Does it matter that two broadcast and cable financial measures are still out of kilter?
For years, we have listened to cable networks complain about not getting their fair share of
advertising dollars -- that is, compared to what broadcasters grab. A 60% audience share by a cable network should yield 60% of the media dollars --- in theory.
Let's assume those
aggressive cable network advertising sales executives are right -- for the moment.
But what about the other side of the coin: distribution/cable subscriber fees? For a long time, cable
networks have grabbed perhaps too high revenues in this area -- at least compared to the broadcast networks.
ESPN gets $4 a month per cable subscriber -- but broadcast networks with many
more viewers like CBS, ABC, Fox or NBC can barely get 50 cents a cable subscriber per month in their respective retransmission deals -- nowhere near their near-term goal of, say, $1 a
subscriber.
It's not just ESPN -- take a look at data for the entire industry. Cable networks
grab 96% of all cable operator programming revenue but only deliver 60% of the ratings points, according to one Morgan Stanley media analyst.
advertisement
advertisement
Should a correction be made here -- as
well? You bet.
This should leave us somewhere down the middle of the road.
Rino Scanzoni, chief investment officer of big media agency Group M, believes more advertising dollars will flow to cable networks, anyway -- because ratings will grow there.
Still,
we might still hear from cable networks about how that isn't enough- -that they might still be lagging the broadcast networks in terms of key, fundamental program price per thousand viewers (CPMs), in
which there remains a big 15% to 20% gap.
But with the coming of the digital age -- does any of this matter? If all TV shows are viewed through some digital mechanism at any time, the
long-term cable/broadcast price disparity would seem to disappear.
Right now, before we fully head into that era, two financial-viewership measures will stay out of whack.