[News] Sportsnet signs 12 year $5.2 billion for NHL CDN Broadcast rights.

[PeteMoss]

Here ya go:

Steve Ladurantaye ‏@sladurantaye 21m
Scoopage: Rogers will create a pay product that allows subscribers to lift all of their regional Sportsnet blackouts.

Rogers says its blackout-free Sportsnet package would cost considerably less than Game Centre etc, and only involve Canadian teams.

Now will the other cable/satelite providers be able to offer the same? Good news for us Flames fans in Ontario who can watch the team and save $$$

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

You can bet your ass cable rates will increase because of this. See the Atlantic article I posted earlier in this thread. The good thing is that at least sports fans will be subsidized by non-sports fans.

What the CP lexicon now needs is a way to identify these disparate groups. Maybe Gatorade gobblers vs. Coke sippers?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

You can bet your ass cable rates will increase because of this.

Agreed. Given that carriage fees exist (i.e. TV channels are not 100% ad-supported), I can't imagine that we'd be getting a ton of new content (more games Saturday, Sunday broadcasts) for free.

I'm very curious as to what the elasticity of demand for sports is like. If the subsidies were to go away, would sports fans just pay more, because we're diehards, to make up the gap? Or would we refuse to pay more, and force revenues and player salaries to drop?

I know personally, I didn't find the old PPVs worth it (though I was willing to go to pubs/home games for them), I don't care enough about non-Flame teams to buy Centre Ice (or its equivalents from other leagues), and I think Sportsnet World is a rip-off.

[Bertuzzied]

Just finished listening to the 960 on my break.

The last TSN broadcast with the NHL will be the 2014 draft.

Bettman was pretty adamant that HNIC and the CBC stayed in place. If that was the case why does Rogers have an out after 4 years and not after the 12?

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Here ya go:



Now will the other cable/satelite providers be able to offer the same? Good news for us Flames fans in Ontario who can watch the team and save $$$

Are we talking about Rogers the broadcaster, or Rogers the cable company?

An online product that allows you to watch all games with no blackouts? Sign me up today!

An add-on to a traditional cable package? No thanks.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by SebC

Or, Sportsnet quality could stay Sportsnet quality (or at least not rise to CBC/TSN quality), and then our Wednesday and Saturday broadcasts have taken a hit.

Also:

HNIC no longer generates revenue for CBC: loss.

It is absolutely idiotic to assume Sportsnet production value stays the same on this. One it makes no business sense, two with out knowing the details, I'm sure some level of production value is baked into the contract. Sportnet becomes a representative of the NHL brand with their national coverage, they will likely be held to a standard.

People need to stop worrying about Rogers / Sportsnet current state of NHL programing. As it sits right now, they are nothing more than a regional provider for the NHL. This impacts everything they do NHL related. The regional contracts represent a much smaller audience, and therefore a much smaller revenue stream for Rogers on their broadcasts. This in turn, means less money to invest in production value, and less money to invest in On Air talent. That then in turns impacts the quality of all their other NHL programing. Because they aren't a National source, less people turn to them for their "other NHL news" (draft coverage, trade deadline day) and they also have less quality talent to pool from on their hockey staff to pool from on these shows. The end result is a very "local" and "low budget" feel to their hockey coverage at the NHL level. That isn't going to be the case whne they are the National Provider, the viewership numbers will go up, and so will the quality of the product. TSN's quality went up when they became a National network.

Also, on the HNIC no longer generates revenue front- how did you figure that. Based of the current ad rev rates? If so your calculation is like wrong, no reason to assume those don't grow, which would be the premise behind why the contracts are more expensive now, and why folks are willing to pay more for the opportunity.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Thanks again, PeteMoss. So if GC is $170 and Centre Ice is $200, I wonder where Rogers will set the price on its product for SN:Unblocked (sounds dirty)?

$70-$80 for a season seems fair.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

Are we talking about Rogers the broadcaster, or Rogers the cable company?

Probably the broadcaster.

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

An online product that allows you to watch all Rogers games with no blackouts? Sign me up today!

fyp, and that would be Rogers equivalent of Game Center.

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

An add-on to a traditional cable package? No thanks.

That would be Rogers equivalent of Center Ice.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

Thanks again, PeteMoss. So if GC is $170 and Centre Ice is $200, I wonder where Rogers will set the price on its product for SN:Unblocked (sounds dirty)?

