DIRECTV unlikely to keep NFL Sunday Ticket

[SamCdbs]

That is not the package. With some exceptions (the NFL clearly front-loaded this year’s schedule to help out Amazon, didn’t work)TNF is bad or mediocre games. Games that, if they were on Sunday afternoon wouldn’t be much noticed outside their fanbases.

Was true last year, the year before that, and since the package was thought up. If anything, this year’s games are a little better than usual.

The point is the previous provider was getting 7s and 8s, and streaming is getting 3s and 4s. And the “old folks” excuse doesn’t hold water. It is getting LESS young (18-54, the so-called “key demographic” ) people as well, just slightly less has among that group than overall.

Less total viewers. Less viewers 18-54.

So Amazon is paying a 8 figures per game, plus production costs, including 7 figures each/year to the two announcers. It isn’t adding subscribers (because apparently “everyone” has it already) it isn’t charging extra for the games, it isn’t making money off the commercial side (couldn’t deliver, farmed it out to DirecTV, at no charge) and maybe is making some money off the commercials (although NBC charges about $800K/minute for SNF, which gets 5 times the rating, so not much). It is losing money. It got outsmarted, or knew what it knew going in and just wanted the video equivalent of a trophy wife.

Either way, the big numbers cannot be ignored. With everything else being equal, 40%, including 15% of the “key demographic” that used to watch the games, either will not, or cannot.

 

[Bruce]

That is not the package. With some exceptions (the NFL clearly front-loaded this year’s schedule to help out Amazon, didn’t work)TNF is bad or mediocre games. Games that, if they were on Sunday afternoon wouldn’t be much noticed outside their fanbases.

Was true last year, the year before that, and since the package was thought up. If anything, this year’s games are a little better than usual.

The point is the previous provider was getting 7s and 8s, and streaming is getting 3s and 4s. And the “old folks” excuse doesn’t hold water. It is getting LESS young (18-54, the so-called “key demographic” ) people as well, just slightly less has among that group than overall.

Less total viewers. Less viewers 18-54.

So Amazon is paying a 8 figures per game, plus production costs, including 7 figures each/year to the two announcers. It isn’t adding subscribers (because apparently “everyone” has it already) it isn’t charging extra for the games, it isn’t making money off the commercial side (couldn’t deliver, farmed it out to DirecTV, at no charge) and maybe is making some money off the commercials (although NBC charges about $800K/minute for SNF, which gets 5 times the rating, so not much). It is losing money. It got outsmarted, or knew what it knew going in and just wanted the video equivalent of a trophy wife.

Either way, the big numbers cannot be ignored. With everything else being equal, 40%, including 15% of the “key demographic” that used to watch the games, either will not, or cannot.

And none of that matters, NFLST is still leaving DirecTV for the streaming world.

 

[jerryez]

I like football, but you can only watch one game at a time, so why pay $300 to see the one game of your choice or maybe two games. I just choose from what is on Fox or CBS, plus the NBC night game for FREE.

 

[Juan]

And none of that matters, NFLST is still leaving DirecTV for the streaming world.

Not yet..nobody wants it

 

[Don in CT]

Not yet..nobody wants it

People want it, just not the NFL’s terms for it.

 

[Don in CT]

That is not the package. With some exceptions (the NFL clearly front-loaded this year’s schedule to help out Amazon, didn’t work)TNF is bad or mediocre games. Games that, if they were on Sunday afternoon wouldn’t be much noticed outside their fanbases.

Was true last year, the year before that, and since the package was thought up. If anything, this year’s games are a little better than usual.

The point is the previous provider was getting 7s and 8s, and streaming is getting 3s and 4s. And the “old folks” excuse doesn’t hold water. It is getting LESS young (18-54, the so-called “key demographic” ) people as well, just slightly less has among that group than overall.

Less total viewers. Less viewers 18-54.

So Amazon is paying a 8 figures per game, plus production costs, including 7 figures each/year to the two announcers. It isn’t adding subscribers (because apparently “everyone” has it already) it isn’t charging extra for the games, it isn’t making money off the commercial side (couldn’t deliver, farmed it out to DirecTV, at no charge) and maybe is making some money off the commercials (although NBC charges about $800K/minute for SNF, which gets 5 times the rating, so not much). It is losing money. It got outsmarted, or knew what it knew going in and just wanted the video equivalent of a trophy wife.

Either way, the big numbers cannot be ignored. With everything else being equal, 40%, including 15% of the “key demographic” that used to watch the games, either will not, or cannot.

