DIRECTV unlikely to keep NFL Sunday Ticket

[Don in CT]

The rumors are Disney offered a Billion, Amazon 1.5 Billion and Apple at $2 Billion with certain conditions, so if Apple does not work out, Amazon would get it based on money offered.

The plus about Amazon getting it is they would be ready on Day one thanks to their AWS Business, with this short of a timeframe until next season, Disney would really have to speed it up to be ready.

Disney owns BamTech, the delivery system MLB started. It competes with AWS.

 

[Juan]

It is not a known number, DirecTV at it’s high had 21 million subscribers ( out of 100 million total Live TV subscribers pre streaming), so 79 million could not subscribe to it, no idea how many would, but obviously some of them if they could.

No the majority that left Traditional Providers is not cord switching, at it highest ( pre-streaming) it was at 100 million, now at 68 million including YTTV, Hulu Live, etc, which leaves 32 million at least without a Live TV Service.

Here via Spectrum, the slowest speed they offer is 100 down at $50, next step up is 400 down for $10 more, which is perfect for streaming, I know I do not need 1000 down, but I like having it.

So if I had 400 down plus all the streaming services I have, that is only $130 a month which is about the same price as a DirecTV bill only, the upgrade to 1G down is $40 more.

No data cap.

Umm those 79 million would only have to call 1 800 directv and they could subscribe to that service..and get this..I know it's hard to believe..but no expensive internet service required..just a dish on your roof

 

[Bruce]

Umm those 79 million would only have to call 1 800 directv and they could subscribe to that service..and get this..I know it's hard to believe..but no expensive internet service required..just a dish on your roof

Well that would be a stupid thing to do since ST is leaving DirecTV after this year.

 

[SamCdbs]

Umm those 79 million would only have to call 1 800 directv and they could subscribe to that service..and get this..I know it's hard to believe..but no expensive internet service required..just a dish on your roof

Exactly. In an era where “everybody” had one of three services (or lived on OTA only, which is not a part of the target audience by definition) this is what DirecTV and ST got, out of the 99% of people who could have had it.

The important thing to remember is that when we are talking about moving from satellite to internet, we are talking about ST being available to LESS people, not more.

Until one finds someone who had only OTA TV in the pre-streaming era, but is just dying to pay for ST, which I would submit such a person does not exist, the number remains a known number.

 

[Juan]

Exactly. In an era where “everybody” had one of three services (or lived on OTA only, which is not a part of the target audience by definition) this is what DirecTV and ST got, out of the 99% of people who could have had it.

The important thing to remember is that when we are talking about moving from satellite to internet, we are talking about ST being available to LESS people, not more.

Until one finds someone who had only OTA TV in the pre-streaming era, but is just dying to pay for ST, which I would submit such a person does not exist, the number remains a known number.

Just look how much ratings dropped for thursday night football..proves your point 100%

 

[Bruce]

The important thing to remember is that when we are talking about moving from satellite to internet, we are talking about ST being available to LESS people, not more.

You must not of passed one High School Math Class?

NFLST available to at the most 21 Million 7 years ago, now, roughly, 10 Million.

Next year, over 100 Million, even if just Prime Members-72 Million.

How many is not a known number, but it will be more then DirecTV.

 

[Juan]

You must not of passed one High School Math Class?

NFLST available to at the most 21 Million 7 years ago, now, roughly, 10 Million.

Next year, over 100 Million, even if just Prime Members-72 Million.

How many is not a known number, but it will be more then DirecTV.

Do you own a telephone?.. back then you would just call 1 800 directv and they would come to your house and install everything needed for sunday ticket on directv..you do not have to already be a subscriber to directv to order sunday ticket..the kind service agents at directv handled all installation issues..as long as you had good credit..sunday ticket was available to just about anyone who wanted it

 

[NashGuy]

I imagine they plan to make up most of the difference between what they pay the NFL and what they collect in NFLST subscriptions by advertising Apple products. Every NFLST subscriber would have an Apple ID, which is linked to all the Apple products you own. Apple would therefore know what Apple products each NFLST subscriber has, or if they have no Apple products, and could tailor their ads just based on that.

i.e. as an iPhone and Apple TV owner but not a Mac and Apple Watch owner, I might see ads for those products. Or if I hadn't just upgraded my iPhone last month, I'd see ads telling me how much better the iPhone 14 series is than the iPhone 11 Pro Max.

Someone who does not own any Apple products might see ads touting the advantages of iPhone over Android, maybe pushing the iPhone SE as a lower priced entry point into the iPhone world. Getting just one person to buy their first Apple product is worth a lot of money to Apple in future sales if they become long time Apple customers.

