Bundling works at scale if you maximize customer pool. I don’t think ESPN cable would be affordable to most people without bundling it into cable packages; their TV is subsidized by every non sports watching household. I wish there was more transparency into the costs to determine if you are coming ahead or behind in the bundling.
But at the end of the day everyone hates paying for multiple streaming apps. To me that means people just want a bundle that magically has everything they want to watch.
I don’t think ESPN cable would be affordable to most people without bundling it into cable packages
Then it’s not a viable network.
their TV is subsidized by every non sports watching household.
But that’s exactly why people started ditching cable in the first place. They wouldn’t be bundling ESPN with non-sports channels, they would bundle other less popular sports channels with ESPN so they can jack up the price because ESPN. But ESPN doesn’t carry the sports I follow, and I can’t get the network that does without paying double because it’s in a bundle with ESPN.
Bundling works at scale if you maximize customer pool. I don’t think ESPN cable would be affordable to most people without bundling it into cable packages; their TV is subsidized by every non sports watching household. I wish there was more transparency into the costs to determine if you are coming ahead or behind in the bundling.
But at the end of the day everyone hates paying for multiple streaming apps. To me that means people just want a bundle that magically has everything they want to watch.
Then it’s not a viable network.
But that’s exactly why people started ditching cable in the first place. They wouldn’t be bundling ESPN with non-sports channels, they would bundle other less popular sports channels with ESPN so they can jack up the price because ESPN. But ESPN doesn’t carry the sports I follow, and I can’t get the network that does without paying double because it’s in a bundle with ESPN.