Hmm, dunno where I'd be without my coveted "Variety Packs" from my local provider. I mean, I love having to subscribe to three (three!) horse racing channels in order to get NBATV.
It's how they amortize the cost of the programming. I read where Disney charges ESPN charges $5 per customer to the cable companies. Yet only 25% of customers actually watch ESPN. If they charged independently, they'd have to charge those 25% 4x, or $20/mo, to make the same money.
I don't make that assumption. I only reported what I read. But if half the homes have cable/satellite (access to ESPN), and EVERYONE in that other 50% actually subscribes, then the rates would have to at least double - to $10/mo.
Well it is the future, the market is changing, and much like the music industry the giants need to adapt.
This^ I don't have cable (or a TV for that matter) because I would only watch ESPN/TNT. Charge me $5/month for those two and I'd gladly pay, but I won't pay $50+/month for channels I don't watch.
I really don't watch ESPN all that much except when there is basketball. You can get all the sports news faster on the internet now days.
I heard the same thing as Denny. ESPN costs a SHIT ton because of so many sports contracts, and that is what really drives up the price of cable.
it would actually be closer to 20$/mo for just ESPN. Right now they distribute the cost to all cable subscribers and then it's only 5$/mo for EVERYONE.