DIRECTV unlikely to keep NFL Sunday Ticket

[Jimbo]

I thought network carriage agreements prescribed the packages that the channel was included in. Disney wanted Disney Channel and ESPN/2 included in the base package. Viacom wanted Nickelodeon and MTV, etc.

Sure, not literally what was charged, but essentially forced DirecTV into what to include for what was charged.

I'm sure that plays into where channels are in packages,, but I'm not sure how that would apply to the ST.

 

[slice1900]

If you're citing a metric I'd like to see your source, thanks. Looks like another cyclical goalpost shuffle train of thoughts from Juan again.

Supposedly over half the people getting NFLST only watch one team's games. They're a Vikings fan living in LA or a Giants fan living in Denver.

 

[Jimbo]

Supposedly over half the people getting NFLST only watch one team's games. They're a Vikings fan living in LA or a Giants fan living in Denver.

That sounds reasonable .

 

[SamCdbs]

Not quite. The ratings show people watch their home team

Quite. Millions of people watch NO SPORTS AT ALL.

The number of viewers for each home team are range from 20,000 to 500,000. When you add up home teams, millions watch sports, and it beats most nationwide cable networks on any given night.

Sure. Sports are popular. But millions of people WATCH NO SPORTS AT ALL.

This is rather dismissive of women. Many women watch sports. Many women participate in sports.

Did I mention women?

Again, no. Most of the soccer people I know (hardcore fans) follow other sports, too.]

Most I know don't. Most found soccer because they have some sort of disdain for American things.

Australian rules football was a mainstay of early ESPN. We know where ESPN is today.

Where is Fox Soccer Plus, which has had that sport for 20 years?

Sunday Ticket will be a loss leader for whoever gets it.

This is correct.

 

[RONZ]

One area that no one has mentioned is what’s the long term affect. I know that Sinclair is looking to offer its regional sport channels over the air encrypted in the new ATSC3.0 format. However this is still in test today and is a long way from being offered. My understanding is there are a couple of stations in test with their local RSN but nothing available. Over the air subscription TV will be making a comeback in the future with many cable channels on the service. This would eliminate the internet connection which is required for streaming services

 

[Bruce]

Over the air subscription TV will be making a comeback in the future with many cable channels on the service.

They did that when I was a kid, it was called ON TV, had movies a few months out of theaters ( before HBO and Showtime back then), sporting events also, it failed and ended up in bankruptcy.

When they started in 1977, most people was still using TV antennas and it still failed.

This would eliminate the internet connection which is required for streaming services

Everyone basically needs the internet ( banking and bill paying for a couple of examples), might as well use it.

These pie in the sky OTA ideas always pop up but never work out.

Most do not use them or know they can, only 18.6 million homes are using antennas, that is out of 130 million households.

Nielsen Sees Uptick in Over-the-Air Households

18.6 million homes using antennas, or 15% of the U.S.

www.nexttv.com

 

[navychop]

IF ATSC 3 succeeds, it will likely include some encrypted fee based services.

 

[Juan]

They did that when I was a kid, it was called ON TV, had movies a few months out of theaters ( before HBO and Showtime back then), sporting events also, it failed and ended up in bankruptcy.

When they started in 1977, most people was still using TV antennas and it still failed.

Everyone basically needs the internet ( banking and bill paying for a couple of examples), might as well use it.

These pie in the sky OTA ideas always pop up but never work out.

Most do not use them or know they can, only 18.6 million homes are using antennas, that is out of 130 million households.

Nielsen Sees Uptick in Over-the-Air Households

18.6 million homes using antennas, or 15% of the U.S.

www.nexttv.com

Golly gee..I wonder how we did all those things without the internet in the 80s and 90s

 

[slice1900]

One area that no one has mentioned is what’s the long term affect. I know that Sinclair is looking to offer its regional sport channels over the air encrypted in the new ATSC3.0 format. However this is still in test today and is a long way from being offered. My understanding is there are a couple of stations in test with their local RSN but nothing available. Over the air subscription TV will be making a comeback in the future with many cable channels on the service. This would eliminate the internet connection which is required for streaming services

People are going to have an internet connection regardless, so a cable replacement service that relies on ATSC 3.0 has no advantage over one that relies on internet delivery. Most of the places where the internet is less available are also places where OTA TV reception is less available.

Even my tech averse 80+ year old mom considers an internet connection a necessity, though I was able to help her save money and avoid outages that annoyed her by switching to a prepaid cellular broadband plan.

 

[Bruce]

Golly gee..I wonder how we did all those things without the internet in the 80s and 90s

Even before that, but things have changed, everything is so easy now with the internet, who wants to go back.

 

[RONZ]

They did that when I was a kid, it was called ON TV, had movies a few months out of theaters ( before HBO and Showtime back then), sporting events also, it failed and ended up in bankruptcy.

