The Wiz Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 (edited) Commercials make more money. On a normal sunday sure. Super bowl sunday had ~114 million viewers last year. Assuming there are about 50 commercials on the very high end, most are 30-60 seconds. At 4m per 30 second commercial your looking at making a gain of 480m max based on those numbers. Now consider if viewing fell to 50% because the game was now on PPV for $60. That's still 57 million viewers at $60 per PPV order. That comes out to 3.4 billion and you could still have commercials netting almost 4 billion. Granted there's the whole contract with whatever network has the rights to what but that is about 4 billion a year they are currently making on the season compared to the big game. I think if the government ever removed their Not-for-profit/tax exempt status we would see it happen. I don't disagree with what any of you have said, I'm just point out that the NFL is a money grab at it's finest and will try whatever possible to make what I proposed be a reality. Edited November 19, 2015 by The Wiz
BillsBytheBay Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 I watch more games for free now than I ever have before. The NFL has found a way to expand its market and viewers without costing me one extra cent. More games in primetime. Early early games... Everyone accuses the NFL of having a money grab, but I haven't paid one extra penny.
bills_fan_in_raleigh Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 As long as I can sync the bills radio broadcast with the stream I am fine or better yet provide the stream with video and selectable audio stream synced up
BUFFALOKIE Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 I watch more games for free now than I ever have before. The NFL has found a way to expand its market and viewers without costing me one extra cent. More games in primetime. Early early games... Everyone accuses the NFL of having a money grab, but I haven't paid one extra penny. A fresh perspective. Thank you!
Chandler#81 Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 I can imagine the fandom when you are forced to pay to watch every game. Then when your team loses, it's not just your team, it's your financial investment going south. In a sense, that's already the case. I've had Directv since '96, solely because I'm a displaced Bills fan. The whole family gets together every Sunday to watch the games in full regalia and enjoy great food. Otherwise, I'd dump that POS dish and its crappy programming and its crappy signal in rain and its high price and..........
HardyBoy Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 On a normal sunday sure. Super bowl sunday had ~114 million viewers last year. Assuming there are about 50 commercials on the very high end, most are 30-60 seconds. At 4m per 30 second commercial your looking at making a gain of 480m max based on those numbers. Now consider if viewing fell to 50% because the game was now on PPV for $60. That's still 57 million viewers at $60 per PPV order. That comes out to 3.4 billion and you could still have commercials netting almost 4 billion. Granted there's the whole contract with whatever network has the rights to what but that is about 4 billion a year they are currently making on the season compared to the big game. I think if the government ever removed their Not-for-profit/tax exempt status we would see it happen. I don't disagree with what any of you have said, I'm just point out that the NFL is a money grab at it's finest and will try whatever possible to make what I proposed be a reality. First pretty sure the non profit status was revoked this summer, anyway it's only related to the league office, which is pennies and forces them to disclose executive compensation. Second, I would say at least half of the people who currently watch the super bowl, if not more, only watch for the commercials and halftime show. A huge reason you can charge so much for those ads is because you are getting such a crazy diverse demographic watching a single show for three hours...that never happens. They would easily lose 75% of their audience (I wouldn't pay unless the Bills were in the game), and probably 90% of the their non standard demographics. Plus people watch the super bowl at parties...
BarleyNY Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 It's a matter of time before the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. Greed will eventually kill the golden goose. I don't consider growing your business greed. It's simply understanding and expanding the market. Growing a business isn't greedy, but over growing it to its detriment is. The NFL hasn't gotten to that point yet, but lately I think it's been flirting with going too far.
