How Long Before they Pull the Plug on ESPN+?

[rjmbrd]

Wow that kinda sucks.

If you live in the USA and want to watch all UFC events, it costs $780/year

It really is absurd. One of the major hurdles to growing the sport has been the PPV model. The UFC doesn't get treated as an actual sport here, its sort of looked at as a spectacle, more like the circus coming to town.

Most people ignore it all year, but once in a while a tent-pole event will get attention.

 

[rjmbrd]

ESPN+ has to somewhat complicate the whole “Theres a UFC tonight? Let’s pitch in and order it!”

“Oh shoot we can’t order it on Satellite Dish or Comcast? What is ESPN+? How do we get it up on the big screen? Never mind!”

I can’t help but wonder, how manny times has this happened?

I think it’d be nice if we could choose between ESPN+ or good ol PPV. Why not both?

If UFC is doing good with ESPN+ then more power to them, but will they ever be able to top Conor/Khabib buys with this model?

Everyone has a smart TV or access to a device that streams.

You watch ESPN+ the same as you use Netflix, this is just common sense stuff in modern Western living. Nobody is going to be confused about how to use a streaming app after the first time doing it.

 

[gspfedkobe24]

Go watch Ballerina or whatever the fudge you watch why are you on sherdog crying like a 16 year old female????

 

[tmsxl]

If you live in the USA and want to watch all UFC events, it costs $780/year

It really is absurd. One of the major hurdles to growing the sport has been the PPV model. The UFC doesn't get treated as an actual sport here, its sort of looked at as a spectacle, more like the circus coming to town.

Most people ignore it all year, but once in a while a tent-pole event will get attention.

NFL Sunday ticket is 400 bucks for 4 months. For the amount of content you’re getting with the UFC’s model, it’s not far off. Beyond that, OP’s hot take is stupid. They’re guaranteed to make money now before even selling 1 PPV.

 

[DocGreenthumb]

NFL Sunday ticket is 400 bucks for 4 months. For the amount of content you’re getting with the UFC’s model, it’s not far off. Beyond that, OP’s hot take is stupid. They’re guaranteed to make money now before even selling 1 PPV.

NFL Sunday ticket isn’t free?

 

[Jojomojo]

If you live in the USA and want to watch all UFC events, it costs $780/year

It really is absurd. One of the major hurdles to growing the sport has been the PPV model. The UFC doesn't get treated as an actual sport here, its sort of looked at as a spectacle, more like the circus coming to town.

Most people ignore it all year, but once in a while a tent-pole event will get attention.

It used to be similar in Germany with the PPV model and still is to a degree but i honestly feel like the availiability through Dazn has led to more people frequently watching and sticking with it.
Ofc its still a more unknown sport over here.

 

[WannaB]

Haven't watched a single event since they moved to ESPN+-=/*^$#@!

 

[delbosque]

One things I will say is this...
Before, when I was on the road, I could always find a PPV at a local BWWs or other sports bar. Then that switched to only being able to find a HIGH-PROFILE PPV at SOME local establishments. But I could still always catch a Fight Night or the FOX cards.

Last weekend, for Gaethje-Cerrone, I could not find a single location showing the fight so that I could watch it with my friends. Ended up having to watch alone on my phone.

Upside of ESPN+: Access to more fights anytime anywhere if you're willing to pay a small fee.

Downside of ESPN+: Short of huge fights, it's harder to enjoy fights in a communal atmosphere. The only real option is to invite people over.

 

[COBRA03]

I have a few friends who like UFC and watched them often when on free TV, but they haven't seen a fight since ESPN+ took over. The die hard fans will pay for it, the casual fan will look for what ever else is on TV. Paying a monthly fee, then running a HDMI cable from your computer to the back of your TV is not for everyone. I think UFC has totally lost it's casual fan base.

 

[Jawth]

PPV events are now purchased through ESPN+ and it still costs $65. The only difference is now $5 of that monthly PPV amount goes towards your ESPN+ subscription, the additional $60 you get charged for per event.

It hasn't changed much for the American audience because the outrageous pricing scheme of $65/event is still in place for all the major events throughout the year. Some people find ESPN+ as an app, instead of delivery over cable, is more of a hassle.

I don't mind the delivery change to OTT other then ESPN+ having technical issues on a somewhat frequent basis.

Difference is I can get most of the fight nights and prelims for five bucks a month. ESPN+ is a far better deal than requiring a cable package.

 

[MRT]

So shitty events, overloaded with women's fights, that are poorly marketed and placed on penny ante pissant webstream services are actually growing the sport? Show me the numbers, SherBro geniuses.

you're the person who started the thread and made a claim...it's up to you to back up your claim with *some* kind of evidence.

 

[GrantB13]

Dana was bragging a while back about how much fucking money and growth they've had since the ESPN deal. Which is suspect because he said that after barely getting underway with ESPN airing.

 

[Jawth]

Everyone has a smart TV or access to a device that streams.

You watch ESPN+ the same as you use Netflix, this is just common sense stuff in modern Western living. Nobody is going to be confused about how to use a streaming app after the first time doing it.

Thats really just not true. For everyone 35 and younger, sure. Most people in their forties are probably fine with it too, unless they live in a very rural area without a connection fast enough to stream (yes, they exist in the US). For me, yes ESPN+ is a much better deal than cable but older and rural viewership will both decline.

 

[kickpuncher]

Here's a graph

Doesn't look good bro

Just look at the inverse and everything is fine.

 

[TimberGhost]

I like my ESPN+, my only problem with espn+ is the availability to rewind without it freezing. Its a cheap service for $5, on soon its going to be part of the disney+ w/Hulu.

And not being able to fast forward without a preview screen, stupid and cheap platform....I'll just FF and guess where the action starts again.

PS: WTF is a "commercial break" on ESPN+, aren't we the consumers of said product ?

 

[rjmbrd]

Difference is I can get most of the fight nights and prelims for five bucks a month. ESPN+ is a far better deal than requiring a cable package.

Yes, for those who already cut the cord - which is a minority of total viewers currently - ESPN+ is a good deal for the fight night cards.

That was not the question I was answering, as the poster did not understand that UFC still charged $60 for each PPV in addition to the $5/month ESPN fee.

 

[rjmbrd]

Thats really just not true. For everyone 35 and younger, sure. Most people in their forties are probably fine with it too, unless they live in a very rural area without a connection fast enough to stream (yes, they exist in the US). For me, yes ESPN+ is a much better deal than cable but older and rural viewership will both decline.

My parents are senior citizens in a rural area and have Netflix streaming on all the televisions in their home.

This is a solved problem.

 

[hedidhisownstunts]

I find the streams inconsistent and they often pause and have to be restarted

 

[Satan's Daddy.]

Somewhere in 2020, then they will promote the 165lb belt with their new streaming platform.

8.99$ a month for all ppvs

 

[BEATDOWNS]

Perfect Sherdog thread - no knowledge of contracts, no figures or data to prove their assertions, just 1 sentence with a fatuous, stupid assertion.

Why are you allowed to make threads?

Troll threads are the only thing that brings this site any traffic?