Google Scores NFL Sunday Ticket Package

[SamCdbs]

Soooooo, you are at work and there is a rule that you cannot be on your phone. And you think that a suspension of ONE THIRD of your work year is appropriate?

The players involved should have been punished. A fine of $50 and a sternly worded note seems appropriate.

 

[meStevo]

Cool story. Discipline is negotiated with the union. Your metaphor is a gross oversimplification.

As demonstrated by Yespage 's now deleted reply joking about league integrity, there's plenty of justification to continue to disallow players to not be able to gamble in any form in team facilities.

Ultimately that's a different debate though, this rule has not materially changed in a long time (at least 5 years), players and staff are regularly briefed on the rules and points of emphasis, there's certainly no doubt that they knew this shouldn't have been done and they did it anyways.

 

[Jimbo]

Cool story. Discipline is negotiated with the union. Your metaphor is a gross oversimplification.

As demonstrated by Yespage 's now deleted reply joking about league integrity, there's plenty of justification to continue to disallow players to not be able to gamble in any form in team facilities.

Ultimately that's a different debate though, this rule has not materially changed in a long time (at least 5 years), players and staff are regularly briefed on the rules and points of emphasis, there's certainly no doubt that they knew this shouldn't have been done and they did it anyways.

Does the part about being "On Team Facilities" have a real part in this ?

Can they gamble if they are at home or outside of the Team Facilities ?

Personally, I think there are a LOT of players that Are gambling (Not NFL mind you, at least I hope not) but not getting caught.

 

[Juan]

Does the part about being "On Team Facilities" have a real part in this ?

Can they gamble if they are at home or outside of the Team Facilities ?

Personally, I think there are a LOT of players that Are gambling (Not NFL mind you, at least I hope not) but not getting caught.

Gambling is why MLB created the position of commisioner of baseball was created..gambling by players has been around a looooong time

 

[Jimbo]

Gambling is why MLB created the position of commisioner of baseball was created..gambling by players has been around a looooong time

Yes, but Gambling NOW is Way different than previously.

 

[SamCdbs]

Gambling is different. Your children will think it normal that every city of any size and every resort of any merit has a casino. And that betting on every sport imaginable via the phone is ordinary.

That is all fine. Restricting sports gambling to just one state with a powerful and corrupt senator was clearly unconstitutional and the Supreme Court said so and then the people of the various states have expanded gambling, specifically sports gambling, and the leagues, including the NFL, have begun an open business relationship with gambling companies.

Which brings me back to the topic. For many gamblers, watching all the games, in all the sports is part of it. YouTube cannot do that. It remains to be seen if the NFL's greed driven commercial venture can.

 

[Juan]

Yes, but Gambling NOW is Way different than previously.

Not really..the problem was never gambling but players throwing games when they gambled. Cough pete rose cough

 

[ncted]

For many gamblers, watching all the games, in all the sports is part of it. YouTube cannot do that.

So, the question is, how many people does that represent? YTTV clearly doesn't think it is enough to justify offering more streams.

 

[Bruce]

Which brings me back to the topic. For many gamblers, watching all the games, in all the sports is part of it. YouTube cannot do that. It remains to be seen if the NFL's greed driven commercial venture can.

Why do the same people keep bringing up this gambling thing with Sunday Ticket, my guess it is a very extreme small percentage that need 8 feeds at the same time.

With Multiview, you get 4 games which counts as one feed, then another feed ( at least one game, maybe another multiview with 4?), then the CBS and Fox games, via YTTV, OTA, Paramount+ or another provider.

Then you can have 7 games minimum on at 1pm and then 4pm, all without those extra box charges DirecTV would charge all year for just so you can watch that many games.

Time to find something else to complain about with Sunday Ticket from the usual suspects.

By the way, Sam and Juan, are you getting ST?

Discount goes away in a month, if not, why are you complaining about something you are never going to get?

I ordered it, cost me $0 with my Gift Card loophole, if I purchased it thru DirecTV, it would of cost me, at least, $1700 for the first year.

