I personally believe the old saying “all roads lead to Rome” tends to embody “different means to the same end” and in the case of online streaming versus traditional cable subscriptions, money as always, is the bottom line. In regards to the streaming cash flow, once again Rome — okay, all of Italy — is front and center in accomplishing the end of collecting revenue, this time by means of streaming. Today the top league of Italian soccer, Serie A, announced a service that beginning on Saturday, will stream three fixtures per weekend.

The price for viewing access is €3.99 for the weekend or €2.00 per individual match. In addition to the games themselves, each will have both pre- and post-game shows for analysis and news for the matches and around the league. It’s a huge move away from the old school television broadcasts, and for here in the United States, where beIN Sports holds the broadcasting rights. Serie A is the first major European league to offer a service of this kind and this could bring about a huge boost to their fandom abroad.

Via Statista, as of 2013, Serie A held the second highest broadcast revenue, trailing only the English Premier League.

An argument could be made that Italy’s top league isn’t the powerhouse it once was, however the league has posted solid results in UEFA Champions League play, the top continental league in Europe. Even after Serie A lost one of their bids to Germany’s Bundesliga following the 2011-12 season, they’ve posted respectable results. Since being limited to three teams receiving bids to the Champions League, Italian powerhouse Juventus has managed a runner-up finish in the CL last year and both Roma and Milan have made appearances in the Group Stage of the tournament as well. Even with four teams (Juventus, AC Milan, Inter and Napoli) in the top-20 most valuable soccer clubs as of 2015, Serie A has some catching up to do if they’d like to match the brand value of the titans of European soccer.

If this streaming agreement opens up the first of many more casual soccer fans here in the US, all the better. The individual game price is well worth testing the waters of Serie A, but the model of online viewing is the most important part. If other leagues — namely the Premier League, Bundesliga or Ligue One — are able to find a way to offer streamed soccer, it will be another huge win, much like Fox Soccer 2 Go, for cord-cutting soccer fans.

The NBA Finals have been wrapped up for just one week, but already the association is looking to the 2015-16 season. Even before the Golden State Warriors were crowned champions, the NBA announced a major change to their streaming League Pass service. Beginning next season, you’ll be given the option to purchase individual games or team packages, provided you’re out of the team’s local market.

As presently designed, the new League Pass will be compatible with computers — Windows and Mac — as well as Android and iOS devices. For those with Fire, Windows, Blackberry or other operating systems, you may be on the outside looking in. The NBA Game Time app (which is required to view League Pass on mobile devices) does support Amazon Fire devices, but support for Game Time was dropped for Windows devices in July of last year.

The importance of the NBA deciding to offer a more a la carte style cannot be understated, as now more light is cast on other sports leagues, particularly the NFL. As Engadget notes, the NFL is currently fighting a lawsuit from a fan regarding the limits of their Sunday Ticket service, specifically being forced to pay hundreds of dollars to see their favorite team 16 games per year even though they live thousands of miles away from the team’s location.

The murky waters of territorial or cable blackouts has been explored before, just ask a local Dodgers fan, and as Time Warner continues to lose money, it seems possible the 25-year and $8.3 billion dollar deal could get reworked. With sports fans and non-sports fans alike clamoring for an a la carte service, the answer could come not from a cable provider, but rather a group who knows a few things about entertainment in Sony.

During the Electronic Entertainment Expo this year, Sony announced an option purchase specific channels on their Playstation Vue services. It is an ambitious undertaking and perhaps Sony is simply dipping their toes in the water rather than diving right in the streaming market. Right now their Vue service is available in just five cities in the United States: Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Philadelphia and New York. Playstation 3 and 4 owners in those cities who are tired of the paying a cable bill can pick up a number of individual channels — or a more traditional package — including Fox Soccer, Showtime and Machinima for prices ranging from $3.99 to $14.99.

Given the push for a la carte services, a recent poll conducted by DigitalSmiths and posted via DSLReports shows an interesting trend. If sports fans are the driving force of streaming or pay-as-you-go streaming options, the survey had an interesting way of showing it.

ESPN ranked 20th among preferred channels, behind non-sports channels such as Animal Planet, Food Network and the History Channel. ABC and CBS ranked first and third respectively, however it would be a stretch to call those sports channels given their diverse programming. The same could be said for NBC (4th), Fox (7th), TBS (15th) and TNT (17th). Where ESPN was the first sports exclusive channel, both Fox Sports 1, NBC Sports, NFL Network, MLB Network plus the Golf Channel and Tennis Channel managed to make the list.

