ESPN Layoffs

[Billy Hoyle]

When ESPN stopped producing sports highlights and sports discussion, and instead focused on pushing political sports stories like making Michael Sam the new Jackie Robinson via Josina Anderson, Caitlyn Jenner as an American hero and Colin Kaepernick as the new Rosa Parks of the NFL, I turned off ESPN and have gone exclusively to Fox Sports.  Today's decisions, in keeping personalities like Stephen A. Smith and dismissing Jayson Stark, is indicative of the type of programming they wish to produce.  That's fine, but it's not for me (and evidently 15 million more viewers since 2011). 

I'm sticking with NFL Network for draft coverage this weekend.

Please tell us all you are not a Marquette graduate wth your plagerism of such a bigoted and hopelessly ignorant comment.

As for the 15 million number, that's from people cutting cable and thus all networks. You can't just cut one network, unless you're using alternative facts.

[Tugg Speedman]

Please tell us all you are not a Marquette graduate wth your plagerism of such a bigoted and hopelessly ignorant comment.

As for the 15 million number, that's from people cutting cable and thus all networks. You can't just cut one network, unless you're using alternative facts.

Don't know about the quote but the second part here is wrong.  ESPN is losing subscribers faster than the overall cable losses.

And, if you think about it, it must be this way.  ESPN is the most expensive non-premium (eg. HBO) channel one can buy ($7/month).  The primary reason people are cutting the cord is its cost and not because they have suddenly become are uninterested in watching programming.  So the most expensive channel has to be losing subscribers faster than average.  If it was not, then it means everyone is happy with their cable bill and merely making choices in tastes and not due to economics.

Cable TV is too expensive giving the option of streaming at a fraction of its cost.  So the most expensive cable channel, ESPN, is going to feel it the most.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/09/espn-isnt-the-only-cable-network-that-suffered-this-year.html

[Skitch]

That's not your quote, I could have sworn I  saw that on twitter earlier today. You stole that one word for word from somewhere I just can't remember who said it. Or maybe I'm just having a terrible case of deja vu.

they don't want to be lectured about why Caitlyn Jenner is a hero, Michael Sam is the new Jackie Robinson of sports, and Colin Kaepernick is the Rosa Parks of football. ESPN made the mistake of trying to make liberal social media losers happy and as a result lost millions of viewers.     

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-firing-over-a-hundred-employees-today-042617

[Tugg Speedman]

they don't want to be lectured about why Caitlyn Jenner is a hero, Michael Sam is the new Jackie Robinson of sports, and Colin Kaepernick is the Rosa Parks of football. ESPN made the mistake of trying to make liberal social media losers happy and as a result lost millions of viewers.     

http://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-firing-over-a-hundred-employees-today-042617

From the link above ....

The simple truth of the matter is this -- ESPN spent way too much on sports rights just as its cable and satellite subscriptions began to collapse. On track for $8 billion in programming costs in 2017, ESPN will rack up its 15 millionth lost subscriber since 2011. Every single day so far in 2017 over 10,000 people have left ESPN. The numbers are astonishing and the collapse is rapid. All those lost subscribers add up to big money -- that's over $1.3 billion a year in money that comes off ESPN's books every year. And ESPN is on the hook for billions and billions a year for all the years ahead. That's guaranteed payments to leagues that ESPN can't escape no matter how many employees it fires.

As I've written before, if the current subscriber loss trajectory keeps up ESPN will begin losing money by 2021. And if the subscriber losses accelerate it will happen even sooner than that.

The collapse of the cable bundle is a huge story that will impact every cable channel, but ESPN stands to lose more by itself than 100 other cable channels combined. That's because ESPN standing alone costs more than 100 channels on many cable and satellite packages. ESPN by itself costs nearly five times the second most expensive channel on cable. ESPN's in infinitely worse shape than any other cable network out there too because it makes more than any other channel off the current business model and because those channels don't have the billions in fixed costs that ESPN does. If CNN makes less money on subscriber revenue, they can spend less on news gathering. If AMC makes less money in subscriber fees, they'll pay for fewer shows, but ESPN's entire business is predicated on the billions they owe for sports rights every year into the foreseeable future.

[muguru]

Andy Katz...gone. Wow!

Seth Greenberg‏Verified account @SethOnHoops · 2h2 hours ago 

The best teammate I ever worked with was let go yesterday. @ESPNAndyKatz is incredibly talented & the most genuine & sincere person I know.

 

[GoldenWarrior11]

Andy Katz.  SMH.

This day has been predicted for the past few years.  Many outside-ESPN columnists called it.  The shift towards screaming discussion panels over quality insight and content has chased off a plethora of viewers.  Couple that with other avenues for fans to get their sports kick, and its no wonder ESPN is declining. 

The fact that ESPN fired true and respected journalists and kept its loud and obnoxious ones should be very telling that ESPN is doubling down on its failure. 

[Tugg Speedman]

Andy Katz.  SMH.

This day has been predicted for the past few years.  Many outside-ESPN columnists called it.  The shift towards screaming discussion panels over quality insight and content has chased off a plethora of viewers.  Couple that with other avenues for fans to get their sports kick, and its no wonder ESPN is declining. 