There is also a huge universe of possibilities for Apple to run third party ads for games on the App Store for iPhone/iPad owners - all your app purchases are linked to your Apple ID so they can tell if you have a lot of games what type of games you are interested in and so forth.

Apple ID would be great for them for targeted advertising, and they don't need to collect or use any personal info on you other than what is already linked to it via your existing relationship with Apple.

They have 1 or 2 minutes of local ad insertions per hour, so they could run 3-6 minutes of Apple ads per game. People watch these games live, so most would see these commercials rather than skip them like people with DVRs do or block or ignore them like they do ads on the web.

Hmm, yeah, the advertising angle isn't something I had considered. I'm still skeptical that it could result in enough incremental Apple hardware and service sales to make NFLST net profitable for Apple at the prices the NFL is supposedly demanding. But it would help.

 

[NashGuy]

I think there is high likelihood that the current contract holder’s business models are quite different in 2033 from what they are today.

Heck, I think it’s more likely that one of the current contract holder’s default on their deal with the NFL during the course of the agreement than that all of them survive.

Fox could be ripe for a takeover to get their NFL rights - they seem to be Fox’s biggest asset. Maybe Paramount could be convinced to sell CBS’s over the next few years.

Many things are going to happen between now and 2033. This alone may be a reason for Apple to take a less than optimal deal.

But, this is still a few years away…

Yeah, things will certainly be different in 2033 than today. I suspect that NFL games will be exclusively distributed via streaming apps in the next contract. I think it's an open question whether OTA TV even exists in a significant way by the mid-30s.

And yeah, I've wondered the same thing about Fox. Right now, Rupert Murdoch is proposing merging his Fox Corp. (Fox, Fox Sports, Fox News, Tubi) with News Corp. (WSJ, NY Post, The Times, etc.). Industry analysts are scratching their head over the logic of this move, as they don't see how it generates cost-savings or unlocks hidden value in the underlying assets. You can sort of see the logic of combining Fox News with his other right-wing news media operations, but not so much Fox and Fox Sports.

I wonder if merging Fox and News Corp. might be a prelude to selling off the non-news/politics holdings, though. Murdoch got *mostly* out of the entertainment arena when he sold off the Fox studios, their film and TV library, and some of their cable channels (FX, Fox Sports RSNs) to Disney a few years back. Maybe now he's looking to exit the rest of the way by selling Fox, Fox Sports, and Tubi. But, if so, to whom?

 

[Juan]

Yeah, things will certainly be different in 2033 than today. I suspect that NFL games will be exclusively distributed via streaming apps in the next contract. I think it's an open question whether OTA TV even exists in a significant way by the mid-30s. And yeah, I've wondered the same thing about Fox. Right now, Rupert Murdoch is proposing merging his Fox Corp. (Fox, Fox Sports, Fox News, Tubi) with News Corp. (WSJ, NY Post, The Times, etc.). Industry analysts are scratching their head over the logic of this move, as they don't see how it generates cost-savings or unlocks hidden value in the underlying assets. You can sort of see the logic of combining Fox News with his other right-wing news media operations, but not so much Fox and Fox Sports. I wonder if merging Fox and News Corp. might be a prelude to selling off the non-news/politics holdings, though. Murdoch got *mostly* out of the entertainment arena when he sold off the Fox studios, their film and TV library, and some of their cable channels (FX, Fox Sports RSNs) to Disney a few years back. Maybe now he's looking to exit the rest of the way by selling Fox, Fox Sports, and Tubi. But, if so, to whom?

Too early to predict..new technology will pop up and change everything..the powers that be want to make streaming as expensive as cable tv

 

[Yespage]

Exactly. In an era where “everybody” had one of three services (or lived on OTA only, which is not a part of the target audience by definition) this is what DirecTV and ST got, out of the 99% of people who could have had it.

The important thing to remember is that when we are talking about moving from satellite to internet, we are talking about ST being available to LESS people, not more.

Seeing that we aren't talking 4K streaming, that is rubbish. Roughly 19 million Americans lack access to broadband.

120 million households have internet in the US.
80% of Americans have access to 100 Mbps speeds (Ibid).

10 million subscribers to Directv.

Moving from Directv to Streaming opens access, not restricts it.

 

[slice1900]

No the majority that left Traditional Providers is not cord switching, at it highest ( pre-streaming) it was at 100 million, now at 68 million including YTTV, Hulu Live, etc, which leaves 32 million at least without a Live TV Service.

The people who left MVPDs entirely, rather than switching from cable/satellite to a streaming MVPD like Sling etc. are almost all not sports fans. The majority of high value (i.e. not stuff like MLS) sports are only available from a traditional MVPD on ESPN/2/U, FS1, RSNs, BTN/SECN/etc., various other networks that run some sports like USA/TNT/TBS, and of course the big 4 networks.

