Jump to content

How much would you be willing to pay for MASN al la carte


atomic

Recommended Posts

Lets face it these deals of sports networks going to leech off other cable subscribers is going to end soon enough. People are cord cutting because they don't want to pay outrageous cable bills to watch maybe Home and Garden Channel.

I think ESPN has lost 20 percent of their subscribers. At some point they won't be profitable anymore. As things go al la carte I expect sports teams to make a lot less money off of TV. Right now ESPN gets 7 dollars off every cable subscriber. They will never be able to make that up if they went al la carte.

I would probably be willing to spend 10 bucks a month for MASN. But how many more people would be willing to do that? I am guessing at 10 dollars a month for only people that sign up for it they would be getting a lot less money. But the problem is the more they charge the less people would sign up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I've thought about this as I switched to Sling after the regular season. I pay $25/month for that. I'd pay $25/month if I had the option to only subscribe for April through October. I'd do $15/month if I had to have it year round, but I'd expect more ST games.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have comcast streaming for $40 a month, it requires you have one digital box in your house but the streaming internet gets all the channels in HD or near HD. Can be choppy occasionally but im sure over time that will get better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MLB.tv is $80 a year for your favorite team with blackout restrictions. I guess i would pay that much for MASN getting the extra coverage.

80 a year seems a fair price for MASN. I think Sports teams are going to get a rude awakening. I just read that in 2014 the Wizards games had average viewership of 25000 per game and were getting paid 30 million dollars a year. Ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing the a la carte model falls apart soon and they start offer "streaming packages" so we end up paying roughly the same for roughly the same.

I'm in a situation that a lot of rural and not a small number of suburban people find themselves in: with more limited internet options than someone closer to a big population center. My home internet connection is capped at about 30Gb a month, which is significantly up from even a year ago but still low enough to make streaming impossible. I don't see any light at the end of the tunnel for getting an unlimited connection to my house so I'll be on Directv for the foreseeable future. I think there will be a small but not insignificant cable/satellite non-streaming TV market for at least a decade-plus. Cable companies are just not going to run hard wires or fiber to places they think aren't profitable and the government won't make them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

80 a year seems a fair price for MASN. I think Sports teams are going to get a rude awakening. I just read that in 2014 the Wizards games had average viewership of 25000 per game and were getting paid 30 million dollars a year. Ridiculous.

That's $1000 per person per year (obviously with some broad assumptions like its the same 25k people each game). If each person was paying $5/month for CSN or whomever carries the Wizards that means advertising would have to make up the $28.5M a year not covered by subscriptions. Plus a share of the expenses of running the network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...