ESPN in 'ongoing conversations' with Apple about streaming service

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2016
ESPN is in discussions with Apple about the prospects of some sort of over-the-top streaming service, according to the sports network's president, John Skipper.




Apple is "creating a significantly advantageous operating system and a great television experience and that television experience is fabulous for sports," Skipper told the Wall Street Journal. The executive added that this would be a "fabulous place" to sell subscriptions, and stated that ESPN and Apple are having "ongoing conversations" in that regard.

He also mentioned however that Apple has been "frustrated" by attempts to build a service that would work for both it and TV programmers.

"We continue to try to work with [Apple]," Skipper said.

Those comments could suggest that Apple is still interested in creating a live TV service bundling together several channels. Last month reports indicated that Apple was putting its efforts on hold, as content providers couldn't agree with Apple on a "skinny" bundle costing under $30 per month. Those providers didn't want some of their channels left out, one report said.

Alternately, ESPN might simply be looking at Apple as a platform through which it could deliver its own streaming service. ESPN is at a critical juncture, as while TV audiences are increasingly going Internet-only, the network still depends on cable and satellite deals for much of its revenue. Sports are often seen as a tipping point that can convince people to keep or cut a traditional TV package.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 14
    I see it at $19/month or $2.99 for an event....70% of a 2.99 football game [especially if it's world cup soccer football]... sounds like a win-win   ESPN charges like $2 a month to cable providers to stay on the expanded basic tier.  Cable cutters would love to drop a $35 bill for the cable package, and get 8 games a month, and still save $10.

    The tipping point will/if local broadcasters get a streaming option (wouldn't it be nice if Apple built such an infrastructure)
  • Reply 2 of 14
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    From what Ive heard, ESPN is in serious trouble, with their subscription rates falling, and talk of Disney spinning them off. This may well be a case of Apple having the record labels by the tail with iTunes again, with cable networks instead.
    edited January 2016 lostkiwi
  • Reply 3 of 14
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 3,056member
    SlingTV seemed to have gotten the deal done. 
  • Reply 4 of 14
    am8449am8449 Posts: 392member
    I would be very happy to be able to do pay-per-view with ESPN on Apple TV. As a cord cutter, I often miss out on big sporting events like U.S. Open tennis because I don't have a cable TV subscription.
  • Reply 5 of 14
    boltsfan17boltsfan17 Posts: 2,294member
    I see it at $19/month or $2.99 for an event....70% of a 2.99 football game [especially if it's world cup soccer football]... sounds like a win-win   ESPN charges like $2 a month to cable providers to stay on the expanded basic tier.  Cable cutters would love to drop a $35 bill for the cable package, and get 8 games a month, and still save $10.

    The tipping point will/if local broadcasters get a streaming option (wouldn't it be nice if Apple built such an infrastructure)
    Personally, I think $19 a month wouldn't be worth it at all. ESPN no longer has the rights for the World Cup. 
  • Reply 6 of 14
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,305member
    I see it at $19/month or $2.99 for an event....70% of a 2.99 football game [especially if it's world cup soccer football]... sounds like a win-win   ESPN charges like $2 a month to cable providers to stay on the expanded basic tier.  Cable cutters would love to drop a $35 bill for the cable package, and get 8 games a month, and still save $10.

    The tipping point will/if local broadcasters get a streaming option (wouldn't it be nice if Apple built such an infrastructure)
    You can get ESPN and ESPN 2 plus over 20 other channels right now for $20 a month.  For another $5, you can get the sport bundle with another 9 sport channels including ESPNEWS.  

