AMAZON WAS THE BIGGEST WINNER
AND NBC WAS THE BIGGEST LOSER.
PRACTICALLY PAYING "A" PACKAGE PRICES
JUST TO SHARE THE CONFERENCE FINALS
EVERY OTHER YEAR
fukk DISNEY
NBA approves new media deals with Disney (ABC/ESPN), Comcast (NBC), and Amazon for 11 years, $77 billion. Update: NBA REJECTS WBD's (TNT Sports) deal
- Thread starter Anerdyblackguy
- Start date
AMAZON WAS THE BIGGEST WINNER
AND NBC WAS THE BIGGEST LOSER.
PRACTICALLY PAYING "A" PACKAGE PRICES
JUST TO SHARE THE CONFERENCE FINALS
EVERY OTHER YEAR
fukk DISNEY
EzekelRAGE
Superstar
The dude who owns skydance's dad has like 150B. He made oracle or some shyt. The son really likes the Star Trek IP. Apparently he and his company(skydance) had a hand in a couple of the movies. So that was sorta part of the play for the merger on their end, ip.
lol this concern of yours is a nothingburger
nikka please lol ...if they had the almighty "matching rights" that these dudes claimed and actually wanted to match the competitions deal the handshake with the NBA would have been locked in and the agreement would have been done .... Who the hell would purposely sign up for this kind of public spat when you allegedly had the nuke button the whole time .... now even if they did match it would be way over what they allocated for a renewalYou misunderstand, the holdup for weeks has been the whole “matching rights” issue with WBD. This could’ve been done weeks ago if WBD bowed out and accepted that they are out fully. Clear there is a legal standoff waiting and the NBA smartly is waiting until after the Finals to announce the deal. WBD could find a way to match as unlikely as it is for the B package
bruh this shyt is over
nikka please lol ...if they had the almighty "matching rights" that these dudes claimed and actually wanted to match the competitions deal the handshake with the NBA would have been locked in and the agreement would have been done .... Who the hell would purposely sign up for this kind of public spat when you allegedly had the nuke button the whole time .... now even if they did match it would be way over what they allocated for a renewal
None of this is official until the NBA and the media companies sign on the dotted line and WBD decides whether they want to match or not. In fact, WBD could counter offer now if they were willing. All that is being reported is the framework of the agreements. That’s not even taking to account if WBD wants to sue or not. Likely this is gonna happen, but things change fast.
Lmao whatever you need to tell yourself big dog
Lmao whatever you need to tell yourself big dog
I’m telling what media reporters/professionals are saying about the WSJ report. If you think they are wrong or idiots I really don’t know what to tell other than do you breh, do you
Saysumthinfunnymike
VOTE!!!
This is the 4th or 5th time now someone has "confirmed" this lol.... The bottom line is WBD is not going to go after the "B" package. They aren't going to pay $2.5B for these rights. We knew that.
It comes down to whether or not they match (or can match) the "C" package and that's why this keeps going around in circles.
NBA first has to sign the deals. Then they are presented to WBD. Then WBD figures out whether they are matching or can match...
I think ultimately it will be ESPN/NBC/Amazon but journalists keep embarrassing themselves trying to be "first"
It comes down to whether or not they match (or can match) the "C" package and that's why this keeps going around in circles.
NBA first has to sign the deals. Then they are presented to WBD. Then WBD figures out whether they are matching or can match...
I think ultimately it will be ESPN/NBC/Amazon but journalists keep embarrassing themselves trying to be "first"
NBC getting back into the NBA business, including the ability to use its highlights, anchoring a weekday and weekend with NBA games, is an absolute win...and they're drawing people to Peacock for live sports which is another W.
AMAZON WAS THE BIGGEST WINNER
AND NBC WAS THE BIGGEST LOSER.
PRACTICALLY PAYING "A" PACKAGE PRICES
JUST TO SHARE THE CONFERENCE FINALS
EVERY OTHER YEAR
fukk DISNEY
The biggest loser is by far Warner if they're out of the basketball business
NAH YOU MISSED MY POINT.
NBC GETTING THE NBA IS AN ABSOLUTE WIN.
I WAS ONLY SPEAKING ON THE 3 PACKAGES.
AMAZON WAS THE BIGGEST WINNER
AND NBC WAS THE BIGGEST LOSER.
As the finals begin Thursday, The Athletic’s Andrew Marchand and Richard Deitsch offer their impressions on the NBA media deal saga, what it means for Charles Barkley and “Inside the NBA,” what ESPN will do if JJ Redikk leaves to coach the Los Angeles Lakers, and whether a series between the Boston Celtics and Dallas Mavericks can draw major viewership.
Deitsch: Let’s play a fun parlor game to start. Imagine WBD ends up losing the NBA. Where does Barkley go?
