Saxum Posted February 5, 2016 Posted February 5, 2016 They already have become flag football...At least when Brady is backing up to pass... Sure zebras threw 20 flags on hits on Brady in AMC championship game and no one saw them.
Malazan Posted February 10, 2016 Posted February 10, 2016 But the more interesting aspect of this thread, is why some don't want him to get more than $30,000. Why do you want him to get this money so badly?
CodeMonkey Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) I know we're supposed to give the knee jerk reaction that the NFL is in the wrong, but $30,000 for an old videotape sounds a lot more reasonable than $1M. 'Reasonable' is subjective. Here are the top 10 average ticket prices in the NFL (2013-2014), not even including the crazy business of paying for a license to be able to buy the tickets. None of these seem reasonable to me to watch 1 football game. 10. Dallas $209 9. Baltimore $220 8. Seattle $220 7. Pittsburgh $221 6. New Orleans $225 5. Denver $227 4. Green Bay $245 3. New England $277 2. Chicago $282 1. New York Giants $292 I can't imagine anyone thinks $292 as an average price to watch one game is reasonable, but this guy trying to get paid big by the NFL, whose history of milking any and every revenue stream for every penny possible is the stuff of legends, for his rare recording is unreasonable. http://www.therichest.com/sports/football-sports/top-10-most-expensive-tickets-in-the-nfl/?view=all Edited February 11, 2016 by CodeMonkey
FireChan Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 'Reasonable' is subjective. Here are the top 10 average ticket prices in the NFL (2013-2014), not even including the crazy business of paying for a license to be able to buy the tickets. None of these seem reasonable to me to watch 1 football game. 10. Dallas $209 9. Baltimore $220 8. Seattle $220 7. Pittsburgh $221 6. New Orleans $225 5. Denver $227 4. Green Bay $245 3. New England $277 2. Chicago $282 1. New York Giants $292 I can't imagine anyone thinks $292 as an average price to watch one game is reasonable, but this guy trying to get paid big by the NFL, whose history of milking any and every revenue stream for every penny possible is the stuff of legends, for his rare recording is unreasonable. http://www.therichest.com/sports/football-sports/top-10-most-expensive-tickets-in-the-nfl/?view=all Demand.
Mr. WEO Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) 'Reasonable' is subjective. Here are the top 10 average ticket prices in the NFL (2013-2014), not even including the crazy business of paying for a license to be able to buy the tickets. None of these seem reasonable to me to watch 1 football game. 10. Dallas $209 9. Baltimore $220 8. Seattle $220 7. Pittsburgh $221 6. New Orleans $225 5. Denver $227 4. Green Bay $245 3. New England $277 2. Chicago $282 1. New York Giants $292 I can't imagine anyone thinks $292 as an average price to watch one game is reasonable, but this guy trying to get paid big by the NFL, whose history of milking any and every revenue stream for every penny possible is the stuff of legends, for his rare recording is unreasonable. http://www.therichest.com/sports/football-sports/top-10-most-expensive-tickets-in-the-nfl/?view=all "The NFL" didn't set any ticket prices anywhere. This whole post is off topic. If the Yankees or the Red Sox only played 8 home games a year instead of 81, what do you think they would charge for those tickets? Also, the recording may be "his" (by a fluke of birth from the loins a guy he never knew), but what is on the tape is not his to sell. That's pretty much what this discussion is about. Also, when you watch an NFL game, I bet it's from your couch and it's at no added cost to you (fee, essentially). In fact, only a tiny fraction of fans pay to watch NFL games. The rest watch for free on broadcast TV for the most part. Edited February 11, 2016 by Mr. WEO
CodeMonkey Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) "The NFL" didn't set any ticket prices anywhere. This whole post is off topic. If the Yankees or the Red Sox only played 8 home games a year instead of 81, what do you think they would charge for those tickets? Also, the recording may be "his" (by a fluke of birth from the loins a guy he never knew), but what is on the tape is not his to sell. That's pretty much what this discussion is about. Also, when you watch an NFL game, I bet it's from your couch and it's at no added cost to you (fee, essentially). In fact, only a tiny fraction of fans pay to watch NFL games. The rest watch for free on broadcast TV for the most part. 32 teams comprise the NFL for gods sake, you obviously know that by now and are just being deliberately obtuse. Yes I do watch from my couch 99.9% of the time. And as a matter of fact, I record it and strip out the 2 hours of commercials as well and watch it when I want to. If that is somehow on topic. Demand. Absolutely, as is the guy setting the price for his recording. And whether or not the NFL pays it, or tells him to F off is up to them. Edited February 11, 2016 by CodeMonkey
FireChan Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 32 teams comprise the NFL for gods sake, you obviously know that by now and are just being deliberately obtuse. Yes I do watch from my couch 99.9% of the time. And as a matter of fact, I record it and strip out the 2 hours of commercials as well and watch it when I want to. If that is somehow on topic. Absolutely, as is the guy setting the price for his recording. And whether or not the NFL pays it, or tells him to F off is up to them. RIght, but the NFL charges what they do because they sell. This guy is charging something that won't sell. Demand dictates price of a good sold. The tape isn't sold, the demand is not there.