The Wiz Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 I watch more games for free now than I ever have before. The NFL has found a way to expand its market and viewers without costing me one extra cent. More games in primetime. Early early games... Everyone accuses the NFL of having a money grab, but I haven't paid one extra penny. Kind of the point. They don't care about the pennies. They care about the dollars. Until it's absolutely necessary they wont exploit the little guy. In return, the networks get the ratings they want and that feeds back to the NFL. They make money hand over fist and could make it worse if they really wanted to for us to pay extra pennies. They are going to do it eventually, the "free" online games is just a warm up to see how it goes. I'd call it stage 2 from the preseason live that they make you pay for. First pretty sure the non profit status was revoked this summer, anyway it's only related to the league office, which is pennies and forces them to disclose executive compensation. Second, I would say at least half of the people who currently watch the super bowl, if not more, only watch for the commercials and halftime show. A huge reason you can charge so much for those ads is because you are getting such a crazy diverse demographic watching a single show for three hours...that never happens. They would easily lose 75% of their audience (I wouldn't pay unless the Bills were in the game), and probably 90% of the their non standard demographics. Plus people watch the super bowl at parties... You're right about the non profit. If you cut superbowl viewing to 10% of what it was they would still make more than commercials 684m vs ~500m. The super bowl party thing isn't something that can be quantified by total viewers so if there are 114m viewers, they mean 114m different locations on that station. That could be 114m viewers or 380m viewers.
CodeMonkey Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 I can imagine the fandom when you are forced to pay to watch every game. . I only care about the Bills now. Tackle football overall has lost it's appeal with me. Paying to watch every game would end it for me.
/dev/null Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 Pretty much. I'm kind of surprised the NFL hasn't made the Superbowl or playoffs for that matter a pay per view event yet. Ad revenue stream beats any potential PPV revenue for Playoffs and Super Bowl I could see the NFL switching back to local coverage on Sundays with "America's Game of the Week" at 4PM EST, Sunday and Monday Night Football. The rest would be PPV
PortlandiaEast Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 It's a matter of time before the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. Greed will eventually kill the golden goose. I cant wait
White Linen Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) Growing a business isn't greedy, but over growing it to its detriment is. The NFL hasn't gotten to that point yet, but lately I think it's been flirting with going too far. You can't be serious? They aren't flirting with danger in the slightest. Edited November 20, 2015 by Triple Threat
dayman Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 (edited) You can't be serious? They aren't flirting with danger in the slightest. Agreed. I actually hate that I have to watch what I consider to be too many commercials. Deal with the modern state of officiating. And watch games all over the place constantly seeking them out and paying money for them ... including NFL ticket online to stream Bills games out of market in a place where direct tv doesn't work well. It's terrible quality. That said...I love the NFL and watch a ton of games including every Bills game even if I do pay $250 for a spinning/loading circle, commercials, and flags. That's why I love this. The Yahoo! game in London was far superior to the normal Direct TV internet service. And it makes sense, Yahoo! is an online company that would be better at streaming, and it's their primary service--not something they begrudgingly do b/c of a contract provision. If this is a short step towards someone other than Direct TV offering out of market streaming packages...this is the greatest thing of all time. Hell, in the mean time direct tv might try to get a little more serious about this to respond who knows (joking, joking). The NFL direct tv streaming package is the biggest crime there is. If there is one single thing they should be ashamed of it is that. Lets bid not only Thursday but all non-home-market games out to companies that can actually deliver. Please. Edited November 20, 2015 by Rex'sOffense
BarleyNY Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 You can't be serious? They aren't flirting with danger in the slightest. Not in this case, but they absolutely are in other ways. The rule changes and consequent number of defensive PI and holding penalties are definitely hurting the game. Then there's the talk of the league looking to add more teams, add more regular season games and allow more teams to make the playoffs. Individually those are bad ideas, but collectively they would would really damage the product even if they'd add revenue in the short term.
HardyBoy Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 The Wiz, what I'm trying to say is if you cut the super bowl audience down to 10% the advertisers aren't paying that amount for the ads. Basically, if they show a super bowl ad in the forest, does anyone see it? The answer is no, there is nothing to show because it doesn't get made.
