Tuesday, June 24, 2025

NBA Finals Ad Spend Jumps 56%, Viewing Drops 9%

NBA Finals Ad Spend Jumps 56%, Viewing Drops 9%

The seven-game NBA Finals averaged 10.3 million Nielsen-measured viewers on ABC and ESPN+ -- down 9% from the year before.

National TV advertising revenue for the major basketball contest was up 56% to $288 million, coming from 608 advertiser commercial airings and 5.7 billion impressions, according to EDO Ad EnGage.

The previous year, a five-game series where the Boston Celtics beat the Dallas Mavericks four games to one earned $184.7 million in national TV advertising revenues for ABC/ESPN. That series averaged 11.3 million viewers.

Because the contest featured small and mid-sized market teams, for the Oklahoma Thunder/Indianapolis Pacers series, analysts estimated somewhat lower viewership. However, the closely fought series that extended to seven games pulled in high viewer interest.

The Thunder beat the Pacers, four games to three. The seventh and deciding game posted the best results (16.4 million) on ABC/ESPN -- the highest-rated NBA Finals game since Game Six of the 2019 (Toronto Raptors vs. the Golden State Warriors) series, which averaged 18.3 million viewers.


Overall, the Thunder/Pacers finals was the lowest series in TV viewing since 2021, when the Milwaukee Bucks beat the Phoenix Suns, four games to two -- 9.9 million viewers.

Previous to this year’s finals, 34 NBA playoff games on ESPN/ABC, averaged 6.2 million viewers, up 10% from the year before.

Consumers' Sports TV Spend Rising - Anyone Calling a Time Out?

 

Commentary

Consumers' Sports TV Spend Rising - Anyone Calling a Time Out?


Consumer demand for sports on TV -- and at games -- continues to rocket ever higher, especially from networks, streaming, and other media.

But in turn, that means ever higher prices for consumers. How long can this go on?

New York Timesopinion piece from sports journalist Joon Lee says that for consumers the overall sports price tag -- per year -- amounts to $4,785 a year.

This is the total for a full year of media expenses from existing pay TV providers, streaming services subscriptions, arena/stadium ticket sales, and other one-time media purchases.


For TV/streaming alone (YouTube TV, MLB.TV, NBA League Pass, NFL Sunday Ticket, Peacock, Apple TV+, Max, Amazon Prime Video, and Paramount+) Lee says his annual bill comes to $2,634 a year.

While the number of platforms has indeed expanded, Lee says sports have become in effect less accessible as higher pricing takes effect.

The situation has been made more complicated by the massive disruption to the pay TV ecosystem -- with live, linear TV continuing to take a massive hit.

All this has exposed the actual higher costs for fans of sports on TV, as well as for non-sports and casual sports TV viewers, to an extent.

Compared to five years ago, consumers now have to pay extra -- beyond their typical cable TV network bundle -- for “Thursday Night Football” on Amazon Prime Video, or “Friday Night Baseball” on Apple TV+, for example. These are two exclusive packages where viewers have to spend more money, with streaming monthly fees, to see this content.

Other in-demand sports content may be sliced and diced down the road. Consider Netflix’s exclusive Christmas Day games a year ago, with more exclusive NFL playoff games to land on individual streamers -- like Peacock had over a year ago, and what Amazon will get in the future.

Testing future price hikes to come, perhaps Walt Disney had no problem releasing a $29.99-a-month price tag for the upcoming launch of its high-profile, major media business ESPN as a full-fledged streaming platform this fall.

To be fair, Disney is offering plenty of incentives to significantly lower the price tag -- like bundling it into Disney+ and Hulu for $35.99 (with advertising).

That said, one can guess sports franchises and leagues will continue their efforts to find niches and segments to optimize revenue for all their assets.

Will consumers ever raise their hands and pull themselves out of the game?

Perhaps sports TV networks need to observe the financial troubles that regional sports networks have gone through over the last few years -- all because of local teams spiking their right fees due to ever higher player contracts.

Perhaps no so far in the future some other legacy TV/streaming business might need to call for another time out

Uncapping The 39% TV Station Ownership Cap: Who Gets Tapped?

Commentary

Uncapping The 39% TV Station Ownership Cap: Who Gets Tapped?

TV station groups are getting ready to rumble.

Who gets slammed to the ground -- and who climbs on the ring ropes with arms in the air declaring victory? Follow the money.

The Federal Communications Commission is examining the long-time rule on limiting TV station ownership -- that owning TV stations cannot collectively exceed 39% of U.S. television households. The FCC has strongly signaled that it wants to remove the rule.

