<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[Get The Picture]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[https://blutarsky.wordpress.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Senator Blutarsky]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://blutarsky.wordpress.com/author/blutarsky/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Content is king.]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s a reason ESPN charges all that money to watch.  <a href="http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/05/cutting_the_chord_as_sports_br.html" target="_blank">We want to pay it</a>.</p>
<blockquote><p>The risk for distributors is losing subscribers who will leave to find live sports provided by a competitor. More than one-third of consumers would cancel their pay TV service if they lost ESPN, the top cable channel for viewer loyalty, according to a 2012 survey by Lazard Capital Markets.</p></blockquote>
<p>Even in an <em>a la carte</em> era, that&#8217;s not going to change.</p>
<blockquote><p>Pilson said he thinks bundling will probably become the subject of a Congressional inquiry over the next five years. The New York Times recently reported government intervention doesn&#8217;t seem likely since the Federal Communications Commission has ensured telecommunication companies can compete in the TV business and empowered programmers in negotiations with cable distributors.</p>
<p>&#8220;Over a period of time, I think we can expect all cable bills to go up,&#8221; Pilson said. &#8220;There seems to be a public acceptance of (higher) bills right now. I think cable is viewed as a necessity in most homes.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>When it comes to sports programming, we live in a whatever the market will bear world.  And the content providers know it.</p>
]]></html></oembed>