ESPN Prez...."I regret not being able to get hockey back."

Search

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
6,478
Tokens
http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2013...t-sports-rights-layoffs-and-bill-simmons.html

skipperj.jpg

ESPN President John Skipper is one of the most powerful people in not just sports television, but sports and television. Skipper's reign at ESPN comes at a pivotal time for the company as the network and cable landscapes shift, sports rights continue to soar in value, and competition is greatly increasing with NBC and Fox launching their own 24/7 sports networks.
This week Skipper opened up about several topics in a Q&A with The Hollywood Reporter, and while it might be little more than a rundown of internal talking points from Bristol, Skipper is still a relatively interesting and revealing quote for a top executive. In the THR interview, he opens up about a number of topics that have made waves in recent months.
One of the central criticisms of ESPN is their lack of hockey coverage and the first quote from Skipper that leaps off the screen is his "regret" that ESPN didn't win back NHL rights from NBC a couple years ago:
"I regret not being able to get hockey back. We made a strong bid for it last time [in 2011]. But the NHL felt well served by NBC. So that's kind of something you have to respect, that they wanted to stay with the incumbents. And of course, it was very difficult for me to lose World Cup soccer [which will go to Fox in 2018]. It's not even a question of who you lose it to. I mean, one thing we've been fortunate in is that while we've aggregated this huge portfolio of rights, the rest of what we don't have has tended to get spread around. When we lost the World Cup, it went to Fox. Hockey is at NBC. CBS and Turner kept the NCAA men's basketball tournament. That's another one that I regret, of course. Basketball is a sport I played as a kid. I grew up in North Carolina [and went to the University of North Carolina as an undergrad], so bringing the men's tournament here would have been great. But I'm generally pretty proud of what we've been able to assemble -- but we weren't able to get the men's basketball tournament, the World Cup, the Olympics, hockey."
[FONT=Chaparral Pro, Georgia, Arial]
[/FONT]In addition to hockey, the ESPN President also wishes he hadn't lost the World Cup and had the NCAA Tournament and Olympics. Those are basically the only sporting events on Planet Earth ESPN doesn't have television rights to, so Skipper is basically saying he wants to televise everything. Hockey fans shouldn't get too excited at that Skipper quote and at this point, they should be happy without ESPN anyways. (After all, for every executive that offers a peace pipe to the NHL there's another that says it's a niche sport.)
 

New member
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
12,563
Tokens
it is a niche sport. a top level league does not lose its ratings in a championship game to a NBa final pregame show.
 

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
31,503
Tokens
Even if the NHL is a niche sport and a clear distant 4th in terms of popularity in america, they will be seeing rapidly increasing TV revenue over the next 10 years in local deals

Sports is the last content available on TV that people care to watch live and actually sit through ads

It is a great time to own a sports team if you aren't in a small market
 

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
17,562
Tokens
Even if the NHL is a niche sport and a clear distant 4th in terms of popularity in america, they will be seeing rapidly increasing TV revenue over the next 10 years in local deals

Sports is the last content available on TV that people care to watch live and actually sit through ads

It is a great time to own a sports team if you aren't in a small market

I agree with your entire post, but I would debate merits of owning a team. The NFL is completely profitable but the NBA and NHL are two sports in which profitable is not a certainty. Baseball is very lucrative even in a small market.
 

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
31,503
Tokens
I agree with your entire post, but I would debate merits of owning a team. The NFL is completely profitable but the NBA and NHL are two sports in which profitable is not a certainty. Baseball is very lucrative even in a small market.

Yeah if you own a team in some area nobody cares or just doesn't have the corporate base to buy the luxury suites and all that, not much you can do but in general the mid to bigger market teams are making more $ off TV than ever.

Another point is teams in cities stay the same (monopoly obviously) whereas in most big cities the population does grow and people do make more and more $ over time so you always need a smaller % of the population to fill your stadium/arena over time.
 

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
17,562
Tokens
The revenues are huge in tv, but take the Miami heat for example, they lost money last year. I just think the cost of buying a team today and its resell cost make it very difficult to see that many buyers.
 

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
31,503
Tokens
The revenues are huge in tv, but take the Miami heat for example, they lost money last year. I just think the cost of buying a team today and its resell cost make it very difficult to see that many buyers.


You think in the future sports team ownership will be more private equity groups rather than random rich dudes?
 

Breaking News: MikeB not running for president
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
13,179
Tokens
A niche sport :):)ya whatever

NHL is the most exciting to watch live and is as awesome on TV. I love the NFL but I rather watch it on TV anytime.

I rather watch a live stream of Murph painting his toe nails or BAS make his home made pop-cycles than watch a NBA regular season game.
NBA play-offs are 100% more exciting that regular season.


 

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
17,562
Tokens
You think in the future sports team ownership will be more private equity groups rather than random rich dudes?

No, because no smart PE firm would waste that kind of capital, unless buying a team like: NYY, LAL, ManU or something major global team.
 