The fact that ESPN fired true and respected journalists and kept its loud and obnoxious ones should be very telling that ESPN is doubling down on its failure.

Who gets shown the door is not necessarily a political or taste decision.  It is possible that Katz made more money than someone like Seth Greenberg and they save more dumping Katz and keeping cheaper "screamers" like Greenberg.

Also, many stories said some could stay if they agree to a big pay cut.  Maybe Katz decided to leave because he thinks someone else (FS1?) will pay him a similar amount instead of taking less to stay at ESPN.

These are very complicated decisions on who stays nd who goes.  The real takeaway is companies that do this are in trouble.  Staff layoffs like this are never done from a position of strength. 

ESPN is reeling.

[GoldenWarrior11]

Who gets shown the door is not necessarily a political or taste decision.  It is possible that Katz made more money than someone like Seth Greenberg and they save more dumping Katz and keeping cheaper "screamers" like Greenberg.

Also, many stories said some could stay if they agree to a big pay cut.  Maybe Katz decided to leave because he thinks someone else (FS1?) will pay him a similar amount instead of taking less to stay at ESPN.

These are very complicated decisions on who stays nd who goes.  The real takeaway is companies that do this are in trouble.  Staff layoffs like this are never done from a position of strength. 

ESPN is reeling.

Fair enough. 

[GoldenWarrior11]

http://thefederalist.com/2017/04/26/the-real-story-behind-espns-wednesday-massacre/

This passage sums up why I have turned off ESPN permanently. I got sick and tired of trying to watch my sports with a political twist attached to it.  ESPN became a joke.

"You want to watch the Lakers game? Okay, but first you're going to hear about Caitlyn Jenner. Want some NFL highlights? We'll get to those eventually, but coming up next will be a discussion about how North Carolina is run by racist, homophobic bigots. You want to see the box scores of today's baseball games? You can watch those at the bottom of the hour, but right now some D-list network talent would like to lecture you about gun control. After that we'll have a panel discussion about how much courage it takes to turn your back on the American flag."

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Andy Katz...gone. Wow!

Seth Greenberg‏Verified account @SethOnHoops · 2h2 hours ago 

The best teammate I ever worked with was let go yesterday. @ESPNAndyKatz is incredibly talented & the most genuine & sincere person I know.

Katz to the UW athletic director's PR dept

[Bocephys]

http://thefederalist.com/2017/04/26/the-real-story-behind-espns-wednesday-massacre/

This passage sums up why I have turned off ESPN permanently. I got sick and tired of trying to watch my sports with a political twist attached to it.  ESPN became a joke.

"You want to watch the Lakers game? Okay, but first you're going to hear about Caitlyn Jenner. Want some NFL highlights? We'll get to those eventually, but coming up next will be a discussion about how North Carolina is run by racist, homophobic bigots. You want to see the box scores of today's baseball games? You can watch those at the bottom of the hour, but right now some D-list network talent would like to lecture you about gun control. After that we'll have a panel discussion about how much courage it takes to turn your back on the American flag."

You could always just turn on ESPN when the Lakers play and get your highlights and box scores whenever you want them from the internet. 

[jficke13]

It's not that the programming or editorial guidelines leaned left (assuming they did, it never stood out that much to me beyond pandering to whatever was a trending topic in the world at the time) that made me not interested in watching ESPN, it was that the programming they were putting on the screen didn't interest me.

Hot takes programming? Nope.
Highlights on an arbitrary schedule? Nope.
Highlights of things you don't like? Nope.
Live sports? Yep.

Only one of those things can't be solved by not watching or getting your programming elsewhere. I mentioned to friends that I don't think I've watched ESPN for something that wasn't live sports since 2009. It's not that people don't want to watch their crappy political programming; it's that people don't want to watch their crappy programming, or at least don't want to pay so much for it.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I really don't think politics has anything to do with this. This all about cord cutting. There are better and cheaper alternatives to cable now.  As Heisy pointed out,  ESPN is the most expensive cable channel so they will be hurt the most by cord cutting.

The politics stuff is a red herring.  I also find it funny that this crowd seems to complain about politics entering sports when it is about Michael Sam and Caitlin Jenner.  But no one complains when Trump has an interview in the middle of Super bowl coverage.

[jficke13]

[...]The politics stuff is a red herring.  I also find it funny that this crowd seems to complain about politics entering sports when it is about Michael Sam and Caitlin Jenner.  But no one complains when Trump has an interview in the middle of Super bowl coverage.

That sucked every bit as much as the other stuff.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

That's not your quote, I could have sworn I  saw that on twitter earlier today. You stole that one word for word from somewhere I just can't remember who said it. Or maybe I'm just having a terrible case of deja vu.

Sounds like Heisy 2.0

[GoldenDieners32]

"you can't lose games in the NFL and still win games" - Trent Dilfer

[Golden Avalanche]

A thread on massive layoffs at the largest sports channel in America has turned into a hodgepodge display of the political persecution complex millions of people inflict upon themselves. 'Murica 2017!

