April 22, 2025Apr 22 The Blackhawks have seen their viewers on their home network down almost 80%!!! https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6297335/2025/04/21/blackhawks-chsn-viewership/
April 22, 2025Apr 22 45 minutes ago, Falstaff said: Sportsvision 2.0 I would venture that Sportsvision made even more than this endeavor...inflation-adjusted to the early 1980s. https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/04/19/white-sox-chsn-comcast/&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjw1Nit2OuMAxUXK0QIHf23KksQFnoECAIQAw&usg=AOvVaw0kA9mxVpbdwCHVRofUYJDg "CHSN may need to think outside the Comcast cable box with Bulls and Blackhawks done and White Sox struggling..." Blackhawks btw have shed more viewers than ANY team in the NHL this season. Shocking! WGN would potentially carry 10-15 Bulls and Blackhawks games and around 25 White Sox games. As a CW affiliate, WGN would have to work to schedule games around the network’s ACC and NASCAR coverage. Local sports have been integral to WGN’s history, carrying Cubs, White Sox, Bulls, and Blackhawks games at various points between 1948 and 2019. Several MLB, NHL, and MLB teams have announced arrangements to simulcast select games on over-the-air stations, increasing the reach to include antenna-only homes. This arrangement is somewhat different as CHSN is already broadcast over-the-air in Chicago (channel 62.2), essentially meaning the simulcast games would be available from two different broadcast stations in Chicago. https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2025/04/wbd-tnt-spin-off-netflix-sports-nhl-rsn-playoffs-chsn-wgn-simulcast/ Edited April 22, 2025Apr 22 by caulfield12
April 22, 2025Apr 22 Showing White Sox games once a week or so...let's say every Sunday afternoon, isn't really going to accomplish all that much. Those 25 games works out to 1 for every 6.48 games played per week, essentially. Weren't the White Sox even on WGN more often than that when nearly every Cubs' game was broadcast...certainly all the home/day ganes.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 Blackhawks chairman and CEO Danny Wirtz said Monday that the report’s numbers didn’t take into account all of the available metrics, but they were close. Wirtz said in March that he was hopeful of creating more access to CHSN in the future. He was firmer Monday in his response to the latest numbers. “At the end of the day, the availability of our games on TV this past season was unacceptable — and our fans deserve better,” Wirtz said. “I am focused on finding potential solutions for next season with our partners at CHSN. We are about to celebrate 100 years of hockey as well as usher in the next generation on the ice. I am committed to ensuring our fans can see that.” https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6297335/2025/04/21/blackhawks-chsn-viewership/&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiNw_Ld3uuMAxViEkQIHR6wMAMQFnoECAEQAw&usg=AOvVaw2b6Z6nMnff8mZAJ7wvvpFA Edited April 22, 2025Apr 22 by caulfield12
April 22, 2025Apr 22 3 hours ago, Falstaff said: Sportsvision 2.0 Free over-the-air digital broadcasts are the exact opposite of the absurd Sportsvision analog/descrambler set-up. One problem now is that there are some who are too lazy or stupid to set up an antenna and run a cable to it. Those that have are amazed at the cable quality of over-the-air free broadcasts.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 Author 14 minutes ago, tray said: Free over-the-air digital broadcasts are the exact opposite of the absurd Sportsvision analog/descrambler set-up. One problem now is that there are some who are too lazy or stupid to set up an antenna and run a cable to it. Those that have are amazed at the cable quality of over-the-air free broadcasts. I think you need some advice from someone who had deep thoughts on one upsmanships and personal digs.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 4 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: The Blackhawks have seen their viewers on their home network down almost 80%!!! https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6297335/2025/04/21/blackhawks-chsn-viewership/ Nobody wants to watch that wretched team play apparently. When they gonna get good again? That was fun when they won 3 titles in 6 years.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 24 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: I think you need some advice from someone who had deep thoughts on one upsmanships and personal digs. You sound like an angry person who harbors grudges and stalks certain posters. Move on from it. Be better.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 Author 6 minutes ago, tray said: You sound like an angry person who harbors grudges and stalks certain posters. Move on from it. Be better. Again, take your own advice. If you want to post long lectures on how to act, you should probably be doing it yourself. Be better.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 11 minutes ago, tray said: You sound like an angry person who harbors grudges and stalks certain posters. Move on from it. Be better. I’m sorry who is calling people lazy and stupid
April 22, 2025Apr 22 Fighting demographic trends with losing products. The only sport that is immune to these chances is the NFL, for various reasons but the big two being gambling/fantasy and the relative lack of games in a year. MLB needs to be careful here while the sport is healthy now economically they are not immune to these changes and having poor owners in big markets will accelerate TV revenue losses.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 1 hour ago, tray said: Free over-the-air digital broadcasts are the exact opposite of the absurd Sportsvision analog/descrambler set-up. One problem now is that there are some who are too lazy or stupid to set up an antenna and run a cable to it. Those that have are amazed at the cable quality of over-the-air free broadcasts. The commonality is that both significantly reduced viewership, which inevitably will erode the fan base.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 7 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said: I’m sorry who is calling people lazy and stupid For a lot of people, especially older ones it isn't very easy to get up on a roof and install an antenna.