DIRECTV unlikely to keep NFL Sunday Ticket

Status
Please reply by conversation.
If Google gets it, will they require you to sub to YouTube TV to get NFL ST? I mean it's cheaper than DTV, but I have no intentions of leaving DTV, not for a while, if they decide to make you sub that's BS, I get you have to sub to Prime(which is like $16.19 a month for me, big deal), & Apple TV+($4.99 a month, big deal), I'm not paying for a service I don't want to use, but I guess if I want the Ticket I'm gonna have to, but if the NFL wants to get more subs they better make it so you're not required to pay for additional services, I get you needed DTV to get the ST, but I just find it to be BS if I have to sub to YTTV, as for pricing, I hope it's not above the current Max price, which is close to $400, I have it free this year, but am willing to pay the $400 for ST, and hope for payment plans like with DTV.
I doubt you'd be required to subscribe to YTTV.

I'd think it more likely be an introductory offer, sub to NFST and you get YTTV for free or significantly discounted for the duration of the season.

The other services, the prereq makes more sense, but could take a similar approach there too.

A lot of value getting people into the ecosystem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JUCJ85
I doubt you'd be required to subscribe to YTTV.

I'd think it more likely be an introductory offer, sub to NFST and you get YTTV for free or significantly discounted for the duration of the season.

The other services, the prereq makes more sense, but could take a similar approach there too.

A lot of value getting people into the ecosystem.

If Amazon or Apple get it, I expect they will require you have to have a yearly Amazon Prime or Apple TV+ membership to be eligible to pay the $300 or whatever to get NFLST. They won't allow monthly subscribers to get it, to prevent people from signing up for just Sept-Dec.

Amazon will probably require the FULL Prime membership not the cheaper video only Prime - because the whole point of getting NFLST for them would be to place ads during those 1-2 minutes an hour of local ad insertions to get you to buy stuff on Amazon (with targeted ads based on what you have bought previously, browsed previously, or talked about in front of your Alexa) and have it shipped free to your door.

All rumors have suggested it down to Apple & Amazon, doubt Google is still in the running.
 
Your record for correct predictions is noted.

What is so hard to believe that if you open it up to everyone, there will be more subscribers.

The vast majority of the population do not want DirecTV and hence, NFLST is not available to them

The vast majority of the population do want and have broadband ( 85% have broadband) so NFLST is available to them.

And as I stated, 26% of NFL Fans that do want ST at $300 is, in my opinion, too high.

But 6-10% is more realistic, which is still enough to make a profit, specially with advertising.
Was it noted as $300 as a STARTING price ?
Once people start seeing it go up the typical increase yearly, it may affect many.
$300 then $329 next year and $349 the next and so forth.
 
If Amazon or Apple get it, I expect they will require you have to have a yearly Amazon Prime or Apple TV+ membership to be eligible to pay the $300 or whatever to get NFLST. They won't allow monthly subscribers to get it, to prevent people from signing up for just Sept-Dec.

Amazon will probably require the FULL Prime membership not the cheaper video only Prime - because the whole point of getting NFLST for them would be to place ads during those 1-2 minutes an hour of local ad insertions to get you to buy stuff on Amazon (with targeted ads based on what you have bought previously, browsed previously, or talked about in front of your Alexa) and have it shipped free to your door.

All rumors have suggested it down to Apple & Amazon, doubt Google is still in the running.
I didn't know there was a cheaper Amazon option out there ....
I thought Monthly or Yearly was the only option, is there another ?
I pay #139, is that the Full option ?
 
Was it scrambled?
Every game was in the clear at first...Then Digicipher(was that the name?) came along and you subscribed for channel packages, and season ticket. You could pick and choose programming.
 
Every game was in the clear at first...Then Digicipher(was that the name?) came along and you subscribed for channel packages, and season ticket. You could pick and choose programming.
Echostar used to sell alot if those
 
I didn't know there was a cheaper Amazon option out there ....
I thought Monthly or Yearly was the only option, is there another ?
I pay #139, is that the Full option ?
Here is the pricing-

Current Amazon Prime membership pricing:
  • $14.99 per month
  • $139 per year
  • Prime Video membership is $8.99 per month

Current Amazon Prime Student membership pricing:

  • $7.49 per month
  • $69 per year

So if you do just the video, yearly cost is $107.88 ( 12 x $8.99), a savings of $31.12.

I have Prime for the shipping, saving $31.12 to get just the video is not worth it.
 
I mean, almost every sentence has an issue here.
Main issue is being correct.
It's been proven by participants in this thread - myself included, that not everyone who wants Sunday Ticket wants or can get DirecTV.
1-800--DIRECTV.

Now you know how.

2M.
So please, show some actual research demonstrating this fallacy you keep repeating as fact.

