RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

Brutal in Bristol today
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 1:43 pm    ::: Brutal in Bristol today Reply Reply with quote

Bloodbath.

http://deadspin.com/a-running-list-of-espn-layoffs-1794664091

Haven't seen the names of any WBB personalities yet.

Some of these tweets remind you that these are real people whose lives are being disrupted.

@dannykanell
Poured my heart and soul into ESPN for last 8 years. Moved my wife and 3 kids to CT to go "all in" 5 years ago. Bummed it ended in 3 minutes


Or this classic. Oops.

Mike L. Goodman @TheM_L_G
Today's gonna suck for a lot of people at ESPN. It doesn't seem like too much to ask to remember that those people are in fact people.


And a while later comes....

Mike L. Goodman @TheM_L_G
And hey, it turns out one of those people is me. Loved my time at ESPN, and now it's time to figure out what's next.


toad455



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 22470
Location: NJ


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 1:48 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ESPN seems to be crumbling. Other sports networks are just ahead of them right now. I'd assume most of those layed-off will find work shortly.



_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!

Twitter: @TBRBWAY
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 1:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

What other sports network is "ahead of them" or even close? None that I know of.

They're caught between a rock and a hard place of really expensive rights deal costs, and really high profit demands from Disney.

The one thing they can most quickly and easily cut is personnel costs.

So this afternoon, for example, the Russilo and Kenell show is filled with two nameless drones who probably work for minimum wage while the more costly names on the logo are unemployed.


sigur3



Joined: 18 Jun 2013
Posts: 6191
Location: Chicago-ish


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 2:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Quote:
NBA Injury Report‏ @NBAInjuryR3port
Report: ESPN (employs Stephen A. Smith) has laid off 100+ employees.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 2:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ESPN had a ton of income from cable subscribers who didn't watch them. Once the cord cutting started, the Worldwide Leader was bound to suffer.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 12493
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 2:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

wonder if Kara or Rebecca are watching the wire hoping there names dont come up ? Id be suprised to see the newest addition LaChina Or Rucco



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
toad455



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 22470
Location: NJ


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 2:16 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

LaChina's likely on a minimum salary. Ruocco is their basketball go to guy. He works NBA, WNBA, & college games. I doubt either one are gone.



_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!

Twitter: @TBRBWAY
WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 12493
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 2:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
What other sports network is "ahead of them" or even close? None that I know of.
.


Fox Idea



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
toad455



Joined: 16 Nov 2005
Posts: 22470
Location: NJ


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 2:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

WNBA 09 wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
What other sports network is "ahead of them" or even close? None that I know of.
.


Fox Idea


FOX is ahead, easily. Better coverage, regional channels, better reporting.



_________________
LET'S GO LIBERTY!!!!!!

Twitter: @TBRBWAY
justintyme



Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 2:53 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

And yet I am sure they will continue to employ the shitshow that is Stephen A. Smith.



_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
Fighting Artichoke



Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 3:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

justintyme wrote:
And yet I am sure they will continue to employ the shitshow that is Stephen A. Smith.


Ratings.

Obviously they aren't sticking with him based on talent.


Silky Johnson



Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 3302



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 3:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

toad455 wrote:
WNBA 09 wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
What other sports network is "ahead of them" or even close? None that I know of.
.


Fox :idea:


FOX is ahead, easily. Better coverage, regional channels, better reporting.


Ratings don't appear to reflect the notion that FOX is "easily" ahead of ESPN. And regional channels and coverage only matter if you actually care about the teams in your region. If you are, say, a transplant who refuses to assimilate, regional coverage is essentially worthless. Now, if you wanted to make the argument that, like, NFL Network and MLB Network and Golf Channel, etc. are ahead of ESPN, I may be forced to take your word for it: I don't watch those networks, because none of those sports are relevant to my interests. But Fox? Fox is trash.

