DIRECTV unlikely to keep NFL Sunday Ticket

Status
Please reply by conversation.
Huh?... they tookout the biggest cost factor RSN...but alas you dream about a price for sunday ticket that will never exist again
No you said this-
Had everything to do with sports costs and programming costs in general..moving to streaming will be just as expensive..if you buy sports
And I showed it did not.

And no one knows what Apple/Amazon will charge for NFLST, it will not be $600, no one will buy it had that price.

Again, Apple/Amazon are two of the most successfully fcompanies out there, they know what they are doing, overcharging for NFLST is not one of them

My guess is they want more or even all of the advertising slots for games on their streaming service, if I was paying $2.5 billion for ST, that is what I would ask for, sure way to make the money back.

Targeted Ads are a sure way to make extra money, for example, I am in Florida watching the Lions, a ad can pop up advertising Better Made Chips ( made in Michigan, not available here) and they can be ordered online and shipped to me ( I know this because I ordered some for my wife last year), then that same ad to anyone watching the Lions in the United States
 
No you said this-

And I showed it did not.

And no one knows what Apple/Amazon will charge for NFLST, it will not be $600, no one will buy it had that price.

Again, Apple/Amazon are two of the most successfully fcompanies out there, they know what they are doing, overcharging for NFLST is not one of them

My guess is they want more or even all of the advertising slots for games on their streaming service, if I was paying $2.5 billion for ST, that is what I would ask for, sure way to make the money back.

Targeted Ads are a sure way to make extra money, for example, I am in Florida watching the Lions, a ad can pop up advertising Better Made Chips ( made in Michigan, not available here) and they can be ordered online and shipped to me ( I know this because I ordered some for my wife last year), then that same ad to anyone watching the Lions in the United States
You said NO RSN

And thats very expensive sports
 
You said NO RSN

And thats very expensive sports
Except, as I wrote, I get Baseball and Hockey( which would normally be on the RSN) and it costs less then $9 dollars a month, plus I get a lot of extras that would not be on the RSN.

And I am glad I don’t get it, I would never watch Bally Florida.
 
Except, as I wrote, I get Baseball and Hockey( which would normally be on the RSN) and it costs less then $9 dollars a month, plus I get a lot of extras that would not be on the RSN.

And I am glad I don’t get it, I would never watch Bally Florida.
Yo have a link for those prices?
 
Yo have a link for those prices?
I already posted it up above, the $60 for MLB was a Father’s Day special, same price as last year, it works for me, do not start watching baseball until then anyways.
 
Here’s an interesting, but maybe dated stat… less than 10% of people who own a TV didn’t watch any sports on national broadcast or cable networks in the third quarter of 2014.

Sports are on TV because a lot of people watch them. They are included in cable packages and, more often now, in streaming packages, too because most people watch them.

 
What I do know is the number of people that want it are about 2M, which is not nearly enough to make it profitable. Which is why, just like with DirecTV, it will be predicated on first buying something else. The main difference being far less people, and far less public places, will be able to access it, and what it is going to be predicated upon, most people don't want. Certainly most public places don't.
You know this how?

Seriously, there is zero way to know what this number is. We know how many subs Directv has...PERIOD!

We have no way of knowing how many millions of subs a streaming service that can reach hundreds of millions of subscribers can attract and we have no way of knowing what the cost will be or if any other subscription fees will be involved. The contract hasn't even been awarded to anyone yet.
 
Here’s an interesting, but maybe dated stat… less than 10% of people who own a TV didn’t watch any sports on national broadcast or cable networks in the third quarter of 2014.

Sports are on TV because a lot of people watch them. They are included in cable packages and, more often now, in streaming packages, too because most people watch them.

But not sunday ticket
 
You know this how?
Because that is what it sold, under universal availability.
Seriously, there is zero way to know what this number is. We know how many subs Directv has...PERIOD!
Right. Everyone that wants it.
We have no way of knowing how many millions of subs a streaming service that can reach hundreds of millions of subscribers can attract and we have no way of knowing what the cost will be or if any other subscription fees will be involved. The contract hasn't even been awarded to anyone yet.
DirecTV is 100% available, and that is what they sold.
 
My guess is they want more or even all of the advertising slots for games on their streaming service, if I was paying $2.5 billion for ST, that is what I would ask for, sure way to make the money back.
Too bad the NFL already signed contracts with CBS and Fox that requires them to show the ordinary regular ads the networks have sold, leaving, as explained, the two minutes per hour local stations get. That simple.

ST is a niche product.

ST will cost way more in the future.

ST is a loss leader, and will be predicated on first buying other things. Things that public houses don’t really want.
 
Because that is what it sold, under universal availability.
'Universal availability' for those who also want the extraordinary expense and 'convenience' of satellite TV. A number that is decreasing significantly daily.
Too bad the NFL already signed contracts with CBS and Fox that requires them to show the ordinary regular ads the networks have sold, leaving, as explained, the two minutes per hour local stations get. That simple.
'That simple' to ignore other advertising opportunities (pre-roll, guide, etc), exposure to the platform, brand value, etc. you mean. With every one of these absolutist posts you look more and more out of touch on the topic.
 
