WGN No More?

[jstraw]

I need a breakdown on the distinctions between whining, bitching and complaining.

[rok]

I reserve the right to do all of the above as well as contradict myself hourly whilst lauding the FO for being geniuses.

[funkster]

Sounds like you need a hug from Clark.

[rok]

Sounds like you need a hug from Clark.

I wouldn't turn him away.

[veryzer]

Sounds like you need a hug from Clark.

 

I'll punch that monstrosity in the throat if he gets near me.

[funkster]

Sounds like you need to be in the middle of a Clark/Woo sammich.

[pgulota24]

It feels like a Civil War brewing...

[MrSheps]

I'm hoping the deal for the bridge period is in place and the Cubs are pushing to solidify what comes after that as much as possible.  Most experts think the live sports bubble will burst, perhaps before the end of that bridge deal.  But lately, I've been second guessing that.  I would think as more people move to DVR and streamed content, the window should stay open for traditional commercials via sports for some time because many large companies/advertisers are hesitant to try new things or target what will be smaller, niche audiences.  But, who knows.

[jstraw]

Live sports are about the only thing I watch where I'm still captive to the advertisers.

[funkster]

Would it be feasible to come to a deal for the WGN games AND the post 2019 games this far in advance?

[Kid]

Would it be feasible to come to a deal for the WGN games AND the post 2019 games this far in advance?

 

It would depend on the terms of the CSN contract.  It's at least possible that CSN has some exclusive negotiating period.

 

I assume, however, that if they cut a deal with Fox, it would include some post-2019 terms.  Otherwise, why is Fox going to pay a premium now when the Cubs could ostensibly go elsewhere after 2019?  That said, I'm skeptical that it makes sense to cut a deal for 6 years from now.  Content distribution is changing so rapidly, who knows what it will look like in 2020.

[funkster]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="funkster" data-cid="213808" data-time="1389737002">
<div>
Would it be feasible to come to a deal for the WGN games AND the post 2019 games this far in advance?

 

That said, I'm skeptical that it makes sense to cut a deal for 6 years from now.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
This is what makes me skeptical as well, though the optimist in me wishes they would announce a mega tv deal here in the coming weeks.  Again, the only thing that gives me hope is Theo's comments to Wittenmeyer a month or so ago.

[MrSheps]

 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Kid" data-cid="213811" data-time="1389738047">
<div>
 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="funkster" data-cid="213808" data-time="1389737002">
<div>
Would it be feasible to come to a deal for the WGN games AND the post 2019 games this far in advance?

 

That said, I'm skeptical that it makes sense to cut a deal for 6 years from now.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
This is what makes me skeptical as well, though the optimist in me wishes they would announce a mega tv deal here in the coming weeks.  Again, the only thing that gives me hope is Theo's comments to Wittenmeyer a month or so ago.

 

</div>
</blockquote>
I've been negative on the Cubs lately, but I sort of think they will bring in a decent deal here that sets them up to partner with FOX on a Cubs Channel at the end of the CSN deal.  I don't know why.  I mean the fact they have let the ratings tank like they did and that they own a chunk of CSN would suggest otherwise, but I'm hopeful with this.  Deals are done far in advance on so many things, and while distribution is changing, all the deals being signed now are 20 year deals.  If the bubble doesn't burst because people start time slipping sports (as I do) or internet delivery systems take over, which will be slow-ish to happen, the ad time will actually become more valuable over time.   

[rok]

I think it could work if they include some escalator clauses in the contract based on future ratings. Also, didn't the recent Phillies deal have a large variable component in it with revenue sharing as opposed to a fixed per game amount? The industry could be starting to move away from fixed deals to avoid a potential bubble.

[MrSheps]

I think it could work if they include some escalator clauses in the contract based on future ratings. Also, didn't the recent Phillies deal have a large variable component in it with revenue sharing as opposed to a fixed per game amount? The industry could be starting to move away from fixed deals to avoid a potential bubble.

Exactly, and as fans that might actually be a good thing if the organization is super healthy at the start of the escalator portion.  More motivation to put money on the field.  I know the goal is for the Cubs to be "in it" every year, like the cards, if they believe that, they might sign that type of deal to get money coming more quickly now.