Movies and TV ESPN reportedly slated for another huge round of layoffs - Page 7

Eleazar · 03-06-2017, 03:45 PM

ESPN is reportedly preparing for another round of cost-cutting — and this time, the cuts could be even more significant, at least in terms of name recognition.

Michael Rand
March 6, 2017

http://strib.mn/2lPzMix

News of layoffs in the media industry have become all-too-familiar in recent years, owing to declining user rates and hollowed out advertising revenue.

Even sports media behemoth ESPN hasn’t been immune to the trend; we’re barely a year removed from a round of layoffs during which the company shed about 300 employees.

And now ESPN is reportedly preparing for another round of cost-cutting — and this time, the cuts could be even more significant, at least in terms of name recognition. SI’s Richard Deitsch has some of the details in a recent column:

SI has learned that ESPN will have significant cost-cutting over the next four months on its talent side (people in front of the camera or audio/digital screen). Multiple sources said ESPN has been tasked with paring tens of millions of staff salary from its payroll, including staffers many viewers and readers will recognize.

The reasons offered by Deitsch are familiar: ESPN’s subscriber base is shrinking — from 100 million early in 2011 to less than 88 million in a February estimate. Every lost subscriber costs the company more than $8 a month in lost revenue between ESPN and ESPN. That’s roughly $100 a year per subscriber. Multiply that by 12 million lost subscribers in the last six years and you see a $1.2 billion (per year) deficit from where ESPN could have been if the subscriber base had stayed flat.

Combine that with declining ad revenue — which caused the stock of Disney, ESPN’s parent company, to tumble at its last reporting date last month — and you have a dangerous mix that leads to layoffs.

That said, the reported layoffs also seem a little disingenuous — a move designed to appease shareholders more than something truly necessary in the moment.

I say that because even though ESPN’s subscriber base has declined steadily in recent years, their fee per user has gone up significantly in the same span. As of mid-2016, the fee for ESPN alone was $7.21 per month — up more than a dollar from 2014 and more than double what it was in 2007. Basically, ESPN is offsetting lost revenue from lost subscribers by making those who still get the network pay more.

This math is over-simplified with round numbers, but it’s still relevant: 88 million subscribers paying $7 a month ($616 million) is more revenue than 100 million subscribers paying $6 a month ($600 million).

Continuously cranking up that fee might be a dangerous game to play since there is a risk of accelerating the spiral of those ditching cable (and therefore ESPN) because of high fees. But sports are a major part of the reason subscribers stick with cable/satellite packages. What’s another dollar or two to die-hard fans? We’ll find out.

raybec 4 · 03-07-2017, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cochise

True. We would be doing a disservice to the discussion if we didn't mention that ESPN completely ruined Monday Night Football.

It's gotten so bad with Gruden, that guy is terrible with all of his goofy catch phrases and bullshit. We watch the games on mute and listen to music in the house on MNF

19now11 · 03-07-2017, 02:16 PM

dose anybody remember why the fired hank jr from mnf? **** espn.

**loochy** · 03-07-2017, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 19now11

dose anybody remember why the fired hank jr from mnf? **** espn.

because he was a dirty dirty alex smith fan

Hammock Parties · 03-07-2017, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 19now11

dose anybody remember why the fired hank jr from mnf? **** espn.

Because he compared Obama to Hitler.

**alanm** · 03-07-2017, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pasta Giant Meatball

No AMC, so......FAAAAAIL

No History, No AHC, No Travel channel nor BBCA. I could go on.

KChiefs1 · 03-07-2017, 04:38 PM

Clay Travis on ESPN's troubles.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/...92dqEQxHi4vLG4

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

siberian khatru · 03-07-2017, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notorious

I used to listen to their radio station for 8-9 hours a day while working. Mike and Mike, Cowherd, then Van Pelt and Russillo.

Mike and Mike sucks ass now, Cowherd left, and the only show worth a **** anymore is Russillo and Kanell. I might listen in on Le Batard for a goofy change, but that grows old quickly.

Don't forget The Trifecta on Saturday afternoons!

03-06-2017, 03:45 PM
Eleazar Beyond the Rapids Join Date: May 2003 Location: Langley, VA Casino cash: $-370000	ESPN reportedly slated for another huge round of layoffs ESPN is reportedly preparing for another round of cost-cutting — and this time, the cuts could be even more significant, at least in terms of name recognition. Michael Rand March 6, 2017 http://strib.mn/2lPzMix News of layoffs in the media industry have become all-too-familiar in recent years, owing to declining user rates and hollowed out advertising revenue. Even sports media behemoth ESPN hasn’t been immune to the trend; we’re barely a year removed from a round of layoffs during which the company shed about 300 employees. And now ESPN is reportedly preparing for another round of cost-cutting — and this time, the cuts could be even more significant, at least in terms of name recognition. SI’s Richard Deitsch has some of the details in a recent column: SI has learned that ESPN will have significant cost-cutting over the next four months on its talent side (people in front of the camera or audio/digital screen). Multiple sources said ESPN has been tasked with paring tens of millions of staff salary from its payroll, including staffers many viewers and readers will recognize. The reasons offered by Deitsch are familiar: ESPN’s subscriber base is shrinking — from 100 million early in 2011 to less than 88 million in a February estimate. Every lost subscriber costs the company more than $8 a month in lost revenue between ESPN and ESPN. That’s roughly $100 a year per subscriber. Multiply that by 12 million lost subscribers in the last six years and you see a $1.2 billion (per year) deficit from where ESPN could have been if the subscriber base had stayed flat. Combine that with declining ad revenue — which caused the stock of Disney, ESPN’s parent company, to tumble at its last reporting date last month — and you have a dangerous mix that leads to layoffs. That said, the reported layoffs also seem a little disingenuous — a move designed to appease shareholders more than something truly necessary in the moment. I say that because even though ESPN’s subscriber base has declined steadily in recent years, their fee per user has gone up significantly in the same span. As of mid-2016, the fee for ESPN alone was $7.21 per month — up more than a dollar from 2014 and more than double what it was in 2007. Basically, ESPN is offsetting lost revenue from lost subscribers by making those who still get the network pay more. This math is over-simplified with round numbers, but it’s still relevant: 88 million subscribers paying $7 a month ($616 million) is more revenue than 100 million subscribers paying $6 a month ($600 million). Continuously cranking up that fee might be a dangerous game to play since there is a risk of accelerating the spiral of those ditching cable (and therefore ESPN) because of high fees. But sports are a major part of the reason subscribers stick with cable/satellite packages. What’s another dollar or two to die-hard fans? We’ll find out.
Posts: 80,659

03-07-2017, 02:16 PM	#92
19now11 Banned Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Humboldt County Ca Casino cash: $10003191	dose anybody remember why the fired hank jr from mnf? **** espn.
Posts: 522

03-07-2017, 04:38 PM	#96
KChiefs1 I’m a Mahomo! Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Mid-Missouri Casino cash: $6771021	Clay Travis on ESPN's troubles. https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/...92dqEQxHi4vLG4 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk __________________
Posts: 54,038