Number of people out of the 100% of the country that have ST, 2M. Really all you need to know.

Advertising opportunities are far more than 2 minutes per hour, and the value beyond just the subscription is significant to both the brand and ancillary services - even if no other services are required to subscribe.

WRONG. All ST is, is the Fox or CBS productions with the Fox or CBS commercials included. All the provider gets is the 2 minutes per hour the local station gets. Fact.
Yeah, take a look at them ratings. You guys like to have this one both ways... you say people only watch their team, but then throw around things like 20-30m people watch the NFL weekly. Which is it?

What it isn't is the 100M or more upon which the laughable "it can be profitable" lunacy is predicated.

So how about some citations for your side, yeah?



SURE. Here is a typical week from mid-season last year.


Here is another.



Where are your 100M?

I'll wait. BTW, the Super Bowl got 99M, and probably a third of those were watching the halftime or just being sociable. The NFL is the most popular thing on TV. It gets maybe 30M for a particular game. Which, for our purposes, we will say is "free". The idea that there are 10s of millions of people, or even the 6 to 8 the poster stated, wanting to pay to watch other games on at exactly the same time, is, simply put, uninformed and laughable.

There are, BTW, no "sides" here. There are those of us who understand this business. We understand that:

- This is a niche package.
- It is a "loss leader" for whoever sells it
- The only purpose of the package is to first predicate the purchase of something else first before access is granted, just like DirecTV.
- The CBS and Fox ads will be shown. Discussion of selling ads is an irrelevancy.
- The internet is not ready to serve the entire country, especially rural people and the commercial side, like DBS is. It may never be.

And those who wish those facts were not true and thing yelling "no" and demanding links to things that are self-evident (and when proven wrong just ignore that) is an argument.

It isn't.
 
Sunday Ticket was originally a C/Ku Band service. It was $99 originally.
My Dads Friend in Maine had a Big Ugly Dish and my Dad would spend Sundays watching the games at his house. If I remember he got it before they scrabbled the channels and watched Football from around the country. Great memories. He actually recorded some of them. I haven't had time to transfer them from VHS tape. I do know he did eventually purchase the Sunday Ticket on C-Band and moved onto to Directv before his death. His widow his tape collection including many of the early days of C-band.
 
Once again, I and many others that have posted in this thread have stated we want it and do not have DirecTV.
You show em.
It would cost a average of $200 a month at least, over 24 months since I need 11 boxes, just because you claim that you only spend $65 a month does not mean everyone does
I don't spend anything (directly). But that is the cost of the package. The only time I watch more than one TV at a time is when I am enjoying the luxury of multiple sports in a public place. Universally on DirecTV.
Just like DirecTV which would costs me over $4000 extra just to get NFLST from DirecTV.
OK. Except, of course, whoever has it next year will predicate it as well
Have you ever tried YTTV, it had a major upgrade about 3 months ago, the guide is just as good as DirecTV or Dish.
Does it have, with one tiny exception (Pac 12) every legitimate channel there is, including my local home sports teams?

No?

Then I will stick with the luxury of DirecTV. Life is too short.

Internet has targeted advertising, which takes in a lot more money then the regular way.
I did the math on that upthred. First, it is 2 minutes/hour. Second, no one pays attention to the ads. But, third, no targeted ads are far less expensive per viewer than a national OTA ad. Ad income is an irrelevancy to this discussion.
Also has that Learn More Box that pops up during a commercial, click on that means even more money for YTTV for example.
Good for them. What channel is the baseball game on?
Now you bring up ratings again, you have been incorrect before on that topic, like when you posted that the RSNs get incredible ratings ( and without evidence or links), yet I have posted they do not ( and I posted prove and links).
Yes. I'll wait on your explanation of why the "100M fans" of football don't, umm, watch football.

Do you dispute the ratings? Do you wish to prove that, somehow, 70M people are secretly watching the NFL without Nielsen noticing.
RSNs get very low ratings, like the Yankees only average 400,000 out of 20 million in the NY metro area, that is only 2% of the potential audience.
That is a HUGE rating. In today's fractured multi-channel environment. Day in, day out. Which is why they get the big bucks.


 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr Tony
We spent the weekend with some friends on the Space Coast and got to talk to friends about this. Some working for the Artemis Program. They have the money to buy the Sunday Ticket but many mentioned it was too high considering you really watch one game at 1 pm and another at 4 pm. And most of the time the best games especially at 4 pm are shown nationwide. They will never do this but considering what you get when you buy other sports packages you think the NFL would let you just purchase games either per week or for just one team. Just my opinion and the opinion of others. The Price is mentioned all the time as being too high for what you get.
 
