Apple reportedly has plans to buy ESPN

[greenbean.sixpack]

Apple reportedly has plans to buy ESPN and get rights to NBA, NFL, MLB, and more

Given the massive effect Lionel Messi had on Apple's broadcasting service, CEO Tim Cook is finally getting to realize how much revenue live sports bring to the company. The folks a

www.marca.com

Don't know if there's any validity to this or not, but interesting and long speculated. Even with ESPN's issues and piss poor management, I think it will remain a valuable property for many years to come.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

Seems like frying pan to fire.
Apple, controlling the SEC.

(of course, Tim Cook is not anti SEC)

 

[HailStout]

If it makes it where I can pay for ESPN without paying a million dollars for YouTube TV I am all for it

 

[Barkman Turner Overdrive]

Seems like frying pan to fire.
Apple, controlling the SEC.

(of course, Tim Cook is not anti SEC)

Just because Rim Cook is an All-In Aubbie, it doesn‘t necessarily mean he is not anti SEC. Case in point all of the posters on this board who actively root aGAINst all other SEC teams.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

Just because Rim Cook is an All-In Aubbie, it doesn‘t necessarily mean he is not anti SEC. Case in point all of the posters on this board who actively root aGAINst all other SEC teams.

Ha ha, I was just trying something nice.

 

[57stratdawg]

That’s fine - I’m an Apple guy. I was hopeful Apple would end up with Sunday Ticket.

For the record, this transaction seems to be mainly speculation from the link OP provided.

 

[Trojanbulldog19]

Yeah if ESPN goes to apple and becomes streaming I would likely cancel live tv

 

[dawgman42]

 

[11thEagleFan]

I don’t get excited about any of this. The days of cheap streaming are over, and I think we’re all about to find out that we won’t be any better off than we were before the cord-cutting phenomenon.

 

[dorndawg]

I don’t get excited about any of this. The days of cheap streaming are over, and I think we’re all about to find out that we won’t be any better off than we were before the cord-cutting phenomenon.

It damned sure isn't any more efficient.

 

[STATEBALLIN]

This is very plausible. Bob Iger and Steve Jobs had a great relationship with each other. If Jobs had not passed away, it’s very likely apple and Disney would already have some type of partnership.

 

[8dog]

I hate to see this. Long term Id rather see ESPN as they are now bc they will need as many subs to the eventual stand alone as possible. I think that protects the Ms States, Kansas States, Minnesotas of the world in CFB. Not sure it makes a huge difference to Apple though.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

I don’t get excited about any of this. The days of cheap streaming are over, and I think we’re all about to find out that we won’t be any better off than we were before the cord-cutting phenomenon.

concur, I've thought from the beginning that streaming would soon be comparable to cable in cost.

 

[The Peeper]

The days of cheap streaming are over, and I think we’re all about to find out that we won’t be any better off than we were before the cord-cutting phenomenon.

I disagree totally. Nobody ever said it would be cheaper if you insist on having every channel you had when you had cable and the add ons. If the family is a slave to the tv and the wife insists on her channels, the kids theirs, and you yours, you aren't going to save anything and if that makes everybody happy, great. If not, go back to cable or maybe some watching habits need adjusting. Using an antenna, Roku, and a Fire Stick I have way more channels/apps to choose from now than I ever had with just cable and I don't have a contract with any of them, everything is month to month and free except for the one service I rotate every few months. I've got Hulu now (unless you count Amazon Prime Video). I'm about to drop Hulu and get Sling for football season but will cancel it in November.

 

[RockyDog]

I disagree totally. Nobody ever said it would be cheaper if you insist on having every channel you had when you had cable and the add ons. If the family is a slave to the tv and the wife insists on her channels, the kids theirs, and you yours, you aren't going to save anything and if that makes everybody happy, great. If not, go back to cable or maybe some watching habits need adjusting. Using an antenna, Roku, and a Fire Stick I have way more channels/apps to choose from now than I ever had with just cable and I don't have a contract with any of them, everything is month to month and free except for the one service I rotate every few months. I've got Hulu now (unless you count Amazon Prime Video). I'm about to drop Hulu and get Sling for football season but will cancel it in November.

