ESPN announces 3D channel in 2010

[tlax25]

ESPN today announced they are creating a 3D channel in 2010. The FIFA World Cup, NFL and possibly MLB will be broadcast in 3D, according to the article/press release on ESPN.com.

I am usually someone who jumps fairly early to adopt new technologies....not quite the true definition of an early adopter, but pretty quick. However, I just can't see wanting to spend money to replace my fairly new HDTV with a newer 3D HDTV. Nor can I see the ever using this technology if it requires wearing those sweet 3D glasses. Finally, my Comcast bill, with HBO, Sports package and HD programming already runs $80+/month. I am definitely not going to go higher for the very limited 3D content that will be available for the next couple of years. I saw the movie Avatar recently (A for the visuals, D for plot) and while it was visually very nice, I don't think I would pay a premium for 3D again. Then again, I have not seen any TV related content in 3D.

What are your opinions? Has anyone seen 3D content for TV? Would you be willing to pay extra for 3D tv content? I am curious to hear other peoples opinions.

[Invader3k]

I have to wonder if a consumer need is being addressed that really isn't there to begin with.

It just seems like this is going to be a very niche thing for a long time. A lot of people only recently got on the HDTV bandwagon when flat panel prices finally became somewhat reasonable. Those same people aren't going to shell out several thousand more for new "3D ready" sets that will only provide a limited amount of 3D content.

I also wonder how already bandwidth strained cable providers are going to manage to fit in "ESPN 3D" and other 3D channels (which, again, will probably have very limited amounts of 3D content to start).

[Woochifer]

The ball's rolling on 3D. Just check the flood of product announcements coming out of CES. The industry is solidly behind 3DTV and the movie industry has concurrently prepped the way for even more 3D movies this year. Development is also underway on 3D TVs that don't require glasses.

Like you, I was skeptical about 3D, until I started looking at the box office trends for 3D movies. Avatar seems to be the benchmark that's driving everything right now, but the groundwork had already been laid out by the solid performance of previous 3D movies. Even a throwaway release like Journey to the Center of the Earth posted surprisingly solid box office numbers thanks to huge uptake on the 3D screenings. About 2,000 of the 3,500 theaters showing Avatar present it in 3D, and over 75% of the box office revenues have been for the 3D screens. The audience has proven that it is ready for 3D.

The ESPN 3D channel is in addition to the 3D channels previously announced by Directv and Discovery/Sony/IMAX.

As with everything else, the initial prices probably won't be cheap, but will gradually trickle lower until it become just another standard feature that comes with nearly all HDTVs. Just look at the evolution of HDTV itself. You can hardly find any non-HD sets nowadays.

[Woochifer]

I have to wonder if a consumer need is being addressed that really isn't there to begin with.

The market will decide that. I think that the marketing push behind 3D would not have been this pervasive if 3D movies hadn't performed as well as they have at the box office. You had some very strong performing 3D movies at the box office, and the staggering box office numbers for Avatar have sent the hype machine into overdrive. I think there is consumer demand for 3D, but the question is at what price point people are willing to go.

It just seems like this is going to be a very niche thing for a long time. A lot of people only recently got on the HDTV bandwagon when flat panel prices finally became somewhat reasonable. Those same people aren't going to shell out several thousand more for new "3D ready" sets that will only provide a limited amount of 3D content.

Flat panel prices are now entrenched in the commodity range. Manufacturers don't make much selling 42" HDTVs for $500, so they need something to prop the prices up or at least maintain existing price points for the high end and mid market models. We'll see what price the 3D models fetch. I doubt that they will stay stratospherically high for too long. The Blu-ray 3D standard has already been announced and releases will probably start coming out shortly.

The HDTV bandwagon is at a point right now where just about every TV option available is HD. There is no bandwagon, it's just the standard. 3D will be yet another early adopter format at first, but I think it will trickle down into the mid-tier models very quickly

I also wonder how already bandwidth strained cable providers are going to manage to fit in "ESPN 3D" and other 3D channels (which, again, will probably have very limited amounts of 3D content to start).

They'll just continue what they've been doing -- eliminating analog channels and/or throttling down the bandwidth. Digital channels gobble a lot less bandwidth than analog channels, and cable companies already compress the outgoing picture. No doubt they will accommodate it somehow if they think consumers will watch it, and perhaps pay extra in the process.

[Happy Camper]

No!!!

[tlax25]

Sure, the market will dictate what will happen. However, I think in the case of HDTV, the market was clamoring for a much better picture. I am not so sure the market really cares, right now, about 3D tv, or feels it will significantly improve their viewing experience.

I would be very interested to see what the demographic breakdown is for the viewers that are flocking to see Avatar. If, as it seems to me from just my own observations, the audience is generally in the young teen to mid 20's range, then the tv manufacturers might have a problem for a while as this demographic is not most likely to buy a lot of highly expensive tv's to begin with.

I guess if the technology gets to the point where I don't need glasses, the picture quality is on par with the best HD sets today, and there is enough bandwidth to provide enough worthwhile content, I might be interested. But much like the music industry (which has evolved from 60 year old standard of vinyl, then to the widely accepted cassette, then to cd, and now mp3 - in ever decreasing time spans) which is now asking the music consumer to yet again spend money on "re-purchasing" product they have already bought several times (in many cases) by going from cassette to cd to mp3, the music industry now wants us to pay yet again to house music we already own in a cloud or to stream it. Same thing is happening with TV's. Only in this case, instead of a monthly subscription for under $20, you have to spend several thousands to buy a 3d tv. I think that is a tough pill to swallow for many consumers.