WGN America to drop Sox, Cubs, other sports

[Lip Man 1]

Originally Posted by anewman35

This is why WGN America wants to go towards scripted programs:



http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/201...merica/260569/

Will their plan work? Who knows, but they clearly think they're better off taking the gamble that they can have some decent scripted programs (without having them pre-empted by baseball a few times a week) than with what they do currently.

Anewman:

Well have to see. One show does not a 'network' make. I know this and have already e-mailed WGN on this...if they drop the Sox and Bulls I will never watch that station again because they have NOTHING that I want to watch or have to watch. I watch them for sports and the news (which is still broadcast mid-mornings)...period. No sports, no viewership.

I know, it's just one fan and nobody gives a damn, but that's how I feel and that's what I'll do.

Lip

[jfinsocal]

The Clippers sold for 2 billion largely because people watching sports on TV are watching live and thus are forced to watch commercials. Many if not most, fast forward through commercials on sitcoms and the like. Looking forward, almost all revenue for TV will be based on sub fees, like SiriusXM. Maybe the distributors influenced this decision?

[roylestillman]

Originally Posted by jfinsocal

The Clippers sold for 2 billion largely because people watching sports on TV are watching live and thus are forced to watch commercials. Many if not most, fast forward through commercials on sitcoms and the like. Looking forward, almost all revenue for TV will be based on sub fees, like SiriusXM. Maybe the distributors influenced this decision?

That's the model that the Dodgers, Rangers and others are working with now. If a la carte cable (where you pay for only what you want rather than what you get with three or four packages) were to become law, this ballgame is over and they're back to Sportsvision. The billions being paid for sports franchises is nuts and can't be sustained if the current cable model collapses. Even without legislation you hear of people cutting the cable cord and getting all the programming they want via Netflix, Roku and over the net.

[cnw8052]

I understand the low viewership in other states for Chicago sports, but what about those of us inside the Chicago sports market?

It's basically crapping on us fans within northern Illinois. Hopefully CSN will pick up the games lost to this stupid decision. My cable outlet (Comcast) carries CSN, but also carries Fox Sports Midwest, which allows me to see dozens of Cardinals games. I guess if the Sox and Cubs games continue to get taken away to Chicago-only, I'll have to trade in my lifelong (42 years) love of the Sox, and switch to the Cardinals.

[MarySwiss]

Originally Posted by Lip Man 1

Anewman:

Well have to see. One show does not a 'network' make. I know this and have already e-mailed WGN on this...if they drop the Sox and Bulls I will never watch that station again because they have NOTHING that I want to watch or have to watch. I watch them for sports and the news (which is still broadcast mid-mornings)...period. No sports, no viewership.

I know, it's just one fan and nobody gives a damn, but that's how I feel and that's what I'll do.

Lip

You're not alone, Lip. I never watch it except for when the Sox are on.

[kba]

Originally Posted by Lip Man 1

What folks are forgetting or overlooking about sports on WGN America is this, how do you distinguish yourself from the glut of stations available on cable or DirecTV.

THAT's one of the keys and sports programming allows you to do it....not 15 year old re-runs of "America's Funniest Videos," or "Law and Order" or 25 year old reruns of "In the Heat of the Night."

Given the choice most sports fans will watch sports even if their favorite or regional team isn't on simply because it's sports.

Even 'new' programming created by Tribune Company won't draw squat unless it's very, very good because of the number of choices available.

Given the Tribune Companies history, does anyone really expect this?

Lip

That may be true, but you also have to consider the cost of the programming. Those reruns cost Tribune Co. almost nothing to broadcast, while a new scripted show like "Salem" can be made for about a million dollars per episode, be aired multiple times, and bring in additional revenue from DVD sales, streaming, etc.

Compare that to the increasingly-stratospheric costs for baseball rights. The Dodgers now are getting $280 million a season. The Angels are getting $147 million. Even the Astros have an $80 million a year contract with Comcast.

Assuming the Cubs and Sox will be looking for similar money on their next TV contracts, it's understandable that Tribune might decide that even a partial schedule of games on WGN has gotten too pricey. I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually walk away from the local Chicago-area Sox and Cubs broadcasts as well.

[nut_stock]

I'm down in Springfield IL and I'm able to get about 1 Sox game per week for free on a local station (WCIX out of Decatur) that carries the WCIU feeds.

[Hitmen77]

Originally Posted by Brian26

Ed Sherman's column in the Trib today says they WBBM-AM deal is basically done. Wow.

No kidding. I can't even imagine the Cubs not being on WGN Radio. The Tribune era for the Cubs really is dead.

Originally Posted by kba

It's all speculation at this point, but the rumor is that the Cubs will move their over-the-air TV games to WFLD or perhaps WPWR, the Fox-owned stations, in 2015. Then, when the Cubs/CSN deal expires after the 2019 season, Fox will also partner with the Cubs on a new cable channel.