[MerrittsMustache]

The live sports/TV landscape has changed drastically and ESPN was far too slow to adjust. Even when they did make adjustments, they missed their mark. The network's left-leaning politics played a minor role in ESPN's struggles but wasn't nearly as big a deal as some are making it out to be. It's all about cord-cutting.

[GGGG]

When ESPN stopped producing sports highlights and sports discussion, and instead focused on pushing political sports stories like making Michael Sam the new Jackie Robinson via Josina Anderson, Caitlyn Jenner as an American hero and Colin Kaepernick as the new Rosa Parks of the NFL, I turned off ESPN and have gone exclusively to Fox Sports.  Today's decisions, in keeping personalities like Stephen A. Smith and dismissing Jayson Stark, is indicative of the type of programming they wish to produce.  That's fine, but it's not for me (and evidently 15 million more viewers since 2011). 

I'm sticking with NFL Network for draft coverage this weekend.

Fox with Cowherd, et. al. is just as bad as ESPN.  Nobody really shows highlights or does in depth stuff any longer.  That's not what the marketplace wants.

And it isn't political.  This trend started long ago.

[GGGG]

The live sports/TV landscape has changed drastically and ESPN was far too slow to adjust. Even when they did make adjustments, they missed their mark. The network's left-leaning politics played a minor role in ESPN's struggles but wasn't nearly as big a deal as some are making it out to be. It's all about cord-cutting.

Yep.  Well said.

[GGGG]

http://thefederalist.com/2017/04/26/the-real-story-behind-espns-wednesday-massacre/

This passage sums up why I have turned off ESPN permanently. I got sick and tired of trying to watch my sports with a political twist attached to it.  ESPN became a joke.

"You want to watch the Lakers game? Okay, but first you're going to hear about Caitlyn Jenner. Want some NFL highlights? We'll get to those eventually, but coming up next will be a discussion about how North Carolina is run by racist, homophobic bigots. You want to see the box scores of today's baseball games? You can watch those at the bottom of the hour, but right now some D-list network talent would like to lecture you about gun control. After that we'll have a panel discussion about how much courage it takes to turn your back on the American flag."

Have fun in your safe space.

It's very easy to avoid politics on ESPN.  I never see the above referenced discussions since I only watch live sports.

[Badgerhater]

Most of this "boycott" due to politics stuff for all business is convenient virtual signaling.

If you cut the cord because cable costs too much money, but you did hate the editorializing it is convenient to emphasize that tangential reason.  In other cases, it is the convenient straw one can pick up, place on top of the camel so you can break its back.

When I want to see team highlights, I go to that team's website which have more and better ones then were ever on a sports TV show.

I will grant that there is a whole bunch of folks out here that are tired of everyone getting political about something.  But they are also equally tired of those that get upset at those who are getting political.   When it gets that meta, the issue is jumping the shark.

I hope I skirted the no-politics rule properly.

[Badgerhater]

Most of this "boycott" due to politics stuff for all business is convenient virtual signaling.

If you cut the cord because cable costs too much money, but you did hate the editorializing it is convenient to emphasize that tangential reason.  In other cases, it is the convenient straw one can pick up, place on top of the camel so you can break its back.

When I want to see team highlights, I go to that team's website which have more and better ones then were ever on a sports TV show.

I will grant that there is a whole bunch of folks out here that are tired of everyone getting political about something.  But they are also equally tired of those that get upset at those who are getting political.   When it gets that meta, the issue is jumping the shark.

I hope I skirted the no-politics rule properly.

[GWSwarrior]

Don't know about the quote but the second part here is wrong.  ESPN is losing subscribers faster than the overall cable losses.

And, if you think about it, it must be this way.  ESPN is the most expensive non-premium (eg. HBO) channel one can buy ($7/month).  The primary reason people are cutting the cord is its cost and not because they have suddenly become are uninterested in watching programming.  So the most expensive channel has to be losing subscribers faster than average.  If it was not, then it means everyone is happy with their cable bill and merely making choices in tastes and not due to economics.

Cable TV is too expensive giving the option of streaming at a fraction of its cost.  So the most expensive cable channel, ESPN, is going to feel it the most.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/09/espn-isnt-the-only-cable-network-that-suffered-this-year.html

Your lack of understanding of the world outside your bubble continues to astound me

[bradley center bat]

So they're saying 15 million stopped watching espn because espn tried to compare the first openly gay football player to the first black baseball player? 

It's such a stupid comment, given that everyone and their mom knows you can't pick individual channels, but hell...lets use it as evidence that people don't want to hear about gay athletes...which leads me to believe the mention of Steven A has to do with more than a big mouth as I'm sure they wouldn't say the same about rush Limbaugh or bill O'Reilly.  I think the comment sucks...and stands for everything MU doesn't.

Make ESPN great again...we all know what that means...no need to pretend.

Not sure if people are saying that is the reason or not. The lay-offs are happening with the cost of MNF and the NBA deal that blocked out FS1. The cord-cutters is always the major factor. That being said, your head is in the sand if you don't think millions are not feed up with ESPN with their programs outside of live sports.