NFL backs down - NE - NYG game to be televised nationwide

[The Leaper]

NBC and CBS pay for the programming. And they would be doing it for the viewers. The more viewers they have the more ad revenue they make. Everyone will make a lot of money on this.

The NFL will NOT make more money. That is my point. I agree with the Captain that it is a shrewd move on their part...but not because it is a windfall of cash for them. If it was such a windfall, then why not get rid of all the NFL Network games altogther? If the NFL is making such a HUGE PROFIT off this, as some are suggesting, then they are FOOLISH for keeping games on the NFL Network in the first place and losing all that additional revenue.

Sure, the NFL gets some additional $$$ from CBS and NBC...but not much. The NFL also will LOSE ad revenue because of this...because advertisers are not going to pay money for ads on the NFL Network when 10 times as many people will see the game on NBC and CBS. The ad revenue windfall is going to go straight to NBC and CBS...which is why those networks are doing this in the first place.

As the Captain points out...this is the NFL's way to prove to cable that the NFL is very profitable and worth the price they demand. A meaningless game will bring in millions of revenue for CBS and NBC...revenue that cable companies are missing out on during their holdout.

The NFL stands nothing to gain here in terms of $$$ from this deal in the short term...although it could have impact in the cable debate down the road and wind up being a profitable move in the end.

[packinpatland]

I think the networks are counting on the "perfect season" as piquing the curiosity of the viewers. Taking the "can they really do it" angle might give them a little nationwide push.

I know the reason I'm watching is to see if the Giants can win...........not to see the 'Perfect Season'.

[FritzDontBlitz]

If the NFL was gonna make more money by showing the games on free TV WHY would they be trying to push the games to cable in the first place.

The NFL doesn't get the ad revenue. The TV stations do. That's why the NFL can charge so much for the TV deals when its time to renew. Its based on how much money the stations will be able to charge advertisers to run ads during the games.

I don't think it hurts the cable companies at all, because they were going to either lose money by accepting the NFL's offer for the games or risk angering their customers by raising their prices to accomodate the deal. Less than half the cable subscribers in America even watch the NFL, so they would be getting charged for something they had no intention of using.

I just read an article quote that puts cable's position in better perspective. From the New York Times:

Cable Plays Hardball With the N.F.L.
By RICHARD SANDOMIR
Published: November 14, 2007

But the NFL Network stalemate has the league running to legislators and regulators to compel cable operators to carry a channel whose lead attraction is eight games that start on Thanksgiving — games that before the 2006 season were seen Sundays on CBS or Fox (some nationally, some regionally) and ESPN (nationally). The scarcity of games lets cable operators say they carry enough: 248 on CBS, Fox, NBC and ESPN.

So, this big brew-ha-ha is about 8 lousy games being forced upon cable when they already broadcast 248 other games through the local affiliates they already carry at LOWER PRICES, so why let the NFL gouge them for 8 more?

[cpk1994]

NBC and CBS pay for the programming. And they would be doing it for the viewers. The more viewers they have the more ad revenue they make. Everyone will make a lot of money on this.

The NFL will NOT make more money. That is my point. I agree with the Captain that it is a shrewd move on their part...but not because it is a windfall of cash for them. If it was such a windfall, then why not get rid of all the NFL Network games altogther? If the NFL is making such a HUGE PROFIT off this, as some are suggesting, then they are FOOLISH for keeping games on the NFL Network in the first place and losing all that additional revenue.

Sure, the NFL gets some additional $$$ from CBS and NBC...but not much. The NFL also will LOSE ad revenue because of this...because advertisers are not going to pay money for ads on the NFL Network when 10 times as many people will see the game on NBC and CBS. The ad revenue windfall is going to go straight to NBC and CBS...which is why those networks are doing this in the first place.

As the Captain points out...this is the NFL's way to prove to cable that the NFL is very profitable and worth the price they demand. A meaningless game will bring in millions of revenue for CBS and NBC...revenue that cable companies are missing out on during their holdout.

The NFL stands nothing to gain here in terms of $$$ from this deal in the short term...although it could have impact in the cable debate down the road and wind up being a profitable move in the end.

Actually, the cable companies will make money of of their local ad drop ins that they always do.

[FritzDontBlitz]

NBC and CBS pay for the programming. And they would be doing it for the viewers. The more viewers they have the more ad revenue they make. Everyone will make a lot of money on this.