@plight got it in one: ESPN benefited greatly from cable subscribers who were paying for channels that they didn't watch. What has always annoyed me about this whole thing is how cable cutting always seems to be spun into a narrative of "ESPN is hemorrhaging subscribers," but not "MTV is hemorrhaging subscribers," or "ABC Family" is hemorrhaging subscribers."



_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard

My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
StevenHW



Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 10979
Location: Sacramento, California


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 3:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Some other remaining ESPN on-air personalities are being reassigned or getting lesser workloads. I wonder if this could be the reason why Doris Burke is not going to cover women's b-ball anymore.



_________________
"The more I see of the moneyed classes, the more I understand the guillotine." -- George Bernard Shaw
Nerd2



Joined: 06 Jun 2010
Posts: 7659



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 3:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The Internet changed how people get their information. I used to sit through a whole hour of Sportscenter to get the scores and highlights. But since they often chose to focus on features before scores, I started going to their web instead for the info I wanted. The people who still watch TV want personalities and not on-air reporters. What will remain is the actual sporting events and the talking head shows that still bring in viewers. A lot of the folks let go were also the ones I read a lot of on twitter and on the website but that doesn't bring in revenue. Might as well hire cheaper reporters to do the best they can since ESPN doesn't make as much money from getting at the truth as they do in other ways.


Silky Johnson



Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 3302



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 3:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Nerd2 wrote:
The Internet changed how people get their information. I used to sit through a whole hour of Sportscenter to get the scores and highlights. But since they often chose to focus on features before scores, I started going to their web instead for the info I wanted. The people who still watch TV want personalities and not on-air reporters.


Speaking only for myself, this is also one hundred percent true. If I want scores and highlights (and I usually don't; I generally watch the games I care about, and there's rarely a case where there are two such games happening at the same time), I can hit the ESPN app on my phone, and have them in seconds. I watch/listen to ESPN because of the personalities.



_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard

My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 4:08 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Silky Johnson wrote:
@plight got it in one: ESPN benefited greatly from cable subscribers who were paying for channels that they didn't watch. What has always annoyed me about this whole thing is how cable cutting always seems to be spun into a narrative of "ESPN is hemorrhaging subscribers," but not "MTV is hemorrhaging subscribers," or "ABC Family" is hemorrhaging subscribers."


ESPN was charging providers more than any other cable network, so they're hurt worse.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
Richyyy



Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24326
Location: London


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 4:25 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The extra-sad thing is that, as that Deadspin article mentioned, most of this is pretty pointless and unnecessary. Compared to the gazillions they've spent on rights fees for major sports, and the millions being haemorraged in lost subscribers, the salary for an Ethan Sherwood Strauss or a Jayson Stark is an absolute drop in the ocean. I already use their website a lot less than I used to, but if you're going to excise the few decent writers and story-breakers you had left, I'm going to visit even less frequently.

And the newer competitors really haven't gone past them. Lots of the Fox shows have ratings so low that they're officially 'zero'. It's the changing landscape of how people consume that's hurting them far more than other people trying to do what ESPN does.



_________________
Independent WNBA coverage: http://www.wnbalien.com/
Silky Johnson



Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 3302



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 5:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Silky Johnson wrote:
@plight got it in one: ESPN benefited greatly from cable subscribers who were paying for channels that they didn't watch. What has always annoyed me about this whole thing is how cable cutting always seems to be spun into a narrative of "ESPN is hemorrhaging subscribers," but not "MTV is hemorrhaging subscribers," or "ABC Family" is hemorrhaging subscribers."


ESPN was charging providers more than any other cable network, so they're hurt worse.


I don't know who your provider is, but I'm pretty sure that I don't have the ability to cancel ESPN by itself. I can't even remember the last time that I had the ability to cancel whatever package ESPN was on, and the only thing that I would have lost was ESPN channels (ain't there only, like, three?). I understand that ESPN was charging providers more money, but I don't see how that has any bearing on the number of subscribers? Like I said, ABC Family (or whatever they renamed it to) is on the same tier that ESPN is on, for me (and, at one point, MTV was, too), but nobody appears to want to spin it as how everybody is dropping ABC Family.