White Linen Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 Agreed. I actually hate that I have to watch what I consider to be too many commercials. Deal with the modern state of officiating. And watch games all over the place constantly seeking them out and paying money for them ... including NFL ticket online to stream Bills games out of market in a place where direct tv doesn't work well. It's terrible quality. That said...I love the NFL and watch a ton of games including every Bills game even if I do pay $250 for a spinning/loading circle, commercials, and flags. That's why I love this. The Yahoo! game in London was far superior to the normal Direct TV internet service. And it makes sense, Yahoo! is an online company that would be better at streaming, and it's their primary service--not something they begrudgingly do b/c of a contract provision. If this is a short step towards someone other than Direct TV offering out of market streaming packages...this is the greatest thing of all time. Hell, in the mean time direct tv might try to get a little more serious about this to respond who knows (joking, joking). The NFL direct tv streaming package is the biggest crime there is. If there is one single thing they should be ashamed of it is that. Lets bid not only Thursday but all non-home-market games out to companies that can actually deliver. Please. I respect your post - but do disagree. The direct package isn't a crime - what would you have the NFL do? What other singular company could really deliver to the most people? The cable companies are all chopped up and gave hell to the NFL for the NFL Network in certain areas. The true crime is how we were trapped into using our local cable company to get TV channels all those years as they basked in their little monopolies- they kept raising their rates and offered the consumer nothing. Directv drove the cable companies to have to earn our business instead of the crap customer service you got because you were stuck without an option. Obviously the next chapter is going to be interesting but I've always gotten excellent customer service from Directv and they gave us choice as they evolved from single LB where you could only watch on one tv to where they are now. I have zero issues with the NFL partnering with Direct for as long as they have. Now they have competition and that usually means nothing but good news for us the consumer.
justnzane Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 (edited) Ask boxing how that has worked for them. There was a time when everyone watched and talked about the big fight, now it is a niche sport. Most casual sports fans maybe know of Mayweather, Pacquiao, Klitschko x2, and no one else at this point. This is why there are deals to get the fights on CBS, NBC, and ESPN to give fighters exposure again. UFC may ultimately be screwed as their poster child just lost. That said, I refuse to pay over $50 to watch a fight at home, and would do the same for the NFL. The NFL already has a black eye for many of the scandals over the past 2 years, yet has multi-billion $ contracts from the Networks, plus the Sunday Ticket Scam that props up Direct TV. If the NFL. went the route of PPV, there would be very little justification for the cable and satellite companies charging as much as they do. I respect your post - but do disagree. The direct package isn't a crime - what would you have the NFL do? What other singular company could really deliver to the most people? The cable companies are all chopped up and gave hell to the NFL for the NFL Network in certain areas. The true crime is how we were trapped into using our local cable company to get TV channels all those years as they basked in their little monopolies- they kept raising their rates and offered the consumer nothing. Directv drove the cable companies to have to earn our business instead of the crap customer service you got because you were stuck without an option. Obviously the next chapter is going to be interesting but I've always gotten excellent customer service from Directv and they gave us choice as they evolved from single LB where you could only watch on one tv to where they are now. I have zero issues with the NFL partnering with Direct for as long as they have. Now they have competition and that usually means nothing but good news for us the consumer. By signing an exclusivity contract, it has forced fans to support a ****ty satellite company that otherwise would have folded years ago. Edited November 21, 2015 by justnzane
machine gun kelly Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 Yahoo may secure OUS rights to the game, but the major networks after this year will bid on a full 16 game showing (Fox, CBS, NBC, ESPN) and the league will make far more money from this business decision. Then they double dip as they make money on the US showing, and double down with the OUS showing with Yahoo for international customers. Makes good business sense to me. Regarding Direct TV, I've had the ticket for over 15 years and fine with it. Yahoo was not better on that morning game. I had the App already on my Smart TV, and there were delays in the audio at times from the video. I had to escape Yahoo, and then go back in at least 5 or 6 times.
shane nelson Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 As long as Yahoo insist on regular uniforms. Thursday night Jags uniforms may be the ugliest I have ever seen. They were so bad I could not watch the game. Seemed more like an Andrew Lloyd Weber production of Cats vs Starlight Express. I was at the Jets Bills game a week early, those uniforms seemed better suited for the Christmas Spectacular than a football game. BLahhhhhhhhhhh
filthymcnasty08 Posted November 21, 2015 Posted November 21, 2015 It's a matter of time before the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. Greed will eventually kill the golden goose. This.
Recommended Posts