But it WAS cheaper with most of the same channels. That is why so many people switched. You could get sling for 20 bucks. Then playstation had a service that was relatively cheap. Directv Now was affordable for a minute. At that time, people were dropping $200+ cable and or satellite plus internet bundles for the cost of high speed internet and 20-40 bucks at most for a streamer that offered most anything that you wanted. Once these services were taken over by the big corporations, the prices all shot up and there's not really any savings involved.

Sling is cheaper, obviously, if you want to just keep it for a few months. But just to get all ESPN programming you have to buy a sports tier which makes it about $45 per month.

Greenbean is exactly right. The days of cheap streaming are over. The prices across the board are all pretty comparable now, and it all becomes a matter of preference. Sure you can add, drop, go antenna only, etc, but if you want football, or you have a wife and/or kids that want their TV channels, there's no cheap way around it anymore.

 

[Dawgg]

This is very plausible. Bob Iger and Steve Jobs had a great relationship with each other. If Jobs had not passed away, it’s very likely apple and Disney would already have some type of partnership.

If you ever want an interesting listen and are short on reasons to dislike Michael Eisner, the Pixar vs Dreamworks episodes of Business Wars will fulfill both of those.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

I hear from friends that you can "share" streaming logons in some situations to make it cheaper. For example if your parents are paying for Direct TV or cable and don't stream, you may be able to use their credentials for ESPN and other services. Not saying it's legal or ethical, but I've heard that some folks do it.

Also, Many folks already have Prime and usually on black Friday you can catch the ad version of Hulu for $1 or $2 bucks/month.

 

[onewoof]

I can tell you with 100% certainly this would never happen.

ESPN is contacting every streaming service to see how they would bundle it to add value and more subscribers. It's what they do. Put us on your basic streaming plan and let's discuss. Also they have to include SEC Network in states where the subscriber is in a state with an SEC team(s).

ESPN is talking to every single streaming service about this, Apple is one of many and one of the smallest if not the smallest. Add monthly subs without an option to opt out.

ESPN will not be exclusive to any streaming service. Ever.

 

[L4Dawg]

I don’t get excited about any of this. The days of cheap streaming are over, and I think we’re all about to find out that we won’t be any better off than we were before the cord-cutting phenomenon.

As predicted. It will probably be worse.

 

[L4Dawg]

I disagree totally. Nobody ever said it would be cheaper if you insist on having every channel you had when you had cable and the add ons. If the family is a slave to the tv and the wife insists on her channels, the kids theirs, and you yours, you aren't going to save anything and if that makes everybody happy, great. If not, go back to cable or maybe some watching habits need adjusting. Using an antenna, Roku, and a Fire Stick I have way more channels/apps to choose from now than I ever had with just cable and I don't have a contract with any of them, everything is month to month and free except for the one service I rotate every few months. I've got Hulu now (unless you count Amazon Prime Video). I'm about to drop Hulu and get Sling for football season but will cancel it in November.

It's going to be more expensive, with less channels.

 

[ronpolk]

If it makes it where I can pay for ESPN without paying a million dollars for YouTube TV I am all for it

I’m getting a much better price on YouTube tv

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

That’s fine - I’m an Apple guy. I was hopeful Apple would end up with Sunday Ticket.

For the record, this transaction seems to be mainly speculation from the link OP provided.

The rumor has been alive for a long time.

 

[patdog]

It's going to be more expensive, with less channels.

And less convenience. I priced streaming a week or two ago and it's already to the point where for me streaming vs cable is about break-even, but the user interface is much better for cable.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

I can tell you with 100% certainly this would never happen.

ESPN is contacting every streaming service to see how they would bundle it to add value and more subscribers. It's what they do. Put us on your basic streaming plan and let's discuss. Also they have to include SEC Network in states where the subscriber is in a state with an SEC team(s).

ESPN is talking to every single streaming service about this, Apple is one of many and one of the smallest if not the smallest. Add monthly subs without an option to opt out.

ESPN will not be exclusive to any streaming service. Ever.

For the right price, and Apple has plenty of cheddar, they will sell it, right?

I wish someone with a little sense would buy it. It's difficult to believe Steven A Smith, Pat McAfee, etc., bring in enough viewers to justify their salary. Any many times, it seems ESPN bids against itself. If Peyton Manning had the money to buy it (and i realize he doesn't), I bet he could make it great again.