ESPN can never sell the service a la carte. Doing so undoes all of its linear contracts. The price if ESPN were available a la carte to only those that want it (and, remember, most everyone who has gone streaming only, has done so because they do not want it, at least enough to overcome the pennies they are saving) would have to be huge.
"Never"? Never is a long time. What makes you think that ESPN's carriage contracts can't and won't be amended? We're apparently already seeing that with other popular linear channels and their content. CBS, and virtually all of its local station affiliates around the nation, can be purchased a la carte inside Paramount+. NBCU is already placing nearly all of their live linear channel sports that air on NBC and USA -- NFL Sunday Night Football, NASCAR, Olympics, Notre Dame Football, etc. -- as live streams inside Peacock.

So yeah, of course Disney will eventually do the same thing with the live sports that air across their various ESPN linear channels. It's just a question of when they do it and how they package and price it. The reality that Disney has to understand, and that Wall Street must eventually price into their stock, is that ESPN will *never* be as profitable under the direct-to-consumer a la carte model as it has been under the forced-bundle linear cable TV model (which is why some analysts are calling for Disney to sell/spin off ESPN now before that reality gets fully priced in by the Street).

Here's what I see happening. Within the next couple of years, Hulu will get folded into Disney+, making it the company's undisputed flagship DTC streaming product. We'll see the biggest, most expensive live sports events -- the ones that appeal even to a lot of casual sports viewers -- live stream inside Disney+ (alongside whichever linear ESPN cable channels they air on). Things like Monday Night Football, College Football Championship, Wimbledon, etc. (Oh, and Little League World Series, of course.)

The rest of their live ESPN content -- the stuff the mainly appeals to true fans of those particular sports -- will be sold DTC through more than one service. Most logical way to package it, I think, might be as one called ESPN College and another called ESPN Pro, carrying a hodge-podge of college sports in one and pro sports in the other.

My guess, though, is that that situation would only last for a few years, i.e. one or two contract lengths with the relevant sports. By the early 2030s, I think we're going to see the vast majority of sports sold DTC by the leagues/conferences/teams themselves, or maybe with the help of a third party that handles running and marketing it, as Apple will be doing with MLS. But each service will be devoted to carrying all (or nearly all) the regular season games for that particular league, conference, or team. (Well, I suppose it's possible we see a single NCAA-branded app for college sports but perhaps with the option to just purchase a particular conference, e.g. SEC.) In order to reach new fans, a sampling of regular season games, and perhaps all playoff/championship games, will be carried on the various general entertainment DTC services, e.g. Disney+, HBO Max, Netflix, Prime Video, Apple TV+.
 
The main difference being far less people, and far less public places, will be able to access it, and what it is going to be predicated upon, most people don't want. Certainly most public places don't.
How can you write that with a straight face, only 10-11 million have access to it, once it goes streaming, over 100 million.

As far as businesses go, I assume they have the same access, 85% can get it, 15% will be too slow.

Too bad the NFL already signed contracts with CBS and Fox that requires them to show the ordinary regular ads the networks have sold, leaving, as explained, the two minutes per hour local stations get. That simple.
We do not know that, the only thing we do know is Apple/Amazon has to charge a certain price range for NFLST.

Show me evidence, a link, to what you say is true.

What happened before with ST and DirecTV does not mean it is the same for Apple/Amazon.

Right. Everyone that wants it.
And that number is getting less everyday.
DirecTV is 100% available, and that is what they sold.
If it is that available, then why do not not the majority have or want it, because they do not want it, even at it’s high mark of 23 million households, that still means, roughly, 100 million households did not want it.

Also, DirecTV has all those sports that you are so excited about, yet having all of them could not stop, roughly, 12 Million from leaving in the last 7 years or so.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: meStevo
My guess, though, is that that situation would only last for a few years, i.e. one or two contract lengths with the relevant sports. By the early 2030s, I think we're going to see the vast majority of sports sold DTC by the leagues/conferences/teams themselves, or maybe with the help of a third party that handles running and marketing it, as Apple will be doing with MLS. But each service will be devoted to carrying all (or nearly all) the regular season games for that particular league, conference, or team. (Well, I suppose it's possible we see a single NCAA-branded app for college sports but perhaps with the option to just purchase a particular conference, e.g. SEC.) In order to reach new fans, a sampling of regular season games, and perhaps all playoff/championship games, will be carried on the various general entertainment DTC services, e.g. Disney+, HBO Max, Netflix, Prime Video, Apple TV+.
so we get pick and play but you may endup paying for the same ESPN / sports x3 times? If you have HBO , Netflix and prime?

I don't think people will want to be forced to pay for sports on netflix even if they don't want it and netflix maybe forced to make basic level come with HD.

and then will there be say an cable like service that gives you
one UI
one bill
one set of rules / fees for multi room / multi box / multi viewing?