Or more with extra boxes if I gambled.

 

[SamCdbs]

People bring up customers and their needs, because the customer is always right. EVERY customer.

YouTube is attempting to serve one type of customer. The "geographically illogical" fan. These are mostly people who have moved and refuse to acclimatize to their new home (not saying that is somehow "wrong", it just is what it is) or people who just decided they are a fan of team in a city they probably have never been to, with a small number of people who based their NFL loyalty on college football and where some past star plays.

Other people have other desires. They have demonstrated their willingness to pay for what they want, via extra receiver fees. YouTube won't (not can't, won't) serve them.

But then we move on to the unanswered question, which is the NFL's greed based commercial service. Exactly who will carry it and how will it be delivered? Its May. Will DirecTV do it? DISH is really a non-starter for a true sports bar, for obvious reasons. That leaves the internet, probably with some proprietary device or an app. I was having a discussion with a friend of mine just yesterday. He owns a bar. Inside the city limits of a city of 50K in a metro of 200K. In a strip mall. Talking about streaming (he is a Cardinals fan and wants to watch the games). Cannot get good internet, because no provider will run service into a commercial zoned area, because nobody but him needs or wants it. The same is true all across the country.

 

[Bruce]

People bring up customers and their needs, because the customer is always right. EVERY customer.

YouTube is attempting to serve one type of customer. The "geographically illogical" fan. These are mostly people who have moved and refuse to acclimatize to their new home (not saying that is somehow "wrong", it just is what it is) or people who just decided they are a fan of team in a city they probably have never been to, with a small number of people who based their NFL loyalty on college football and where some past star plays.

Which is the majority of fans that would get ST.

Other people have other desires. They have demonstrated their willingness to pay for what they want, via extra receiver fees. YouTube won't (not can't, won't) serve them.

And YT has figured out that extremely low number of fans is not worth it to them.

And you are ignoring the fact with multiview they will get, at least 7 games at 1pm and 4pm, which has to be pretty close to all of them.

But then we move on to the unanswered question, which is the NFL's greed based commercial service. Exactly who will carry it and how will it be delivered? Its May. Will DirecTV do it? DISH is really a non-starter for a true sports bar, for obvious reasons.

Not the NFL‘s greed, they would have been happy to let DirecTV have it as was the plan, except DirecTV is not trying to spend any extra right now, trying to get ready for a merger/sale/or the end in a few years.

That leaves the internet, probably with some proprietary device or an app. I was having a discussion with a friend of mine just yesterday. He owns a bar. Inside the city limits of a city of 50K in a metro of 200K. In a strip mall. Talking about streaming (he is a Cardinals fan and wants to watch the games). Cannot get good internet, because no provider will run service into a commercial zoned area, because nobody but him needs or wants it. The same is true all across the country.

Just because that is true in one area does not make it true for others.

My last employment in Michigan before I retired, from 2014-2019, they had AT&T DSL when I started, in 2015 Comcast was available , up to 1G speeds ( expensive compared to whatI was paying at my House), my boss went for the 150 speed, cost was $145 a month with 3 phone lines, by the time. I left, it was up to $185 a month, but the speed increased to 300 down.

That was in a Commercial Area, no houses near at all.

Now do I believe my experience is true for all the United States, of course not, but it is getting better real fast, Comcast, Charter, etc knows, since Residential Growth, is pretty limited now, so they really need to expand in other areas, Commercial Distribution is about the only thing left for them to expand to.

 

[Juan]

So, the question is, how many people does that represent? YTTV clearly doesn't think it is enough to justify offering more streams.

They are more concerned about account sharing

 

[ncted]

They are more concerned about account sharing

True, as well as the corollary: they are more concerned about making money. Clearly they think it is better to limit streams to prevent account sharing than to make gamblers perfectly happy.

 

[Juan]

True, as well as the corollary: they are more concerned about making money. Clearly they think it is better to limit streams to prevent account sharing than to make gamblers perfectly happy.

