Zach Lowe out at ESPN

[Mi Scusi]

Should’ve fired Perkins

[Free Rider]

Sad day. ESPN values sensational commentary over insightful reporting. I look forward to listening to Zach Lowe wherever he lands next.

As much as I’d like to lay the blame squarely on ESPN’s shoulders I think the sad reality is that most viewers value sensational, superficial content over insightful, nuanced and in-depth reporting and ESPN is responding to that market. Zach Lowe doesn’t add much value if you’re just a casual viewer clicking on to ESPN for hot takes. In fact the average ESPN viewer probably doesn’t even watch their programs live and instead goes to whatever clickbait video they can find on YouTube. The kind of reporting Zach provides just isn’t useful in today’s climate where people are more interested in sound bites than thoughtful analysis. As much as I hate to admit it from a pure business perspective this probably makes given the changes in how people consume their entertainment. If I’m someone like Brian Windhorst I might be looking for a backup plan right now because I’ll be surprised if he’s still there in a year.

I made this comment to another poster, but Bill Simmons just a few years ago got 250 million bucks to sell The Ringer and they have kept him on to run it. So he's making even more money. So this idea that ESPN can't generate money with what Zach does is just false. ESPN is frankly being lazy and worse...they're doing it at the detriment to the games themselves...something they're paying billions for the right to air and then insult with their bad takes.

I don’t disagree that there’s a market for someone like Zach Lowe and that The Ringer and other podcast networks are well suited for that market. I just don’t think ESPN is catering to that market or more accurately I don’t think the people who are watching ESPN are looking for that type of commentary that Zach provides. It’s similar to what’s been happening to the cable news industry over the past couple of decades. There are still platforms for people interested in in-depth, un-biased, comprehensive, investigative journalism but the people watching MSNBC or FoxNews aren’t interesting in that kind of reporting.

[QingJames]

And yet I imagine Perkins is still on the payroll?

[dhsilv2]

As much as I’d like to lay the blame squarely on ESPN’s shoulders I think the sad reality is that most viewers value sensational, superficial content over insightful, nuanced and in-depth reporting and ESPN is responding to that market. Zach Lowe doesn’t add much value if you’re just a casual viewer clicking on to ESPN for hot takes. In fact the average ESPN viewer probably doesn’t even watch their programs live and instead goes to whatever clickbait video they can find on YouTube. The kind of reporting Zach provides just isn’t useful in today’s climate where people are more interested in sound bites than thoughtful analysis. As much as I hate to admit it from a pure business perspective this probably makes given the changes in how people consume their entertainment. If I’m someone like Brian Windhorst I might be looking for a backup plan right now because I’ll be surprised if he’s still there in a year.

I made this comment to another poster, but Bill Simmons just a few years ago got 250 million bucks to sell The Ringer and they have kept him on to run it. So he's making even more money. So this idea that ESPN can't generate money with what Zach does is just false. ESPN is frankly being lazy and worse...they're doing it at the detriment to the games themselves...something they're paying billions for the right to air and then insult with their bad takes.

I don’t disagree that there’s a market for someone like Zach Lowe and that The Ringer and other podcast networks are well suited for that market. I just don’t think ESPN is catering to that market or more accurately I don’t think the people who are watching ESPN are looking for that type of commentary that Zach provides. It’s similar to what’s been happening to the cable news industry over the past couple of decades. There are still platforms for people interested in in-depth, un-biased, comprehensive, investigative journalism but the people watching MSNBC or FoxNews aren’t interesting in that kind of reporting.

The point is that ultimately, ESPN decided to waste Zach's talent. He came up as a writer and podcaster on ESPN.com. ESPN has seemingly despite having the biggest platform just given that game away to The Atlantic and The Ringer...as well as youtube. That's just beyond stupid. It's low hanging fruit. Meanwhile, they could actually have Lowe do short segments where he does what he's got with as part of pregames shows to enhance the value of the NBA to the fans. Instead ESPN nearly throws away the whole concept of pre and half time shows.

People talk about SAS as if he's popular, but is he? I know they get youtube clip views and I know some of his morning crap does well. But I don't think anyone is watching the half time shows for him. He's frankly neither informative or even interesting on those. He doesn't stir up anything. He hardly even discussing the games. It's just a seemingly never ending waste of talent and then shocker...people are only watching ESPN for the games. So they keep cutting the on air talent. SAS isn't Chuck after all. Chuck gets people to watch, casuals and even more basketball centered people. SAS...he's just there.