 

[11thEagleFan]

It's going to be more expensive, with less channels.

Exactly. I’m the perfect storm of a person that a la carte television is a nightmare for. My family honestly doesn’t watch a whole lot of television. But the breakdown is as follows. I watch HBO (its own streaming service, but it’s always been premium so no big deal) and live sports. As far as live sports though, pretty much all Sun Belt games are on ESPN+, whereas in the past many of these games were on ESPN U. Also, I’m a Saints fan that lives out of market. Ouch.

My wife watches Hallmark like she’s planning on quitting her lucrative career, moving back to her hometown, leaving me for her high school sweetheart and opening a cupcake bakery. She also watches The Bachelor and Yellowstone. That’s it. So cable is a must.

Now for the children. Literally the only things they watch are Disney (its own streaming service) and Discovery (its own streaming service). We also keep Netflix because they have good children’s programming. All this adds up to a monthly bill that’s significantly higher than premium cable.

 

[8dog]

I can tell you with 100% certainly this would never happen.

ESPN is contacting every streaming service to see how they would bundle it to add value and more subscribers. It's what they do. Put us on your basic streaming plan and let's discuss. Also they have to include SEC Network in states where the subscriber is in a state with an SEC team(s).

ESPN is talking to every single streaming service about this, Apple is one of many and one of the smallest if not the smallest. Add monthly subs without an option to opt out.

ESPN will not be exclusive to any streaming service. Ever.

They will be stand alone at some point. Not exclusive.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

My wife watches Hallmark like she’s planning on quitting her lucrative career, moving back to her hometown, leaving me for her high school sweetheart and opening a cupcake bakery.

I'm assuming her ex is an handsome fireman who seems to have plenty of money and free time (where he volunteers to do good int he community) in-spite of his wages, with a family of gold. And your mother is disapproving, high society lady?

 

[The Cooterpoot]

ESPN has MTV'd themselves into a bit of a corner.

 

[STATEBALLIN]

If you ever want an interesting listen and are short on reasons to dislike Michael Eisner, the Pixar vs Dreamworks episodes of Business Wars will fulfill both of those.

I read Iger’s book. Very good read and he went into some of it. Iger saved Disney once. Can he do it again?

 

[Coast_Dawg]

How much is premium cable?

 

[UpTheMiddlex3Punt]

If streaming gets any more expensive I'm going back to pirating movies and live streams

 

[GloryDawg]

ESPN, the SEC channel all suck. They are only good for watching the games. All other programs are crap. So, it doesn't really matter who owns it. I only watch college baseball, football on them. I will watch some college basketball but only State.

 

[MSUDOG24]

Exactly. I’m the perfect storm of a person that a la carte television is a nightmare for. My family honestly doesn’t watch a whole lot of television. But the breakdown is as follows. I watch HBO (its own streaming service, but it’s always been premium so no big deal) and live sports. As far as live sports though, pretty much all Sun Belt games are on ESPN+, whereas in the past many of these games were on ESPN U. Also, I’m a Saints fan that lives out of market. Ouch.

My wife watches Hallmark like she’s planning on quitting her lucrative career, moving back to her hometown, leaving me for her high school sweetheart and opening a cupcake bakery. She also watches The Bachelor and Yellowstone. That’s it. So cable is a must.

Now for the children. Literally the only things they watch are Disney (its own streaming service) and Discovery (its own streaming service). We also keep Netflix because they have good children’s programming. All this adds up to a monthly bill that’s significantly higher than premium cable.

Well done ..... My wife watches Hallmark like she’s planning on quitting her lucrative career, moving back to her hometown, leaving me for her high school sweetheart and opening a cupcake bakery.

 

[MississippiTexan]

Exactly. I’m the perfect storm of a person that a la carte television is a nightmare for. My family honestly doesn’t watch a whole lot of television. But the breakdown is as follows. I watch HBO (its own streaming service, but it’s always been premium so no big deal) and live sports. As far as live sports though, pretty much all Sun Belt games are on ESPN+, whereas in the past many of these games were on ESPN U. Also, I’m a Saints fan that lives out of market. Ouch.