Kudos to the NBA for seizing an opportunity to gain new fans after a strong ratings performance in the finals. Perhaps more professional leagues or streaming service options will follow suit and offer a more personalized option.

(Header image via Wikipedia)

One week from today the final piece of the 2015-16 English Premier League will be decided. A single match between Middlesbrough and Norwich City will kick off at 10 am eastern time on May 25. The winner will advance to arguably the best soccer league in the world, the loser remains in England’s second tier league, the Football League Championship. Unfortunately, despite the high stakes, only a limited number of soccer fans — in particular those with cable subscriptions — outside of the United Kingdom will have access to the game.

Foreign broadcast rights for the Championship here in the United States and Canada fall to beIN Sports. Directly from the beIN website, they offer a free online system called beIN SPORTS CONNECT, allowing users to stream live events to their computers, iOS and Android systems. The downside is there is no standalone option for the service. You have to be in an area with beIN available to you, with a compatible cable provider and then purchase a qualifying cable package.

The good news is Sling TV offers a package for $10.00 per month that includes, among other sports options, beIN Sports. Perhaps this is one of the first times in broadcasting history where cord cutters without a traditional cable package sit in an advantageous position to those with a cable subscription. Despite some channel lineups coming with beIN, the vast majority of cable packages don’t offer beIN until their highest package, or as an add-on at additional cost. In my area in particular, beIN isn’t available for my current provider. A competing cable and internet provider does offer beIN, though it isn’t an included feature — it is available as an add-on for $10.00 with the second and third most expensive packages —  until the highest cost package, coming in at a hefty $91.00 per month. That bill is before taxes and without accounting for internet or installation and activation.

At this point it’s hard to say which is more accurate: that the cord cutting generation is winning or that the old school cable TV model is losing.

(Header image via beIN)

For those frustrated in the United Kingdom regarding the Sky TV’s Go and Go Extra no longer being watchable on Google Chrome, help has arrived in the form of Slingbox’s M1 now being available throughout Europe. Via press release, Slingbox announced their set-top box system is now being sold for £129.99 or €199.99 and boasts being compatible with every cable and satellite provider and 100 percent channel availability in their M1 video.

While this still requires a cable subscription, Slingbox does not require any monthly fees to watch sports and shows on the go. That their computer and laptop interface is compatible with Chrome (as well as Safari and Firefox) is a major chip in Slingbox’s favor. Sky Go doesn’t cost anything extra for eligible cable subscriptions, however features such as international viewing, downloading or watching downloaded content are limited to the Sky Go Extra package, costing an additional £5 per month. Currently Sky Go and Extra are limited to iOS and Android whereas the M1 works with iOS, Android, Windows Phone and Kindle devices.

Slingbox is looking to fill what appears to be a self-created void created by Sky for many soccer fans throughout the UK. Given Sky — and to a lesser extent BT Sports — dominate the English Premier League broadcasting rights, it’s surprising to see a company refuse service on a web browser. Fans who can’t be in front their televisions could turn to Slingbox for their on-the-go needs. Senior VP and GM of Sling Media Michael Hawkey is counting on that and said of the latest market expansion:

Given its strong reception in the United States, we are excited to introduce the Slingbox M1 into the European market….With a Slingbox M1 that has been completely localised for customers, we’re delivering the most affordable Slingbox packed with the most robust set of features that we believe will significantly expand the mobile TV and video market.

If the M1 sells well enough and Sky finds many subscribers canceling their Sky Go Extra package, perhaps then the message will be clear: keep up to date with the consumer’s demands or you will lose money.

(Header image via Slingbox)

Last year’s Super Bowl being streamed online was a huge move for the big four — NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL — though the other sports have yet to cater to the streaming population. More fringe or niche leagues may be more willing to embrace the available technology as they attempt to grow their brands, or so it would seem within the ranks of the Professional Bull Riders. Last week PBR announced a partnership with the streaming company Flipps to showcase via pay-per-view their Ring of Honor: Unfinished Business event.

Earlier today via press release, Flipps posted additional details about the Ring of Honor stream. Set to take place on May 30, will consist of a three hour live broadcast of the various competitions with riders aiming to take home up to $160,000 in the winner-take-all formats. In order to view the event, a $29.95 price tag is attached, the same price to watch on Dish Network. Flipps CEO, Kosta Jordanov, said of the partnership with PBR:

PBR is the premiere bull riding organization in the world and we are honored to be able to elevate that content to new audiences through the Flipps platform.