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
17,562
Tokens
A niche sport :):)ya whatever

NHL is the most exciting to watch live and is as awesome on TV. I love the NFL but I rather watch it on TV anytime.

I rather watch a live stream of Murph painting his toe nails or BAS make his home made pop-cycles than watch a NBA regular season game.
NBA play-offs are 100% more exciting that regular season.




Scott, you are missing the point. I love the NHL and the NHL post-season in particular, but taking into account people like my father and other casual sports fans. They would only turn on game 7 of the Stanley cup finals if it was tied at 2-2 in game 7 in the 3rd period.
 

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
31,503
Tokens
No, because no smart PE firm would waste that kind of capital, unless buying a team like: NYY, LAL, ManU or something major global team.

Yeah that is true, unless it is something like comcast buying the 6ers or something that just makes sense.

Otherwise it'll probably continue to be rich people that aren't necessarily looking to make a profit off the team i.e Prokorhov types
 

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
17,562
Tokens
Yeah that is true, unless it is something like comcast buying the 6ers or something that just makes sense.

Otherwise it'll probably continue to be rich people that aren't necessarily looking to make a profit off the team i.e Prokorhov types

exactly, that is why I am surprised Larry Ellison never bought at team. He could out bid anyone. I know he tried for Warriors but still. Sports ownership profitably margin sailed in the past 10 years.
 

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
17,562
Tokens
Bob McNair paid $750 million for the Texans and while the FUCKING IDIOTS at FORBES continue to value NFL teams and other teams at some of these prices, unless there are other idiots out there like Magic Johnson group that bought the Dodgers, these teams aren't selling for these prices.
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
44,310
Tokens
Bob McNair paid $750 million for the Texans and while the FUCKING IDIOTS at FORBES continue to value NFL teams and other teams at some of these prices, unless there are other idiots out there like Magic Johnson group that bought the Dodgers, these teams aren't selling for these prices.

I believe the LA group would pay well over $750 million for the Texans.

ANd the guys at Forbes are not fucking idiots.
 

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
17,562
Tokens
I believe the LA group would pay well over $750 million for the Texans.

ANd the guys at Forbes are not fucking idiots.

They are fucking idiots. They value teams based on so many factors, but how many people are actually willing to spend a $1B plus on a sports team? It all comes down to what the market will bear.
 

Dice, Sports & Cocktails
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
13,706
Tokens
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/11/28/toronto-maple-leafs-1-billion_n_2205400.html

Canadian hockey teams support the nhl, case in point

Although the Jets did not qualify for the Stanley Cup playoffs in their first season, the team was very successful off the ice. It was widely believed that the Jets, playing in the league's smallest market, would require assistance through the NHL's revenue sharing program to be financially viable. However, the team's revenues in 2011–2012 exceeded expectations to the extent that they did not qualify.[14] According to Forbes' annual NHL financial report, the Jets generated $105 million US in revenue during their inaugural season, 16th best in the league, and posted operating income of $13.3 million.[15]

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/31/hockey-valuations-10_Atlanta-Thrashers_317422.html

the team they replaced had revenue of 71 million and lost 8 m
 

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2007
Messages
31,503
Tokens
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/11/28/toronto-maple-leafs-1-billion_n_2205400.html

Canadian hockey teams support the nhl, case in point

Although the Jets did not qualify for the Stanley Cup playoffs in their first season, the team was very successful off the ice. It was widely believed that the Jets, playing in the league's smallest market, would require assistance through the NHL's revenue sharing program to be financially viable. However, the team's revenues in 2011–2012 exceeded expectations to the extent that they did not qualify.[14] According to Forbes' annual NHL financial report, the Jets generated $105 million US in revenue during their inaugural season, 16th best in the league, and posted operating income of $13.3 million.[15]

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/31/hockey-valuations-10_Atlanta-Thrashers_317422.html

the team they replaced had revenue of 71 million and lost 8 m


Good tidbit but wasn't their 1st season back in Winnipeg? Certainly some novelty effect on those #s I would think.

I do agree though NHL should have teams in the canadien cities rather than places like Atlanta...
 

New member
Joined
Jul 21, 2006
Messages
12,563
Tokens
the demographic shift of the US will be the real doom of the NHL.

hispanics watch football and basketball mostly, with some watching baseball.

no minorities period watch hockey, and hockey is behind the big 3 with white youth as well.

itll never be a top league.

itll just be a niche league and continiue to be a section in the More Sports category of sports websites.
 

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
17,562
Tokens
Good tidbit but wasn't their 1st season back in Winnipeg? Certainly some novelty effect on those #s I would think.

I do agree though NHL should have teams in the canadien cities rather than places like Atlanta...

Yes, it was their 1st year back. NHL should get rid of Miami (Florida Panthers) and PHX.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,108,637
Messages
13,453,167
Members
99,426
Latest member
bodyhealthtechofficia
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com