The Holy Land of Hoops

I do not believe the claim however here it is for you to peruse.

1. ESPN $6.61 x 94.5 million homes = $7.5 billion. This I believe the remainder are questionable.

2. NFL Network $1.31 x 73.6 million homes = $1.16 billion

3. FS1 .99 x 91.2 million homes = $1.08 billion

4. ESPN2 .83 x 94.5 million homes = $941.2 million

There are 15 networks listed including the B1G and SEC.

PLEASE NOTE: THE ARTICLE WAS WRITTEN BY A FOX EMPLOYEE.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footba ... rks-050715

robinreed wrote:I do not believe the claim however here it is for you to peruse.

1. ESPN $6.61 x 94.5 million homes = $7.5 billion. This I believe the remainder are questionable.

2. NFL Network $1.31 x 73.6 million homes = $1.16 billion

3. FS1 .99 x 91.2 million homes = $1.08 billion

4. ESPN2 .83 x 94.5 million homes = $941.2 million

There are 15 networks listed including the B1G and SEC.

PLEASE NOTE: THE ARTICLE WAS WRITTEN BY A FOX EMPLOYEE.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footba ... rks-050715

What's not to believe as written?

He noted outright that he didn't handle ad revenue, as one example.

Frankly, in the context of being two years into all this, I find it to be a damn strong article and one that certainly refutes the need for expansion under any scenario.

Gotta be a big NASCAR fan to buy this.

Costs me very little on dish. Watching all the X games well worth it to me.

Xudash wrote:

robinreed wrote:I do not believe the claim however here it is for you to peruse.

1. ESPN $6.61 x 94.5 million homes = $7.5 billion. This I believe the remainder are questionable.

2. NFL Network $1.31 x 73.6 million homes = $1.16 billion

3. FS1 .99 x 91.2 million homes = $1.08 billion

4. ESPN2 .83 x 94.5 million homes = $941.2 million

There are 15 networks listed including the B1G and SEC.

PLEASE NOTE: THE ARTICLE WAS WRITTEN BY A FOX EMPLOYEE.

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footba ... rks-050715

What's not to believe as written?

He noted outright that he didn't handle ad revenue, as one example.

Frankly, in the context of being two years into all this, I find it to be a damn strong article and one that certainly refutes the need for expansion under any scenario.

With 91.2N home having Fs1 available then should t ratings be higher? And im not specifying BE but all live sports not named nascar or ufc

According to the posts and links listed in the FS1 topic thread, ratings are getting better. As others have said - with ISPs pushing digital boxes/packages, the FSs (1,2,3) will be easier and easier to find. The numbers will continue to rise.
Looks as though the WWL bundles much more than just live sports to achieve their numbers. Interesting read.

With Fox making $1.1 billion bucks/yr (and that number will rise) with FS1, so much for the failure forecast. They don't have to catch or match ESPN - merely make selective dents in the WWL's armor. With contract renewals ahead over the next several years it will be interesting to watch Fox's strategy and tactics evolve.

Was a liitle lost as the thread should say FS1, not FSN.

Is this report reading FS1 is generating .90 per subscriber? If so, the narrative is nothing but propaganda much like the polls in UK over the last few weeks. SPEED was generating .23 per viewer and FS1 ratings have been no better than SPEED and unlike SPEED, FS1doesnt deliver a target audience.

If only we had Dayton then we would be #1 in ratings and revenue!

DudeAnon wrote:If only we had Dayton then we would be #1 in ratings and revenue!

Dont forget sienna, st Bonnie's, and Fordham to ensure you have the NY state and city market