Most people can get the big 4 networks with an antenna, so if everything they want to watch (or are willing to limit themselves to) is available via OTA and there is spotty availability via streaming alternatives so a few sports fans might be able to drop an MVPD subscription but the vast majority wouldn't consider it.

 

[meStevo]

The people who left MVPDs entirely, rather than switching from cable/satellite to a streaming MVPD like Sling etc. are almost all not sports fans. The majority of high value (i.e. not stuff like MLS) sports are only available from a traditional MVPD on ESPN/2/U, FS1, RSNs, BTN/SECN/etc., various other networks that run some sports like USA/TNT/TBS, and of course the big 4 networks.

Most people can get the big 4 networks with an antenna, so if everything they want to watch (or are willing to limit themselves to) is available via OTA and there is spotty availability via streaming alternatives so a few sports fans might be able to drop an MVPD subscription but the vast majority wouldn't consider it.

A lot of 'almost all' 'most of' 'most people' in this post, making it amount to not really saying anything anything at all and just hoping people don't notice it doesn't address the point except for how you vaguely rationalize your stance.

Provide some actual research perhaps instead of stating opinion as facts, unlike the post you replied to? Otherwise you're only convincing yourself restating the same opinions over and over.

 

[meStevo]

Seeing that we aren't talking 4K streaming, that is rubbish. Roughly 19 million Americans lack access to broadband.

120 million households have internet in the US.
80% of Americans have access to 100 Mbps speeds (Ibid).

10 million subscribers to Directv.

Moving from Directv to Streaming opens access, not restricts it.

This will be met with crickets or dialing the crazy up to 11.

 

[SamCdbs]

Nope. Just basic math. Virtually everyone in the USA has access to DirecTV. A simple fact. Less people than that have access to mega quality internet.

 

[Bruce]

Nope. Just basic math. Virtually everyone in the USA has access to DirecTV. A simple fact. Less people than that have access to mega quality internet.

And that should tell you something that the vast majority of the United States want nothing to do with DirecTV, both when it had 21 Million Subs and now that it is 10-11 million subs.

That is pretty awful considering that it is nationwide, if it was so great, more people would have it since it is so available to everyone.

Yet a company like Comcast has a lot more video customers and it is not available nationwide, it must be true luxury Television as you claim DirecTV is.

Heck, Comcast is not even in a bunch of States, yet they have over 17 million video subscribers.

Xfinity Availability & Coverage Map | BroadbandNow

As the Comcast coverage map above makes clear, Xfinity is the largest cable company in the USA. The Comcast Internet availability area covers [ProviderStateCount] states and offers service to a population of [ProviderPopCount], with the widest statewide coverage in [ProviderTopStates] as of...

broadbandnow.com

 

[meStevo]

And that should tell you something that the vast majority of the United States want nothing to do with DirecTV, both when it had 21 Million Subs and now that it is 10-11 million subs.

That is pretty awful considering that it is nationwide, if it was so great, more people would have it since it is so available to everyone.

Yet a company like Comcast has a lot more video customers and it is not available nationwide, it must be true luxury Television as you claim DirecTV is.

Heck, Comcast is not even in a bunch of States, yet they have over 17 million video subscribers.

Xfinity Availability & Coverage Map | BroadbandNow

As the Comcast coverage map above makes clear, Xfinity is the largest cable company in the USA. The Comcast Internet availability area covers [ProviderStateCount] states and offers service to a population of [ProviderPopCount], with the widest statewide coverage in [ProviderTopStates] as of...

broadbandnow.com

Bruce didn't you know, everyone can get Comcast, they just have to move.

 

[Bruce]

Bruce didn't you know, everyone can get Comcast, they just have to move.

Yeah, some of these postings are quite ludicrous.

I back up everything I post with links and actual research, all I get in response is DirecTV is Luxury Television and it is available to 153% of the United States.

These are the only facts-

DirecTV did not want ST anymore because they have lost 10-11 Million Subscribers and it will be going elsewhere, probably a streaming service.

They are already trying to sell or merge, they tried with Dish Network before their value goes much lower, because they are still losing a estimated 1.5 million-up subscribers a year.

Dish Network already backed out of merger talks.

DirecTV is not planing, designing or launching any new Satellites.

If ST does go to a streaming service, it will be available to a lot more people.

Those are the facts.

 

[Juan]

Bruce didn't you know, everyone can get Comcast, they just have to move.

You didn't have to move to get directv...just 1 800 directv..they will send a installation tech right out

 

[Bruce]

You didn't have to move to get directv...just 1 800 directv..they will send a installation tech right out

They rather move and get Comcast, that is why they have 17 million subs, left certain states to get it.