ALLESPN.com

ESPN has a game on their website which it started back in April called "ESPN Streak for Cash." I found this game to be quite interesting and relevant in terms of recent readings for my Business and Media class.

Last week, I read two readings which each argued a different point. The first reading, by Chris Anderson, argued that media outlets should continue the trend of offering free content in order to attract readers to see ad's and eventually buy into their product. The other reading, by Malcolm Gladwell, revealed that media companies would best be served by charging for their services because people find more value in things when they pay for it.

While I tend to fall on the side of Gladwell, because I believe that there is immense value in paying for higher quality, I understand Anderson's point as well.

ESPN.com, which is one of the most celebrated and well respected sports content providers in the world, has gone an extra step in the “Free for all Media World" by giving access to a service that is not typically free; gambling.

In the ESPN.com game called “Streak for The Cash" contestants can gamble for free and win up to a million dollars in cash. The games rules are simple; place one bet from a given list of games or head-to-head player match-up's once a day, and build a streak with the right picks. Lose once and you start back at the beginning. The top seven contestants with the longest streaks between April 1st 2009 to December 6th 2009 will be flown out to Bristol Connecticut, (ESPN headquarters) for a pick-off competition, where the winner will receive $1,000,000 in cash.

With this free betting concept ESPN has managed to give one of the most expensive leisure activities and offer it for free. Imagine if the New York State lottery gave out free lotto tickets, surely everyone in their right mind would play for free, right?

What works so great with “Streak for Cash" is that the consumer can actually have an impact on winning and now sports gamblers can bet without ever having to leave their couch or pay a dollar.

The only set back to the consumer is the occasional annoyance of having to look at the "Progressive, Car insurance" ad's placed neatly around the web page as well as within the content. For example, showcased right above the "game of the day" the headline reads "Progressive game of the day."

The reason that makes this ad so efficient is that it is the only ad that is seen on the Streak for Cash web page. With that being said, the consumer could either subconsciously or even consciously be focusing on one ad. The gambler may even be forced to eventually click on the ad just to finally know what it is all about. If one goes to the site, which seems like one would have to go every day to keep their streak alive, than they will probably stumble upon clicking the Progressive ad sooner or later.

Secondly, what makes the ESPN Streak for Cash so interesting is that it is using gambling, which sometimes goes synonymous with sports, as a device in attracting readers to their website. In fact, I would even think that they could put advertisements for casinos on this game. Betting on a game and looking up to see an advertisement for Caesar’s Palace seems to go together nicely.

Additionally, using one leisure activity (gambling) to promote another leisure activity (reading about sports) is something that ESPN is excelling at with this betting on sports games concept. Maybe in some way, none that I can think of, other websites will follow a similar model.

But what is certain is that giving away free access to gambling on sports surely works. If ESPN.com were to charge for “Streak for Cash" I do not think that they would get as many hits to their site, thus swatting away ad companies. Nothing sounds better than allowing one to enjoy in a leisure activity for free. Sure stealing movies online is cool, and getting to read the New York Times online without getting a cent is great, but paying for these mediums would not be the worst thing in the world nor would it take a bite out of anyone' wallet. But being able to gamble for free is another story. Gambling can get pricey, thus forcing people to stop (i.e. Vegas hurts in a recession) but gambling for free sounds too good to be true. In the end, people gamble to make money anyways, not to lose it.

I wonder if the gambling people would ever consider this concept. How about an ad on top of a free scratcher?

Whatever the case, I can surely say that free gambling on sports is a win-win.