When they started in 1977, most people was still using TV antennas and it still failed.

Everyone basically needs the internet ( banking and bill paying for a couple of examples), might as well use it.

These pie in the sky OTA ideas always pop up but never work out.

Most do not use them or know they can, only 18.6 million homes are using antennas, that is out of 130 million households.

Nielsen Sees Uptick in Over-the-Air Households

18.6 million homes using antennas, or 15% of the U.S.

www.nexttv.com

ON-TV was a sync suppression system that you could see on a UHF channel. Encrypted. With ATSC 3.0 they can run channels in both normal mode and encrypted mode at the same time. However your TV will not allow you to see any sign of the encrypted signal. You forget that many areas of the USA still do not have internet access because there simply is no cheap way of distribution for it. I will add that with ATSC 3.0 unlike ON-TV can have many channels. In the case
Of ON-TV they were renting time on a UHF channel typically at a rate of 200 dollars a hour. The. Blonder Tong encryption system that ON used was not very hard to defeat rendering it outdated One last
comment the Blonder Tung design was developed in the 1960’s

 

[Juan]

Even before that, but things have changed, everything is so easy now with the internet, who wants to go back.

Those who live in rural areas with no internet

 

[Bruce]

You forget that many areas of the USA still do not have internet access because there simply is no cheap way of distribution for it.

For the 982nd time, Corporations do not care about the 15% who cannot get broadband, they care about the 85% who can.

And then there are options like Star Link, I know it is pricey, but still cheaper then Hughesnet, also I have read that folks in rural area are paying $75-90 for real icky DSL type speed.

I will add that with ATSC 3.0 unlike ON-TV can have many channels.

As slice posted, if you cannot get good broadband, it is doubtful you can get good signal with a antenna.

 

[AZ.]

ON-TV was a sync suppression system that you could see on a UHF channel. Encrypted. With ATSC 3.0 they can run channels in both normal mode and encrypted mode at the same time. However your TV will not allow you to see any sign of the encrypted signal. You forget that many areas of the USA still do not have internet access because there simply is no cheap way of distribution for it. I will add that with ATSC 3.0 unlike ON-TV can have many channels. In the case
Of ON-TV they were renting time on a UHF channel typically at a rate of 200 dollars a hour. The. Blonder Tong encryption system that ON used was not very hard to defeat rendering it outdated One last
comment the Blonder Tung design was developed in the 1960’s

Wouldnt that need more bandwidth in theory?....Running to data streams at once? or lose picture quality big time?

 

[RONZ]

For the 982nd time, Corporations do not care about the 15% who cannot get broadband, they care about the 85% who can.

And then there are options like Star Link, I know it is pricey, but still cheaper then Hughesnet, also I have read that folks in rural area are paying $75-90 for real icky DSL type speed.


As slice posted, if you cannot get good broadband, it is doubtful you can get good signal with a antenna.

Not true, for example: The Traverse City markets has 28 countries. All of networks over the air broadcast have high power repeaters 3 each per network which is at 100% coverage. In towns like Red Oak get TV with no issues but no internet. I would ask that look at the news there are many many stories about the government expanding internet service to areas like this. Also when service is available like say Hughesnet the speed is 3Mbps for down load and not even 1Mbps for upload. Which is worthless for streaming

 

[RONZ]

Wouldnt that need more bandwidth in theory?....Running to data streams at once? or lose picture quality big time?

Not with ATSC 3.0. Also multi-path signal issues becomes a thing of the past.

 

[Juan]

For the 982nd time, Corporations do not care about the 15% who cannot get broadband, they care about the 85% who can.

And then there are options like Star Link, I know it is pricey, but still cheaper then Hughesnet, also I have read that folks in rural area are paying $75-90 for real icky DSL type speed.


As slice posted, if you cannot get good broadband, it is doubtful you can get good signal with a antenna.

They do if its 200 million sitting on the table...guess we will have to wait and see your reaction when directv cuts that deal

 

[John2021]

don't who ever closes on the deal have the right to sell the rights to the sat casters or who ever wants it?

 

[Bruce]

don't who ever closes on the deal have the right to sell the rights to the sat casters or who ever wants it?

The only thing we know is Roger Goodell said it will be a exclusive and it looks to be going to a streaming provider.

The other thing is, the last 2 bidders are Amazon and Apple, everyone else have dropped out.

Lastly, DirecTV has said they want to talk to the winner, but there have been no talks yet because there is no winner.

 

[John2021]

The only thing we know is Roger Goodell said it will be a exclusive and it looks to be going to a streaming provider.

The other thing is, the last 2 bidders are Amazon and Apple, everyone else have dropped out.

Lastly, DirecTV has said they want to talk to the winner, but there have been no talks yet because there is no winner.

this should get interesting!!!