This post was originally published on this site
Disney has made no secret of its desire to finally offer an ESPN streaming service. A lack of access to sports has been a key reason many people have yet to cut the cable cord.
The trick to streaming sports, though, is the cost.
Simply put, sports is by the far the most expensive content available. Cable companies got around this by bundling sports channels with other programming, thus making non-sports fans subsidize the cost for sports enthusiasts.
You can’t do that with a streaming service, which by definition will be subscribed to only by people who want to watch sports.
It was widely reported Friday that Disney is now in preliminary talks with Amazon on partnering for an ESPN streaming service and sharing the financial risks.
Neither Disney nor Amazon has commented on the reports, but such a partnership makes sense.
Disney would get a deep-pocketed affiliate to help shoulder the financial load, and Amazon presumably would gain access to more sports for its Prime Video service.
But even if a deal comes together, how much could the companies charge for an ESPN streaming network?
According to reports, the monthly amount could run as high as $35.
If so, that would make the service by far the most expensive streaming network available — more than double what Netflix and Max currently charge.
Would sports fans pay that much? It’s too soon to say.
My feeling is that, no matter how high they priced an ESPN streaming service, it would still lose money.
Heck, if Disney+ can’t make a dime with its huge library of top-tier content, how could ESPN profit with what would presumably be a smaller audience?
Perhaps that’s precisely the question that Disney CEO Bob Iger is hoping Amazon can answer.
Suggest a Correction