Prickly Pete Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) RIght, but the NFL charges what they do because they sell. This guy is charging something that won't sell. Demand dictates price of a good sold. The tape isn't sold, the demand is not there. 32 teams comprise the NFL for gods sake, you obviously know that by now and are just being deliberately obtuse. Yes I do watch from my couch 99.9% of the time. And as a matter of fact, I record it and strip out the 2 hours of commercials as well and watch it when I want to. If that is somehow on topic. Absolutely, as is the guy setting the price for his recording. And whether or not the NFL pays it, or tells him to F off is up to them. Chan and Mr. Workforce Educational Organization will evade, and refuse to see it from any other angle. I suggest you just let the story unfold, and come back to gloat at a later date. Edited February 11, 2016 by HoF Watkins
FireChan Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 Chan and Mr. Workforce Educational Organization will never see it from any other angle. I suggest you just let the story unfold, and come back to gloat at a later date. I refuse to see anything from any other angle than reality.
Prickly Pete Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 Why do you want him to get this money so badly? How many times do I need to spell it out? Just read the thread...I have nothing more to add at this point.
Mr. WEO Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 32 teams comprise the NFL for gods sake, you obviously know that by now and are just being deliberately obtuse. Yes I do watch from my couch 99.9% of the time. And as a matter of fact, I record it and strip out the 2 hours of commercials as well and watch it when I want to. If that is somehow on topic. Absolutely, as is the guy setting the price for his recording. And whether or not the NFL pays it, or tells him to F off is up to them. I love when people who can't make a cogent point call others "obtuse". Every owner individually sets the price of tickets based on what he thinks fans will pay for them. This is no different than any other league or business. "The NFL" isn;t engaged in price fixing or collusion, which is obviously what you are getting at. Pegula could charge an average of $250 a ticket but wouldn't sell many tickets. Jerry Jones could sell his tickets for under $100 apiece but he would be leaving a lot of money on the table. Why would you make him do that? Jones's team brings in far more revenue than Pegula's. Simple, really. The guy is setting a price for an item that has no legal market, except the NFL itself (per the NFL--and no one has challenged this so far on this goofball's side). Do you see the difference now? No? Chan and Mr. Workforce Educational Organization will never see it from any other angle. I suggest you just let the story unfold, and come back to gloat at a later date. I only see it from the angle that it is copyrighted material, which makes it illegal for him to sell it. Nothing else matters in this discussion. If it is not copyrighted, he is free to sell it. What part of this are you struggling with? Do you think if it is the copyrighted property of the NFL, the guy should still be able to put it on the market? Simple question.