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 1 hour ago, tray said: Free over-the-air digital broadcasts are the exact opposite of the absurd Sportsvision analog/descrambler set-up. One problem now is that there are some who are too lazy or stupid to set up an antenna and run a cable to it. Those that have are amazed at the cable quality of over-the-air free broadcasts. Sure, it may be a problem for some. But far from being near the top of problems. The viewership for the Sox ranked towards the bottom even before the move to CHSN.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 10 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said: For a lot of people, especially older ones it isn't very easy to get up on a roof and install an antenna. There are indoor options that are virtually plug and play. But still not an ideal solution. The Sox aren't worth the effort.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 1 hour ago, tray said: Free over-the-air digital broadcasts are the exact opposite of the absurd Sportsvision analog/descrambler set-up. One problem now is that there are some who are too lazy or stupid to set up an antenna and run a cable to it. Those that have are amazed at the cable quality of over-the-air free broadcasts. Antenna TV. The future!!! Turns out making your customers jump through hoops to watch your shitty teams is bad for business. Who would have thought? I can't wait to see the White Sox numbers after this season. Probably going to exceed that 78%.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 Author 14 minutes ago, Paulie4Pres said: Antenna TV. The future!!! Turns out making your customers jump through hoops to watch your shitty teams is bad for business. Who would have thought? I can't wait to see the White Sox numbers after this season. Probably going to exceed that 78%. Sure, but also the ratings had already collapsed last year.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 10 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: Sure, but also the ratings had already collapsed last year. Well yeah. That's what happens when the product on the field is the worst in the history of the sport. I didn't watch a single Bulls' game this season. I won't watch a single White Sox game in 2025. For the first time in probably 30 years. I'm not alone. That's what Jerry Reinsdorf has done.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 Author 49 minutes ago, chitownsportsfan said: Fighting demographic trends with losing products. The only sport that is immune to these chances is the NFL, for various reasons but the big two being gambling/fantasy and the relative lack of games in a year. MLB needs to be careful here while the sport is healthy now economically they are not immune to these changes and having poor owners in big markets will accelerate TV revenue losses. All so Jerry can make a few more bucks off of us.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 1 hour ago, tray said: Free over-the-air digital broadcasts are the exact opposite of the absurd Sportsvision analog/descrambler set-up. One problem now is that there are some who are too lazy or stupid to set up an antenna and run a cable to it. Those that have are amazed at the cable quality of over-the-air free broadcasts. Pretty sure the actual problem is that the CHSN folks are too lazy and stupid to realize that not everyone wants to do OTA, whether they're too lazy, too stupid, or whatever other reason. It's not like this is new information.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 Robert Channick in the Tribune has reported that one of Comcast's demands is that CHSN discontinue the free over-the-air broadcasts on channel 62: Quote Sources familiar with negotiations say CHSN’s over-the-air broadcasts remain a stumbling block. In order to strike a pay-TV deal with Comcast, CHSN may have to pull the plug on its free TV broadcasts, sources said. So what's the best option for fans and the teams? Should CHSN jettison the antenna viewers to potentially reach the million Comcast viewers in Chicago -- albeit on Comcast's more expensive Ultimate tier? Or should they forgo Comcast, which has been steadily losing customers nationally for years? Maybe there's some split of free games on WGN/WJYS and Comcast-exclusive games that would satisfy everyone? Given the performance of Bulls, Hawks, and Sox, it's hard to imagine that anyone but the most devout fans will be motivated to either fiddle around with an antenna or pay an extra $20/month to Comcast. So until the teams get better, I doubt their TV revenue numbers are going to get better.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 The saddest thing is, the White Sox and Bulls obviously and the Blackhawks have known for a year or two what was going down with Comcast, yet, just like their teams, they weren't prepared.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 8 minutes ago, Dick Allen said: The saddest thing is, the White Sox and Bulls obviously and the Blackhawks have known for a year or two what was going down with Comcast, yet, just like their teams, they weren't prepared. They counted 100%...Hahn and Boyer...on renegotiating that last three or five year deal upwards, bigtime. Ofc that renegotiation timeframe for their unprecedented competitive window fell right in 2022/23, when the team had already started to descend towards unwatchable.
April 22, 2025Apr 22 16 minutes ago, kba said: Robert Channick in the Tribune has reported that one of Comcast's demands is that CHSN discontinue the free over-the-air broadcasts on channel 62: So what's the best option for fans and the teams? Should CHSN jettison the antenna viewers to potentially reach the million Comcast viewers in Chicago -- albeit on Comcast's more expensive Ultimate tier? Or should they forgo Comcast, which has been steadily losing customers nationally for years? Maybe there's some split of free games on WGN/WJYS and Comcast-exclusive games that would satisfy everyone? Given the performance of Bulls, Hawks, and Sox, it's hard to imagine that anyone but the most devout fans will be motivated to either fiddle around with an antenna or pay an extra $20/month to Comcast. So until the teams get better, I doubt their TV revenue numbers are going to get better. Given how they have zero leverage I'd suggest keeping the free option but what do I know. JR probably thinks he's got a stronger hand then he does. Comcast doesn't need to overpay for this product.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.