Directv might drop the NFL Sunday Ticket
- Thread starter Radioguy41
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 62
- Views 6K
yeah, but there's a possibility of a clause that could end that deal early if one or both sides agree to end the deal early.
Satellite TV will be so close to a thing of the past by 2022. Just can't imagine any kind of renewal being offered. It will be on one of the major streaming platforms with a world audience and if it's not will be shocked. I know NFL has made many dumb decisions, I hope this won't be one of them. The idea that soccer is becoming a popular sport in America just makes me laugh. I don't care how many kids grow up playing (all mine did) very few would watch over an American football game. WMBA has a better chance of becoming popular over soccer.
I doubt 2020 .... I get it streaming is more popular but
Remember not all folks live in a metro area
Some folks live in rual areas
Some dont have FTTH available and have 2 suffer with cable broadband
Some folks can't even use cable broadband and or DSL and have to use satellite broadband
Also wasn't some company trying to build a massive satellite internet network for the entire planet ?
Here's why Amazon is trying to reach every inch of the world with satellites providing internet
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Thats actually a positive they can't reach you with high speed broadband
Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!
I doubt 2020 .... I get it streaming is more popular but
Remember not all folks live in a metro area
Some folks live in rual areas
Some dont have FTTH available and have 2 suffer with cable broadband
Some folks can't even use cable broadband and or DSL and have to use satellite broadband
Also wasn't some company trying to build a massive satellite internet network for the entire planet ?
Here's why Amazon is trying to reach every inch of the world with satellites providing internet
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G950U using the SatelliteGuys app!
DirecTV already has a streaming app for Sunday Ticket. Can they just sell an over the top version of the service. Or will the league not allow it.
I'd be surprised if many streaming customers would pay almost $300 for Sunday Ticket, but I could be wrong. Also, if they discounted it for streaming, that would cannibalize satellite subscriptions. To make up the $500 million annual loss, they'd need to sign up an additional ~1.7 million new subscribers (assuming no additional delivery costs for new subscribers, which there probably would be with streaming). I don't see streaming accomplishing that for them either.
I'm thinking people are looking at this with tunnel vision and an assumption. The assumption is Directv needs to have sole access to Sunday Ticket from a money standpoint. It's the opposite, it isn't keeping customers like some think it is, it is way overpriced now for Directv with less and less subscribers and what Directv needs is to be one of at least two who has it. The tunnel vision is not seeing At&t is almost screaming from the rafters Directv is getting into financial trouble with loss of subscribers, and it's a medium At&t does not intend to keep long term.
They are literally saying what I posted - at a minimum a two company rights to Sunday Ticket, one of them Streaming. The NFL could still get about what it gets now and the two or more companies could charge less because they are paying less each.
They are literally saying what I posted - at a minimum a two company rights to Sunday Ticket, one of them Streaming. The NFL could still get about what it gets now and the two or more companies could charge less because they are paying less each.
Why would any streaming provider pay more for NFLST than it could make back in sales?
Why does Amazon pay alot for the Grand Tour. Why does Amazon pay for exclusive programming with no idea if it will increase sales. It's building and making a brand. To stand out and get your name on the lips of people right after they say they want to stream. Get enough of what people want as a whole and you are going to get more subscribers. I may want the Grand Tour, someone in my family wants Sunday Ticket, and how likely is it Amazon becomes the choice? I'm using Amazon it could be Youtube etc.
You are close though on it can't be redicoulsy costly as it was for Directv but that's where having more than one with it reduces the cost to each. And in the end you could be right it is too much for what they will get in return. But I wouldn't say that is a Fait of Compli.
Doesn't DTV give NFL ticket to new subscribers for FREE. With all the floater out there, I can see how they could lose money if that is what they are doing. How many people switch back and forth after their contract expires?
