collapse

* Recent Posts

2024 Coaching Carousel by willie warrior
[Today at 03:50:16 AM]


2024 NCAA Tournament Thread by Plaque Lives Matter!
[Today at 01:02:54 AM]


45 minutes ago at the Dallas Westin by MuggsyB
[Today at 12:19:24 AM]


2024 Transfer Portal by CountryRoads
[Today at 12:05:42 AM]


Are we still recruiting anyone for the 24-25 season. by Don_Kojis
[Today at 12:04:21 AM]


Where is Marquette? by marqfan22
[March 28, 2024, 09:29:52 PM]


Chicago bars for Fri game by Daniel
[March 28, 2024, 08:47:22 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!


Author Topic: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)  (Read 73519 times)

brandx

  • Guest
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #225 on: February 09, 2017, 07:46:43 AM »
If they have a smart TV, with one swipe on your phone, you can mirror with you're watching on the 60 inch TV in surround sounds.   I do it all the time.

Don't need $120/month DTV or Cable account.

Of course you need a DTV or cable account to access most good sporting events, including MU basketball.

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #226 on: February 09, 2017, 11:15:40 AM »
Depends on your TV brand and your phone. That isn't 100% true for every smart TV/phone combination. Sometimes you also need an accessory like Amazon fire TV or Google Chromecast

Or Apple TV

Chromecast is $35

Litehouse

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2211
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #227 on: February 09, 2017, 11:33:29 AM »
If they have a smart TV, with one swipe on your phone, you can mirror with you're watching on the 60 inch TV in surround sounds.   I do it all the time.

Don't need $120/month DTV or Cable account.
Yes, but that isn't always as smooth.  I've used streaming a lot, particularly with mlb.tv, but the irregularity of the signal makes me appreciate the steady/reliable picture you get from cable.  Being able to quickly flip channels is also a nice bonus with cable.

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #228 on: February 09, 2017, 11:36:14 AM »
Of course you need a DTV or cable account to access most good sporting events, including MU basketball.

Remember 90% of the cable subscription don't need this.

And the rest can be streamed live.  The NFL has started streaming games via twitter.  This board has a "steaming option" thread almost every game.

The only reason Cable has not collapsed yet is the networks (HBO, ESPN, ABC, CBS, NBC etc.) are not ready to offer a streaming option to compete against Cable/Sat.  Right now you need a cable account and have to sign in with that to use their streaming options.  They are not offering their services for purchase as stand alone product priced to compete with their cable option.  When NBC/CBS/ABC offer themselves as a package for $3/month ... goodbye cable (and ESPN is really screwed).

This will happen, and it will not take 20 years.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2017, 11:52:51 AM by Yukon Cornelius »

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #229 on: February 09, 2017, 11:37:30 AM »
Yes, but that isn't always as smooth.  I've used streaming a lot, particularly with mlb.tv, but the irregularity of the signal makes me appreciate the steady/reliable picture you get from cable.  Being able to quickly flip channels is also a nice bonus with cable.

Gigabit will take care of that.  I get 400 mips downstream at home.

Herman Cain

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 12800
  • 9-9-9
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #230 on: February 09, 2017, 12:18:14 PM »
Remember 90% of the cable subscription don't need this.

And the rest can be streamed live.  The NFL has started streaming games via twitter.  This board has a "steaming option" thread almost every game.

The only reason Cable has not collapsed yet is the networks (HBO, ESPN, ABC, CBS, NBC etc.) are not ready to offer a streaming option to compete against Cable/Sat.  Right now you need a cable account and have to sign in with that to use their streaming options.  They are not offering their services for purchase as stand alone product priced to compete with their cable option.  When NBC/CBS/ABC offer themselves as a package for $3/month ... goodbye cable (and ESPN is really screwed).

This will happen, and it will not take 20 years.
One of the keys is exclusive content that people want. The local cable provider where I live covers the local high school sports teams. They will not sell that channel stand alone.
Winning is overrated. The only time it is really important is in surgery and war.
                       ---Al McGuire

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #231 on: February 09, 2017, 02:41:51 PM »
One of the keys is exclusive content that people want. The local cable provider where I live covers the local high school sports teams. They will not sell that channel stand alone.

