 9 year old daughter would stop talking jumping and singing Taylor swift and go the ?!?!!??? To sleep or at least go to her room. I might ready the Samuel l Jackson book go the f to sleep! 
    • Well when people say his comp is Mookie freaking Betts, I think people are getting carried away with upside projections. I hope I look back at this post in 6 years and Martin has an MVP and multiple top 5 finishes. 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...