UFC's ESPN+ PPV deal

[GoodStoppage]

First, let me say, I don't come on here much so I apologize if many threads have been made on this. I wanted to share my thoughts..

When it comes to live PPV events like this, isn't more options to buy the better? UFC's decision to REQUIRE a 5 dollar a month subscription to ESPN+ to have the privledge to order the PPV is ridiculous. Dana White said that streaming is where the future is headed. Well, thats only because of the cost of cable. Make no mistake, when it comes to fixed location TV , cable is far superior due to its reliability and video quality. When it comes to highly suspenseful events such as MMA, I want the option to have superb reliability and not be at the mercy of my internet connection. Also, what about all the people who still cable and don't have a streaming device? Fortunately, it was noted that bars will have the right to oder PPV events through their cable/satellite provider still which is just really clunky and weird. Horrible decision.

 

[MMA_enthusiast]

@FrankieNYC stated in a thread that UFC is getting a guarantee from ESPN so that the loss of ppv sales traditionally by the other options will be offset by the investment of ESPN.

Meltzer reported on his overnight audio that ESPN is paying UFC a yearly guarantee, so UFC does not need to worry regarding certain PPV's doing less than others.
After an x-amount of PPV's are sold they will do a split.

ESPN is doing this to build ESPN+ and will be promoting these PPV's & UFC in full force.

In a nutshell, there is no longer a PPV split for every PPV

I agree that cable is way better for experience but it is what it is

 

[Trifick]

The more options argument fails. PPV is becoming futile. It might be even nore less now, but they can now offset that by taking a bigger percentage of the cut and taking out the middle man.

 

[WarDosAnjos]

ESPN going all in on MMA and ESPN +. They've been really struggling to get by lately, suffering the consequences of a terrible deal they made to broadcast MLB a few years ago.

 

[TITS]

Some people just want to watch on their TV without having to get some roku firestick chromecast or whatever bullshit you have to have to get it to your big screen.

 

[mattlane17]

I was hoping this would lead to something like the WWE network. I recognize it would be more than $5 per month for that, but I'd gladly pay $20 per month to have a UFC equivalent of WWE network

 

[Senzo Tanaka]

I'm guessing they figure if you are a UFC fan, you're probably going to be paying that $5 anyway. The casual fans that watch PPV from time to time will be made up in what ESPN is paying them. I still think they should just offer PPVs through the ESPN app with Plus just at a higher price. Wouldn't that make a little more sense?

 

[fiftywattmafia]

Free free free! Every ting free now!

Da beisbol is free. No pay world serie?!

You make free now Bald head cock! Free!!

 

[DetachedOrchid]

It's #1 bullshit.

 

[mb23100]

Its number 2 bullshit. Reebok deal is #1.

 

[1 other person]

If it's a cable vs. streaming thing, putting up double gates is like the worst of both worlds. I can't see how it works out with the casual buys...

Hey Biff, fights on, let's get it..
OK.., wait I gotta sign on for something. .. Now I gotta.., fuck it pass me another beer.

 

[GoodStoppage]

I'm guessing they figure if you are a UFC fan, you're probably going to be paying that $5 anyway. The casual fans that watch PPV from time to time will be made up in what ESPN is paying them. I still think they should just offer PPVs through the ESPN app with Plus just at a higher price. Wouldn't that make a little more sense?

Great point regarding the casual fan. This really does them dirty. I have several friends that have cable that on a Sat night if they see a high profile fight going on , they'll just order from their remote. UFC may make up the casual fan losses through the deal but its shitty for a lot of folks.

 

[RoosterHucklebuck]

3 People on different devices can share ESPN+, so all I want to know is if 3 people can also share the PPVs.

 

[RoosterHucklebuck]

I haven't watched a ESPN+ stream yet that didn't have hiccups in it. If they are going to charge for it, then ti should be 100% consistent.

 

[blaseblah]

Some people just want to watch on their TV without having to get some roku firestick chromecast or whatever bullshit you have to have to get it to your big screen.

Old people?

 

[Senzo Tanaka]

I'm not a sports fan at all outside of MMA and a little boxing but I still pay for the ESPN app. I figure $5 for a reliable stream + archives is a fair bargain. I just wish they could add normal ESPN cards on top of it. I like the idea of a one stop shop for UFC content but having cards that air on "big" ESPN and still require cable when they are pushing streaming a the future is dumb.

 

[GoodStoppage]

I was hoping this would lead to something like the WWE network. I recognize it would be more than $5 per month for that, but I'd gladly pay $20 per month to have a UFC equivalent of WWE network

I feel moving away from the PPV model would be smart.

Old people?

Old People?? Ask yourself, if money wasn't an issue, would you have cable or stream? Cable is far superior but extremely over priced which has fueled the cord cutting movement. I know a lot of young people who have and prefer cable.

 

[Exemplar]

I feel moving away from the PPV model would be smart.

Old People?? Ask yourself, if money wasn't an issue, would you have cable or stream? Cable is far superior but extremely over priced which has fueled the cord cutting movement. I know a lot of young people who have and prefer cable.

Disagree with your assessment. Cable isn’t over priced in a content-to-content comparison, actually it’s cheaper. Cord-cutting allows granular control of specific content, thus if done right, saves money (but with less content than most cable packages).

Basically people that realize they want a minimum baseline, and a limited specific set of content do well cord-cutting.

 

[TITS]

I'm not a sports fan at all outside of MMA and a little boxing but I still pay for the ESPN app. I figure $5 for a reliable stream + archives is a fair bargain. I just wish they could add normal ESPN cards on top of it. I like the idea of a one stop shop for UFC content but having cards that air on "big" ESPN and still require cable when they are pushing streaming a the future is dumb.

I always said they should air the ESPN/ESPN+ cards on both the regular ESPN channel and ESPN+ simultaneously, and just have maybe a couple of ESPN+ exclusive prelim fights, like with Fight Pass, so they can still get the hardcore fans for $5/month. I don't see casuals subscribing beyond the occasional 7-day free trial.

 

[blaseblah]

Old People?? Ask yourself, if money wasn't an issue, would you have cable or stream? Cable is far superior but extremely over priced which has fueled the cord cutting movement. I know a lot of young people who have and prefer cable.

Streaming. Cable is 90% garbage except for the premium channels. I don't want to flip through 100 channels looking for something decent to watch.