If you move the Sunday night package to Amazon you would get better ratings for the games. This was always the problem with TNF. The games were always subpar. This is why the networks passed on it.

 

[AZ.]

I like football, but you can only watch one game at a time, so why pay $300 to see the one game of your choice or maybe two games. I just choose from what is on Fox or CBS, plus the NBC night game for FREE.

I think I enjoy flipping to the interesting games that are not over the air. And watching the endings of real close games. Most weeks their is 3 or 4 close endings for early games and a few on the later games. Yea $300 is a lot for 17 weeks, and no preseason games.

 

[SamCdbs]

And none of that matters, NFLST is still leaving DirecTV for the streaming world.

Maybe. On the commercial side? Certainly not. We already know streaming just cannot get the job done. On the home side? Time will tell.

But, what is important is that fundamentally silly assertions like “it will be profitable” and “ (a number later shown to be more than watch the “free” games) will subscribe” and such, upthread, are borne of a fundamental lack of understanding of this business.

This package WILL NOT be profitable.
This package has a maximum number of subscribers that is basically how many subscribed to it on DirecTV.
This package WILL be predicated on first purchasing something else.
Cheap is as cheap does.

If you move the Sunday night package to Amazon you would get better ratings for the games. This was always the problem with TNF. The games were always subpar. This is why the networks passed on it.

More than TNF? Yes. More than NBC currently gets for SNF? Not a chance. Logic teaches us that if streaming can only get 60% or so of the previous TNF audience, then likewise it would only get 60% or so of the previous SNF audience as well.

Because streaming means less, not more, viewers. Be it TNF, SNF, or Sunday Ticket.

 

[Bruce]

Because streaming means less, not more, viewers.

Except Streaming is still growing, Traditional TV is dying a slow death, just ask DirecTV who has lost half of it’s subscribers.

By the way, third month in a row streaming has grown and Cable is shrinking-

Last month streaming accounted for 36.9% of total TV usage – almost two points better than August when it captured 35%, and a 34.6% increase from September 2021.

https://www.fiercevideo.com/video/streaming-snags-record-share-tv-viewing-september

 

[Don in CT]

Maybe. On the commercial side? Certainly not. We already know streaming just cannot get the job done. On the home side? Time will tell.

But, what is important is that fundamentally silly assertions like “it will be profitable” and “ (a number later shown to be more than watch the “free” games) will subscribe” and such, upthread, are borne of a fundamental lack of understanding of this business.

This package WILL NOT be profitable.
This package has a maximum number of subscribers that is basically how many subscribed to it on DirecTV.
This package WILL be predicated on first purchasing something else.
Cheap is as cheap does.

More than TNF? Yes. More than NBC currently gets for SNF? Not a chance. Logic teaches us that if streaming can only get 60% or so of the previous TNF audience, then likewise it would only get 60% or so of the previous SNF audience as well.

Because streaming means less, not more, viewers. Be it TNF, SNF, or Sunday Ticket.

We are reaching an inflection point where streaming overtakes traditional TV. Has it happened yet, not for live sports. It has had an effect on prime time ratings. If the NFL left broadcast for streaming 100% you would see a tidal wave. Now that’s not happening any time soon but it would be the tipping point.

 

[jerryez]

I think I enjoy flipping to the interesting games that are not over the air. And watching the endings of real close games. Most weeks their is 3 or 4 close endings for early games and a few on the later games. Yea $300 is a lot for 17 weeks, and no preseason games.

You sound like youneed NFL Redzone at $13.95 per month.

 

[AZ.]

You sound like youneed NFL Redzone at $13.95 per month.

Not sure why it sounds that way? I cant watch a whole game or a close game? To me red zone is more like your local sports news report. Nothing but scores? filled with some highlights.
Now if it goes all streaming maybe thats my only choice as internet is never reliable around here, and speeds very greatly!

 

[Juan]

Not sure why it sounds that way? I cant watch a whole game or a close game? To me red zone is more like your local sports news report. Nothing but scores? filled with some highlights.
Now if it goes all streaming maybe thats my only choice as internet is never reliable around here, and speeds very greatly!

No...its a bit busy for the 1pm games..but you get good chunks of the 4pm games

 

[meStevo]

Not sure why it sounds that way? I cant watch a whole game or a close game? To me red zone is more like your local sports news report. Nothing but scores? filled with some highlights.
Now if it goes all streaming maybe thats my only choice as internet is never reliable around here, and speeds very greatly!