Flipps, a free app available on iOS, Android, most SmartTVs and more, offers both free and PPV options for sports highlights, games and matches ranging from the ACC Digital Network to UFC Sports, the Golf Channel and dozens of others. The entertainment isn’t limited to sports coverage, though. Flipps is dedicated to bringing live coverage to their user base, and includes select programming from Showtime, music videos, plus dedicated genres for children and news. The channel selection also includes industry updates and videos from automotive, health and tech sources. With much of their content readily available for free, Flipps’ revenue comes from in-app ads and video ads, though given their impressive lineup, it is understandable. If you happen to be a bull riding fan who has cut the cord, this is mana from streaming heaven. For those who have dropped their cable packages but are not terrible enthusiastic about the PBR, Flipps has enough other options to be well worth a download.

(Header image via Doug Wertman)

Media consumption, like most things, can be broken down into various age demographics. While the brackets tend to have somewhat arbitrary numbers attached to them  — does turning 26 years old really change the preferred method of watching your favorite TV shows? — they can serve as a platform for observation. With thanks to Statista and Deloitte, the gap between paid cable subscriptions and streaming services, among other things, for those in the United States can be clearly shown.

It comes as no real surprise to see the two younger age groups consume the least amount of television while also nabbing the top two spots in video streaming. Somewhat surprising is to see the leading millennials 26-31 age group absorbing more newspaper, be it digital or print, than their older 32-48 counterparts. With large number of online and subscriptions available, plus the Washington Post’s agreement with Kindle customers, perhaps the leading millennial group has come back around in a cyclical trend of newspaper reading.

The percentage of the different aged people who are content with their current cable TV subscription is closely tied with age. The youngest three groups are the least satisfied, reporting at most 55% saying they haven’t at least considered cutting the cord.

With no shortage of streaming or screencasting options — despite AppleTV’s recent insistence on requiring a cable package for CBS Sports, USA and NBC Sports — the number of current and potential cord cutters has increased over the years, particularly in the younger crowds. Already 25% of the polled age-14 through 25 group hasn’t paid for TV in over a year or have ended their cable subscription within 12 months. Within the age group another trend emerges as 28% of 19-25 year olds versus 21% of 14-18 year olds are calling themselves cord cutters.

As the overall demand for TV changes, so does the desire for the way TV packages are sold. For the first time in the three year data set, more than 50% of the polled desire the ability to choose individual channels to watch. A three year decrease in the average number of channels watched further highlights the growing calls for an a la carte system. Canada is already developing a government mandate for cable companies to allow customers to choose individual channels after an initial package, though no legislative traction has gained ground in the U.S. yet.

The numbers represent a clear trend in increased subscription based services and a desire to either ditch cable TV altogether or give it a serious overhaul in programming options. The people are applying pressure to big cable with their wallets as companies lose money with every person severing their TV packages. Still, and with apologies to Bon Jovi, at this point it feels like we’re livin’ on a prayer rather than being halfway there.

(Header image via Deloitte)

The growth of soccer is something we’ve been hearing about since the mid 1990s. Major League Soccer may not have the top tier quality of European leagues just yet, but the quality of play has certainly been on the rise, particularly in the last few seasons. Older stars such as Thierry Henry, Robbie Keane and of course David Beckham have given the MLS a touch of precision it has been lacking. When seeing what these players can do in the MLS, many fans have seemingly sought out higher levels of competition, namely the English Premier League.

Back at the midway point of the EPL season, NBC — who owns broadcasting rights here in the United States — released viewership numbers and they showed an uptick from last season. NBC claimed a 15% jump in TV views and an encouraging 36% increase in streamed games via PC, mobile and tablets. Corroborating the continued rise in soccer’s popularity is the latest Global Web Index report, showing an bump up across the board in EPL watching.

Of the sample of about 40,000 users across 32 different countries, 28% claimed they watched the EPL on television. Another 16% reported streaming the games through their connected devices rather than the traditional TV route.