They will stream it and make money of advertising ... like they do now.

brandx

  • Guest
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #232 on: February 09, 2017, 03:23:11 PM »
Remember 90% of the cable subscription don't need this.

And the rest can be streamed live.  The NFL has started streaming games via twitter.  This board has a "steaming option" thread almost every game.

The only reason Cable has not collapsed yet is the networks (HBO, ESPN, ABC, CBS, NBC etc.) are not ready to offer a streaming option to compete against Cable/Sat.  Right now you need a cable account and have to sign in with that to use their streaming options.  They are not offering their services for purchase as stand alone product priced to compete with their cable option.  When NBC/CBS/ABC offer themselves as a package for $3/month ... goodbye cable (and ESPN is really screwed).

This will happen, and it will not take 20 years.

1. You can't stream most NFL games without some sort of subscription, whether that is Sling, Vue, cable, DTV, etc. You infer that you can stream any NFL game for free. You are simply wrong.

2. Why would people pay $3/ month or whatever for ABC/NBC/ CBS/FOX +plus another dozen or two channels when most people can put out $40-$50 one time on an antenna and watch the networks forever for nothing?

3. HBO offers stand alone HBO.

4. CBS is also available standalone. You cannot get it for $3 a month. It won't ever be $3.00 a month.

You make many blanket statements. Very few hold up to the truth.

#alternativefacts

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #233 on: February 09, 2017, 04:26:18 PM »
1. You can't stream most NFL games without some sort of subscription, whether that is Sling, Vue, cable, DTV, etc. You infer that you can stream any NFL game for free. You are simply wrong.

2. Why would people pay $3/ month or whatever for ABC/NBC/ CBS/FOX +plus another dozen or two channels when most people can put out $40-$50 one time on an antenna and watch the networks forever for nothing?

3. HBO offers stand alone HBO.

4. CBS is also available standalone. You cannot get it for $3 a month. It won't ever be $3.00 a month.

You make many blanket statements. Very few hold up to the truth.

#alternativefacts

You're telling me what is the case now and acting these current business models are permanent and will never change.  That would be quite the story because these business models are in a big state of flux.

For instance the NFL just started streaming via twitter this year.  You make it sound like that is the last change they will make for the next 20 years.  I say the current model for delivering NFL games will radically change in 3 to 5 years, and then radical change again in the following 3 to 5 years.  Ditto all the other stuff you mention above, it is changing at 100 MPH and your freezing it in time, explaining where it today, and assuming it will be exactly the same in 20 years. This is the only way what you say makes sense.

The #alternativefacts is you belief that cable will have still 50% penetration in 20 years.  See the chart below.  See the slope of the decline.  You say that will magically stop above 50%?  Why?  As streaming gets easier and cheaper the decline will accelerate.  I feel like it is 1988 again and I'm arguing with my old office manager that believes the fax machine will be a viable technology for the next 20 years.  Maybe that was you.

In 20 years we will no longer have drivers, no longer have cashiers, no longer have cable.  Heck we will no longer have wired internet connections.  Will be on something like 10g or 11g and that will be gigabit speeds streaming on every device we have, from TVs, phone appliances, cars etc.  Everything will be on the cloud so we won't even have computers in 20 years, just keyboards and screens to access the cloud.

What we will have in 20 years is you and me arguing with each other when we are not changing our depends.

« Last Edit: February 09, 2017, 04:29:28 PM by Yukon Cornelius »

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #234 on: February 09, 2017, 04:39:12 PM »
Quite simply, you are wrong.

"Besides young people don't even watch TV on some big screen on the wall.  They watch it on their devices."

What a silly statement. Yes, a minority of young people watch things on their phone. But, you made a blanket statement that was ludicrous.

And, there are a myriad of reason why the vast majority of people have cable. Whether you or I disagree with their reason for keeping cable is meaningless.

Yes, some will continue to ditch cable. 20 years from now, the majority will still have it.

Sounds like you lost this bet a year before you made it!

