On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Mark Jeffries <[email protected]> wrote: > Meanwhile, no one has the > balls to get rid of or challenge ESPN or the regional sports channels that > are the real reason for the bloated rates (or move them out of basic).
I've always been torn about putting RSNs into the same category ESPN because RSNs focus on a different audience: local sports fans, which may not necessarily cross over to a general sports fan. Exhibit A: my wife, who is a huge Packers fan but barely follows the NFL in general. She has no problem sitting down to watch a Packers game, but watches no other football otherwise. I'm sure there's data out there that settles this, but I think a majority of sports fans follow a team to a larger extent than a sport.* In other words: the audience for a live sports event on ESPN is watching with a rooting interest in the contest as opposed to the sport in general. * The one huge exception is the NFL, and I think that has more to do with fantasy sports than anything else. -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