They are not charging enough to make money...they are trying to make youtube tv profitable..but without something like a 2 year contract tied to the discounted price..its gonna be a tough road tovhor

 

[ncted]

They are not charging enough to make money...they are trying to make youtube tv profitable..but without something like a 2 year contract tied to the discounted price..its gonna be a tough road tovhor

Assuming you know everything about their business model, you may be right. I think there is also a possibility that they are going to monetize ST differently than D* did.

 

[meStevo]

They are not charging enough to make money...they are trying to make youtube tv profitable..but without something like a 2 year contract tied to the discounted price..its gonna be a tough road tovhor

Google just reported earnings, how much is YouTube TV losing and how much per customer are they losing for each Sunday Ticket subscriber?

.... or is this just another made up negative from you guys? Unless you can answer those two questions, I don't think you can say the above, and think we all know nobody's holding their breath for a straight answer.

 

[Bruce]

They are not charging enough to make money...they are trying to make youtube tv profitable..but without something like a 2 year contract tied to the discounted price..its gonna be a tough road tovhor

I see you moved away from Gambling and back to Google will not make enough money, it is like there are no more things to bring up and try to make the move of ST to streaming negative, now a rerun of old material.

 

[SamCdbs]

Which is the majority of fans that would get ST.

Link to that? Or just YOUR opinion?

And YT has figured out that extremely low number of fans is not worth it to them.

Link to that? Or just YOUR opinion?

And you are ignoring the fact with multiview they will get, at least 7 games at 1pm and 4pm, which has to be pretty close to all of them.

On 1/4th of a screen?

Not the NFL‘s greed, they would have been happy to let DirecTV have it as was the plan, except DirecTV is not trying to spend any extra right now, trying to get ready for a merger/sale/or the end in a few years.

DirecTV should be PAID, not paying, to distribute ST to the commercial market. No one else can get the job done. The NFL, in its greed to squeeze the last drop out of the consumer, is going down another path. A path that won't serve the customer.

Just because that is true in one area does not make it true for others.

Correct. Just as what YOU think is the right choice for YOU is not for everyone, and the fact that YOU made certain choices does not mean that you are some sort of harbinger of some trend, some sort of genius early adopter of things the rest of us rubes have not picked up on yet. Rather YOU made what YOU want. Other people have different ideas.

But, right. Its not true in every area. But what about the ones that it is true for? Why not take care of EVERY customer?

Now do I believe my experience is true for all the United States, of course not, but it is getting better real fast, Comcast, Charter, etc knows, since Residential Growth, is pretty limited now, so they really need to expand in other areas, Commercial Distribution is about the only thing left for them to expand to.

Except, most commercial businesses, have no need for internet beyond VOIP, text level internet and the credit card machine.

 

[Juan]

Assuming you know everything about their business model, you may be right. I think there is also a possibility that they are going to monetize ST differently than D* did.

I know what they paid ( 2 to 2.5 billion) for just residential..directv paid 1.5 billion including commercial rights...and we know there a roughly 2 million customers for out of market football...so we can safely say google is losing money on Sunday ticket at the current price point..but will youtubetv pick up enough subs to be profitable with sunday ticket?..only time will tell

 

[meStevo]

I know what they paid ( 2 to 2.5 billion) for just residential..directv paid 1.5 billion including commercial rights...and we know there a roughly 2 million customers for out of market football...so we can safely say google is losing money on Sunday ticket at the current price point..but will youtubetv pick up enough subs to be profitable with sunday ticket?..only time will tell

This makes a lot of assumptions though. What does each customer cost DirecTV? What about the cost per customer for Youtube? How much ancillary revenue does the Sunday Ticket customer bring in? Are they more or less valuable to YouTube TV or to DirecTV? And then how does standalone factor into that?

The reality is you don't know, but based on the smallest amount of possible information (that even then you aren't able to be specific about because you don't know that either) you are inventing your desired conclusion.