they overpaid the WWE for WWE content on Peacock, so they have plenty from WWE (without SmackDown as that's on Fox).
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
TNT to join ESPN in airing NHL games
- Thread starter CurtisNEPA
- Start date
The fluff is for the 25-44 female demo the advertisers are paying the big bucks to reach. You don't matter, nor do most of those on this board.
Two games a night, most nights. $6 a month is a great deal if you just love to watch hockey and don't care if you have a rooting interest in one of the teams or not.
Wrestling isn't a sport.
Absolutely. The vast majority of network TV buys are against 18-49. Efforts to change this, such as the ongoing CBS television campaign to meet with agency and sponsor executives to try to get the ceiling lifted, have mostly failed.
And that is why cable networks that do target older consumers get an entirely different set of clients... prescription meds, home gadgets, vacations, walkers, bathtubs with doors, etc. Oh, and, of course, pillows... we can't forget pillows.
The ESPN deal will include a handful of regular season and playoff games on ABC, including the complete Stanley Cup Final in 2022-24-26-28. The Turner deal will have the SC Final on TNT in 2023-25-27. So it'll be one or the other with no over-the-air in those odd-numbered years unless you're near the border with Canada and can get CBC's simulcast of the Rogers Sportsnet playoff coverage.
That is legitimately weird. Why would any championship game or series alternate between OTA/cable and cable only annually? Unless the TV bean counters have calculated that the OTA-only audience is either too small, not wealthy enough, not young enough, and too cynical to buy what advertisers are pitching, the move is only going to frustrate fans. I assume that the participating teams in the Final won't be able to offer an OTA alternative to the ESPN feed in their markets, right? Or will their local ABC affiliates get those games?
TNT does a great job airing NBA which they have had for years. I'm sure NHL will be the same. Did CBS Sports Network or FS1 make bids at all?
As I said earlier in this thread, the NHL's goal here was to make the most money it could. To do that, the NHL had to frustrate some fans. The only way they were going to get the price they wanted was to put something in a less accessible pot. So that's the deal they signed.
We have seen that audiences are declining for all sporting events, as with all events in general. And the license holders for those things don't want to see their price go down just because the audience is smaller. They say to TV companies: Your business model is not my problem. That leaves it up to the TV companies to find a way to pay for it. So you will be seeing less free TV and more exclusive subscription TV. All that means is watching sports on TV is about to become more expensive.
I assume ESPN was going make sure they outbid everyone.
Then, as I've said before, the advertisers are foolish (to assume we of the older set don't matter). We may not have the numbers of the young, nubile sweet things but there are many of us and we do spend. Not on $10 lipstick but on big vacations, new cars, boats and all manner of stuff for our grandchildren (not to mention significant purchases of financial products, vacation homes and medical products and care). The total senior market may not equal the gullible post-teen numbers but it is to be ignored at (the advertisers) risk.
I remember when the Olympic Games were must see TV. Now it seems they are just a rainy afternoon substitute.
I have to admit, I don't watch much hockey any longer. Like other sports before it the NHL has gotten more predictable and boring.
(Professional) wrestling isn't a sport. The Olympics and college/high school definitely are.
The OP mentioned AEW as a program TNT has in its "sports" portfolio. That is a professional wrestling organization. I didn't think I needed to mention the legitimate status of freestyle and Greco-Roman wrestling in that context.
The issue is the cost per sale. National advertisers know that advertising for mass-market products against seniors costs too much per sale to be particularly profitable.
It's not about whether seniors buy things; it is about how many times they have to hear a message for a sale to be made. In most cases, there is no efficiency.
And a lot of specifically targeted things for seniors sell best with visual support. An example is the person enjoyably walking the beach with their dog because they took a particular medication. Those drug ads like to show the greater enjoyment of life that can be had when using a particular med. Same for cruse and vacation choices: the visual is key.
Add in the fact that there is a huge percentage of seniors who live on Social Security alone and don't have much disposable income... you see them by the thousands in Quartzsite and Salome. That is not a profitable market.
Wrong. You're talking local channels for home teams. The national channels broadcast the entire league. They can often pre-empt the local channels. At least that's how it's been this year for the NHL.
yes, Wrestling is a sport, but it's a predetermined sport, which makes it "Sports Entertainment", the wrestlers risk actual bodily harm every time they step foot in that wrestling ring, and if you want to ask if the sport is fake, ask Sid Eudy aka Sid Vicious aka Sycho Sid/Sid Justice in WWE, the man destroyed his leg by breaking it during a big boot from the middle rope at a WCW PPV in early 2001 before the promotion's abrupt and untimely death as a promotion. also they work out and have the strength and cardio to handle long matches that last more than 20 mins and some of the wrestlers do high flying moves that are very much proof it's a sport even if it's "Fake".
now Olympic armature Wrestling aka Greco-Roman wrestling is 100% a real legit sport. so think twice before you call Wrestling not a sport, it's a Sports form, just a predetermined fake form of it for the sake of entertainment.
Last edited:
Sorry Dude but "professional" wrestling is nothing more than movie making without the film. Hitting each other with folding chairs is not "sport" (nor entertainment as far as I am concerned). Allowing little old ladies into the audience on Wednesday afternoons to boost the Saturday evening "hate" matches is not sport either. Any contest which has a pre-determined outcome is not a bonafide sport. Neither are phony "punches". If someone getting injured determined whether an activity is a sport then mixing cement would also qualify.
and many seniors are cheap even if they have $
- Status