Fox Sports 1 strikes deals with DirecTV, Dish and TWC

[Benny B]

I agree. It seemed almost like they were trying to out-clown or out- booyah SC. I was very disappointed. Still hopeful they can work it out though.

http://www.hulu.com/embed.html?eid=lpmzpuhsxrouhax8uwehew

Ugh... apparently Scoopy no likey Hulu embeddy.

Exterior link: http://www.hulu.com/watch/124974

[ChicosBailBonds]

ESPN Plans On Continuing With "SportsCenter" As Usual In Response To "Fox Sports Live"

By John Ourand, Staff Writer

Published August 19, 2013


On Saturday night at 7:24pm ET, ESPN "SportsCenter" anchor Steve Levy sent out a tweet saying, "its me and [Scott Van Pelt] on SportsCenter after little league world series on espn #notour1stshow." The message behind the hashtag Levy used was obvious. "Fox Sports Live," the newest competitor to "SportsCenter," was three-and-a-half hours from debuting and already picking up a lot of media attention. But ESPN execs feel they have the experience and personalities to hold off any challenges. In separate phone conversations yesterday, THE DAILY spoke with Van Pelt and "SportsCenter" Senior Coordinating Producer Michael Shiffman about some of the decisions behind what ESPN put into Saturday's show.

On choosing Levy and Van Pelt to anchor "SportsCenter" Saturday night:
Shiffman: We wanted to put our best foot forward. We knew it was their first night, and we want to have our strongest anchor teams out there as well.
Van Pelt: We've worked together for many years. He just celebrated his 20th year at ESPN, and I've been there more than 10. This is a show you know, and these are people that you know. I don't think it was entirely coincidental that we were asked to do this. We have a sense of pride in our place. We are proud to be asked to be the ones to sit out there, and if there is some kind of a taste test going on, remind people that this is what you know.

On changes to "SportsCenter" on FS1's launch night:
Shiffman: Our overall theme was to attack the show like we do every single night, which is to do the best highlights possible, the best storytelling possible and be really smart. That's not different from what we did other nights before they launched.
Van Pelt: During our production meeting, I told an anecdote of a basketball coach friend I had spoken to that day. I explained to him that there was this new network that's launching, and he says, "Oh, what is it?" I said, "Fox Sports 1." He said, "What channel is that?" He hadn't heard and had no clue. It's a good reminder that when you live in our small little world, you could convince yourself that this is a big deal, that they're ready to join the fight, and it's crickets outside the walls of our little fraternity. With that thought in mind, my philosophy is that we do exactly what we do and have done for 30-some odd years.

What was the best part of Saturday night's "SportsCenter?"
Shiffman: We try to maximize our resources. Last night, we had reporters at two of the NFL games. We have Mark Schwarz at Jaguars-Jets and Pedro Gomez at Cowboys-Cardinals. We had the My Wish feature. Those things have always been staples of the show and, as far as I can tell, will continue to be staples of the show.
Van Pelt: I can't think of a stand-alone moment that I'm most proud of. It wasn't like we said, "Let's do one highlight where we really show Fox what we can do." It wasn't like that. It wasn't anything that differentiated itself from any particular day.

On the idea that Fox Sports 1 is bringing fun back into sports:
Van Pelt: The easiest thing in the world to do is to talk a bunch of junk on Twitter. They're really good at that --­ poking the bear with a stick. I would swing up, too, if I were them. That's what they're doing. The idea that they co-opted fun in sports and that ESPN and "SportsCenter" is some kind of a trip to the dentist is laughable. I have fun every single time I do "SportsCenter." If they want to be fun, great. Go have fun. I encourage you to do so because we do it every day. That's the one thing I found to be a head-scratcher, that they planted their flag on this fun hill, as if they discovered it. Like they're the Christopher Columbus of fun in sports and they're putting their flag down on that hill. Really? We've been living here since 1979. Welcome to the fun of sports.

On FS1's launch:
Van Pelt: If you reference [co-President] Eric Shanks or ["Fox Sports Live" Executive Producer] Michael Hughes, these are guys that I like whose talent I respect and who I sincerely wish well. The PR folks wanted to make it a jousting war verbally. Sincerely, I like those guys. This is a big, giant buffet table and there's room for everybody to belly up to the table. Sincerely, you just wish them the best because I like those folks. But I work for ESPN and I'm proud to do so. We'll do our part to keep our seat at the table.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Analysis by SBD.


It's been a constant theme in the pay-TV industry for the past decade: Distributors complain about the cost of sports, but they are powerless to stop it. In discussing the Time Warner Cable-CBS battle last week, financial analyst Craig Moffett said, "These disputes always end up with the broadcaster winning."

That's why news last week that Fox backed down on its asking price for Fox Sports 1 was so surprising. A confluence of events gave distributors enough leverage to resist Fox's asking price of 80 cents per subscriber per month.

Just days before last week's scheduled launch, Fox told some of the biggest U.S. distributors that they could carry Fox Sports 1 with the same deals and at the same rates that they carry Speed, which costs about 23 cents per subscriber per month. The move surprised industry insiders. In essence, Fox decided to punt, opting to fight Fox Sports 1's carriage battles another day.

Score one for the distributors, at least for now.

In the long run, Fox certainly will be able to get the money it wants for Fox Sports 1. But for now, distributors can bask in a victory where, for once, they held most of the leverage. For them, it was a long time coming.

Much of the leverage came from sheer numbers. Fox was seeking significant increases from DirecTV, Dish Network, Time Warner Cable, Cox and Cablevision, which account for nearly 55 million homes. It's bruising enough to fight any one of those distributors on their own. But carriage fights with all of them — all of which have been champing at the bit to take a stand against sports costs — at the same time? Fox executives, led by distribution president Michael Hopkins, said no thanks. It made more sense to spread out these deals over the next few years and negotiate them one at a time.

Distributors also believed that they gained more leverage as the channel's launch approached. On background, many of them pointed to a key juncture as a turning point. That being March 1 — when company executives unveiled Fox Sports 1 and pledged to launch the channel to 90 million homes. At the time, one distribution executive said, "The only way Fox can get to 90 million is with my subscribers." Other distributors had the same thought: Fox needs us right now more than we need them.

Fox signed rights deals and advertising clients predicated on the channel having 90 million homes. News stories had the network at near full distribution. There seemed to be no question that it would have full distribution at launch.

On the other side of the table, distributors held their cards and bet that the longer they waited, the more likely Fox would move from its initial asking price in order to bulk up its distribution numbers. Even as the distributors became embroiled in high-profile fights with other networks (Time Warner and CBS; DirecTV and Pac-12 Networks), they believed they would be able to wait out Fox Sports 1.

The massive PR effort by Fox continued in the weeks leading up to launch. The network sent out multiple releases each day on FS1, from new talent to planned shows to charter advertisers. But distributors believed that Fox faced more pressure as the Aug. 17 launch date neared. What if after so much hype, the next big competitor to ESPN launched only to a handful of homes? Talk about a buzz kill.

Distributors are used to being the punching bags when it comes to sports channels. Leverage will return to Fox, which is certain to get the price it wants for FS1 eventually — maybe as early as this fall.

That's when Time Warner Cable's affiliate deal for YES Network ends. Fox, which owns part of YES and handles its distribution, could get its Fox Sports 1 price during those negotiations. Cox's deals with several Fox-owned RSNs are up at the end of this year, as well. Expect Fox to package Fox Sports 1 at that point.

But for this one moment, distributors took solace that they did their part to keep sports rights down. It's a solace they know won't last long. As one executive said last week, "This feels never-ending."