If the exclusive ends, the NFL will have to charge providers a set price per viewer. A flat rate isn't feasible without an exclusive. That means an end to all the freebies Directv uses to acquire/keep customers, and there would be no reason for there to be a difference in pricing between satellite, cable and streaming, unless a company was willing to take a loss on it. A couple million people were willing to pay $300 a season for NFLST on Directv, I see no reason why they would balk at the same $300 just because it is streamed. What's the reason why it should be offered for less on streaming? What's the reason why the NFL should price it lower than a price they know many people are already gladly paying?
The only difference in the pricing is they may offer a single team option. But I'll bet if they do it is $200, because they know a lot of people are getting NFLST solely to watch one out of market team they're a fan of. I doubt they'd do this from year one, because they'd want to compare their revenue and number of subscribers before and after making the switch, to see if it was a good idea. If they decide it is costing them revenue via too many people who were paying $300 saving $100, the single team option would see a price increase or not be offered the next season.
The only difference in the pricing is they may offer a single team option. But I'll bet if they do it is $200, because they know a lot of people are getting NFLST solely to watch one out of market team they're a fan of. I doubt they'd do this from year one, because they'd want to compare their revenue and number of subscribers before and after making the switch, to see if it was a good idea. If they decide it is costing them revenue via too many people who were paying $300 saving $100, the single team option would see a price increase or not be offered the next season.
They pay a flat rate to the NFL, so it costs them $0 to give it away (unless that person would have paid the $300 if they hadn't been given it for free)
The NFL will NEVER get the money that ATT currently pays them, regardless who they go with.
I doubt 2020 .... I get it streaming is more popular but
Remember not all folks live in a metro area
Some folks live in rual areas
Some dont have FTTH available and have 2 suffer with cable broadband
Some folks can't even use cable broadband and or DSL and have to use satellite broadband
Also wasn't some company trying to build a massive satellite internet network for the entire planet ?
Here's why Amazon is trying to reach every inch of the world with satellites providing internet
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
I have cable and I'm not suffering with 940 Mbps
I guess I would expect AT&T to have to offer it for less on streaming because that is pretty much the model of Live OTT streaming (excluding DNow or whatever it is called today). That said, they are just not likely to get the numbers of subscribers they need to pay for ST no matter how they offer it. The single team option makes sense to me.
There is no way they would charge more for Directv customers than streaming. The Directv customers would simply drop NFLST and sign up for it on streaming to save money.
The "model of OTT" streaming is not to pay less. You pay less for Netflix because it has a fraction of the content you can get from cable/satellite. Now maybe you don't care about most of that content, or just care about "having stuff to watch when I'm bored and want to watch TV" in which case Netflix may be fine because even if it has a fraction of the overall content that's out there it is still far more than you could ever watch.
There is no savings of distribution cost for streaming vs cable/satellite, the only reason it costs less is because on demand streaming like Netflix has much less content (and no sports, which is the most expensive content there is) and "cable replacement" streaming like Sling TV and so forth costs less because they're willing to lose money to grow a subscriber base. At least for now. They pay the same price for programming that cable/satellite does, which amounts to about 2/3 of what cable/satellite collects from its subscribers. That 1/3 left over has to cover all their costs, and still leave room for profit. If a cable replacement streamer costs less than about 85% of what cable/satellite costs, you can pretty much guarantee it is losing money.
So, you pretty much made my point for me, but to start, I specifically wrote "Live" OTT streaming in the post you quoted, meaning things like Sling, PS Vue, YTTV, etc. I did this because we are discussing sports which is something people largely watch live, so I'll skip responding on the topic of Netflix.
You hit the nail on the head when you wrote. "streaming like Sling TV and so forth costs less because they're willing to lose money to grow a subscriber base." That was exactly what I was getting at in my post. Because that is where the streaming market is right now, and DirecTV needs to grow their subscriber base to have any chance of not losing money on NFLST. So, we're pretty much on the same page there.
Whether or not DirecTV is willing to do that (offer streaming for less than satellite delivery), I don't know, but I believe they'd have to to get close to the number of subscribers they'd need to put a dent in the deficit. Just my opinion though.
