The press release clearly says it is included in ESPN+. Not sure why you're offended at the ESPN+, as it will be considerable cheaper than nhl.tv, and the nhl.tv has a pretty crappy interface.
It says it will be available for fans to stream only as part of an ESPN+ subscription. Considering how they handle MMA and PPV now it wouldn’t surprise me if they said to be able to order nhl.tv you have to be a subscriber to ESPN+, making you pay twice. The way it’s worded leaves some of that open to interpretation, hence my question.
It says it will be available for fans to stream only as part of an ESPN+ subscription. Considering how they handle MMA and PPV now it wouldn’t surprise me if they said to be able to order nhl.tv you have to be a subscriber to ESPN+, making you pay twice. The way it’s worded leaves some of that open to interpretation, hence my question.
The press release is more clear:
Quote:
Additionally, ESPN+ subscribers get truly incredible value with more than 1,000 out-of-market games now available digitally only on the industry-leading sports streaming service - making it a must-have for hockey fans. ESPN+, which topped 12.1 million subscribers by the end of 2020, nearly doubling in a year, also features "In the Crease" an exclusive original highlights show, hosted by ESPN's Linda Cohn and Barry Melrose each NHL gameday throughout the season.
Chris Johnston @reporterchris
The NHL still has a second broadcast deal to negotiate/finalize (which include three Stanley Cup Finals), plus another deal with a streaming partner. So it'll ultimately be a lucrative package when combined with the ~$2.8-billion coming from ESPN.
Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Think the average comes between $410M-$420M
The NHL is like the 7th most popular league in the USA and they got top notch service.
The NHL the equivalent of the NFL here, and we get Snet garbage broadcasts.
Honestly, is it worth if for Sportsnet to pump millions more into the broadcast with it wont significantly increase viewership ? Down in the States you likely get way more bang for your buck when you improve the product.
Up here will just scream and moan about the horrible broadcast, but watch it anyways.
The NHL is like the 7th most popular league in the USA and they got top notch service.
The NHL the equivalent of the NFL here, and we get Snet garbage broadcasts.
Most of the games ESPN+ will be showing are local broadcast simulcasts. Most American fans are stuck finding whichever service isn't having a carriage fight with Sinclair sports networks, which aren't exactly top notch services.
I don't really have hopes that the few ESPN produced games will be any better than national Sportsnet games.
The press release clearly says it is included in ESPN+. Not sure why you're offended at the ESPN+, as it will be considerable cheaper than nhl.tv, and the nhl.tv has a pretty crappy interface.
I don't think thats what it says. "Available only as part of an ESPN+ subscription. "
That makes it sound like an adder to an existing ESPN subscription to me. Ie - you still have to pay extra, but you can only do that if you have espn+
Chris Johnston @reporterchris
The NHL still has a second broadcast deal to negotiate/finalize (which include three Stanley Cup Finals), plus another deal with a streaming partner. So it'll ultimately be a lucrative package when combined with the ~$2.8-billion coming from ESPN.
Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Think the average comes between $410M-$420M
Another deal with a streaming provider? In the US?
As for worrying about whether it is included with the existing ESPN+, I guess let's wait and see before getting mad. They are not using words like premium content. Can't imagine this not being cheaper than NHL.tv or Center Ice for a better product.
Another deal with a streaming provider? In the US?
Just a guess, but I think the other streaming provider might be someone that doesn't require a paid subscription, like Amazon/Twitch, Youtube, or Facebook. Put a game up for free once in a while for exposure.
The Following User Says Thank You to sureLoss For This Useful Post:
Just a guess, but I think the other streaming provider might be someone that doesn't require a paid subscription, like Amazon/Twitch, Youtube, or Facebook. Put a game up for free once in a while for exposure.
They’ll want a broadcast network for the other half of playoff games and the other Stanley cups. I would guess peacock/USA/nbc.
They’ll want a broadcast network for the other half of playoff games and the other Stanley cups. I would guess peacock/USA/nbc.
Yeah NBC is expected to be the other partner for the other playoff games and Stanley Cups.
I am talking about the streaming provider that Johnston is alluding to in this tweet:
Chris Johnston @reporterchris
The NHL still has a second broadcast deal to negotiate/finalize (which include three Stanley Cup Finals), plus another deal with a streaming partner. So it'll ultimately be a lucrative package when combined with the ~$2.8-billion coming from ESPN.
I hope that when the Canadian rights are up again in what's forever right now, that this is the same format they go with also rather than flat out exclusivity. Having Bell and Rodgers share the rights of regular season, playoffs, and trade the Stanley Cup Final annually would add more diversity to the programming.
It says it will be available for fans to stream only as part of an ESPN+ subscription. Considering how they handle MMA and PPV now it wouldn’t surprise me if they said to be able to order nhl.tv you have to be a subscriber to ESPN+, making you pay twice. The way it’s worded leaves some of that open to interpretation, hence my question.
I hear the concern, but anything on ESPN+ for me is free once i've subscribed. Disney's plan is to wrap D+, Hulu, and ESPN+ in one simple package at an affordable price...get the sub numbers up, and then slowly bump prices over time. Not worth it for them to make you pay twice for NHL.tv then ESPN+.