Marchand: Wherever he wants. I know ESPN, Amazon and NBC are interested in him, according to executives briefed on their plans. If TNT Sports loses the NBA, I’m not sure Barkley is just totally free to do whatever he wants — though it might end up that way — especially if he continues to go after Warner Bros. Discovery chairman David Zaslav.
WBD Sports still has the NCAA Tournament, which Barkley works on, and other events where they could use him. Barkley has said he can just leave on his own accord. There have been no real discussions on how Barkley, Ernie Johnson, Shaquille O’Neal and Kenny Smith could stay together, but there will be. If it is ESPN, Amazon and NBC, they will all surely listen.
But driving it all will be Barkley. He might receive a huge offer and just go do that on his own. He’s the best sports studio analyst ever, so he has a lot of power. What do you think?
Deitsch: Everyone who loves that show is probably hoping they’ll end up being packaged somewhere, even for a year. That’s a tough ask, and here is what’s not often discussed: The show would change in some ways given you would not hire everyone working behind the scenes. Long-term, the new NBA media players will likely want to create their own signature NBA studio show given the length of the contract, but any “Inside the NBA” connection for a partner would give that partner instant studio credibility.
As you said, Barkley can go wherever he wants. An educated guess is that any number will be closer to $20 million annually than $10 million. If I had to handicap a non-WBD player, I would cautiously put my money on NBC. Very cautiously.
Let’s move to the ESPN crew of Mike Breen, Doris Burke and Redikk: Will they be one and done?
Marchand: This new ESPN crew is likely one and done. Breen is not going anywhere. The Athletic’s Shams Charania has reported that the Lakers are zeroing in on Redikk as their next coach. Burke will continue on, but she might not go on for a long time, as I’ve heard she doesn’t want to be a lifer like Hubie Brown. So ESPN, after nuking its longtime crew of Breen, Jeff Van Gundy and Mark Jackson and then having Doc Rivers basically leave for coaching before he really even started as an ESPN analyst, could have its third new combo in a little more than a year to start next season.
Deitsch: Agreed. Dave Roberts, the head of event and studio production at ESPN, has significant decisions ahead of him given the new NBA media deal begins in 2025. As both of us have written, it screwed up royally in getting rid of Van Gundy, and the public reasons for the dismissal were absurd.
In the long term, ESPN has to think about who will be calling the NBA Finals and a conference final in, say, 2030. Health-willing, hopefully Breen, 63, continues into his 70s. But the analyst position is key. Any hire likely has to be either a youngish (in media years) high-profile former player or coach. Where do the media deals stand right now based on your reporting?
Marchand: The Warner Bros. Discovery wild card is where it stands right now. The NBA is closing in on the paperwork with ESPN, Amazon and NBC on 11-year deals that will go into the mid-2030s, but Zaslav has publicly said he could match. They might go after Amazon Prime Video’s agreement, which is for around $1.8 billion a year. The lawyers will fight it out, and though I tend to doubt it, he could eventually be headed to a court of law.
The NBA clearly wants ESPN, Amazon and NBC to be its partners, but it can’t yet be entirely ruled out that the league will create a fourth package to make the drama go away. It’s possible there will be an announcement or the paperwork will be done during the finals, but it is complicated.
Let’s turn back to the finals. The NBA suddenly has a lot of parity with a new matchup of the Celtics and Mavericks. What is your take on what that means for viewership?
Deitsch: Hollywood knows all about risk aversion. If you want to know why you see so many sequels or reboots, the answer is financial. It’s a safer bet against loss. The familiar sells — we’ve often seen that in sports as well when it comes to popularity metrics. The NBA Finals matchups between the Steph Curry-led Golden State Warriors and LeBron James-led Cleveland Cavaliers in the 2010s each averaged more than 17 million viewers. Viewers became familiar with the storylines and star players. Even the Toronto Raptors’ win over the Warriors in 2019 averaged 15.1 million viewers, an impressive number given anyone watching on Canadian television in the Toronto area would not be part of Nielsen’s estimated viewership. That series is the last NBA finals to feature a game with more than 14 million viewers.
It makes this year’s Celtics-Mavericks series interesting given it runs counter to the NBA’s last 30 years of finals featuring mostly narratives of greatness and dynasty. The Mavericks’ making the finals means 10 franchises have played for the NBA championship since 2018. This series will have a game that tops 14 million because I’m predicting it to go long. Length is ultimately what ESPN/ABC and the NBA desire. But I don’t expect either team to be dynastic.
Marchand: Either way, the NBA is about to double or triple what it brings in for TV revenues in the next deal, so the ratings won’t really matter for another decade or so.
Deitsch: Let’s play a fun parlor game to start. Imagine WBD ends up losing the NBA. Where does Barkley go?