The NFL will NOT make more money. That is my point. I agree with the Captain that it is a shrewd move on their part...but not because it is a windfall of cash for them. If it was such a windfall, then why not get rid of all the NFL Network games altogther? If the NFL is making such a HUGE PROFIT off this, as some are suggesting, then they are FOOLISH for keeping games on the NFL Network in the first place and losing all that additional revenue.

Sure, the NFL gets some additional $$$ from CBS and NBC...but not much. The NFL also will LOSE ad revenue because of this...because advertisers are not going to pay money for ads on the NFL Network when 10 times as many people will see the game on NBC and CBS. The ad revenue windfall is going to go straight to NBC and CBS...which is why those networks are doing this in the first place.

As the Captain points out...this is the NFL's way to prove to cable that the NFL is very profitable and worth the price they demand. A meaningless game will bring in millions of revenue for CBS and NBC...revenue that cable companies are missing out on during their holdout.

The NFL stands nothing to gain here in terms of $$$ from this deal in the short term...although it could have impact in the cable debate down the road and wind up being a profitable move in the end.

Actually, the cable companies will make money of of their local ad drop ins that they always do.

I never thought of that. By carrying the game on local affiliates - stations already broadcasted by the cable companies - the cable companies get the game without forking over a penny.

[MJZiggy]

The cable companies get it, but have to have it on the lower tier where NFL wants it--and no one has to buy a cable subscription to get it.

[the_idle_threat]

The NFL also will LOSE ad revenue because of this...because advertisers are not going to pay money for ads on the NFL Network when 10 times as many people will see the game on NBC and CBS. The ad revenue windfall is going to go straight to NBC and CBS...which is why those networks are doing this in the first place.

Bingo.

I was waiting for somone to mention this. The NFL will be pissing off the advertisers who paid for time on the NFL network thinking the game would be shown exclusively on that channel. Maybe it's a good strategy for the NFL in the greater scheme of things, but the NFL does stand to lose something from this move in the shorter term.

[FavreChild]

Actually, that is not correct.

This is a simulcast - it is still the NFLN feed, and the NFL will still get the ad revenue. 30-second spots are being sold for $200k, which is about double the normal rate for the NFLN. However, because the game is now being simulcast by two networks, the advertisers will be actually getting extra bonus viewers. In other words, they will get an extra bang for their buck.

The NFL is still making its money, and they are racking up tons of goodwill from both advertisers and consumers.

That's how it will work. The networks benefit because they basically get to air free programming (they normally have to pay for rights to anything they air). The NFL gets the ad revenue. The NFL, the networks, and the advertisers all benefit.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/recent_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003688906

[Jimx29]

I got a question. Why didn't FOX get a shot at the feed?

NBC owns Sat/Sunday nite
CBS is the Net of the AFC

Didn't FOX want a chance at this game? The Jints draw big money for FOX, shouldn't they get their piece of the pie?

are you kidding me? a chance to show "are you smarter than a 5th grader", followed up by American idol rewind or a NFL game?

Fox knows their viewers

[FavreChild]

The NFL also will LOSE ad revenue because of this...because advertisers are not going to pay money for ads on the NFL Network when 10 times as many people will see the game on NBC and CBS. The ad revenue windfall is going to go straight to NBC and CBS...which is why those networks are doing this in the first place.

This is a simulcast, so the NFL loses nothing. The NFL gets all the ad revenue.

The networks are doing this because they get to air free programming, instead of paying for the rights as they do for all other programming (even when it is produced by their own network).

Broadcasting rights are complicated stuff, no doubt. All I'm trying to get across is that the NFL is still the party in control, and they are gaining tremendously from this move, despite what it might appear.

[FritzDontBlitz]

Don't let Jerry Jones blow smoke up your ass. The NFL just lost the PR war bigtime, and they know it.

[RashanGary]

That's how it will work. The networks benefit because they basically get to air free programming (they normally have to pay for rights to anything they air). The NFL gets the ad revenue. The NFL, the networks, and the advertisers all benefit.

http://www.mediaweek.com/mw/news/rec..._id=1003688906

You just said the networks were not getting any advertising dollars. How do they win by having the game then? Where do they make their money?

[RashanGary]

OK, I just read it. They get whatever advertising slots are left over at this point. NFLN isn't getting much out of this other than (like you said) looking like good guys to the fans and advertisers that are getting something they wouldn't have gotten for nothing.

[RashanGary]

I'd switch right now except I'd be giving up Brewer and Bucks games on FSN Wisconsin. If dish could find some way to get me that channel, I'd say F-U to cable forever.

[Bretsky]

Me too; if the NFL network has a great broadcast this can be some effective advertising for more of us to say piss off to the cable slimebuckets as well