But really back to my point, ESPN fires Bill and he goes off and about a decade later he's running essentially a billion dollar media company. I don't know how big The Atlantic is, but they've doing it similar. Kinda obviously a broader media outlet, but isn't that effectively what Grantland and Fivethirtyeight were trying to be? And on the sports side just hiring former ESPN employees and going right at their media coverage and seemingly profiting off of it. I believe over a million subs at this point.

And just for fun, thinking basketball is nearing 100 million views his it launched in december of 2018 with 259 uploads. ESPN has 84,347 uploads since 2005 and 15.19 billion views.

That's 180,075 views per upload from ESPN vs 383,650 per upload from a much newer channel. And this at least to start was just one dude making content by himself. Not a huge corporation with staff and studio sets to do it.

So again...the market seems to be indicating it VERY much would be interested in quality content. We see podcasts, youtube content (streaming in general) and even subscription models (does EPSN even still have a premium web service?) are all thriving in a space that ESPN at one point seemingly had locked up.

What I'm not reading about anywhere are people trying to compete and losing money. It seems ESPN is the only places that I keep hearing about pay cuts and failing to be profitable. So...is ESPN actually doing what consumers want? And even if they are doing it with their TV shows...don't they have an entire radio, web, and podcast network?

[noreaster23]

As much as I’d like to lay the blame squarely on ESPN’s shoulders I think the sad reality is that most viewers value sensational, superficial content over insightful, nuanced and in-depth reporting and ESPN is responding to that market. Zach Lowe doesn’t add much value if you’re just a casual viewer clicking on to ESPN for hot takes. In fact the average ESPN viewer probably doesn’t even watch their programs live and instead goes to whatever clickbait video they can find on YouTube. The kind of reporting Zach provides just isn’t useful in today’s climate where people are more interested in sound bites than thoughtful analysis. As much as I hate to admit it from a pure business perspective this probably makes given the changes in how people consume their entertainment. If I’m someone like Brian Windhorst I might be looking for a backup plan right now because I’ll be surprised if he’s still there in a year.

I made this comment to another poster, but Bill Simmons just a few years ago got 250 million bucks to sell The Ringer and they have kept him on to run it. So he's making even more money. So this idea that ESPN can't generate money with what Zach does is just false. ESPN is frankly being lazy and worse...they're doing it at the detriment to the games themselves...something they're paying billions for the right to air and then insult with their bad takes.

I don’t disagree that there’s a market for someone like Zach Lowe and that The Ringer and other podcast networks are well suited for that market. I just don’t think ESPN is catering to that market or more accurately I don’t think the people who are watching ESPN are looking for that type of commentary that Zach provides. It’s similar to what’s been happening to the cable news industry over the past couple of decades. There are still platforms for people interested in in-depth, un-biased, comprehensive, investigative journalism but the people watching MSNBC or FoxNews aren’t interesting in that kind of reporting.

We're in alignment. ESPN is following market trends and, if the reporting is accurate, shedding a high paid employee from their books. Again, happy to listen to Zach Lowe wherever he lands next. Since Kevin O'Connor left The Ringer I wonder if Zach would be interested in reuniting with Bill Simmons. Also, I bet the Athletic would be interested in Zach Lowe. Curious to see where he lands.

[HotelVitale]

I made this comment to another poster, but Bill Simmons just a few years ago got 250 million bucks to sell The Ringer and they have kept him on to run it. So he's making even more money. So this idea that ESPN can't generate money with what Zach does is just false. ESPN is frankly being lazy and worse...they're doing it at the detriment to the games themselves...something they're paying billions for the right to air and then insult with their bad takes.

I don’t disagree that there’s a market for someone like Zach Lowe and that The Ringer and other podcast networks are well suited for that market. I just don’t think ESPN is catering to that market or more accurately I don’t think the people who are watching ESPN are looking for that type of commentary that Zach provides. It’s similar to what’s been happening to the cable news industry over the past couple of decades. There are still platforms for people interested in in-depth, un-biased, comprehensive, investigative journalism but the people watching MSNBC or FoxNews aren’t interesting in that kind of reporting.

We're in alignment. ESPN is following market trends and, if the reporting is accurate, shedding a high paid employee from their books. Again, happy to listen to Zach Lowe wherever he lands next. Since Kevin O'Connor left The Ringer I wonder if Zach would be interested in reuniting with Bill Simmons. Also, I bet the Athletic would be interested in Zach Lowe. Curious to see where he lands.

People who watch espn are definitely interested in Lowe, it's just that there's more people interested in other commentators, and not enough of the Lowe crowd to justify his salary.