Prickly Pete Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) I love when people who can't make a cogent point call others "obtuse". Every owner individually sets the price of tickets based on what he thinks fans will pay for them. This is no different than any other league or business. "The NFL" isn;t engaged in price fixing or collusion, which is obviously what you are getting at. Pegula could charge an average of $250 a ticket but wouldn't sell many tickets. Jerry Jones could sell his tickets for under $100 apiece but he would be leaving a lot of money on the table. Why would you make him do that? Jones's team brings in far more revenue than Pegula's. Simple, really. The guy is setting a price for an item that has no legal market, except the NFL itself (per the NFL--and no one has challenged this so far on this goofball's side). Do you see the difference now? No? I only see it from the angle that it is copyrighted material, which makes it illegal for him to sell it. Nothing else matters in this discussion. If it is not copyrighted, he is free to sell it. What part of this are you struggling with? Do you think if it is the copyrighted property of the NFL, the guy should still be able to put it on the market? Simple question. I know you have taken a beating around here after the Denver win, and are trying to wring a victory out of your many other conflicts on the board, but just calm down, man. The positions have been declared, we can return to this when there are new developments on the matter. Good day! Edited February 11, 2016 by HoF Watkins
Best Player Available Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 I love when people who can't make a cogent point call others "obtuse". Every owner individually sets the price of tickets based on what he thinks fans will pay for them. This is no different than any other league or business. "The NFL" isn;t engaged in price fixing or collusion, which is obviously what you are getting at. Pegula could charge an average of $250 a ticket but wouldn't sell many tickets. Jerry Jones could sell his tickets for under $100 apiece but he would be leaving a lot of money on the table. Why would you make him do that? Jones's team brings in far more revenue than Pegula's. Simple, really. The guy is setting a price for an item that has no legal market, except the NFL itself (per the NFL--and no one has challenged this so far on this goofball's side). Do you see the difference now? No? I only see it from the angle that it is copyrighted material, which makes it illegal for him to sell it. Nothing else matters in this discussion. If it is not copyrighted, he is free to sell it. What part of this are you struggling with? Do you think if it is the copyrighted property of the NFL, the guy should still be able to put it on the market? Simple question. Regarding the issue of selling copyrighted material. it is not aganst the law. It is illegal to sell copyrighted material and in this case broadcast it without consent of the copyright holder(s). To sell it from one " collector" to another simply as a collectible is legal. Check out ebay because they literally millions of copyrighted material listed all the time for sale. From music, books, pictures, movies, etc. Example: Ringo Starr's personal copy of the white album just fetched north of at least one million at Juliens auctions. That album is owned and copyrighted by someone. The tape of superbowl one basically a one off. And could demand huge collector interest in a sports auction. just because it is a 1/1. And some people have the means to pay whatever for that tape. Legally. That said they can then watch it in their man cave. Legally.
Mr. WEO Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 I know you have taken a beating around here after the Denver win, and are trying to wring a victory out of your many other conflicts on the board, but just calm down, man. The positions have been declared, we can return to this when there are new developments on the matter. Good day! Taken a beating after the...Denver win? Anyway....come on man, simply answer the simple question. Set me straight! Regarding the issue of selling copyrighted material. it is not aganst the law. It is illegal to sell copyrighted material and in this case broadcast it without consent of the copyright holder(s). To sell it from one " collector" to another simply as a collectible is legal. Check out ebay because they literally millions of copyrighted material listed all the time for sale. From music, books, pictures, movies, etc. Example: Ringo Starr's personal copy of the white album just fetched north of at least one million at Juliens auctions. That album is owned and copyrighted by someone. The tape of superbowl one basically a one off. And could demand huge collector interest in a sports auction. just because it is a 1/1. And some people have the means to pay whatever for that tape. Legally. That said they can then watch it in their man cave. Legally. I agree with the bolded part. It is why he can't sell it--he doesn't have consent. We can all resell copyrighted things we have purchased. But we can't legally sell, say, a bootlegged copy of a concert (which this is the equivalent) without the consent of the artist. You can't sell a bootleg movie you taped at the AMC cinema with your helmet cam without the consent of the studio--even though you paid for a ticket to watch the movie.
Best Player Available Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) Taken a beating after the...Denver win? Anyway....come on man, simply answer the simple question. Set me straight! I agree with the bolded part. It is why he can't sell it--he doesn't have consent. We can all resell copyrighted things we have purchased. But we can't legally sell, say, a bootlegged copy of a concert (which this is the equivalent) without the consent of the artist. You can't sell a bootleg movie you taped at the AMC cinema with your helmet cam without the consent of the studio--even though you paid for a ticket to watch the movie. Correct. Technically this tape is not a bootleg. It is a pirated copy. Copying a movie off your helmet cam is pirating. And there is a difference. What you describe above yes taping a concert is bootlegging. i did not read the first page of this thread. I was under the impression the seller's father had a 2" master tape of the game. But since it appears he taped the broadcast would indeed be illegal and a pirated copy of the broadcast. In the wonderful world of music labels, artists, everyone are increasingly turning their heads to this. The NFL well they are in their own special orbit and are douchebags. boots are all over the internet if you know how to find them. No one gives a schit anymore. In the end though it appears this guy has to negotiate something with the league. it as it sits today is illegal to sell. Edited February 11, 2016 by Best Player Available
Recommended Posts