New NFL TV deals could hurt smaller cable channels
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
There has been a lot of talk lately about how the rising costs of professional sports -- particularly the National Football League -- will affect consumers.
After all, if the networks that carry football will all be paying roughly $1 billion per season (almost $2 billion for ESPN), then those costs will be passed on. The cable and satellite operators will be asked to pay more for those channels. The distributors will then turn to the consumers and expect them to chip in as well.
‘There is no question bills will go up,’ Adam Chase, a lawyer at the Washington firm Dow Lohnes who specializes in sports media, said in a recent interview.
But other cable networks that don’t carry sports or have huge audiences may also be hurt by the new NFL deals.
In a new report, Morgan Stanley analyst Benjamin Swinburne predicts that cable channels that don’t air sports will see their annual distribution fees decline.
Many wonder whether the rising cost of sports programming will lead sports channels to be in separate packages.
Swinburne doesn’t see that happening.
‘To be frank, we see no easy path towards tiering or a la carte, short of a government mandate,’ he wrote in a recent report.
The challenge for cable and satellite pay-TV distributors though will be negotiating with companies that own sports and entertainment channels. In New York, Time Warner Cable is locked in a battle with Madison Square Garden Co., which owns two regional sports channels and a music channel called Fuse.
Time Warner Cable wants to sign new deals for the sports channels, but not Fuse. Madison Square Garden wants a new contract that includes Fuse.
RELATED:
NFL signs new TV deals with Fox, CBS and NBC
New NFL deals could mean bigger bills for consumers
Cable industry’s Jim Dolan wears many hats
-- Joe Flint