Also I have no idea how much people make at the Ringer, but don't no one (except Simmons) make seven figures like Lowe does.

[HotelVitale]

That's 180,075 views per upload from ESPN vs 383,650 per upload from a much newer channel. And this at least to start was just one dude making content by himself. Not a huge corporation with staff and studio sets to do it.

So again...the market seems to be indicating it VERY much would be interested in quality content. We see podcasts, youtube content (streaming in general) and even subscription models (does EPSN even still have a premium web service?) are all thriving in a space that ESPN at one point seemingly had locked up.

You're not wrong but maybe missing or glossing over a few things. First espn just puts its TV content on youtube so they're not really spending $ at all on YT content. Them not performing that amazing at it is fine since it's sort of like a bonus (I know that's exaggerating the situation and cutting some corners but you get what I mean).

It's also fairly difficult and expensive to identify and develop good quality content creators. You need people out there looking for creators and can also foster and develop them over time and put them to work right away too. Same thing with record labels (for non-pop music), used to have big A&R and talent development teams and that was a big part of their business model, now a lot of them don't bother with that stuff or only do it superficially. In part because they no longer have a monopoly on exposure and bands aren't willing to sign with them on bad deals rather than just doing their own thing in more direct-to-consumer ways.

For espn and for bigger music companies, it's comparatively easy and profitable enough to just churn out a simple popular formula and focus on that rather than quality. And for higher quality content creators, they can start doing their own thing on their own terms and maybe let it be attached to a larger entity at some point (like Thinking Bball), but also have the option to make it profitable while DIY too.

In other words, I wouldn't be surprised if espn was like 'we could try to have a presence in the quality and more niche markets but it's not a great investment and complicates our staff a lot, and we defintely shouldn't bother crossing streams of our mainstream schlock and a more quality guy like Lowe.' But I can also see your point, and could see them kicking themselves in another couple years when their thing's shrinking and the niche market's growing and they don't have any way to get themselves into that game.

[Ballerhogger]

That’s bummer let’s hire more players that’s have 0 basketball sense !

[tsherkin]

The thoughtful ones get fired, while the trolls get promoted. By now, I should not be surprised.

This, for sure. ESPN is just SAS, the channel. That's what they're for.

[tsherkin]

The thoughtful ones get fired, while the trolls get promoted. By now, I should not be surprised.

This, for sure. ESPN is just SAS, the channel. That's what they're for.

[DaPessimist]

He'll probably end up at Fox or NBC. Sounds like ESPN just didn't want to pay him 7 figures. I imagine they can bring new analysts on for a fraction of the cost.

[JN61]

What will happen to The Lowe Post? I guess nothing?

[JN61]

Should’ve fired Perkins

Now, now... He is still great guy bringing scowl and hardness to the starting lineup.

[CallMeKahn]

And just cancelled my ESPN+. There really isn't a reason to carry them anymore.

[hippesthippo]

WTH is ESPN doing? Lowe has to be a Top 5 NBA writer.

Does ESPN have anybody left? Did Woj actually "retire," or did he just avoid being laid off?

[hippesthippo]

That's 180,075 views per upload from ESPN vs 383,650 per upload from a much newer channel. And this at least to start was just one dude making content by himself. Not a huge corporation with staff and studio sets to do it.

So again...the market seems to be indicating it VERY much would be interested in quality content. We see podcasts, youtube content (streaming in general) and even subscription models (does EPSN even still have a premium web service?) are all thriving in a space that ESPN at one point seemingly had locked up.

You're not wrong but maybe missing or glossing over a few things. First espn just puts its TV content on youtube so they're not really spending $ at all on YT content. Them not performing that amazing at it is fine since it's sort of like a bonus (I know that's exaggerating the situation and cutting some corners but you get what I mean).

It's also fairly difficult and expensive to identify and develop good quality content creators. You need people out there looking for creators and can also foster and develop them over time and put them to work right away too. Same thing with record labels (for non-pop music), used to have big A&R and talent development teams and that was a big part of their business model, now a lot of them don't bother with that stuff or only do it superficially. In part because they no longer have a monopoly on exposure and bands aren't willing to sign with them on bad deals rather than just doing their own thing in more direct-to-consumer ways.

For espn and for bigger music companies, it's comparatively easy and profitable enough to just churn out a simple popular formula and focus on that rather than quality. And for higher quality content creators, they can start doing their own thing on their own terms and maybe let it be attached to a larger entity at some point (like Thinking Bball), but also have the option to make it profitable while DIY too.