Will there be say
leagues/conferences/teams themselves system comes with ALL teams games (maybe local areas only)
  1. With the teams sueing for the right to sell there own games?
  2. With some kind of In market + (lower cost your team only ESPN)
    1. Simsub the ESPN only games on the local team service like how the NFL does it on OTA for steaming / cable only games.
  3. Only playoffs on that nation wide service that are not part of the team only service
 
so we get pick and play but you may endup paying for the same ESPN / sports x3 times? If you have HBO , Netflix and prime?

I don't think people will want to be forced to pay for sports on netflix even if they don't want it and netflix maybe forced to make basic level come with HD.

and then will there be say an cable like service that gives you
one UI
one bill
one set of rules / fees for multi room / multi box / multi viewing?

Will there be say
leagues/conferences/teams themselves system comes with ALL teams games (maybe local areas only)
  1. With the teams sueing for the right to sell there own games?
  2. With some kind of In market + (lower cost your team only ESPN)
    1. Simsub the ESPN only games on the local team service like how the NFL does it on OTA for steaming / cable only games.
  3. Only playoffs on that nation wide service that are not part of the team only service
Again, things are changing, availability and how we watch sports ( and other content) is evolving.

We are, at the most, five years away from Traditional Providers being unprofitable, only 68 million total subs now, we have been increasing losses every quarter, now at 2.1 million, if that pace does not increase ( it will), that is 40 million gone in 5 years.

Sports was the last thing Traditional Providers/Channels/Broadcasters had almost to themselves, now that has changed, streaming companies are after the rights, since they have tons of cash, they can overpay while someone like ESPN cannot anymore because they have lost 30 million customers‘ per sub fees.

Evidence-Disney/ESPN dropped out of the bidding for NFLST because it became too expensive for them.
 
How can you write that with a straight face, only 10-11 million have access to it, once it goes streaming, over 100 billion.

Wrong.

Twice.

First the population of the USA is not 100 Billion. This is a USA contract. Try to keep up, OK?

But second, every single person in the USA has access to ST. Even back before streaming allowed the sports adverse to opt out, the most they sold was 2M. Niche product.


As far as businesses go, I assume they have the same access, 85% can get it, 15% will be too slow.

You know what they say about assumptions, right?

Fact is you don’t know. But I know that there are millions of businesses that have no other need of video quality internet. And many have no access to it.


Also, DirecTV has all those sports that you are so excited about, yet having all of them could not stop, roughly, 12 Million from leaving in the last 7 years or so.
Yep. Called “people that don’t like sports”.

Again, we are talking about TWO MINUTES of ads. Which can only be “targeted” to the home viewer, not really applicable to the public house. At best it is 1/1000000th of the possible revenue.

You are trying very hard to make this look like what you wish it was, rather than what it is.

It is going to sell about 2M.

It is going to be predicated on first buying something else.

The ordinary CBS and Fox ads will be included.

They will lose money on a cash basis on it.

Many many many businesses will lose access.
 
Again, things are changing, availability and how we watch sports ( and other content) is evolving.

We are, at the most, five years away from Traditional Providers being unprofitable, only 68 million total subs now, we have been increasing losses every quarter, now at 2.1 million, if that pace does not increase ( it will), that is 40 million gone in 5 years.

Sports was the last thing Traditional Providers/Channels/Broadcasters had almost to themselves, now that has changed, streaming companies are after the rights, since they have tons of cash, they can overpay while someone like ESPN cannot anymore because they have lost 30 million customers‘ per sub fees.

Evidence-Disney/ESPN dropped out of the bidding for NFLST because it became too expensive for them.
the one thing about the NFL is all local games on a OTA channel. No way to make games only on ESPN with the NFL.
 
Wrong.

Twice.

First the population of the USA is not 100 Billion. This is a USA contract. Try to keep up, OK?

But second, every single person in the USA has access to ST. Even back before streaming allowed the sports adverse to opt out, the most they sold was 2M. Niche product.




You know what they say about assumptions, right?

Fact is you don’t know. But I know that there are millions of businesses that have no other need of video quality internet. And many have no access to it.



Yep. Called “people that don’t like sports”.

Again, we are talking about TWO MINUTES of ads. Which can only be “targeted” to the home viewer, not really applicable to the public house. At best it is 1/1000000th of the possible revenue.

You are trying very hard to make this look like what you wish it was, rather than what it is.

It is going to sell about 2M.

It is going to be predicated on first buying something else.

The ordinary CBS and Fox ads will be included.

They will lose money on a cash basis on it.

Many many many businesses will lose access.
Isn't playstation access a available to those without satellite?
 
I already posted it up above, the $60 for MLB was a Father’s Day special, same price as last year, it works for me, do not start watching baseball until then anyways.
So, thats a half year price ...
I would not want to wait till June to start watching baseball games.
 
Status
Please reply by conversation.
Top