Last edited:
Speaking of the NFL somebody mentioned years ago when the NFL had a website shut down that showed what games were being broadcast in what region. Regional Maps. The owner of the website fought it and won because all they were doing was providing information about what games were being broadcast where you lived. They didn't provide links or anything. Just maps.
 
Speaking of the NFL somebody mentioned years ago when the NFL had a website shut down that showed what games were being broadcast in what region. Regional Maps. The owner of the website fought it and won because all they were doing was providing information about what games were being broadcast where you lived. They didn't provide links or anything. Just maps.
I remember that site, the506 or something like that, I remember checking that every week to see what game was in my area ahead of time, course I could of just checked the guide lol.
 
If Amazon or Apple get it, I expect they will require you have to have a yearly Amazon Prime or Apple TV+ membership to be eligible to pay the $300 or whatever to get NFLST. They won't allow monthly subscribers to get it, to prevent people from signing up for just Sept-Dec.

Amazon will probably require the FULL Prime membership not the cheaper video only Prime - because the whole point of getting NFLST for them would be to place ads during those 1-2 minutes an hour of local ad insertions to get you to buy stuff on Amazon (with targeted ads based on what you have bought previously, browsed previously, or talked about in front of your Alexa) and have it shipped free to your door.

All rumors have suggested it down to Apple & Amazon, doubt Google is still in the running.
If the NFL wants as many people as possible they better let people with the monthly subscription to get it, I pay the $29.99 for Apple One, and $16.19 after taxes for Amazon Prime, I would go to yearly on Prime, not sure how Apple would work, I get a better deal with them then paying yearly. Either way I'll have to do what I have to do, but they're making this more difficult than it has to be then, just pick someone announce it, details, and all, ridiculous that week 1 is tomorrow and no one knows who's getting the ST next year. NFL Needs to get off their high horse, and stop being money hungry.
 
I remember that site, the506 or something like that, I remember checking that every week to see what game was in my area ahead of time, course I could of just checked the guide lol.
That was the argument the website made to defend itself. Providing a guide only for regions of the United States. Not sure how the NFL actually got them shut down at that time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JUCJ85
I remember that site, the506 or something like that, I remember checking that every week to see what game was in my area ahead of time, course I could of just checked the guide lol.
506sports.com
JP still does it and was even mentioned in awefulannouncing
 
  • Like
Reactions: JUCJ85
My Dads Friend in Maine had a Big Ugly Dish and my Dad would spend Sundays watching the games at his house. If I remember he got it before they scrabbled the channels and watched Football from around the country. Great memories. He actually recorded some of them. I haven't had time to transfer them from VHS tape. I do know he did eventually purchase the Sunday Ticket on C-Band and moved onto to Directv before his death. His widow his tape collection including many of the early days of C-band.
With no commercials
 
Main issue is being correct.

1-800--DIRECTV.

Now you know how.

2M.


Number of people out of the 100% of the country that have ST, 2M. Really all you need to know.



WRONG. All ST is, is the Fox or CBS productions with the Fox or CBS commercials included. All the provider gets is the 2 minutes per hour the local station gets. Fact.


What it isn't is the 100M or more upon which the laughable "it can be profitable" lunacy is predicated.




SURE. Here is a typical week from mid-season last year.


Here is another.



Where are your 100M?

I'll wait. BTW, the Super Bowl got 99M, and probably a third of those were watching the halftime or just being sociable. The NFL is the most popular thing on TV. It gets maybe 30M for a particular game. Which, for our purposes, we will say is "free". The idea that there are 10s of millions of people, or even the 6 to 8 the poster stated, wanting to pay to watch other games on at exactly the same time, is, simply put, uninformed and laughable.

There are, BTW, no "sides" here. There are those of us who understand this business. We understand that:

- This is a niche package.
- It is a "loss leader" for whoever sells it
- The only purpose of the package is to first predicate the purchase of something else first before access is granted, just like DirecTV.
- The CBS and Fox ads will be shown. Discussion of selling ads is an irrelevancy.
- The internet is not ready to serve the entire country, especially rural people and the commercial side, like DBS is. It may never be.

And those who wish those facts were not true and thing yelling "no" and demanding links to things that are self-evident (and when proven wrong just ignore that) is an argument.

It isn't.

It's wild how you just ignore anything fatal to your argument and pretend to know everything - without being able to cite anything you claim. You'd do real well in a political discussion, but in one based on facts it's a big swing and a miss as you fundamentally don't seem to understand both ratings, economies of scale and the opportunities provided by moving to a streaming platform - and have no interest in understanding them because it would invalidate dozens of your posts on the topic.

For example, since you posted them to rebut the '100m viewers' PR, how many NFL viewers are you suggesting they get weekly based on your links?
 
Status
Please reply by conversation.