$70-$80 for a season seems fair.

I'm guessing a monthly rate, say $7/mo?

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Also, on the HNIC no longer generates revenue front- how did you figure that. Based of the current ad rev rates? If so your calculation is like wrong, no reason to assume those don't grow, which would be the premise behind why the contracts are more expensive now, and why folks are willing to pay more for the opportunity.

Rogers gets the revenue for ads on HNIC under this agreement as I understand it, as HNIC is not paying for the games to be shown on CBC.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

I'm guessing a monthly rate, say $7/mo?

Yeah, that seems like it could be in the right ballpark too.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Also, on the HNIC no longer generates revenue front- how did you figure that. Based of the current ad rev rates? If so your calculation is like wrong, no reason to assume those don't grow, which would be the premise behind why the contracts are more expensive now, and why folks are willing to pay more for the opportunity.

HNIC no longer generates revenue (and more importantly/accurately, income) for CBC. Right now HNIC makes money for CBC. Under the new deal, CBC is basically loaning out their channel to Rogers, and all the profit goes to Rogers.

Even if CBC had kept the broadcast rights, the increase in broadcast fees would mean less profit for CBC. That's bad for Canadians, because we're all effectively CBC shareholders. (Rogers shareholders, though, may net positive.)

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by SebC

HNIC no longer generates revenue (and more importantly/accurately, income) for CBC. Right now HNIC makes money for CBC. Under the new deal, CBC is basically loaning out their channel to Rogers, and all the profit goes to Rogers.

Even if CBC had kept the broadcast rights, the increase in broadcast fees would mean less profit for CBC. That's bad for Canadians, because we're all effectively CBC shareholders. (Rogers shareholders, though, may net positive.)

So what's in it for CBC? They must be paid something. Or at least keep commercial revenue...

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by TurnedTheCorner

Probably the broadcaster.

fyp, and that would be Rogers equivalent of Game Center.

That would be Rogers equivalent of Center Ice.

That's why I'm curious. Live sports is the only reason I have a traditional cable package, and I know I'm not alone. $100-150/year and I can cut the cord? That's massive. And too good to be true.

But, because Rogers is also in the cable business, I can't see them making it easy to disconnect from traditional cable. They certainly didn't drop all of this money on a TV deal so they could cannibalize their cable profits.

[nik-]

I'm wondering what's in it for CBC too. They get to keep an institution, which is obviously huge, but they were using that institution to push all of their other offerings. Unless they get to keep doing that (which I assume they won't) CBC will be paying Rogers to advertise on their own feed.

It seems odd.

[PeteMoss]

I would think it would be the cable provider. They would just do something like $10/month added to your bill to get the Sportsnet channels unblocked but you'd have to be signed up for basic cable.

Currently the only way to get Centre Ice with Rogers is to get the Sports pack (with NFL Sunday ticket/NBA/MLB etc) which is $36/month.

I really doubt they'll give a package beyond Game Centre if you don't have a cable package.

[StrykerSteve]

Rogers broadcasts suck, I much preferred TSN's coverage. Audio delays, grainy picture, dark studios.... And an annoying theme song. Boooooo to this deal, boooooo!

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by nik-

I'm wondering what's in it for CBC too. They get to keep an institution, which is obviously huge, but they were using that institution to push all of their other offerings. Unless they get to keep doing that (which I assume they won't) CBC will be paying Rogers to advertise on their own feed.

It seems odd.

Re: CBC - they get free programming and can promote their shows during it. Anything else they would air during that time would cost money and get less viewers.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Originally Posted by Jimmy Stang

That's why I'm curious. Live sports is the only reason I have a traditional cable package, and I know I'm not alone. $100-150/year and I can cut the cord? That's massive. And too good to be true.

But, because Rogers is also in the cable business, I can't see them making it easy to disconnect from traditional cable. They certainly didn't drop all of this money on a TV deal so they could cannibalize their cable profits.

This product would work the same as existing ones, in that you could use it to watch out of market games. I don't think anyone said the online product could be used to replace the national and regional broadcasts?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Re: CBC - they get free programming and can promote their shows during it. Anything else they would air during that time would cost money and get less viewers.

Is that how it is? Rogers willing to allow CBC to cut into their revenue to promote CBC's own shows?