'The witching hour' is amazing TV on Red Zone as games all conclude or are decided in the last 20-30 minutes of a set of games. Almost all of the action is live, not replays. Nothing like a sports report.

For example (you'll have to click through the auto-embed)


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pv8uRuq8O-c

 

[NashGuy]

We are reaching an inflection point where streaming overtakes traditional TV. Has it happened yet, not for live sports. It has had an effect on prime time ratings. If the NFL left broadcast for streaming 100% you would see a tidal wave. Now that’s not happening any time soon but it would be the tipping point.

The NFL will leave traditional TV for 100% streaming in their next round of contracts, come 2033. But it won't produce much of a tidal wave at that point because direct-to-consumer streaming apps will have subsumed and pretty much killed cable TV before then.

 

[Juan]

The NFL will leave traditional TV for 100% streaming in their next round of contracts, come 2033. But it won't produce much of a tidal wave at that point because direct-to-consumer streaming apps will have subsumed and pretty much killed cable TV before then.

Doubt it...I don't think streaming in its present form will last..nobody is making money but Netflix...especially when TNF ratings have collapsed...OTA is on its last legs with an antenna but the stations will live on

 

[SamCdbs]

Yes, the death of “cable” has been predicted for a decade. Ain’t happening.

Most people who have “left cable” are really just cord switchers, still paying for linear TV. The much smaller cadre of true “cord cutters” (who still PAY for internet and still PAY for non-linear services) are united by two characteristics, a dislike of sports and cheapness.

Most people, and certainly most all sports fans, understand that life is too short, and aren’t out to save four cents, but rather to enjoy life. Thus linear TV, in whatever form delivered, which will include DBS because the internet and cable just can’t get the job done for rural Americans, will continue to exist and, unlike streaming, continue to be profitable, for many decades to come.

As to the next NFL contract, probably best to save commentary for a 8 or 9 years, but the next contracts up for bids are the NBA and NASCAR. The failure of TNF has changed the game for both deals and wise watchers of this industry can learn from both.

 

[Bruce]

Yes, the death of “cable” has been predicted for a decade. Ain’t happening.

Most people who have “left cable” are really just cord switchers, still paying for linear TV.

This has been proven to you multiple times that you are incorrect with links and math, both here and DBSTalk.

Total Cable TV/Satellite Subs was, roughly, 100 million households in 2014, that was before any LIVE OTT Service.

We are now at 68 Million, which includes YTTV and the likes, that means, roughly, 44 million left Traditional Providers and only about 12 million went to Live OTT Service, so Paid Live TV has lost 32 million and growing

The much smaller cadre of true “cord cutters” (who still PAY for internet and still PAY for non-linear services) are united by two characteristics, a dislike of sports and cheapness.

Ok, I dropped YTTV, not because I am cheap and/or cannot afford it, it is because I find no value to it.

Since the vast majority of content from Traditional Channels are on Streaming Services and in better quality (1080P, some are in 4K and Dolby Digital+ ) , then the exclusive content you do not get with a Traditional Provider at a less expensive price, why pay for a Live TV Service.

Most people, and certainly most all sports fans, understand that life is too short, and aren’t out to save four cents, but rather to enjoy life.

I get tons of sports with the MLB Streaming App, ESPN+ for the NHL, Peacock for NFLSNF, Paramount+( NFL on Sunday) and OTA for Fox, next year BIG TEN Football ( Michigan) will be on those above services and of course NFLST will be streaming.

I care nothing for Basketball.

Thus linear TV, in whatever form delivered, which will include DBS because the internet and cable just can’t get the job done for rural Americans, will continue to exist and, unlike streaming, continue to be profitable, for many decades to come.

Broadband is getting better for rural folks every day, was at 80% a few years ago for the whole of the United States, now at 85%.

For those that broadband will never reach, that is what Star Link is for and before you bring up the costs, compare it to Hughes, more expensive and way worse.

As far as DBS keep going as a viable business, better start a Go Fund me to build new Satellites because DirecTV/Dish are not doing it.

Since it takes about 4 years to design/build/launch a new Satellite, better get started because DirecTV ( the satellite side) will just be about unprofitable.

As to the next NFL contract, probably best to save commentary for a 8 or 9 years, but the next contracts up for bids are the NBA and NASCAR. The failure of TNF has changed the game for both deals and wise watchers of this industry can learn from both.