For the First Time, More Than Half of Americans Will Watch Streaming TV
Digital movie streaming lags behind
February 3, 2016

https://www.emarketer.com/Article/First-Time-More-Than-Half-of-Americans-Will-Watch-Streaming-TV/1013543

This will be a benchmark year for digital video usage, particularly streaming television. According to eMarketer’s latest forecast of digital video consumption, 2016 will be the first time more than half of the US population will watch TV shows online at least once a month. In 2016, 164.5 million Americans will watch digital TV—50.8% of the US population. That's a jump from 47.8% last year.




brandx

  • Guest
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #235 on: February 09, 2017, 07:20:34 PM »
You're telling me what is the case now and acting these current business models are permanent and will never change.  That would be quite the story because these business models are in a big state of flux.


Again, you are wrong. If you go back and look at any of the threads on TV, cable, netflix, etc., my point every time is that things are changing and will continue to do so at an even faster rate.

brandx

  • Guest
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #236 on: February 09, 2017, 07:42:10 PM »
Sounds like you lost this bet a year before you made it!

For the First Time, More Than Half of Americans Will Watch Streaming TV
Digital movie streaming lags behind
February 3, 2016


The article is misleading. The numbers are much, much, higher. About half of Americans will watch netflix this year.

That stat does not even consider Youtube. Consider that 91% of teenagers stream Youtube. Then add in Hulu, Amazon, facebook etc., and 50% doesn't even come close.

But there is still much content that users want and can only get via cable. Period.

Are you satisfied watching the NFL on Twitter? Are you satisfied with 3% of the schedule? Mostly crappy games? Yes people can stream MLB - For a price.

Americans pay for cable for the ease of watching TV. Middle-aged and older folks do not want to have 4, 5, 6 or more bills for their TV watching when cable - which everyone hates - offers the TV experience as a one-stop shop. It's not a big deal to me to set up 6 different payments (which total about 65% of what my cable bill was), but it is for some people.

Go to the grocery store and wait in line while people write checks - yes a lot of people still do. Change is coming. We know it is coming. But it is always slow because millions of people don't want to have to change.

Once someone hits on a way to bundle streaming services, where you can pick and choose networks, sports channels netflix, amazon,m HBOm MLB, NFL, etc. then the change will really roll.

20 years ago, we knew the music industry was gonna change even as the music companies denied and resisted. Napster created a new playing field.

We are not too far away from a new playing field for entertainment.

Herman Cain

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 12800
  • 9-9-9
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #237 on: February 09, 2017, 09:16:14 PM »
They will stream it and make money of advertising ... like they do now.
This cable operator doesn't think that way. They operate under the model of knowing the parents and kids want to see their games on TV so they force you to by the cable package in order to stream.
Winning is overrated. The only time it is really important is in surgery and war.
                       ---Al McGuire

rocket surgeon

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • NA of course
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #238 on: February 10, 2017, 05:54:59 AM »
good article to get ya"ll up to speed on the "state" of tv viewing-some of this chit is a little over my head, but as with most of us 50-somethings, we have shown the ability to adapt and utilize to varying degrees of effectiveness.  i usually consider myself more average to slightly above with regards to adapting and utilizing the ever evolving technology in every day life.  my dad(in his 80's) for example, is more or less lost.  my mom however, has utilized just enough to remain dangerous...and somewhat more efficient.

but this article, i found :D to be a pretty good barometer of where things are today and moving forward-

http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21716459-peak-tv-its-way-slowly-traditional-tvs-surprising-staying-power
don't...don't don't don't don't

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #239 on: February 10, 2017, 07:34:32 AM »
good article to get ya"ll up to speed on the "state" of tv viewing-some of this chit is a little over my head, but as with most of us 50-somethings, we have shown the ability to adapt and utilize to varying degrees of effectiveness.  i usually consider myself more average to slightly above with regards to adapting and utilizing the ever evolving technology in every day life.  my dad(in his 80's) for example, is more or less lost.  my mom however, has utilized just enough to remain dangerous...and somewhat more efficient.

but this article, i found :D to be a pretty good barometer of where things are today and moving forward-

http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21716459-peak-tv-its-way-slowly-traditional-tvs-surprising-staying-power

Good article.  As this chart shows, it is all about age.