The purpose of the rule -- which started up in 2004 -- was to keep then-powerful TV station owners in check from becoming too big and powerful. But now the rise of many new digital-first companies -- especially social media companies -- is changing business dynamics.

Social-media giants like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and SnapChat and broader entertainment companies like YouTube, Spotify and others have no such household limitations. What will the near-term effects be?


The biggest TV station groups Nexstar Media Group, Sinclair, Tegna, Gray Television and others, with the financial wherewithal, can grow to become ever faster and more competitive in pricing against digital competitors when it comes to local and regional ad time.

It is not only those independent TV station groups that would benefit, but broadcast TV network-owned station groups -- ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox.

That said, all this might be too little too late. The future internet/broadband world doesn’t need more TV station-antenna based signals as a foundational part of the TV ecosystem.

Who then gets hurt? Small and mid-sized TV station owners who would find it difficult to compete against major TV network-based companies or large TV station groups -- now ever stronger -- in pushing down ad prices to gain greater market share.

Does that mean a new wave of TV station ownership will hurt “localism” -- especially high-profile TV-station newscasts, where local/regional brands spend a lot of their media dollars?

Many would point to research that already shows over 60% of U.S. consumers already get some of their news content via social media -- a trend that seemingly keeps growing.

Small and midsized TV station owners would then be squeezed two ways -- digital-first companies that have better business outcome results and even bigger, stronger TV station groups.

GrowingTV companies would also have an easy path to create more national TV-type networks, which analysts say doesn’t sound too good for creating local broadcast journalism.

Still, the National Association of Broadcasters says new bigger TV-station companies would mean more advertising revenue, which could be reinvested in local TV news.

In other words, trickle-down economics coming to an already hard-pressed TV station near you.

Imagine how that news story ends

Tuesday, June 10, 2025

Layoffs, Revamped Film/TV Marketing - As Business Concerns Mount Over AI

 

Commentary

Layoffs, Revamped Film/TV Marketing - As Business Concerns Mount Over AI

Walt Disney is laying off hundreds of staffers across its film and TV divisions, with many coming from marketing positions, according to news reports.

Somewhat regular announcements related to media companies' layoffs can seem like ordinary business to some -- regardless of industry-disruptive phrases attached to those moves like "cord-cutting," or even less media industry-specific words such as "pandemic."

But now layoffs are coming amid heightened business concerns around "AI" -- artificial intelligence. What does this have to do with anything, especially entertainment marketing? Savings, anywhere you can get it.

The rise of AI-influenced marketing efforts is coming at a fast and furious pace -- and especially to those more savvy media and digital-first companies.


In a recent announcement, Meta Platforms and its CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that in a couple of years, AI will not only replace many decisions related to brands' media-planning efforts on Facebook/Instagram, but much of the creative activations as well.

Meta is looking to fully automate ads on its platforms by 2026, enabling brands to activate a campaign by just inputting their business URL. Meta’s AI creative and targeting systems will do the rest.

So specifically, what are we talking about in the future of marketing of entertainment?

Video content, primarily -- trailers, video clips, content of TV shows and original theatrical and streaming movies. All that may seem easy for AI to figure out.

While legacy media platforms TV networks --and now streamers -- are a critical and obvious place for video engagement to attract consumers, this also looks like fertile ground for AI efforts to take hold.

This all comes in tandem with movie and TV marketing on social media. (Hello, Meta!)

Consider the explosion of entertainment options out there, especially now with streaming. AI coming from a TV network or streaming group -- a la Meta -- could be around the corner.

More broadly, Sam Altman, co-founder/former of CEO of OpenAI, predicted over a week ago that AI would replace 95% of ad agency work in the future.

Considering the looming clouds looming over much of the legacy media business these days -- linear TV, cable-network centric TV channel bundles, and everything in between -- should we expect other media companies to peacefully acknowledge defeat and issue their own staffing reductions .. with future efforts offered to Meta?

Perhaps a few AI-generated press releases are on the way.

Is Cord-Cutting Hurting Everyone? Not Exactly

 

Commentary

Is Cord-Cutting Hurting Everyone? Not Exactly

Cord-cutting continues to eat into the traditional linear TV pay TV business -- with subscriber declines of around 10% in recent quarters -- now landing at an estimated 40-or-so million, according to Bernstein Research.

Adding in virtual pay TV providers has not helped much -- contributing to a total decline over the last couple of quarters of around 5%, resulting in a total of about 62 million subscribers.

All this has driven declines in linear TV affiliate revenues --- anywhere from 3% (for Walt Disney) to a recent 8% drop (for Warner Bros. Discovery).

At the same time, only one legacy TV-network-based media company still shows gains: Fox Corp. And you probably know the reason why: High-valued sports and news content.

