Yet more layoffs coming to ESPN.

[SamCdbs]

Andrew Marchand

Andrew Marchand is a sports media columnist for the New York Post. Besides writing columns and breaking news, he is the co-host on the "Marchand & Ourand Sports Media Podcast.” Marchand has been named the best sports media reporter in the country by The Big Lead the past two years. Marchand...

nypost.com

ESPN’s latest round of layoffs will have “no sacred cows,” meaning everybody from top on-air people to big-time executives are being scrutinized with the cuts expected to be finalized in the next four to six weeks, The Post has learned.

 

[Radioguy41]

The only people left from the previous cuts, with one or two exceptions, aren't worth keeping around anyway so whoever gets the axe it shouldn't come as any big surprise. I think the big question here is, how much longer is Disney willing to subsidize the bleeding? This all sttarted years ago when ESPN made a conscience decision to start emphasizing the bad behavior of individual participants with shows like "Outside The Lines" rather than emphasizing the positive impact the various sports can have. The talking heads, like Mike Greenberg, took it upon themselves to be judge and jury, no matter how uninformed they were of the facts while calling for people to be fired then ignoring the subject altogether when they were shown to be misinformed. It's called biting the hand that feeds you. Whatever happens to ESPN, they earned it.

 

[SamCdbs]

True.

ESPN simply spends too much on "talent".

Reality is that 99% of the value in ESPN is what goes on from 7 to midnight (ET) weeknights and noon to midnight weekends (except for Sundays during the NFL season). During the day, most of the target demographic is at work. They used to fill the time with reruns of the previous night's games (which was free programming) or of SportsCenter (also free). Then somebody got the bright idea of all these argument shows, which, as you say, are mostly really uninformed people for the most part. And they pay these people millions. Why? The ratings do not justify it. If you are into that kind of programming, YouTube is full of people doing the same thing, often focusing on one sport which they know well, who give their opinions away for free. If you are not, well, you are in the vast majority of sports fans.

Reality also is that, while its important to have competent announcers doing games, there are 1000s of competent announcers out there. Nobody is making a decision to watch or not watch a particular game because of who the announcers are.

 

[harshness]

ESPN simply spends too much on "talent".

I'm not sure I agree. I didn't see any high-dollar talent in the belt-sander races that I watched momentarily yesterday. Cornhole was playing on another ESPN channel at the same time.

 

[Yespage]

Andrew Marchand

Andrew Marchand is a sports media columnist for the New York Post. Besides writing columns and breaking news, he is the co-host on the "Marchand & Ourand Sports Media Podcast.” Marchand has been named the best sports media reporter in the country by The Big Lead the past two years. Marchand...

nypost.com

ESPN’s latest round of layoffs will have “no sacred cows,” meaning everybody from top on-air people to big-time executives are being scrutinized with the cuts expected to be finalized in the next four to six weeks, The Post has learned.

Really, did anyone think ESPN had any sacred cows just strolling around the studio or property?

 

[navychop]

I'm not sure I agree. I didn't see any high-dollar talent in the belt-sander races that I watched momentarily yesterday. Cornhole was playing on another ESPN channel at the same time.

And I missed it!

darn

 

[Don in CT]

True.

ESPN simply spends too much on "talent".

Reality is that 99% of the value in ESPN is what goes on from 7 to midnight (ET) weeknights and noon to midnight weekends (except for Sundays during the NFL season). During the day, most of the target demographic is at work. They used to fill the time with reruns of the previous night's games (which was free programming) or of SportsCenter (also free). Then somebody got the bright idea of all these argument shows, which, as you say, are mostly really uninformed people for the most part. And they pay these people millions. Why? The ratings do not justify it. If you are into that kind of programming, YouTube is full of people doing the same thing, often focusing on one sport which they know well, who give their opinions away for free. If you are not, well, you are in the vast majority of sports fans.

Reality also is that, while its important to have competent announcers doing games, there are 1000s of competent announcers out there. Nobody is making a decision to watch or not watch a particular game because of who the announcers are.

ESPN spends too much on league rights. They have billions Locked up in the NFL NBA NHL NCAA.