So it looks like traditional TV sticks around until the over 50 crowd dies off.  Enough of them will be gone in 20 years that streaming will be the dominant form.

And don't forget "Moore Law" that computing power will double every 18 months.  What does this mean?  If you have an iPhone7, you have more computing power in your pocket than the entire of human history through 1960!  Moore laws suggest the iPhone 23 in 20 years (at the current pace) will have more computing power and capabilities that all of Google today!

So in 20 years traditional cable will look like over-the-air TV now, horribly slow, inefficient,limiting and expensive.

When TV viewing gets that efficient so you pay for only what you want and only to the level you want to pay, sports will lose its subsidy it has now and find a drastic reduction in revenues.





http://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/mooreslaw.asp
What is 'Moore's Law'
Moore's law refers to an observation made by Intel co-founder Gordon Moore in 1965. He noticed that the number of transistors per square inch on integrated circuits had doubled every year since their invention.

Moore's law predicts that this trend will continue into the foreseeable future. Although the pace has slowed, the number of transistors per square inch has since doubled approximately every 18 months. This is used as the current definition of Moore's law. 
« Last Edit: February 10, 2017, 08:32:48 AM by Yukon Cornelius »

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #240 on: February 11, 2017, 09:06:46 AM »
February 10, 2017
ESPN Reportedly Losing 10,000 Subscribers Every Day

http://www.inquisitr.com/3970090/espn-reportedly-losing-10000-subscribers-every-day/

ESPN has become a drag on the earnings of parent company Disney as cord-cutters unsubscribe in droves.

“A floundering ESPN, with rising costs and declining viewership, continued to sink Disney’s financial results during its fiscal first quarter,” MarketWatch noted.

With its movie franchises and theme parks, Disney is and should be doing fine, but the 1Q revenue was down 3 percent and profit plummeted 14 percent because of its sports media investment.

“The world-wide leader in sports lost subscribers, while average viewership and advertising rates declined and programming costs grew,” MarketWatch added.

Through the end of 2016, Bristol, Connecticut-based ESPN had lost about 12 million subscribers from a 100 million high in 2011.

“At an estimated $7 per subscriber, that dip has been a substantial hit to Disney, especially considering media networks made up 49 percent of Disney’s profits during fiscal 2016,” explained The Wrap about ESPN’s financial troubles.

Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #241 on: February 11, 2017, 09:29:09 AM »
I had not thought this was the case, largely because I almost exclusively watch live sports on ESPN and almost none of the recap shows or commentary anymore. 

That said, the non-political part below is interesting and goes to ESPN's problem


ESPN Profit Plummets As Network Turns Left
ESPN has become MSESPN.
By Clay Travis
Feb 8, 2017 at 1:11p ET

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-profit-plummets-as-network-turns-left-020817

Presently ESPN has the following yearly sports rights payments: $1.9 billion a year to the NFL for Monday Night Football plus an additional playoff game which costs the network an additional $100 million, $1.47 billion to the NBA, a deal I told you flat out wasn't sustrightble back in July because it meant every single cable and satellite subscriber in the country was paying an average of $30 a year for the NBA whether they watched or not, $700 million to Major League Baseball, $608 million for the College Football Playoff, $225 million to the ACC, $190 million to the Big Ten, $120 million to the Big 12, $125 million a year to the PAC 12, and hundreds of millions more to the SEC.

Add it all up and the amounts are staggering, tens of billions of dollars in yearly fees owed regardless of what revenue looks like. With most companies you can cut costs if your revenue declines. Not ESPN. It owes these tens of billions for the next decade to come and more. 

________________

So 88 million cable subscribers that get ESPN are paying $30 year for the NBA whether they watch it or not.  That means every person that reads this post and gets ESPN on cable/Sat is paying $30/year for the NBA. 

This is precisely why streaming is going to kill off cable's business model.  90+% of the country could care less about the NBA and don't want to pay for it.  So streaming is a way to not pay for stuff you don't want.  Streaming makes you pay for what you want, not anything more.

Again, ESPN is suffering from the decline in all cable.  But ESPN is the most expensive cable station and far and away has the highest cost.  So it has the most to lose.

