Netflix and Christmas day games

I don't begrudge the NFL either but I question their strategy. The NFL is founded on availability and tradition. When it's no longer readily available, the fans will find different traditions. Right now the NFL is the only game in town but they are cracking the door for competition to sneak in and steal some viewership, viewership that they may never get back. I wonder if it's worth the few extra bucks for the NFL.

I always hear about how I'm not the NFL target market.. they want the 20 somethings...well those 20 somethings can't afford 10 paid streaming services in most instances, so how does this help the NFL?

I agree the may be getting over their tips with their greed.

NorseFeathers wrote:
I don't begrudge the NFL either but I question their strategy. The NFL is founded on availability and tradition. When it's no longer readily available, the fans will find different traditions. Right now the NFL is the only game in town but they are cracking the door for competition to sneak in and steal some viewership, viewership that they may never get back. I wonder if it's worth the few extra bucks for the NFL.

Those viewers they may never get back are replaced by three times that amount of new viewers. Like every business, the NFL is willing to lose nickels to gain dimes.

NFL renenue in 2014 $8B approx
NFL revenue in 2022 $12B approx
NFL revenue in 2023 $19B approx

Why The NFL Could Reap More Than $126 Billion In TV Money By 2033
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2023/08/30/why-the-nfl-could-reap-more-than-126-billion-in-tv-money-by-2033/?sh=171e78ea15b5

This article has a chart of NFL viewership. Since it's viewership peak in 2014 and approximated $8B in revenue, viewership is down but revenue has more than doubled.

Turns out, I was wrong.
Looks like surviving the holiday gatherings is about to get harder.

I’m so used to sailing the seven seas to get the Vikings that at this point it doesn’t matter what platform or channel they’re on.

What’s hilarious. When the NFL started on prime (which we have) it was more reliable on the pirates sites then prime.

All the NFL is doing is taking advantage of how consumers consume media.

They be stoopid if they didnt -- and they aint stoopid.

My over/under bet for the first NFL game in Dubai is 2028.

This is living their dream.

NorseFeathers wrote:
NFL renenue in 2014 $8B approx NFL revenue in 2022 $12B approx NFL revenue in 2023 $19B approx

Why The NFL Could Reap More Than $126 Billion In TV Money By 2033
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2023/08/30/why-the-nfl-could-reap-more-than-126-billion-in-tv-money-by-2033/?sh=171e78ea15b5

This article has a chart of NFL viewership. Since it's viewership peak in 2014 and approximated $8B in revenue, viewership is down but revenue has more than doubled.

Turns out, I was wrong.
Looks like surviving the holiday gatherings is about to get harder.

I'd also add-- for every fan who watches a lot of games on cable/dish/ticket saying, "I don't have (X) streaming service and it's bs I can't watch that game," there's another-- possibly more valuable in the NFL's eyes-- viewer who isn't a big NFL fan but happens to have that one streaming service. Exposing them to a game or two per year is a great way to reach a new audience, which seems to be their goal. Casuals aren't going to buy Sunday Ticket but if the NFL can make it easy for them to sample the product, that's a good thing for the league.

purplefaithful wrote:
All the NFL is doing is taking advantage of how consumers consume media.

They be stoopid if they didnt  -- and they aint stoopid.

My over/under bet for the first NFL game in Dubai is 2028.

This is living their dream.

The markets they're trying to penetrate are enormous.

I worked for a B2B company for years. 90% of our market was other businesses. If we saw a 1% increase in that market, it would translate to, say, 500 new customers. But if we were somehow able to achieve a 1% increase in our B2C market (consumers), it would be something like a thousand times that.

I have Netflix, so I'll be watching. If some games are on other platforms I don't have, I won't be watching. its simple for me. The older I get, the less NFL games I watch quite honestly. And I like watching games other than the Vikings. I don't begrudge the NFL for doing what they are doing with this. I hate all the commercial breaks, so the NFL Redzone Channel is heaven for me. It's fun.

NorseFeathers wrote:

I don't begrudge the NFL either but I question their strategy. The NFL is founded on availability and tradition. When it's no longer readily available, the fans will find different traditions. Right now the NFL is the only game in town but they are cracking the door for competition to sneak in and steal some viewership, viewership that they may never get back. I wonder if it's worth the few extra bucks for the NFL.

I hear you, I do.....but this has been said about the NFL for two decades now or more. No competition sticks against the NFL machine. Tradition is something that only those that have aged out of the demographic talk about. 65% of NFL fans are age 25-39.....that passed me by awhile ago. So although I completely understand what you are saying, the NFL know longer cares what I think at age 57. I'm also a diehard, so they know they got me anyway. I'm the dumbass waiting for Minnesota to do something they've never done, shame on me I suppose.

Soon all of the games will be on one streaming service or another. At some point paying for all of those services is going to be cost prohibitive for a lot of fans just to watch the NFL. But I guess that is the way the league is going.