Unsurprisingly the 16-24 and 25-34 age demographics lead the online viewership numbers, with 19% and 22% respectively streaming their games

Given the time zone differences — a Tottenham fan in San Jose, CA is faced with a seven hour difference or a Bayern fan in NYC still has a five hour difference — it remains a difficult reality for the European leagues to grow here. While some people, myself included, are more than happy to wake up early to watch games, eventually we may reach a point where the casually interested fans are not willing to sacrifice sleep for their soccer fix. Until we reach that point, the rising popularity of soccer, especially the EPL, is a welcome sight.

(Header image via Ungry Young Man)

If you’re a fellow cord cutter then no doubt you’ve been just as giddy as myself at the thought of a standalone HBO service — dubbed named HBO Now — ever since it was announced it was in the works. Catching things like Last Week Tonight, Real Sports and more all without paying a premium cable television bill seemed too good to be true. Today HBO may have shaken me out of my dream scenario as today the company announced at an Apple event that the service will debut next month…specifically on Apple TV.

To their credit, HBO Now will be able to be streamed from any web browser, but only with Apple TV will the customer be able to see the premium programming on their televisions. No Roku, Chromecast, Fire TV or other service will be available at launch. CNN senior media correspondent Brian Stelter reported the HBO/Apple exclusive deal will last three months though that is yet to be confirmed by either company. On the hardware side of things, Apple is reducing the price of Apple TV from $99 down to $69,

Statista shows Apple TV holds a clear lead among streaming services, nearly double the share of the second place Roku.

With almost 60% of the streaming market shutout of utilizing HBO Now to its full potential or be forced to make an additional upfront hardware purchase, I’m struggling to maintain my previous enthusiasm.

(Header image via HBO)

It should be no surprise to hear online viewing is on the rise, but just how dramatically it has risen is another matter. According to the latest Global Web Index poll — where it sampled 16-64 year-olds in 32 different countries — 55% of sports fans watched a sporting event online (a clarification email went unanswered when the question regarding Roku boxes and like counting for broadcast, online or both).

The ESPN network and self-proclaimed “World-Wide Leader in Sports” did just that, with 30% of the polled users saying they watched a sport on ESPN3/WatchESPN. The second place Eurosport grabbed 18% of the online market. Of the previously mentioned 55% of online watchers, half of them tuned in using a laptop or computer. One in three used a mobile phone and one in five caught sports action on their tablets. In addition to ESPN’s stream viewing, their website also led the way with 20% of sports traffic heading their way on computers, 13% via mobile phone and was tied with Eurosport at 10% on tablets.

Despite the growth, standard television broadcasts still dominate the viewing market. The polled field averaged almost an hour per day of streamed content — not just sports — whereas they stated watching 2.78 hours of TV broadcasts. Perhaps the most interesting thing is that 18% of sports fans are now paying for online streams. The popularity of streaming platforms such as MLB.TV and Fox Soccer 2Go et al has certainly played a significant role in the rise of paid subscriptions and keep in mind this chart does not display some of the incredible viewing numbers esports attracts.

(Source and graphic via GWI)
(Header image via Twitter)

According to CNBC, YouTube could be on the brink of a major makeover for companies and content creators. The service would offer a subscription price to eliminate advertisements in videos. Google — which bought out YouTube for $1.65 billion in 2006 — has been experimenting with a subscription based revenue model since 2013, though now it seems the service will launch full-scale in a matter of months.

The ad-free experimental model, starting as low as $0.99 per month, currently features partnerships with National Geographic, PGA, UFC and 26 other channels. After two months the service wasn’t quite what some hoped, at least according to National Geographic’s senior vice president of global strategy. On top of the channels and content, YouTube is also launching their Music Key service in order to bring ad-free content specifically to music videos.

As more and more people are finding ways around the pre-roll and in-video ads — the Ad Block Plus Chrome extension claims over 50 million users — it will be curious to see what demographic this new YouTube service is aimed at. As someone who has cut the cord, I rely on streaming services for information, entertainment and the like. While I turn off ABP for certain websites and for Twitch.TV, for the vast majority of my computer based browsing, I leave it on.

The sheer volume of content on YouTube is staggering: over one billion active users upload 300 hours of content is uploaded every minute. Despite sporting an impressive 50% advert revenue going back to the partners on YouTube, this new subscription-based model for generating revenue could be the cure for people like myself who use third-party options to avoid ads. I certainly can’t speak for everyone using ABP or a similar service, but advertisements are a matter of being an inconvenience and for me, just being impatient.

I for one, welcome our new subscription based YouTube overlords.

(Header image via YouTube)