    Why would I as a cable cutter want  to only save a few bucks and get a fraction of the channels I could just get from cable? Your prices are just dumb.  
    techlover
  • Reply 7 of 14
    mac_128 said:
    From what Ive heard, ESPN is in serious trouble, with their subscription rates falling, and talk of Disney spinning them off. This may well be a case of Apple having the record labels by the tail with iTunes again, with cable networks instead.
    ESPN could be a good use of any excess cash by Apple. Make it an Apple TV/iTunes Store exclusive and we've got something.
    edited January 2016 oneof52
  • Reply 8 of 14
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 3,056member
    am8449 said:
    I would be very happy to be able to do pay-per-view with ESPN on Apple TV. As a cord cutter, I often miss out on big sporting events like U.S. Open tennis because I don't have a cable TV subscription.
    Agree. I would buy PPV events as well. But I think some of the content is already "exclusive" to other providers. And of course, the PPV model is not as lucrative as the subscription concept. Subscriptions have consumers pay for things they wouldn't otherwise.
  • Reply 9 of 14
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,241member
    ESPN is in trouble because they don't have exclusive rights to broadcast all (or most) sports like they used to do. The NFL network has some exclusive games while the NBA network along with TNT broadcast many of the professional basketball games. ESPN still broadcasts a lot of the college games but they really don't have many of the big games on anymore. If Apple really wanted to have a game changer they'd figure out a way to have a monthly subscription for a sports channel that included sporting events no matter where they originated. Of course, I doubt this will ever happen since professional sports see these as income streams and don't want to give them away.
  • Reply 10 of 14
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member
    I see it at $19/month or $2.99 for an event....70% of a 2.99 football game [especially if it's world cup soccer football]... sounds like a win-win   ESPN charges like $2 a month to cable providers to stay on the expanded basic tier.  Cable cutters would love to drop a $35 bill for the cable package, and get 8 games a month, and still save $10.

    The tipping point will/if local broadcasters get a streaming option (wouldn't it be nice if Apple built such an infrastructure)
    I get ESPN now as part of my $20 Sling subscription. For another $5/mo I can get the rest of the ESPN channels plus more that aren't part of the base package. For $35 I'd actually be almost as well off keeping cable with some of the special deals that DirectTV and Verizon are offering right now. Cool tip by the way: ESPN Now honors your Sling subscription giving you even more sports content. Until recently they did not, requiring you to be a traditional cable subscriber.

    EDIT: Pip'd by JBDragon.  B)
    edited January 2016
  • Reply 11 of 14
    I want Apple to buy Time Warner Inc and use it's own content to start the AppleTV streaming service.  
    Others can opt-in on Apple's terms if they want to.

    Apple has the global streaming infrastructure in place with tvOS / iOS.
    Time Warner has the content, the studios, the media networks and content know-how within HBO, Turner Broadcasting Systems and Warner Bros.
    It would take each company too long to develop what the other has, not to mention the brand recognition.
    Apple would be wise to use its pile of cash to acquire Time Warner and really revolutionize TV.


    lostkiwi
  • Reply 12 of 14
    am8449 said:
    I would be very happy to be able to do pay-per-view with ESPN on Apple TV. As a cord cutter, I often miss out on big sporting events like U.S. Open tennis because I don't have a cable TV subscription.
    That's me too. I'd love to watch Formula One, but I'm not going to pay my cable provider $100/mo. to do it. Besides, I kind have lost interest since Senna died. 
  • Reply 13 of 14
    eightzero said:
    SlingTV seemed to have gotten the deal done. 
    Sling TV owned by Dish Network, so...yeah... Cant wait for tvOS but not sure Apple can pull off a package at the right price point.
  • Reply 14 of 14
    I am a seven year cord cutter and I am IN LOVE with the new Apple TV. Having been without cable or satellite for so long I missed out on many hit shows until years later where I would catch up with them on Netflix. Now I have Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, HBO, Showtime and Sling subscriptions. Many thanks to Roku for allowing this over the years. But with Apple TV, all these have a new home. The interactivity that TV OS allows is amazing. It will quickly turn tv as we know it on its head. Particularly with sports. Currently, the sport league will negotiate a money deal covering many years with the highest bidder, whether that be NBC, ESPN, TNT, etc. Then we all go out and buy that channel. Soon, I will buy NFL coverage directly, from them, through Apple. Because Apple provides both the direct access between my living room and the NFL and also provides the tools that will make the game the best viewing experience. It will not just be streaming video, it will be interactive. From selectable camera angles, deep stats, user polls, tweets, user defined scoring alerts, big play break ins, mini games, previous interviews, ... the list goes on and on. How about a Wiki article about ACL injury over on the right side of the screen? I predict they could make MORE money a la carte. You see my list of subscriptions above and I'm a penny pincher! I'm ready to buy more sports services like Pac 12 Network if it were available.
Sign In or Register to comment.