Talent is relatively cheap compared to what they are paying the leagues.

 

[harshness]

Really, did anyone think ESPN had any sacred cows just strolling around the studio or property?

Anyone who doesn't clearly hasn't been paying attention.

 

[Don in CT]

SVP, Joe and Troy Stephen A are considered untouchable.

 

[harshness]

The issue with most of the recent layoffs at various companies is that everyone who was let go was at or near the bottom of the food chain. When the management numbers get too close to the number of employees that they manage, cows start tipping.

 

[Yespage]

ESPN spends too much on league rights. They have billions Locked up in the NFL NBA NHL NCAA.

Talent is relatively cheap compared to what they are paying the leagues.

Compared to what ESPN paid for MNF, I can't imagine that anyone is getting paid an amount that comes remotely close to challenging it. We aren't talking Turner owned WCW here.

 

[SamCdbs]

Compared to what ESPN paid for MNF, I can't imagine that anyone is getting paid an amount that comes remotely close to challenging it.

Yes, but the sports are the point of ESPN. If you had to describe ESPN to some time traveler from 1970, you would say "well its a TV channel that shows just sports." You wouldn't add "oh, and they fill the day with people arguing." Because the point of ESPN is the sports, they show the sports and between what you and the advertisers pay, the goal is to make a profit.

Here are the total viewers the BEST of the daytime arguers got in one report a few years ago (it is lower today):
PTI — 424,000
First Take — 316,000
Around the Horn — 269,000
NFL Live – 244,000
Highly Questionable — 214,000 (since cancelled)
The Jump — 198,000
Get Up — 178,000
Jalen & Jacoby —158,000 (since cancelled)
Undisputed — 153,000 (Fox)
The Herd — 100,000 (Fox)

They are paying these people MILLIONS of dollars. Millions. To entertain 200K people. Mostly shift workers, retirees, kids and people that don't work. (Not exactly your key demographic)

Yes, they pay a lot for the rights to the sports. They are worth it. These people just aren't.

 

[Juan]

Bring back the hot dog eating contests

 

[Don in CT]

Bring back the hot dog eating contests

July 4th.

 

[Don in CT]

Yes, but the sports are the point of ESPN. If you had to describe ESPN to some time traveler from 1970, you would say "well its a TV channel that shows just sports." You wouldn't add "oh, and they fill the day with people arguing." Because the point of ESPN is the sports, they show the sports and between what you and the advertisers pay, the goal is to make a profit.

Here are the total viewers the BEST of the daytime arguers got in one report a few years ago (it is lower today):
PTI — 424,000
First Take — 316,000
Around the Horn — 269,000
NFL Live – 244,000
Highly Questionable — 214,000 (since cancelled)
The Jump — 198,000
Get Up — 178,000
Jalen & Jacoby —158,000 (since cancelled)
Undisputed — 153,000 (Fox)
The Herd — 100,000 (Fox)

They are paying these people MILLIONS of dollars. Millions. To entertain 200K people. Mostly shift workers, retirees, kids and people that don't work. (Not exactly your key demographic)

Yes, they pay a lot for the rights to the sports. They are worth it. These people just aren't.

Now do cable news ratings and how much their hosts make.

 

[cosmo_kramer]

Bring back the hot dog eating contests

It never left.

 

[cosmo_kramer]

ESPN spends too much on league rights. They have billions Locked up in the NFL NBA NHL NCAA.

Talent is relatively cheap compared to what they are paying the leagues.

They need live sports to justify their relevance.

 

[Don in CT]

They need live sports to justify their relevance.

Nobody is arguing that. Do any of these networks need to pay as much as they do for them. This goes for all of them.

 

[cosmo_kramer]

Nobody is arguing that. Do any of these networks need to pay as much as they do for them. This goes for all of them.

I don't know of any examples where a network grossly overbid on a contract without stiff competition from another network. They all want and need to stay relevant, and the leagues are the benefactors of that.

 

[Don in CT]

I don't know of any examples were a network grossly overbid on a contract without stiff competition from another network. They all want and need to stay relevant, and the leagues are the benefactors of that.

Who pays for it in the end. We do.