I know 2019 is still 5 years away, but I wonder if the Cubs would go it alone on a new cable RSN. The Bulls of course would stay with the Sox since they're both owned by JR. Would the Cubs try to peel away the Hawks from CSN? I know the Cubs are a very marketable franchise, but I wonder how much cable/sat operators are going to pay for a Cubs-only channel that needs to fill programming 12 months a year.

[Lip Man 1]

Hitmen:

Remember JR and Rocky Wirtz are tight, both paid half for building the United Center. (Specifically the Wirtz family not Rocky personally) Of course if JR is no longer on the scene all bets are off but I'd guess the Hawks would stay with the Sox and Bulls.

Royle:

Again for what it's worth when I asked Bob Grim the Sox director of broadcast operations about a la carte programming options for fans he doubted it would happen because of the chaos it would cause cable and satellite companies. But we'll see...I know there's a legal suit from some football fans against DirecTV that may be winding its way through the courts and that could possibly force a la carte programming but I don't know the status of it at this time.

They are Browns fans and are suing because they have to pay for the entire NFL Sunday Ticket package when all they want to watch is their team.

I know the extra innings package at 250 bucks a year is out of my range (and outrageous to boot for an industry that Bud Selig said is "worth seven billion dollars a year...") But if I could just get the Sox games I could afford 75 or 100.

Lip

[Golden Sox]

Lip; Would anybody really be surprised to see the Wirtz family buy the White Sox somewhere down the line from JR? If that does happen theres no way the Hawks would align themselves with the Cubs in a TV deal. Rocky Wirtz is one of the White Sox investors and I could see him wanting to buy the White Sox. Does anybody know when the contract the White Sox have with WGN-TV expires?

[Railsplitter]

Originally Posted by nut_stock

I'm down in Springfield IL and I'm able to get about 1 Sox game per week for free on a local station (WCIX out of Decatur) that carries the WCIU feeds.

When I was down there from 1994-99, Chicago Sports Channel was available on cable. Is CSN Chicago available down there?

[kba]

Originally Posted by Hitmen77

No kidding. I can't even imagine the Cubs not being on WGN Radio. The Tribune era for the Cubs really is dead.

If the Cubs move to WBBM, it will be interesting to see if WGN goes after the Sox radio rights when the WSCR contract expires after next season. Will CBS even try to keep the Sox contract on WSCR if they're also paying big money for the Cubs rights on WBBM?

[Lip Man 1]

Originally Posted by Golden Sox

Lip; Would anybody really be surprised to see the Wirtz family buy the White Sox somewhere down the line from JR? If that does happen theres no way the Hawks would align themselves with the Cubs in a TV deal. Rocky Wirtz is one of the White Sox investors and I could see him wanting to buy the White Sox. Does anybody know when the contract the White Sox have with WGN-TV expires?

Golden:

For what it's worth I've never heard the Wirtz family's name brought up in discussions about potential future Sox owners.

One name I did know about was the former owner of the Memphis Grizzlies who died I think in the past year. He was from Chicago and I was told had very strong interests in getting them.

Lip

[nut_stock]

Originally Posted by Railsplitter

When I was down there from 1994-99, Chicago Sports Channel was available on cable. Is CSN Chicago available down there?

Yes....along with fox sports Midwest (cardinals)

[GoSox2K3]

Originally Posted by amsteel

Is anyone that surprised that Big Bang Theory (or whatever comedy) reruns gets better ratings nationally that Sox games? It's a business decision pure and simple and I'm surprised it took them that long to figure it out.

Blackout rules won't change until the regional sports network bubble bursts, which actually may be in the next 5 years or so.

I hope you're right. The RSNs and ESPN are a total rip off for people who want cable but aren't into sports. Right now, the choice for consumers is pay the high monthly surcharge for these channels (reflected in your bill) or cut the cord.

I really hope the day comes soon where cable/sat providers are forced to offer sports networks a la carte. Let sports fans pay for it themselves and not have the price essentially subsidized by everyone else. The market will dictate how much ESPN and the RSNs can get away with charging customers. No reason why everyone in the NY Yankees television market should have to pay for YES no matter what their interest in that team if they want cable or satellite.

Originally Posted by Lip Man 1

Hitmen:

Remember JR and Rocky Wirtz are tight, both paid half for building the United Center. (Specifically the Wirtz family not Rocky personally) Of course if JR is no longer on the scene all bets are off but I'd guess the Hawks would stay with the Sox and Bulls.

Royle:

Again for what it's worth when I asked Bob Grim the Sox director of broadcast operations about a la carte programming options for fans he doubted it would happen because of the chaos it would cause cable and satellite companies. But we'll see...I know there's a legal suit from some football fans against DirecTV that may be winding its way through the courts and that could possibly force a la carte programming but I don't know the status of it at this time.

They are Browns fans and are suing because they have to pay for the entire NFL Sunday Ticket package when all they want to watch is their team.

I know the extra innings package at 250 bucks a year is out of my range (and outrageous to boot for an industry that Bud Selig said is "worth seven billion dollars a year...") But if I could just get the Sox games I could afford 75 or 100.

Lip

MLB.tv has price options of $79.99 and $99.99 per year:
http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/subscriptions...=MLBTVREDIRECT