Mastodon
@National Basketball Association

Chuck on NBA broadcasting: “They don’t really care about anything but how to make the most money possible…Everybody can’t afford streaming… when you start just going to the highest bidder and you’re not on regular television, I think you do a disservice to the fan.”



Source: https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2024/07/11/nba-media-rights-wbd-matching-package

Full quote:

“They don't really care about anything but how to make the most money possible. We should never put money above the regular fan. Everybody can't afford streaming. There's nothing wrong with streaming, but when you start just going to the highest bidder and you're not on regular television, I think you do a disservice to the fan.”

He also adds: “But in fairness, the players want to make as much money as possible. The owners want to make as much money as possible. But … the fan's always the most important thing. No matter how much money you make, if the people are not watching, it's a lose-lose proposition.’’

by Balls_of_Adamanthium

43 Comments

  1. CoyotesSideEyes

    TNT costs more than Prime and Peacock do.

  2. AutographedSnorkel

    The dude that spent his entire broadcasting career on a cable network is concerned about people not being able to afford streaming

  3. Particular_Ad_9531

    This is such a boomer take; nobody under the age of 50 wants “regular” cable tv anymore and wishes they could get everything on streaming.

  4. NightSleepStars

    Understandable when Chuck comes out of “retirement” to go to the highest bidder

  5. rawman200K

    Yeah so now the cable network is losing its rights to a company with broadcast stations. I don’t see the issue

  6. FrnklndaTurtle

    More national games will now be OTA with NBC so I would say the new deals are better for the fans. Chuck just upset his show is going away.

  7. HokageEzio

    As opposed to cable, which is obviously free. Thank you to the 61 year old man for explaining cable vs streaming.

  8. Chuck has zero idea what anything costs lol. There will be more games on free OTA channels with the new contracts than previously. Also, more people can afford streaming than they can afford to pay cable pricing to get TNT. Not happy about losing Inside the NBA but Chuck is way off here.

  9. neuroticsmurf

    I’m looking at having to get YTTV (ABC/ESPN & possibly TNT), Amazon Prime, and Peacock PLUS League Pass next year.

    That’s disgusting just to watch the game I love.

    I don’t even want all the extra shit I’d get with those services. I literally only watch the NBA, Max & Netflix.

  10. i mean i don’t disagree with the “they only care about making money” point but, like. cable isn’t exactly cheap either

  11. ApoliticalAth3ist

    Most people don’t want to watch anyway. They just want to tweet about it

  12. Chuck is right the NBA is moving away from cable now you need three separate subscriptions

  13. Quick someone ask him what a gallon of milk costs.

    The winds are shifting and streaming is front and center. Only makes sense to evolve and not force people into cable bundles that have outstayed their welcome. You gotta meet people where they are.

  14. gabeharris23

    I mean I like the idea, but cable is not regular tv. NBC is much more accessible than TNT

  15. Chuck’s right. Both the NHL and Pac-12 made short term revenue decisions that ended up costing them Billions down the line. Now the NBA is starting down the same path.

  16. BeamTeam032

    The NFL and NBA make it hard to be a fan. Which is why so much fandom is now “I dont really watch the games, I follow along on social media, watch highlights and listen to podcasts”

    I wouldn’t mind paying for league pass but 200 is a little outrageous. And I don’t get playoff games? I wouldn’t mind paying 100 bucks and I only get 3 teams I can watch during the season. Instead of paying 200 and getting every game.

    Same with football, but Sunday Ticket is like 450 bucks.

  17. LanaSwiftFan

    streaming is more affordable than cable you bald dumbass

  18. In this case the nba is actually going to be on regular tv for the first time in decades. People won’t need a cable package to watch basketball with NBC

  19. spoofrice11

    We agree.

    Love watching NBA games (have NBA channel and got Sports package for teams in my area with D-TV), but am not going to sign up for Amazon or other streaming services for the games not on my TV.

  20. Literally_12

    As someone who could never afford cable, the new deal is a massive upgrade for my NBA watching experience.

  21. im against streaming because i hate getting in and out of apps. i end up watching the ads just because theres too much friction to channel surf

  22. Prestigious_Fail3791

    Ha, does Chuck think TNT can be picked up on antenna?

    That said, it’s easier to get TNT than ESPN these days. ESPN is no longer in the basic DirectTV package.

    All games should be found on the same platform. The NFL has the same playbook showing games on numerous services. All that does is encourage fans to bootleg. I’m not going to subscribe to watch 1-2 games.

    Wouldn’t they make more money simply going paper view and charging like $1-$5 per game?

  23. slicksonslick

    I literally could not watch basketball when I was younger because I didn’t have cable…

  24. MeanCommission994

    TNT studio shows being ignorant of the NBA also did a disservice

  25. Am I missing something? People can get ABC and NBC for free over the air with an antenna, and Prime is a pretty good deal if you pay the annual rate. I’m a cord cutter so I just won’t be able to watch the ESPN games

  26. So-_-It-_-Goes

    The only reason I was able to watch tnt games is because my parents still have a crazy expensive cable subscription and I used their log in

  27. caterpillardave

    Every year, I have to tack on like 40 bucks a month to my budget to watch the playoffs. I already have access to Prime from both family and roommates. Of course I support it going more to other services I already have.

  28. rNBA_Mods_Be_Better

    I work in TV and was talking to a development person the other day, and they told me “The longer I work here the more I realize everyone above me would be content to show a screensaver all day if that’s what got the most eyeballs. They do not care about quality whatsoever, just the most amount of eyes and doing it fast/cheap.”

    I feel like it’s this race to the bottom. All the money filters into the top 1% of people then stays there, so it’s running out for the rest of us and it’s a mad scramble to slash and dash to allocate what little we can get.

  29. Accurate_Hunt_6424

    I will never understand the bitching about streaming costs. You could have six or seven streaming subscriptions and it would still be far cheaper than your average cable bill. Yet there will still be dorks in the comments here making pirate noises.

  30. Cable was a huge disservice to most fans. they had a monopoly and would charge outrageous amount and put people in contracts. streaming you can sign up and cancel instantly.

  31. A lot of people don’t have cable but already have Prime Video and Peacock is one of the cheapest streaming services. Personally this set up is better for me. Even if I go with the highest tiers its still significantly less than cable and something I’ll watch other things on. I would not be watching anything else on cable channels.

  32. DadOfPete

    Boxing went completely to PPV, look at what happened to boxing. But the execs don’t care. If basketball loses viewers because of the expense, what do they care? All they care about is maximizing profits during their time at the job. The long term health of the sport is not a concern. Welcome to late stage capitalism.

  33. sonegreat

    I think they will get more eyes on the product through Prime. And if Disney decides to stream on their Disney+/Hulu streaming services away from ESPN, even more people will watch.

Write A Comment