« Last Edit: February 11, 2017, 09:38:49 AM by Yukon Cornelius »

brandx

  • Guest
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #242 on: February 11, 2017, 10:14:51 AM »
February 10, 2017
ESPN Reportedly Losing 10,000 Subscribers Every Day

http://www.inquisitr.com/3970090/espn-reportedly-losing-10000-subscribers-every-day/

ESPN has become a drag on the earnings of parent company Disney as cord-cutters unsubscribe in droves.

“A floundering ESPN, with rising costs and declining viewership, continued to sink Disney’s financial results during its fiscal first quarter,” MarketWatch noted.

With its movie franchises and theme parks, Disney is and should be doing fine, but the 1Q revenue was down 3 percent and profit plummeted 14 percent because of its sports media investment.

“The world-wide leader in sports lost subscribers, while average viewership and advertising rates declined and programming costs grew,” MarketWatch added.

Through the end of 2016, Bristol, Connecticut-based ESPN had lost about 12 million subscribers from a 100 million high in 2011.

“At an estimated $7 per subscriber, that dip has been a substantial hit to Disney, especially considering media networks made up 49 percent of Disney’s profits during fiscal 2016,” explained The Wrap about ESPN’s financial troubles.

Again, you claim, this is an ESPN-induced problem.

It is not. It is a cable problem.

Why not have a headline saying "Comedy Channel loses 10,000 subscribers a day"? Oh, that doesn't fit your agenda.


Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #243 on: February 11, 2017, 12:37:09 PM »
Again, you claim, this is an ESPN-induced problem.

It is not. It is a cable problem.

Why not have a headline saying "Comedy Channel loses 10,000 subscribers a day"? Oh, that doesn't fit your agenda.

The sentence I wrote immediately above ...

Again, ESPN is suffering from the decline in all cable.  But ESPN is the most expensive cable station and far and away has the highest cost.  So it has the most to lose.

ESPN/ESPN2 cost you $10/month.  The Comedy channel cost you about 85 cents a month.  So yes the comedy channel  is losing subscribers like ESPN.  But the comedy channel has no overhead when compared the huge broadcasting rights ESPN has shelled out.

And like you said the lower fees will get passed along to the sports leagues and conferences.  That is a nice way to say the sports leagues/conferences are screwed and not take it lying down.  I expect strikes and problems in the leagues as the realization sets in that payrolls are peaking and may head lower in the coming years.  Cities like Milwaukee are going to be choking on their new basketball stadium.

brandx

  • Guest
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #244 on: February 11, 2017, 05:48:18 PM »
The sentence I wrote immediately above ...

Again, ESPN is suffering from the decline in all cable.  But ESPN is the most expensive cable station and far and away has the highest cost.  So it has the most to lose.

ESPN/ESPN2 cost you $10/month.  The Comedy channel cost you about 85 cents a month.  So yes the comedy channel  is losing subscribers like ESPN.  But the comedy channel has no overhead when compared the huge broadcasting rights ESPN has shelled out.

And like you said the lower fees will get passed along to the sports leagues and conferences.  That is a nice way to say the sports leagues/conferences are screwed and not take it lying down.  I expect strikes and problems in the leagues as the realization sets in that payrolls are peaking and may head lower in the coming years.  Cities like Milwaukee are going to be choking on their new basketball stadium.

Yes they put out a lot of $$$$$ and the NFL and MLB negotiations in 4 years will tell us a lot about the future.

They also rake in about $7,000,000,000 - that;s 7 with a 'B' - more from carriage fees than Fox Sports. They also rake in a ton more advertising $$$$than FOX.

ESPN is down about 11 mil viewers in the last 5 years. Still, the money they make from cable carriage fees is up about $2B. Advertising $$$$ are also rising big time.

Annual rights fees now run almost $6B a year - nowhere near the $11B -$12B they bring in.

We will not totally know where ESPN's financial health is at until the MBL negotiations in 4 years and NFL in 5 years. Let's just say for now that they have no competition.