My wife watches Hallmark like she’s planning on quitting her lucrative career, moving back to her hometown, leaving me for her high school sweetheart and opening a cupcake bakery. She also watches The Bachelor and Yellowstone. That’s it. So cable is a must.

Now for the children. Literally the only things they watch are Disney (its own streaming service) and Discovery (its own streaming service). We also keep Netflix because they have good children’s programming. All this adds up to a monthly bill that’s significantly higher than premium cable.

You must have a heck a deal on cable. The only hold up is the ESPN main channels. You can get HBO and Discovery on MAX for $15 a month, Disney/ESPN+/Hulu (which has the Bachelor) with the Disney+ bundle for $15 a month, Peacock which has Hallmark. Bravo, and NBC shows for $6 a month, and Paramount+ for Yellowstone and CBS shows for $6 a month, which you can cancel when the season is over. That's $36 a month ($42 during Yellowstone season) and covers everything you listed except ESPN main channels.

I get MAX for free through my ATT wireless and I pay for the Disney+ bundle, but I have Youtube TV for my main TV channels right now and the only reason I still have that is for ESPN. Even so I'm coming out ahead of the $150 plus I used to pay for cable or DirectTv service (to include their charges for their equipment). Once ESPN goes standalone I'll drop YouTube tv and get ESPN for me and Peacock for the wife. I'm guessing ESPN standalone will be around $20 to $25 a month, so I could get that and Peacock and save even more than YouTube tv which is like cable light as it has less worthless channels, but still has many.

 

[11thEagleFan]

You must have a heck a deal on cable. The only hold up is the ESPN main channels. You can get HBO and Discovery on MAX for $15 a month, Disney/ESPN+/Hulu (which has the Bachelor) with the Disney+ bundle for $15 a month, Peacock which has Hallmark. Bravo, and NBC shows for $6 a month, and Paramount+ for Yellowstone and CBS shows for $6 a month, which you can cancel when the season is over. That's $36 a month ($42 during Yellowstone season) and covers everything you listed except ESPN main channels.

I get MAX for free through my ATT wireless and I pay for the Disney+ bundle, but I have Youtube TV for my main TV channels right now and the only reason I still have that is for ESPN. Even so I'm coming out ahead of the $150 plus I used to pay for cable or DirectTv service (to include their charges for their equipment). Once ESPN goes standalone I'll drop YouTube tv and get ESPN for me and Peacock for the wife. I'm guessing ESPN standalone will be around $20 to $25 a month, so I could get that and Peacock and save even more than YouTube tv which is like cable light as it has less worthless channels, but still has many.

Lots of good information here that I’m going to check out. With regard to the Disney bundle, we tried to do it awhile back and I don’t remember the details but we were basically told, “Sorry, we can’t do that.” Despite all the advertising to the contrary, we couldn’t get it, and I don’t remember why. Might be worth revisiting.

 

[The Peeper]

But it WAS cheaper with most of the same channels. That is why so many people switched. You could get sling for 20 bucks. Then playstation had a service that was relatively cheap. Directv Now was affordable for a minute. At that time, people were dropping $200+ cable and or satellite plus internet bundles for the cost of high speed internet and 20-40 bucks at most for a streamer that offered most anything that you wanted. Once these services were taken over by the big corporations, the prices all shot up and there's not really any savings involved.

Sling is cheaper, obviously, if you want to just keep it for a few months. But just to get all ESPN programming you have to buy a sports tier which makes it about $45 per month.

Greenbean is exactly right. The days of cheap streaming are over. The prices across the board are all pretty comparable now, and it all becomes a matter of preference. Sure you can add, drop, go antenna only, etc, but if you want football, or you have a wife and/or kids that want their TV channels, there's no cheap way around it anymore.

This is why its not cheaper to stream, its people that think they just have to get every channel. If that's the case then that's on them, not the streaming services. This is an article from todays USA Today:

 

[BulldogBlitz]

Sounds like a good idea, then I won't be able to see any of the channels.

 

[onewoof]

you guys do realize the impact of ESPN going direct to customers right? you think you have seen people cancel their TV packages, it will be brutal to Comcast, Dish, Charter, DirecTV, and alll the other TV providers. Predicted to be as high as 30% of customers gone in 90 days.