But, trying to get back on brand, so to speak, was anyone who covers the WNBA for the network cut loose?



_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard

My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 5:26 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Silky Johnson wrote:
pilight wrote:
Silky Johnson wrote:
@plight got it in one: ESPN benefited greatly from cable subscribers who were paying for channels that they didn't watch. What has always annoyed me about this whole thing is how cable cutting always seems to be spun into a narrative of "ESPN is hemorrhaging subscribers," but not "MTV is hemorrhaging subscribers," or "ABC Family" is hemorrhaging subscribers."


ESPN was charging providers more than any other cable network, so they're hurt worse.


I don't know who your provider is, but I'm pretty sure that I don't have the ability to cancel ESPN by itself. I can't even remember the last time that I had the ability to cancel whatever package ESPN was on, and the only thing that I would have lost was ESPN channels (ain't there only, like, three?). I understand that ESPN was charging providers more money, but I don't see how that has any bearing on the number of subscribers? Like I said, ABC Family (or whatever they renamed it to) is on the same tier that ESPN is on, for me (and, at one point, MTV was, too), but nobody appears to want to spin it as how everybody is dropping ABC Family.

But, trying to get back on brand, so to speak, was anyone who covers the WNBA for the network cut loose?


ESPN charges higher carriage fees, so they're losing more money than other networks. ESPN charges $7+ per subscriber. No other network charges more than $2, most are under 25¢.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
Nerd2



Joined: 06 Jun 2010
Posts: 7659



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 5:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The way I consume ESPN now is that I watch it for sports events. I will not browse their web site because I find it too busy and hard to look at. I would tend to follow their reporters and analysts and it was their tweets that would pull me to the site for specific articles or to the TV for specific shows. It was free advertising. Wherever these people land will then become my source for online info. ESPN makes a ton of money per cable subscriber and cable companies probably have a deal with them so that they can't sell WatchESPN on demand. If people could purchase WatchESPN without a cable subscription, it would really accelerate the pace of cord-cutting. I personally have kept cable just for that and for the PAC-12 Network which I can't get any other way.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 5:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

toad455 wrote:
WNBA 09 wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
What other sports network is "ahead of them" or even close? None that I know of.
.


Fox Idea


FOX is ahead, easily. Better coverage, regional channels, better reporting.


You're joking, right?


NYL_WNBA_FAN



Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 14097



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 5:56 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Don't want anyone to lose jobs. But it's especially unfortunate when it's the journalistic types that are largely the first to go.



_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
Silky Johnson



Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 3302



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 6:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
ESPN charges higher carriage fees, so they're losing more money than other networks. ESPN charges $7+ per subscriber. No other network charges more than $2, most are under 25¢.


What does that have to do with the question, "Why aren't people talking about how these other networks are losing subscribers, if they're losing the same number of subscribers"? I never questioned whether or not ESPN was losing more money than the other networks.



_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard

My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
Youth Coach



Joined: 23 Mar 2008
Posts: 4752



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 6:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

All these people let go and yet Stephen A. Smith is still there and they continue to broadcast SC6.

NFL.com / NFL Network is crazy if they don't hire Ed Werder.
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/17 6:35 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Youth Coach wrote:
All these people let go and yet Stephen A. Smith is still there and they continue to broadcast SC6.

NFL.com / NFL Network is crazy if they don't hire Ed Werder.


SC6 and its ilk is a big part of what drove these layoffs. Read the NY Times coverage of the layoffs today. (It's very little about cord cutting)

There's going going to be a new talk show headed by MIke Greenberg as the morning "Sportscenter" too.

They're convinced people want "personalities" and "entertainment" and aren't interested in sports news or highlights. Get ready for more SC6-like shit.


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin