Archie Graham: Hey, ump, how 'bout a warning?
Umpire: Sure, kid. Watch out you don't get killed.
WSJ’s deep dive into the sports broadcast landscape is a good one, as they smartly illuminate an important viewership angle. Certainly, the news of the Spulu streaming service was good news for sports fans, but as we look into the slicing, dicing and pricing (ha! see what I did there?), there’s an interesting gap here:
While the new service will account for 55% of all sports rights (https://lnkd.in/gjfBeJ4c) and carry nearly all of the nationally broadcast NBA, NHL and MLB games, it will not have access to those games carried on the regional sports networks, which carry local-market telecasts for major professional teams. As we know, the biggest RSN broadcast entity is the filing-for-bankruptcy (something like 42 teams) across which is currently being rescued by Amazon Prime Video (https://lnkd.in/gHv8zkUH) for the price of an hour's parking on Wilshire. The rest are scattered across traditional cable.
With sports as the next battleground for streaming, this disjointedness will no doubt amplify consumer confusion/frustration regarding content (game) discovery and ultimately dilute viewership, especially since 52% of Millennial/Gen Z sports fans don't view watching live sports as an important part of being a fan in the first place per Morning Consult (https://lnkd.in/gujHRgDV).
I remain bullish on sports and streaming, but baffling consumers, who will be asked to dig even deeper into their pockets ($50 for Spulu + another $20 for Paramount+ and Peacock to complete the set), is something sports streamers will need solve for via better curation, better tune-in, better integration with how’ve dimensionalized our fandom, better sports-as-culture moments. Without better integration into contemporary sports fan culture, just because you build it, they may not come at these price points.
https://lnkd.in/gBnTzCAs
Director of Partnership Development
1moWhere are the Colorado Rockies