Tugg Speedman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8836
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #245 on: February 11, 2017, 06:05:57 PM »
Yes they put out a lot of $$$$$ and the NFL and MLB negotiations in 4 years will tell us a lot about the future.

They also rake in about $7,000,000,000 - that;s 7 with a 'B' - more from carriage fees than Fox Sports. They also rake in a ton more advertising $$$$than FOX.

ESPN is down about 11 mil viewers in the last 5 years. Still, the money they make from cable carriage fees is up about $2B. Advertising $$$$ are also rising big time.

Annual rights fees now run almost $6B a year - nowhere near the $11B -$12B they bring in.

We will not totally know where ESPN's financial health is at until the MBL negotiations in 4 years and NFL in 5 years. Let's just say for now that they have no competition.

Yes we know the HISTORY lesson.  But the reason DIS stock is struggling is about the future.  Investors are worried the number you cite are never to be seen again and they will get worse and worse as we move forward in time.

brandx

  • Guest
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #246 on: February 11, 2017, 09:45:21 PM »
Yes we know the HISTORY lesson.  But the reason DIS stock is struggling is about the future.  Investors are worried the number you cite are never to be seen again and they will get worse and worse as we move forward in time.

Sometimes investors are right; sometimes not.

There were an awful lot of people who bad-mouthed Netflix 5 years ago. One of them was our resident cable and satellite "expert" at the time - although I always thought he lied about what he did. But they were putting out a ton of money for acquisition rights without the income to back it up.

ESPN? We don't know yet. We take the opposite views and it will be five years when the big negotiations come up before we know who is right.

Not A Serious Person

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1144
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #247 on: December 29, 2018, 09:44:39 AM »
As a Disney stockholder and former Disney employee  (Mouseschwitz is what we used to call it), I'm not worried one iota.

They beat earnings, they were short on revenue.  Sure the stock will get hit, but just wait until Star Wars next quarter and some of the pipeline content.

Put another way, I'm buying Disney today.

I bought some today when it was down about $10.00.   May buy some more tomorrow.

I love Bob Iger, but thought he was a bit disingenious with his statement that they could go OTT today if they wanted to.  From a technical perspective, he's correct.  From a contractual perspective, not so fast.  More importantly, he knows that if he did the amount of money he stands to lose is huge.  That's why they are sticking with the bundle despite a lot of people screaming they shouldn't, because of those people simply don't understand the mechanics or the risk involved.

Some day, yes, but not for awhile.

This was 3 1/2 years ago.  The stock is lower significantly today.  So you been sitting with a loss for at least 3 1/2 years?  What is the difference between being "early" and "wrong?"
Western Progressives have one worldview, the correct one.

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22730
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #248 on: December 29, 2018, 01:39:00 PM »
This was 3 1/2 years ago.  The stock is lower significantly today.  So you been sitting with a loss for at least 3 1/2 years?  What is the difference between being "early" and "wrong?"

Actually, DIS is only down about $3 since then (which isn't "significantly" for a $100+ stock).

With dividends reinvested, a $10K investment on 8/5/15 would be worth about $10,230 today -- so not a loss at all, but a 2.3% gain.

Now, a 2.3% gain over nearly 3 1/2 years is nothing to really celebrate, especially since the S&P 500 (SPY) is up about 26.6% over the same span, and some blue-chip stocks are up 100% or more since then (such as Microsoft, up 128%).

But it's not a loss, let alone a "significant" one. And DIS has handily beaten SPY over the last year.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2018, 01:40:48 PM by MU82 »
“It’s not how white men fight.” - Tucker Carlson

Cheeks

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6045
  • Hall of Fame Hugger
Re: Is ESPN In Trouble (cord-cutter)
« Reply #249 on: December 29, 2018, 02:40:58 PM »
This was 3 1/2 years ago.  The stock is lower significantly today.  So you been sitting with a loss for at least 3 1/2 years?  What is the difference between being "early" and "wrong?"


Why didn’t you factor in the dividend Disney paid me during that time?
"I hate everything about this job except the games, Everything. I don't even get affected anymore by the winning, by the ratings, those things. The trouble is, it will sound like an excuse because we've never won the national championship, but winning just isn't all that important to me.” Al McGuire

 

feedback