One thing that I think needs to change is the London games. Since this has become a regular venue now, watching games at 8:30 in the morning Central Time just doesn't do it. Not sure how many are really ready to watch games at that time but then maybe it's jut me that isn't in the mood to watch at that time.

JimmyinSD wrote:

I always hear about how I'm not the NFL target market.. they want the 20 somethings...well those 20 somethings can't afford 10 paid streaming services in most instances, so how does this help the NFL? 

I agree the may be getting over their tips with their greed.

This is why:

"Seven weeks after the game, the study concluded that 71 percent of the users who purchased Peacock for the wild-card game remained subscribers. Peacock paid $110 million for the exclusive postseason game. In 2024, the exclusive streaming game will go to Amazon, for $120 million. "

Its not that the NFL just wants 20-somethings, they want the fence sitters and as you mention, the kids that make money. You think kids can't afford streaming services?? lol, they waste money on far more expensive and stupid shit than that. I think there is definitely greed here, but what else is new with Corporate America? The NFL is doing this because they can.

StickierBuns wrote:

I'm probably in the minority, but I love it. Gives me an excuse to have a Bloody Mary before noon!  :P

I love it. I'm a morning person, so that was the first thing I noticed. Woohoo! Game on at 7:30 am my time!

I am one of the 70% who stayed on Peacock Plus for a month past the first monthly billing. However, I terminated it a month after that simply because I never went there again for any viewing. I suspect that the NFL is playing spin the bottle with all content / subscription suppliers, both diversifying their base and seeing what sticks. Streaming platforms have really evolved and there is a reason to dial up for a "must see" game, and gamble on who/what sticks.

I remember the "good old days" when there were just three over-the-air MSP network TV stations, one independent (WTCN?) and Public TV station. Not many choices and you could always get the Vikings on TV because games sold out...and over-the-air TV meant a lot of fuzzy video, the further from the Twin Cities that you got. But then I moved out of state (where Packers & Lions were dominant) and for ten years that was tough sledding for a Vikings fan. Then I moved to yet another state, where anything Broncos was readily available, but it was really hard to get any Vikings info. Then I moved to yet another Western state with the explosion of the interweb, and I can join all of you Vikings enthusiasts, pontificating and digesting every nuance of purple information endlessly, streaming whatever I want, whenever I want.

Boy, it has really changed and I suspect the future will bring even more curves in the road as the NFL continues to be a driver of both content and media control. Hang on.

Greylock wrote:

Soon all of the games will be on one streaming service or another.  At some point paying for all of those services is going to be cost prohibitive for a lot of fans just to watch the NFL.  But I guess that is the way the league is going.

One thing that I think needs to change is the London games.  Since this has become a regular venue now, watching games at 8:30 in the morning Central Time just doesn't do it.  Not sure how many are really ready to watch games at that time but then maybe it's jut me that isn't in the mood to watch at that time.

I'm probably in the minority, but I love it. Gives me an excuse to have a Bloody Mary before noon!  :P

My cost for Youtube TV is less than half what I was paying for Direct TV. Yes there were some bumps in the road but YT TV has some plus things like unlimited DVR. As far as other streaming, I have netflix, and my daughter has amazon but we are still far below what cable or DirectTV was monthly.

I agree that the NFL will continue to push for more $$$ sources. THe only way to combat this is to not pay for the new things they push. Thankfully the Vikings are not on Peacock and not playing on Xmas. Viewership/ratings will always drive their decisions. Boycott the games that are pay per view and hopefully it sends a message. I know we all want to get our games but every game on these sites are replayed on the NFL network immediatly after.

pattersaur wrote:

I'd also add-- for every fan who watches a lot of games on cable/dish/ticket saying, "I don't have (X) streaming service and it's bs I can't watch that game," there's another-- possibly more valuable in the NFL's eyes-- viewer who isn't a big NFL fan but happens to have that one streaming service. Exposing them to a game or two per year is a great way to reach a new audience, which seems to be their goal. Casuals aren't going to buy Sunday Ticket but if the NFL can make it easy for them to sample the product, that's a good thing for the league.

This is me for the Timberwolves.  For a long time, basketball has been a sport that I haven't paid any attention to.  I stopped doing cable around the time Garnett left and the Wolves started sucking.  I just haven’t had a reason to get back into basketball.  The sport got less watchable and it never crossed my radar.  Well this year, the Wolves are doing well, playing a more interesting brand of basketball, and I discovered that they are showing some of the games on HBO Max, which we already have but don’t use much.  So here we are now watching most of the available games on streaming, watching more Max than we typically have, and even watching all the commercials despite paying for the streaming service.  I can’t guarantee that we’ll continue watching basketball once the Wolves are done this year, but they’re getting more from us than they did when we were on cable only.  That said, I doubt we would have started watching at all if they were on a platform we didn’t have to begin with.