Marchand: Wherever he wants. I know ESPN, Amazon and NBC are interested in him, according to executives briefed on their plans. If TNT Sports loses the NBA, I’m not sure Barkley is just totally free to do whatever he wants — though it might end up that way — especially if he continues to go after Warner Bros. Discovery chairman David Zaslav.
WBD Sports still has the NCAA Tournament, which Barkley works on, and other events where they could use him. Barkley has said he can just leave on his own accord. There have been no real discussions on how Barkley, Ernie Johnson, Shaquille O’Neal and Kenny Smith could stay together, but there will be. If it is ESPN, Amazon and NBC, they will all surely listen.
But driving it all will be Barkley. He might receive a huge offer and just go do that on his own. He’s the best sports studio analyst ever, so he has a lot of power. What do you think?
Deitsch: Everyone who loves that show is probably hoping they’ll end up being packaged somewhere, even for a year. That’s a tough ask, and here is what’s not often discussed: The show would change in some ways given you would not hire everyone working behind the scenes. Long-term, the new NBA media players will likely want to create their own signature NBA studio show given the length of the contract, but any “Inside the NBA” connection for a partner would give that partner instant studio credibility.
As you said, Barkley can go wherever he wants. An educated guess is that any number will be closer to $20 million annually than $10 million. If I had to handicap a non-WBD player, I would cautiously put my money on NBC. Very cautiously.
Let’s move to the ESPN crew of Mike Breen, Doris Burke and Redikk: Will they be one and done?
Marchand: This new ESPN crew is likely one and done. Breen is not going anywhere. The Athletic’s Shams Charania has reported that the Lakers are zeroing in on Redikk as their next coach. Burke will continue on, but she might not go on for a long time, as I’ve heard she doesn’t want to be a lifer like Hubie Brown. So ESPN, after nuking its longtime crew of Breen, Jeff Van Gundy and Mark Jackson and then having Doc Rivers basically leave for coaching before he really even started as an ESPN analyst, could have its third new combo in a little more than a year to start next season.
Deitsch: Agreed. Dave Roberts, the head of event and studio production at ESPN, has significant decisions ahead of him given the new NBA media deal begins in 2025. As both of us have written, it screwed up royally in getting rid of Van Gundy, and the public reasons for the dismissal were absurd.
In the long term, ESPN has to think about who will be calling the NBA Finals and a conference final in, say, 2030. Health-willing, hopefully Breen, 63, continues into his 70s. But the analyst position is key. Any hire likely has to be either a youngish (in media years) high-profile former player or coach. Where do the media deals stand right now based on your reporting?
Marchand: The Warner Bros. Discovery wild card is where it stands right now. The NBA is closing in on the paperwork with ESPN, Amazon and NBC on 11-year deals that will go into the mid-2030s, but Zaslav has publicly said he could match. They might go after Amazon Prime Video’s agreement, which is for around $1.8 billion a year. The lawyers will fight it out, and though I tend to doubt it, he could eventually be headed to a court of law.
The NBA clearly wants ESPN, Amazon and NBC to be its partners, but it can’t yet be entirely ruled out that the league will create a fourth package to make the drama go away. It’s possible there will be an announcement or the paperwork will be done during the finals, but it is complicated.
Let’s turn back to the finals. The NBA suddenly has a lot of parity with a new matchup of the Celtics and Mavericks. What is your take on what that means for viewership?
Deitsch: Hollywood knows all about risk aversion. If you want to know why you see so many sequels or reboots, the answer is financial. It’s a safer bet against loss. The familiar sells — we’ve often seen that in sports as well when it comes to popularity metrics. The NBA Finals matchups between the Steph Curry-led Golden State Warriors and LeBron James-led Cleveland Cavaliers in the 2010s each averaged more than 17 million viewers. Viewers became familiar with the storylines and star players. Even the Toronto Raptors’ win over the Warriors in 2019 averaged 15.1 million viewers, an impressive number given anyone watching on Canadian television in the Toronto area would not be part of Nielsen’s estimated viewership. That series is the last NBA finals to feature a game with more than 14 million viewers.
It makes this year’s Celtics-Mavericks series interesting given it runs counter to the NBA’s last 30 years of finals featuring mostly narratives of greatness and dynasty. The Mavericks’ making the finals means 10 franchises have played for the NBA championship since 2018. This series will have a game that tops 14 million because I’m predicting it to go long. Length is ultimately what ESPN/ABC and the NBA desire. But I don’t expect either team to be dynastic.
Marchand: Either way, the NBA is about to double or triple what it brings in for TV revenues in the next deal, so the ratings won’t really matter for another decade or so.
Bet, I can agree with that.
NAH YOU MISSED MY POINT.
NBC GETTING THE NBA IS AN ABSOLUTE WIN.
I WAS ONLY SPEAKING ON THE 3 PACKAGES.
AMAZON WAS THE BIGGEST WINNER
AND NBC WAS THE BIGGEST LOSER.
