Updated throughout the day with quick takes from staff.
Say, Comcast Sports New England, which broadcasts Boston Celtics' games, has the inside scoop (note: not an inside scoop) on just how much money players are losing during the NBA lockout.
Kevin Garnett is out $887,499 by missing that one bi-monthly check on Tuesday. Dwight Howard missed $745,224. Amare Stoudemire? Yeah, he's out $759,070. And Gilbert Arenas -- you may want to divert your eyes -- lost out on $802,887 when his check didn't come in the mail.
But I feel as if CSNNE is missing another important point here ...
Ah, the Boston Globe's Johnny Diaz has it covered.
For the regional cable channel Comcast SportsNet in Boston, the Celtics are a reliable ratings bonanza. [...] Every canceled game is a big loss. For example, 149,000 viewers tuned into SportsNet for the game between the Celtics and the Milwaukee Bucks on Nov. 3, 2010, according to Nielsen Co. ratings.
On the most comparable night this year - Wednesday, Nov. 2, when the Celtics were scheduled to play the Cleveland Cavaliers - SportsNet drew only 9,400 viewers. [...]
A 30-second spot during a Celtics game on SportsNet can cost from $2,500 to $4,000. A spot on an off night will command only hundreds of dollars, according to a Boston advertising agency official who requested anonymity to avoid conflicts with clients.
So while CSNNE's content side is "reporting" on the shocking salaries players are missing, CSNNE's sales side is likely down on bended knee praying for the lockout to end so that the network's advertisers don't revolt. Good to know. I wonder when CSNNE will report on this side of the lockout.
3 comments
5
Nov 28
3
Nov 27
Comments
Neither here nor there
According to Marine Layer over at newballpark.org every week lost in the 2011-2012 season translates to about $100 million in losses in game revenue, including tickets, other arena revenue, and broadcast revenue. He claims the the $100 million a week estimate comes from: 43-44 games played per week @ $1 million gate per game = $43 million. Add in national and local broadcast revenues/fees (50+% of BRI) and you get to around $100 million.
Also, according to the player union’s NLRB complaint awhile back, the owners supposedly admitted in negotations that the lockout would cost them approximately $1.5 billion per year."
Also
Why would the advertisers revolt? It says in the article that a 30 second spot on an off night commands only hundreds of dollars. They aren’t paying $2,500 to $4,000 right now for game nights where there is no game. The advertisers are likely just paying for add time where people are actually watching in the area. Don’t quite get why they would be revolting.
Words of wisdom from the great Billy Dee Williams
Oh so you disagree. Well then, here is a mature, sophisticated, and compelling rebuttal.
by wallywagon11 on Nov 17, 2011 11:30 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Maybe a revolt is too strong a word, but if the advertising they’re paying for doesn’t bring them the amount of business they need, there’s a strong chance they might try elsewhere. And sports programming is great for zeroing in on a target audience. Sponsors could migrate over to some other channel featuring cagefighting and such.
I don’t get why the majority says the owners have all the power. They’ve got more money, but they’ll also be losing a lot more. Mo’ money, mo’ problems, mo’ expenses.
Michael Jordan’s Final Comeback, Rewritten
by jahidi_jones on Nov 17, 2011 1:43 PM EST up reply actions
more revenues.
"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!
by caseycheesecake on Nov 17, 2011 2:40 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed