SPORTS BUSINESS DAILY had some very interesting sports cable TV rating numbers today - for 2008:
SBD:
For ‘08, Versus saw the biggest viewership gains among cable sports nets for both total day programming and primetime, up 20.2% and 23.6%, respectively, from a year ago. Speed also saw double-digit growth in ‘08, as the net had a successful season of NASCAR Camping World Truck Series telecasts. Among the ESPN-branded nets, only ESPN saw gains in ‘08, up in both total day and primetime.
Yeah, ESPN still has over seven times the viewership of Comcast-owned Versus, but those numbers may be a prelude to something much bigger. Comcast may, once again, be eyeing getting serious in an attempt to slay the ESPN dragon. Or at least put out an eye - or break off a nail or two.
Since Fox’s failed bid in the ’90s to challenge ESPN’s sports programming dominance, the WWL has grown into a gargantuan money-printing machine for Disney. ESPN now sucks up by far the most sports-related ad dollars of any single sports media company. So it stands to reason that a company with vast resources, like Comcast, would be interested in trying to barge its way into the oft-lucrative sports play-by-play business.
Of course, Versus is only a tiny baby step towards doing that. Acquistion of the NHL was more symbolic. An initial, but small, volley fired in Bristol’s direction.
To get serious, Comcast would have to build out its broadcast capabilities dramatically, pony up Billions in broadcast rights fees and establish a serious presence on the web. That’s all something that will take time. But with the economy likely to go sideways in 2009, this might just be that time.
If you think this is a pipe dream, you weren’t paying attention three years ago, when Comcast made serious overtures about challenge ESPN’s industry dominance.
The WALL STREET JOURNAL reported in 2005 that “Comcast Corp., the nation’s largest cable operator, may be weighing a sports network to challenge the leadership of ESPN, according to a published report.”
More:
Comcast may try to turn its niche Outdoor Life Network into a more broad-based sports network. At first it would need to land rights to broadcast games from the National Hockey League and National Football League to give it the sports programming it needs to attract viewers and greater cable distribution.
The NFL has recently signed broadcast rights deals with ESPN that run through 2013 and three broadcast networks that run through 2011 to carry most of its games. But the NFL will offer Thursday and Saturday night games late in the season starting in the 2006 season.
Comcast is in talks to broadcast those Thursday and Saturday games, according to the report, for as much as $400 million a year. The Journal reported that in one scenario under discussion, Comcast would give the NFL an equity stake in the rebranded sports channel.
Comcast bid for ESPN owner Walt Disney in early 2004, partly attracted by Disney’s profitable cable networks, led by the ESPN brand. Broadcasting NFL Sunday night games starting in 1987 was a key to building the ESPN franchise, and in 2006 the cable network will start broadcasting “Monday Night Football,” which had long been a staple of Disney-owned broadcast network ABC.
You read that right. Comcast tried to buy Disney in 2004, acquiring ESPN along with it. And since then, ESPN has been Disney’s most profitable unit.
Unlike the declining NFL Network, Comcast operates a vast amount of cable systems itself, so significant early cable clearance for an all-sports challenger to ESPN wouldn’t be as difficult, at least initially, as you might think. And if Comcast was to acquire the rights to major league play-by-play (NBA, NASCAR, anyone?), you can bet there would be plenty of pressure for competitor cable outfits to pick up Comcast’s sports channel.
And despite damaged relations with the NFL over carriage issues, I still believe Comcast could still land PBP rights to league games (Thursday nights?) if it was willing to overpay.
With a slow 2009 on the horizon, Comcast might be looking to build up its sports operation under the cover of darkness. Then break it thereafter with massive bids on major league-caliber sports broadcast rights. Or perhaps there would be no move until Comcast was able to anchor a channel with a massive major league broadcast rights acquistion. Could happen either way.
Another factor is web. Versus has an underwhelming presence on the internet and isn’t recognized in sports blogosphere. Meanwhile, ESPN has largely ignored the countless millions who read highly-trafficked sports blogs. By embracing the blogs, Versus’ website and programming could gain traction almost instantly.
Regardless, a Comcast challenge to ESPN would be a huge boon to sports fans. Thanks to the blogs, we’ve already seen what competition from the web has done to improve and adjust ESPN’s sometimes insufferably arrogant reporting procedures. Now throw in another well-funded (read loss leader) legitimate sports channel, which embraces all things web, and all hell could break loose.
If that happens, somebody get T.O. on the phone. I’m gonna need some popcorn.
9:19 pm on January 6th, 2009
Lordy what I would do to have an alternative to ESPN. Wishful thinking though I think.