Streaming will overpay, look at the Big Ten deal for a example, their goal is to destroy Traditional Service, I can see Amazon or Apple making a run at the NBA since they both have so much cash.

 

[Bilbo1]

The NFL will leave traditional TV for 100% streaming in their next round of contracts, come 2033.

That will make them the last thing on traditional TV. Pretty fitting since sports were one of the first things on traditional TV.

Yes, the death of “cable” has been predicted for a decade. Ain’t happening.

Most people who have “left cable” are really just cord switchers, still paying for linear TV. The much smaller cadre of true “cord cutters” (who still PAY for internet and still PAY for non-linear services) are united by two characteristics, a dislike of sports and cheapness.

We’ll, “cable” been dying a slow death for at the last three or four years with the subscriber losses.

Cord switching is happening, but something else is happening as well… Peacock and Paramount+ have linear channels available in their app. It’s only a matter of time before Disney/ABC/ESPN does the same. (I see Fox as ripe for takeover by Apple or Amazon if only just to get their NFL rights - it’s pretty much their only in-house content since the Disney deal). It’s looking more like streaming is becoming what a la carte was supposed to be. Linear channels with a VOD library.

It’s only a matter of time before the cord switchers drop the vMVPD in favor of the DTC product from each network.

Right now, Disney is the only one that breaks out sports separately in ESPN. But, Peacock and Paramount+ include sports as part of their service.

As to the next NFL contract, probably best to save commentary for a 8 or 9 years, but the next contracts up for bids are the NBA and NASCAR. The failure of TNF has changed the game for both deals and wise watchers of this industry can learn from both.

But who thinks TNF has been a failure? Does Amazon or the NFL see it as such? Ratings may be down, but was that unexpected? Even if they say something like the hoped rating were higher, what does that really mean? You could say that about any show. What did Amazon and the NFL envision happening during the contract? Sure, you see it as a failure, but that really doesn’t matter.

As for the NBA and NASCAR, I’d expect a money bump for the NBA, and streaming rights to someone. The NBA has been on Disney/ESPN and Warner/TNT (how does Paramount merger affect this?). I’d imagine both would like to retain the NBA and both have strong streaming platforms. Apple could come in offering an MLS style deal.

NASCAR is a bigger question mark for me. My recollection is their ratings aren’t as strong as they were. But, Formula One has a growing following. But, there is a different image there, too… European vs. good ol boy south. It may be a good play for NBC/Peacock since they currently hold some of the rights… again, strong streaming presence.

So, I’d expect both the NBA and NASCAR deals to have a strong streaming component. I wouldn’t read much into them also having a traditional TV component, too, to protect legacy access as traditional TV wanes.

 

[Juan]

This has been proven to you multiple times that you are incorrect with links and math, both here and DBSTalk.

Total Cable TV/Satellite Subs was, roughly, 100 million households in 2014, that was before any LIVE OTT Service.

We are now at 68 Million, which includes YTTV and the likes, that means, roughly, 44 million left Traditional Providers and only about 12 million went to Live OTT Service, so Paid Live TV has lost 32 million and growing


Ok, I dropped YTTV, not because I am cheap and/or cannot afford it, it is because I find no value to it.

Since the vast majority of content from Traditional Channels are on Streaming Services and in better quality (1080P, some are in 4K and Dolby Digital+ ) , then the exclusive content you do not get with a Traditional Provider at a less expensive price, why pay for a Live TV Service.


I get tons of sports with the MLB Streaming App, ESPN+ for the NHL, Peacock for NFLSNF, Paramount+( NFL on Sunday) and OTA for Fox, next year BIG TEN Football ( Michigan) will be on those above services and of course NFLST will be streaming.

I care nothing for Basketball.

Broadband is getting better for rural folks every day, was at 80% a few years ago for the whole of the United States, now at 85%.

For those that broadband will never reach, that is what Star Link is for and before you bring up the costs, compare it to Hughes, more expensive and way worse.

As far as DBS keep going as a viable business, better start a Go Fund me to build new Satellites because DirecTV/Dish are not doing it.

Since it takes about 4 years to design/build/launch a new Satellite, better get started because DirecTV ( the satellite side) will just be about unprofitable.

Streaming will overpay, look at the Big Ten deal for a example, their goal is to destroy Traditional Service, I can see Amazon or Apple making a run at the NBA since they both have so much cash.

You haven't proven anything about linear tv...only that it still exists on a different delivery platform...its still cable