In other words, I wouldn't be surprised if espn was like 'we could try to have a presence in the quality and more niche markets but it's not a great investment and complicates our staff a lot, and we defintely shouldn't bother crossing streams of our mainstream schlock and a more quality guy like Lowe.' But I can also see your point, and could see them kicking themselves in another couple years when their thing's shrinking and the niche market's growing and they don't have any way to get themselves into that game.

Yeah, cheap content is cheap which makes it profitable if you already have eyeballs, but what is the draw for ESPN now other than the few live sports they carry two nights a week?

In the past, I would go to ESPN solely to read/watch a Zach Lowe piece and once I was there I'd linger around and click on the other bull, or watch a little bit of whatever "Wakeup with First Pizza," show was on. Now, I don't have any reason to bother.

[Teen Girl Squad]

WTH is ESPN doing? Lowe has to be a Top 5 NBA writer.

Does ESPN have anybody left? Did Woj actually "retire," or did he just avoid being laid off?

That's the speculation but Simmons (who's usually pretty plugged in) thinks it was legit Woj being burned out. Letting go of Lowe might have actually been a reaction and ESPN divesting themselves of the reporting wing of their NBA content since drama is what sells with the NBA right now.

[hippesthippo]

WTH is ESPN doing? Lowe has to be a Top 5 NBA writer.

Does ESPN have anybody left? Did Woj actually "retire," or did he just avoid being laid off?

That's the speculation but Simmons (who's usually pretty plugged in) thinks it was legit Woj being burned out. Letting go of Lowe might have actually been a reaction and ESPN divesting themselves of the reporting wing of their NBA content since drama is what sells with the NBA right now.

I could see Woj being burned out spending 24 hours a day stuck to his phone and dealing with idiots like Perk and SAS at work, but completely divesting from the reporting wing of the NBA after their parent company invested billions of dollars in the sport seems like a bit of an overreaction.

[HotelVitale]

That's 180,075 views per upload from ESPN vs 383,650 per upload from a much newer channel. And this at least to start was just one dude making content by himself. Not a huge corporation with staff and studio sets to do it.

So again...the market seems to be indicating it VERY much would be interested in quality content. We see podcasts, youtube content (streaming in general) and even subscription models (does EPSN even still have a premium web service?) are all thriving in a space that ESPN at one point seemingly had locked up.

You're not wrong but maybe missing or glossing over a few things. First espn just puts its TV content on youtube so they're not really spending $ at all on YT content. Them not performing that amazing at it is fine since it's sort of like a bonus (I know that's exaggerating the situation and cutting some corners but you get what I mean).

It's also fairly difficult and expensive to identify and develop good quality content creators. You need people out there looking for creators and can also foster and develop them over time and put them to work right away too. Same thing with record labels (for non-pop music), used to have big A&R and talent development teams and that was a big part of their business model, now a lot of them don't bother with that stuff or only do it superficially. In part because they no longer have a monopoly on exposure and bands aren't willing to sign with them on bad deals rather than just doing their own thing in more direct-to-consumer ways.

For espn and for bigger music companies, it's comparatively easy and profitable enough to just churn out a simple popular formula and focus on that rather than quality. And for higher quality content creators, they can start doing their own thing on their own terms and maybe let it be attached to a larger entity at some point (like Thinking Bball), but also have the option to make it profitable while DIY too.

In other words, I wouldn't be surprised if espn was like 'we could try to have a presence in the quality and more niche markets but it's not a great investment and complicates our staff a lot, and we defintely shouldn't bother crossing streams of our mainstream schlock and a more quality guy like Lowe.' But I can also see your point, and could see them kicking themselves in another couple years when their thing's shrinking and the niche market's growing and they don't have any way to get themselves into that game.

Yeah, cheap content is cheap which makes it profitable if you already have eyeballs, but what is the draw for ESPN now other than the few live sports they carry two nights a week?

In the past, I would go to ESPN solely to read/watch a Zach Lowe piece and once I was there I'd linger around and click on the other bull, or watch a little bit of whatever "Wakeup with First Pizza," show was on. Now, I don't have any reason to bother.

Me too, but it does make intuitive sense to me that there’s not enough people like us to make Lowe’s deal worthwhile. Espn was basically investing in Lowe as their one and only ‘kinda knows what he’s talking about’ guy, and they weren’t going in the direction of developing that more. I don’t know how marketing and $ works for a big media company but it’s not surprising that they would say ‘we tried it out and having the most famous online analyst guy isn’t working for us branding or $ wise.’

[Slimjimzv]

Brian Windhorst should thank his lucky starts that Lebron likes him so much.