1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NBC 2012 Olympics Coverage

Discussion in 'TV Show Talk' started by gusmahler, Jul 27, 2012.

  1. Aug 1, 2012 #441 of 578
    anleva

    anleva Icon

    568
    1
    Nov 14, 2007
    Once you accept that NBC is not targeting the male sports fan with their evening Olympic coverage their seemingly bizarre decisions make a bit more sense.

    All hail our Olympic overlord and content curator!
     
  2. Aug 1, 2012 #442 of 578
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    You are such an NBC apologist...

    NBC themselves say it is forced. They call it funneling viewers to the network. It is staged and planned and forced. Yeah. Record. Try to find out what the hell is on when or record huge blocks of time every day. Then try to find full coverage on replay on line of network event. Good luck.

    If they aren't forcing anything, why not have in depth on the family of channels at night. Oh, that's right. They want you to watch only the main net and force it by shutting down everything else during prime time.

    And real fans are interested in the Olympics. What the nets decided was to go after the casual fan figuring the normal fan would come along for the ride. Not unusual in sports marketing. It is what drives minor league baseball marketing and the Super Bowl. But what they remembered but NBC forgets....you don't drive the sports fan away.

    As for choices, they SUCK. I have tried using streaming every damned day. It is erratic and it is impossible to figure out what you want to watch. Descriptions are lacking and every time you change a channel or drag the timer, you have to watch 1 to 3 commercials often to find out their is no feed. and the mobile apps are horribly designed.

    And wow. They are so wonderful. They didn't hold the Streams back. Yay. They are catching up to the rest of he world. They are so wonderful. Sorry. I forgot I'm supposed to kiss the pea****s ass and be grateful.
     
  3. Aug 1, 2012 #443 of 578
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    And editor of art. Don't forget that they decided what was art in the opening ceremony. So glad they decide everything for us.
     
  4. Aug 1, 2012 #444 of 578
    Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    A difference of opinion does not make me an NBC apologist, just because you think they're a horrible exploitative company (which they somewhat are, but not exactly a first in sports television). I just understand their strategy and don't scream from the rafters that they're doing the wrong thing. I know their coverage is extremely staged and edited, I know that. So does the faction out there that actually enjoys it. There's a term for folks like that.. women. And I'll tell ya (and I'm sure you'll accuse me of NBC brainwashing here, especially since I'm a guy and a big sports fan).. yesterday and today, I watched Olympics all afternoon, either on TV and/or online. Managed not to see the results of most of the swim races. Last night with Phelps in the 200 fly and today with Adrian in the 100 free, I had no idea of the results. That was great television I witnessed full well knowing it happened hours earlier. I'm sorry but I have to give NBC a little credit, because especially on the Phelps race, that was a great sequence they edited with all the reaction shots. You're not getting that live. And don't even try to tell me I was forced. VERY easily I could have watched these races online, but I chose to wait and I'm extremely happy with that decision.

    Sports fans don't follow the Olympics. To them it's likely unimportant, especially to, say, a baseball fan in the middle of baseball season. It's not just about going after the causal fan (and you're ready, it's absolutely the norm in sports television) but about designing the telecast around the viewers they know will consume it. Yes, that means if you have a penis you're probably not going to like it, but the strategy in that regard is still working.

    I'm not going to defend NBC on this one, especially from the technological standpoint, although it's gotten a little better. And impossible to figure out what you want to watch? I don't think you can entire blame NBC for that one. Not exactly that difficult to figure out what's on.

    You and everyone else seem to only want to focus on the negative. They should have done all the streaming for 4 years ago, but at least it's an improvement for 4 years ago when everyone's making it seem like they regressed from last time around.
     
  5. Aug 1, 2012 #445 of 578
    Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    Why NBC Doesn't Care That You Want to Watch the Olympics Live on TV

    Not exactly new information here, but again, a pretty good explanation of what's going on. And once again, I'm not sharing this because your complaints are unfounded, it's because far too many people still seem to think that NBC is missing out on an even bigger pot of gold by doing the Olympics the way they do. That may be the case, but you've got all these sportswriters who are panning NBC and at the same time praising them for a business strategy that is, contrary to popular belief, working.
     
  6. Aug 1, 2012 #446 of 578
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,189
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Folks, remember to discuss the issue not each other --- try not to get personal.

    Thanks!
     