9:26 pm on January 6th, 2009
Didn't NFL declare jihad against Comcast about broadcasting their games?
No way NFL will play ball.
9:27 pm on January 6th, 2009
Comcast is in Philly? Hello Sal Pal!
9:29 pm on January 6th, 2009
Maybe they'll hire me! I've run out of networks!
9:33 pm on January 6th, 2009
*hoots and hollers, waves hands, jumps up and down, bangs pots and pans, fires rifle, draws "Career S.O.S" in sand*
9:48 pm on January 6th, 2009
god forbid espn "embracing" the blogs. they'd ruin them. blogs are the only place to get the truth.
10:08 pm on January 6th, 2009
Hey, anyone know if they're looking for some hot female talent?
10:37 pm on January 6th, 2009
Of course they have the largest growth in viewership: they also have the fewest viewers.
11:33 pm on January 6th, 2009
It's gonna be some years before the 'empire' (wtf) of ESPN is 'brought down'…the addition of the MLB Network January 1st (50 million homes, instantly) will add another slight dent. But this is good for all of us, because this will nudge ESPN to up the ante even more. Capitalism at it's finest, I suppose. The whole 'empire' tag is a smidge annoying however…empire simply because they came first and sufficient competition hasn't come forth? Lots of choice is always a good thing, and ESPN's various parent companies over the years have never fought that. Thusly, we all win.
1:14 am on January 7th, 2009
What is this "competition" you speak of?
1:55 am on January 7th, 2009
Hahaha, Karl. I suppose these networks know that tackling a monolith like Disney is pointless, so they just try to attract the splinter audience. I was speaking more to the fact that ESPN hasn't really done anything predatory to keep their dominant market position. They've just sorta always been around longest. They always streamlined their product, and stood up well. I mean, cable ratings are a relatively new thing…and ESPN will always be a bedrock. Speaking for myself, I just know I'll be watching less ESPN because of the existence of MLB Network. If my cable provider actually carried NFL network…I'd watch even less. My objection was to the term 'empire'. Maybe it was tongue in cheek on the author's part. It's all very interesting, seeing how many sports networks it takes to merely chip away at ESPN's numbers. The 'competition' lies in the fact that no matter who's tried, against ESPN, there really is NO competition, right? Then again, you'd know far more than I on these matters…comrade. WOTW Unite?
2:34 am on January 7th, 2009
espn has internet, tv, radio, espn zones, and god knows what else.
i think its safe to qualify that as a f'ing "empire".
1:30 pm on January 7th, 2009
ESPN doesn't 'have' any of those things…Disney does. The explosion of ESPN into an 'Empire' didn't happen until DISNEY did it. Big difference between 'dominant in the market' and the connotations a word like 'empire' brings. They have done nothing to stop the competition, the competition simply doesn't measure up. It's not because the competition doesn't have resources to compete…NewsCorp tried and failed. This is why these other smaller networks appeal only to specific sports. The depiction as 'empire' is cute…but it lightly implies that there's some sort of budding David v. Goliath story coming down the line…which there is none…because there is simply no real competition. They have the sports market pretty cornered. Now if you want to talk 'empires'…ESPN is just one facet of the enormous disney empire…NewsCorp…also an empire. Oh jesus christ who f'ing cares! Sorry to bore you all, as I've now bored myself.
1:50 pm on January 7th, 2009
I didn't realize people still watched ESPN after they stopped showing sports so they could market Disney movies.
2:05 pm on January 7th, 2009
If ESPN pulls off any more crap like "Who's Now?", and I'll personally lead the drive to get people to switch to other channels.
2:14 pm on January 7th, 2009
also don't forget that vs had some good college football games this year
3:07 pm on January 7th, 2009
I can't help but wonder if this is a testament to the type of sports that are broadcast on Versus. The NHL has certainly received an overall boost after the last two winter classics and the resurgence of some original six teams. College football is always a strong selling point.
It's kind of annoying that the original sports programming they do gets buried and lost because they seem inept at programming and promotion. The Contender was always a very good show, depsite the network switches, so why not promote it? Why not try to improve on the mistakes of seasons past and find that right balance between fighting and story telling? It seems like a no-brainer. But then again, they did apparently hire Tony Danza to host. Just gross.
12:56 am on January 8th, 2009
I'm glad Versus is covering the 2009 Dakar Rally.
9:51 pm on January 8th, 2009
Comcast will never be able to challenge ESPN. ESPN viewership is damn huge. The analogy is like Microsoft trying to challenge Google. No way!
9:24 am on April 26th, 2009
Were did you find these informations?