Tampa8
Supporting Founder - I'll stand up and say so
Original poster
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Direct TV Last year for Sunday Ticket?
- Thread starter Tampa8
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 85
- Views 7K
- Status
This guy is making a whole heck of a lot out of a change in a dependent clause in the fine print nobody reads.
Maybe AT&T just had a new lawyer who decided she could jazz up the disclaimers better than the previous empty suit.
Maybe AT&T just had a new lawyer who decided she could jazz up the disclaimers better than the previous empty suit.
No, this isn't the first story that's reported that NFL Sunday Ticket may move away from DTV. That's been floating around for a few months now.
Yes, given the possible options now available to the NFL for distributing its product they'd be crazy not to look at any and all offers. Plus, while sat TV is not going away tomorrow it is on its last legs and the NFL sees that as well.
I could easily see Amazon picking up Ticket and offering it free to prime members while charging for stand-alone subscribers.
Why not just open it up to who ever wants it. Give it to cable and sat and streaming. The NFL could make a lot more money by offering it to a wider audience.
Simple. DirecTV loses money on NFLST. The total number of subscribers and what they pay is LESS than AT&T pays the NFL. That simple. This is because, and you can argue if this is right or wrong, it doesn't matter, DTV management THINKS it is right, people get the service to get NFLST.
If the NFL somehow could DIRECTLY sell the package to every consumer that wanted it and keep ALL of the money for itself, this is LESS than it gets from AT&T.
Wasn't that a big selling point for ST, exclusively on DTV. I'm sure there was a portion of subscribers that bought DTV because of ST. That might not be true anymore, if the NFL could cut out the middle man and sell it themselves over the top they would.
Right. Well, maybe the NFL could sell ST directly to consumers via an OTT package and make as much as they're getting now from AT&T by pricing it lower but attracting more subscribers. I don't know.
But as it's distributed currently, being an exclusive add-on/freebie from DTV, that obviously reduces the potential number of subscribers. And since AT&T is getting less in ST subscriber fees than they're paying the NFL to be the exclusive distributor, AT&T would rightly view ST as more of a marketing expense, something done to attract and retain subscribers to DTV in general.
But given everything that AT&T has said lately about DTV -- they see it as something in irreversible decline -- and given the fact that AT&T is deeply in debt from their two major acquisitions and they're committed to cranking out cash now to try to pay big chunks of it down, I don't know if I would bet on AT&T choosing to continue losing money on ST. If AT&T is trying to cut spending, does it make sense to continue shelling out cash on ST to prop up their satellite product which is bleeding subscribers anyway?
Directv had to include that language, since the NFL has the right to end the contract early. It doesn't mean Directv wants to drop it or plans to drop it, just that dropping it is a possibility if the NFL exercises that option and Directv doesn't do a new deal with them.
Even if the NFL exercises that option, they are not going to go exclusive with a streamer because there's no way anyone would pay them close to what Directv does for an exclusive. So they'd make a deal with say Amazon or Apple or whoever and then talk to others. Directv would want to keep it for their commercial customers, but they'd be willing to pay a lot less without that exclusivity (and even less if it other cable/satellite providers got it so they might lose some of those commercial customers)
Directv "loses money" on NFLST if you only count subscription revenue, but the real profit figures for it would also count all the people who subscribe mainly/only because of NFLST. How many times have we seen posters complain about Directv's prices or whatever and say they have no choice because of NFLST. They probably have one or two million subscribers who are with Directv only because of NFLST. They aren't dumb, they are making money on having NFLST.
Even if the NFL exercises that option, they are not going to go exclusive with a streamer because there's no way anyone would pay them close to what Directv does for an exclusive. So they'd make a deal with say Amazon or Apple or whoever and then talk to others. Directv would want to keep it for their commercial customers, but they'd be willing to pay a lot less without that exclusivity (and even less if it other cable/satellite providers got it so they might lose some of those commercial customers)
Directv "loses money" on NFLST if you only count subscription revenue, but the real profit figures for it would also count all the people who subscribe mainly/only because of NFLST. How many times have we seen posters complain about Directv's prices or whatever and say they have no choice because of NFLST. They probably have one or two million subscribers who are with Directv only because of NFLST. They aren't dumb, they are making money on having NFLST.