Fox Corp. posted an eye-opening 5% gain in the most recent first quarter to about $2 billion in linear affiliate revenue -- a number that has been trending higher, growing from a 2% increase starting in the third quarter of 2023.


Fox is still big on what linear TV can do for its business. Only recently did it announce a broad-based premium streaming platform -- Fox One -- that will house news, sports, and entertainment content. But this is about six years after legacy TV media companies launched their own premium streaming platforms.

Even then, Fox's announcement of its forthcoming streamer is designed to “complement” -- not replace -- its traditional broadcast and cable channels.

This, of course, is why Fox has been able to weather the rise of premium streaming competitors, which currently have been seeing some maturing of their business and cutbacks. That said, many premium streamers are now profitable.

Walt Disney and Warner Bros. Discovery are now regularly posting quarterly positive cash flow. Paramount Global and Comcast (NBCUniversal) are improving, but are still in the red.

To be fair, Fox Corp. -- like other legacy media companies-- has been impacted by losing cord-cutting subscribers -- down 6.5% in the first quarter of this year, according to Bernstein Research. But this is a smaller decline than Disney (8%) and WBD (9%).

Does it expect this to continue? Possibly.

Think about this: For Fox One, the company doesn’t even intend to target the usual suspects -- longtime pay TV customers. Instead, it looks to target mostly “cord-nevers” -- those who have never had traditional cable/satellite TV subscription in the first place.

This makes sense in terms of explaining why Fox Corp. still focuses on preserving legacy TV partnerships.

Hard-pressed executives at companies like Comcast Corp., Charter Communications, YouTube TV, Sling, Hulu+Live TV must be smiling -- at least a little bit.

WBD Slicing Away Cable Nets an Easier Split Than Comcast? Something Else?

 

Commentary

WBD Slicing Away Cable Nets an Easier Split Than Comcast? Something Else?

Warner Bros. Discovery now follows the strategy of where Comcast Corp. has gone with its spinning off its declining, mostly cable TV networks. But it could be a bit more complicated.

On the surface, and plainly, WBD keeps the good stuff -- and not just because of high-level streaming and studio-production business. Think about cash flow.

Estimated EBITDA for the WBD Streaming & Studios is a combined $4.3 billion for this year. This includes not just TV and moviemaking abilities, but Warner Bros. Games and Experiences businesses.

WBD did not disclose anticipated WBD Global Networks, however. The problem now is that much of the still eye-popping $38 billion debt will be put onto WBD Global Networks.

In a presentation on Monday, WBD executives talked up the positive -- that the company is now left in a unique position as a pure-play streaming and studio company.


In that regard, it is different from Comcast's Versant -- a forthcoming cable TV, network-centric business.

Comcast Corp. will keep the NBC Television Network and Bravo. In this regard, WBD does not have a live, linear broadcast TV network, which as a strict legacy TV business, can be viewed positively.

That said, Comcast isn't exactly splitting up all business operations of its legacy TV business.

Initially, analysts believe splitting NBC Television Network and Bravo from its cable networks could significantly hamper and harm the advertising leverage for NBCUniversal cable networks -- MSNBC, CNBC, USA Network, Syfy Channel, Oxygen, and Golf Channel.

Fixing this problem for Versant to an extent last month, it has struck a two-year deal with NBCUniversal -- a commercial service agreement -- to sell domestic advertising inventory, this is to keep the bigger ad-selling operation together.

While that would seem to ameliorate the separation of the publicly traded pieces of the business, it doesn't seem to address more declines for live, linear TV viewing usage.

NBCUniversal still has its big, growing premium streaming business in-house: Peacock. This is similar to where WBD will be with regard to HBO Max -- the returning brand name of Max.

For its part, WBD is left to try to build up discovery+ -- as well as the possibility of finding new streaming platform businesses for CNN -- on the Global Network side of things. Comcast has similar issues with boosting MSNBC/CNBC streaming activations.

WBD now has its TNT network without the NBA. It does retain the three-week, end-of-the-season college basketball event, "March Madness." Versant probably will look to grow some of its limited sports business on the USA Network.

Which newly spun-off cable TV network groups are poised to do better? Few are placing bets. That said, analysts might consider the idea of a merger -- further complicating these moves.

What remains? Paramount Global could be next.

Tuesday, June 3, 2025

AI Adoption is More Than Just Tech, It’s A Mindset Shift for Marketing Teams

 

SMM


AI Adoption is More Than Just Tech, It’s A Mindset Shift for Marketing Teams

Great AI change leaders foster an environment where all team members learn from each other.

