Boycott of ESPN coverage....?

N

Nutcracker69

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 10, 2015
Total posts
692
Chips
0
I'm conflicted with this. I'm very disappointed with how the main event ended up playing out considering the amazing field that was left with about 100 to go. So I'm already inclined to not want to watch it. Also, not that it completely matters, but my TV is not with me where I'm living ATM, it is in storage. But the home has a TV in the cafeteria and it has cable and few of these old farts bother to watch TV in there, especially at night. So if I'm still stuck here then, I could probably still watch it. And if I'm fortunate enough to have moved on, I'd definitely have access to the broadcasts as they air.

So here's my bigger contention and it is a bit of a catch-22. According to ESPN, they have widdled down their coverage to just the final days of the Main Event mostly for cost concerns. But they had already scaled back to show JUST the Main event a while before that, stating that ratings were down and less people were watching poker on TV. F* that noise! It was a ton more entertaining watching people like Grinder, Dutch Boyd, Fishman, and then some more established pros win their bracelets. Hell, it was more entertaining watching Jennifer Tilly win hers, if only to spend enough camera time on her excellent breasts. I feel like there was one year where they tried to show every single event and definitely did feature every single final table. THAT WAS AWESOME. And that would be awesome again. If you watch ESPN's coverage of the Main you'll be like Jason Mercier who? When full coverage would show his dominance this series. I'm assuming without ESPN ****blocking coverage, that we can find video of the earlier events elsewhere so maybe I should just do that and shutup. After all, as I said, it is a catch-22. If enough people refuse to watch ESPN's coverage of the Main, ratings would be even lower and that coverage could go away forever. Since the goal would have been more coverage instead of less, the purpose would be defeated.
 
BiliousBetil

BiliousBetil

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Total posts
1,666
Awards
5
Chips
56
I'm conflicted with this. I'm very disappointed with how the main event ended up playing out considering the amazing field that was left with about 100 to go. So I'm already inclined to not want to watch it. Also, not that it completely matters, but my TV is not with me where I'm living ATM, it is in storage. But the home has a TV in the cafeteria and it has cable and few of these old farts bother to watch TV in there, especially at night. So if I'm still stuck here then, I could probably still watch it. And if I'm fortunate enough to have moved on, I'd definitely have access to the broadcasts as they air.

So here's my bigger contention and it is a bit of a catch-22. According to ESPN, they have widdled down their coverage to just the final days of the Main Event mostly for cost concerns. But they had already scaled back to show JUST the Main event a while before that, stating that ratings were down and less people were watching poker on TV. F* that noise! It was a ton more entertaining watching people like Grinder, Dutch Boyd, Fishman, and then some more established pros win their bracelets. Hell, it was more entertaining watching Jennifer Tilly win hers, if only to spend enough camera time on her excellent breasts. I feel like there was one year where they tried to show every single event and definitely did feature every single final table. THAT WAS AWESOME. And that would be awesome again. If you watch ESPN's coverage of the Main you'll be like Jason Mercier who? When full coverage would show his dominance this series. I'm assuming without ESPN ****blocking coverage, that we can find video of the earlier events elsewhere so maybe I should just do that and shutup. After all, as I said, it is a catch-22. If enough people refuse to watch ESPN's coverage of the Main, ratings would be even lower and that coverage could go away forever. Since the goal would have been more coverage instead of less, the purpose would be defeated.

It's important to keep in mind that broadcasting the events you miss took place during the height of the poker boom. Available viewership is a fraction now of what it was then. What this means is that, wsop coverage/broadcast are evaluated in the same way as any other content: what are the numbers?

Let me give you an example from ESPN's history. Remember ESPN Outdoors? During the height of the Fly fishing boom (yes, that was a thing) there were fishing programs all over the weekend mornings. Once the boom subsided, and the number of viewers diminished, the shows vanished. It's not personal, it's just business - gee, that sound familiar.

Now, one has to give ESPN and the WSOP credit in that they have fine-tuned live-streaming of the final tables other than the main. Even there, the number of events have been paired down. There no longer are duel streams; one with commentary and one without.

The bottom line is: the bottom line. WSOP/ESPN are not charities. They do what they do to make money, which is complicated by the fact the ESPN is shrinking due to the large number of cable cutters. So it goes.

Cheers!
 
T

Two6JJ

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 27, 2016
Total posts
746
Chips
0
Hopefully ESPN coverage does go away. I much prefer the 30min delay stream that WSOP did for most of the tournaments. It looks like the future of poker coverage since it is as live as it gets and you can see every hand. This gives you the best chance to learn how the best measure the table and play out sick bluffs or laydowns.
 
BiliousBetil

BiliousBetil

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Total posts
1,666
Awards
5
Chips
56
Hopefully ESPN coverage does go away. I much prefer the 30min delay stream that WSOP did for most of the tournaments. It looks like the future of poker coverage since it is as live as it gets and you can see every hand. This gives you the best chance to learn how the best measure the table and play out sick bluffs or laydowns.

One question: Who will provide the broadcast of these live streams? Currently, it's the production company hired by ESPN. See the problem here? Let's say ESPN drops their coverage and WSOP wants to continue the live streams, who is going to pay for it. Remember, WSOP is not a charitable organization.

This situation could change overnight if large sponsors - such as the pre-black Friday poker sites - were to materialize. However, at this point, that seems unlikely.

Cheers!
 
S

Shiroslullaby

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 2, 2016
Total posts
29
Chips
0
ESPN needs to adjust the way they operate in regards to poker.
They are still thinking like its 20 years ago.
Live streams are the future. ESPN needs to take a look at the way companies are doing live streams of tournaments for LoL, Dota, StarCraft etc and do the same sort of thing for poker.
There are still viewers, its just moving to the online streaming arena.
People want good live coverage of an event.
 
BiliousBetil

BiliousBetil

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Total posts
1,666
Awards
5
Chips
56
ESPN needs to adjust the way they operate in regards to poker.
They are still thinking like its 20 years ago.
Live streams are the future. ESPN needs to take a look at the way companies are doing live streams of tournaments for LoL, Dota, StarCraft etc and do the same sort of thing for poker.
There are still viewers, its just moving to the online streaming arena.
People want good live coverage of an event.

It's hard to nail this down, Internet info being what it is, but as of 2014 ESPN's annual ad revenue was some $11 Billion. Reduce that down to an hourly rate, that's rough $1.25mm per. As best as I could tell, the top individual Twitch streamers bring in $8-10k per month. That said, the really large channels like StarCraft without a doubt bring in a lot more, but $1.25mm per hour . . . seems unlikely. The individual ESPN spot rate has to be pretty high.

Cheers!
 
N

Nutcracker69

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 10, 2015
Total posts
692
Chips
0
Hopefully ESPN coverage does go away. I much prefer the 30min delay stream that WSOP did for most of the tournaments. It looks like the future of poker coverage since it is as live as it gets and you can see every hand. This gives you the best chance to learn how the best measure the table and play out sick bluffs or laydowns.

Do you watch the coverage? The final table is broadcast live with a 30 minute delay, and has the awesome addition of Esfandiari giving "Pro analysis" on the hands, what bet sizing to expect, what calls or folds to expect, etc. It's actually great television even if it does seem to go on for like 12 hours with at least 6 of those hours being one raise and 8 folds.
 
Top