Could this somehow effect DTV over IP? Stephenson said that DTV Now could not do NFL Sunday Ticket. What if they got rid of NFL Sunday Ticket and then decided to just have DTV Now on the C71KW box and then say DTV Now on that box is close enough to the full DTV on the internet? Then don't do the full DTV over the IP. This way they could revaluate their channel lineup like they said they were going to do.
In other words, what I already said, which is that NFLST is a marketing expense to attract and retain subscribers to a DTV base package.
Maybe. Who knows? We don't have access to their internal figures. And perhaps buying exclusive rights to NFLST was a net money-maker for DTV in the past but their analysis is that it won't be going forward as the TV landscape continues to shift out from underneath them.
I think both sides, AT&T and the NFL, are trying to figure out what makes the most sense for themselves with regard to NFLST. We'll see what happens...
The TV landscape is only shifting for people who don't watch sports. People who watch sports still need an MVPD subscription, and people who want to watch out of market NFL games still have to get Directv or go somewhere that has Directv, with a few exceptions. If the NFL stands pat, that will still be true through the end of the contract. Cord cutting isn't practical for sports fans now or in the near term.
The NFL would lose all there bars with OTT only. Unless they give them free GOOD uncapped internet / with no Throttling for some of them that maybe Cell or satellite internet
cable commercial customers?? Comcast will need to Rush X1 out to Commercial customers and let them have it as TV only subs as well.
Right in that article, it says Direct or ATT has not said this ... yet the title of the article sounds like theres no chance of them having it after this current year ....
Talk about click bait.
Fwiw, theres always a chance that 1. ATT doesn't want to pony up 15 to 20 BILLION for it any longer, it was 12 Billion last time around .. I wouldn't blame them.
2. theres no reason why it can't go to other companies as well and D* still has it as well.
Theres a big difference between getting rid of a product and sharing it.
Talk about click bait.
Fwiw, theres always a chance that 1. ATT doesn't want to pony up 15 to 20 BILLION for it any longer, it was 12 Billion last time around .. I wouldn't blame them.
2. theres no reason why it can't go to other companies as well and D* still has it as well.
Theres a big difference between getting rid of a product and sharing it.
Well, if the NFL doesn't opt to sell exclusive distribution rights for NFLST to one company -- AT&T or whoever -- for a big lump sum, I would think they would instead choose to maximize distribution of the product. So basically do the same thing that HBO, Showtime and Starz do: offer the NFLST subscription as a standalone OTT service (distributed through the app stores run by Apple, Google, Amazon, and Roku), but also as an add-on to any MVPD (cable, satellite, telco) that wanted to carry it.
So a bar could have TV service from their local cable company and still get NFLST that way.
From the NFL's perspective, I don't know why they would ONLY want to offer it via OTT subscription UNLESS they were to sell it for a big lump sum to, say, Amazon to exclusively distribute it. And, of course, Amazon only offers their video content via OTT. I guess the question for the NFL is whether they could make more money by lowering the price somewhat and selling it anywhere and everywhere possible to a much larger number of subscribers or if they're better off just selling it for exclusive distribution through a single partner who wants to use NFLST as a marketing/advertising tool to drive sales of their core services.
You missed a decimal point. They were paying $1.5 billion a year with the new contract (I think that was an average, so it started lower and went up higher over time)
Still, its a Considerable amountof cash that others wouldn't pay.
Fwiw, I noticed another change to the TOS for ST ....
Not only did they change the " Provided D* still has the rights (paraphrasing).
Also noticed a differenct change .... the part where you have to cancel prior to the start of the seson.
Now is you have to cancel up until the 2nd week of the season ... (that I noticed on Awful announcing article)
- Status