AI Adoption Is About Change Management

Imagine you’ve stocked your kitchen with the finest ingredients: organic flour, farm-fresh eggs, rich Belgian chocolate (my favorite). You’ve purchased the latest top-of-the-line mixer. But here’s the challenge: You don’t have a recipe. This is how most marketing teams are approaching AI adoption.

They invest in the newest tools with the expectation of immediate return on investment. Tools don’t bring success; People who know how to use them do. And just like with baking without a recipe, success happens with the right people in an environment where experimentation and learning will ultimately result in creating something that fits your goals.

Now some will ask, “Why not simply ask AI for a recipe?” Certainly, you can. You can give AI a list of instructions, your flavor preferences and dietary needs and get a personalized recipe back. That’s amazing. However, it’s still your guidance that makes the outcome remarkable. It’s your input, your adjustments, your taste-testing that turn a generic recipe into something remarkable.

Here is where marketing leaders need a mindset shift. AI is not a shortcut; It’s a partner that is available 24/7. And like any partnership, it requires collaboration, transparency and trust.

That’s why adopting AI is not a tech launch, it’s about change management. It is a question of empowering your organization to build the skills, the confidence and the curiosity to work with AI. To experiment. To fail fast. To learn what’s optimal for your business.

There is a simple seven-step approach that can help marketing leaders lead this change. Because the goal isn’t just to make cookies – it’s to make the right cookies, together, in a way that works for your team.

7 Steps to Lead AI Change in Your Marketing Team

AI adoption is a people-first journey, grounded in best practices from change management. The following framework can help marketing leaders guide their teams from AI uncertainty to confidence.

1. Define the Why and Paint the Vision

Help your team understand why AI matters to your business and how it aligns with your values – and most importantly the goals of the individual team members, the department and the organization itself. Create a compelling vision of how AI can elevate their work and replace the more mundane tasks. When people see the destination, they’re more likely to take the first step.

2. Demystify AI for Leadership

Many senior leaders have read about AI in research reports, studies and social media headlines, but few have seen it in action. Carve out time to demo real tools, show outputs and spark curiosity. A live experience of AI often flips the switch from doubt to buy-in, and trust from the top makes change much easier.

3. Build Skills, Not Just Awareness

Understanding AI basics, like what does GPT stand for (generative pre-training transformer) or how to write a useful prompt, is now considered table stakes. Now is the time to go deeper. Equip your team with skills they can use immediately. Host hands-on sessions, build prompt libraries and custom GPTs, and talk openly about limitations and risks. The more confident your team feels, the more likely they are to embrace experimentation.

4. Answer the Question: ‘How Does This Help Me?’

This is the most important step in people change management. As a manager, you must clearly state and show the benefit to your team members or they will never get onto the adoption curve. Show them how AI can eliminate the repetitive, time-sucking parts of the job, freeing up marketers to do more creative, strategic work. And be real. Those who can’t shift to this higher-value work may struggle in the AI era. This isn’t about creating fear, it’s about preparing your people to thrive. As they say, AI is not going to replace people, people using AI will.

5. Let Them Play and Experiment

Reading about the latest AI trends is one thing, but using it is another. Create as many opportunities as possible for your team to try tools in a safe, structured way. Encourage team members to share what they learn and share what the tools can and currently cannot do well.

Of course, you will need an AI Code of Conduct that will clearly define rules around data privacy and security. Think about how you can create a positive learning “sandbox,” not a free-for-all for your team to learn and play together.

6. Start Small and Scale

Often when we start with AI we think that these agents can tackle large, multiple-step tasks. Instead, look for small, bite-sized, well-defined use cases such as helping with outlines, reviewing a first-draft copy, crafting your meta titles and descriptions for blogs, or summarizing research. Smaller wins will roll out to bigger wins. Then scale those wins into more complex use cases as confidence grows.

7. Keep the Momentum Alive

Last but not least, every week ensure that the topic of AI is front and center in all your meetings and check-ins. AI adoption is not a singular workshop, announcement or training session. Consistently have team members share wins and challenges, celebrate experimentations and continually share use cases that will help inspire other team uses. Real change happens not when new tools are introduced, but when team members’ mindsets shift.

When you bring your team along for the ride, they stop seeing AI as a threat and start seeing it as a powerful teammate.

The Future of AI in Marketing: The Mindset Shift

Marketing teams must go beyond just adopting AI tools and embrace them as a teammate. AI won’t replace human creativity, but it will enable more of us to be creative, and it will definitely change how we work in the future. Marketers will be able to shift their focus from mundane, repetitive tasks to developing new ideas. Leaders who push for curiosity and experimentation, and who start to realize that AI creates new capabilities for us to execute campaigns more effectively, not just efficiently, will do well in this AI-driven future.

The future of AI in marketing isn’t just about automating – it’s about changing everything.