  7. Aug 1, 2012 #447 of 578
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    What? David, that's like saying that the MLB Network doesn't show baseball.
     
  8. Aug 1, 2012 #448 of 578
    Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    Niche television networks play to their audience. Broadcast networks like NBC have to play to everyone, but the fact is more females are watching the Olympics than you'd ever get from traditional sports programming. That's who NBC is playing to, not that we didn't know that already. But it would be really hard for them to achieve a balance, and whether it's the right decision or not, NBC gave that a shot one time and it failed, that's what they've never gone back to it (and yes, I'm aware this is from 24 years ago)..

    NBC's low Olympic ratings may drive down the fees for the 1992 Barcelona Games

    We all know why NBC plays to the female audience. This is what happened when they tried to play to a male audience. Yes, I know this is a long time ago, but there WAS an Olympics when NBC tried to do things similar to what folks want now. Completely different times of course without cable and the Internet, but a lot of the points still stand.
     
  9. Aug 1, 2012 #449 of 578
    dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,345
    503
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    Taping olympics on VHS in 1988 was more complex than recording events on a DVR for those that can't watch it live.
     
  10. Aug 2, 2012 #450 of 578
    Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    Even in 2012, not everyone out there has a DVR. But still, there are plenty of people out there who treat the primetime show as appointment viewing, full well knowing it's all events contested hours earlier. That's the audience that consumes primetime television. The younger more tech-saavy crowd is going to be more driven towards online, less towards the primetime show. Probably not the best way for NBC to satisfy everyone, but NBC feels they're serving the greater good this way. And yes, in the process, make the advertisers happy because (as if we need to keep saying it), NBC cares more about what they want than what the viewers say they want.
     
  11. Aug 2, 2012 #451 of 578
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,189
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    From what I could find (and posted earlier this week) only 42% of US households have a DVR.

    Sometimes on this generally tech savvy site people forget that everyone does not have the same toys they have.
     
  12. Aug 2, 2012 #452 of 578
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    Any idea how they get that number? How does that compare to HDTV adoption? I can't remember where that number stands now...
     
  13. Aug 2, 2012 #453 of 578
    Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
  14. Aug 2, 2012 #454 of 578
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,189
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    The figures are sourced as being from Nielson ...
    http://www.thecab.tv/main/bm~doc/time-shifting-2012_public.pdf

    I misremembered the number ... it is 43.3% of households (February 2012). There are other interesting figures in the report, including "Among P18-49, 76% Of All Viewing Still Occurs “Live” During Primetime". 71% of homes with a DVR only have one DVR, 23.3% of homes with a DVR have two (the rest have more).

    As for HD Penetration ... (January 2012)
    "According to new consumer research from Leichtman Research Group, 69% of households in the United States have at least one high definition television set, up from 17% in 2006. Over the past five years, 52% of US households adopted HDTV. In addition, 48% of HDTV households have more than one HD set."
    source
     
  15. Aug 2, 2012 #455 of 578
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 Active Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    Wow...69%. That's great.
     
  16. Aug 2, 2012 #456 of 578
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    46,189
    1,074
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    69% in January ... Quaker's numbers are more current and higher. People are still buying their first sets.

    It doesn't hurt that SD TVs are harder to come by and HD TVs can be purchased for $100 or less for small screens.
     
  17. Aug 2, 2012 #457 of 578
    Laxguy

    Laxguy Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense.

    15,399
    585
    Dec 2, 2010
    Winters,...
    It also doesn't mean that 69% of households watch HD or can watch HD, though I bet the percentage dropouts is small.
     
  18. Aug 2, 2012 #458 of 578
    djlong

    djlong Hall Of Fame

    4,343
    57
    Jul 8, 2002
    New Hampshire
    I'll make my comments quick...

    When I had the choice, I *always* watched the Canadian feeds of the Olympics. They were *always* better. What's worse is when I saw a CBC reporter interviewing a Canadian gold medal winner right after the race and an NBC reporter literally hip-checked the CBC reporter out of the way to get the interview - IN MID INTERVIEW!

    NBC has done a few things right and a few wrong. I can sum it up this way...

    - My DVR is constantly recording thanks to all the additional channels.
    - I have watched *NONE* of the prime-time coverage

    Given the chance, I would GLADLY pay the UK's BBC TV tax to be allowed to record and watch the Olympics from them as opposed to NBC.

    Let me re-state this - I would GLADLY pay the over $200 (145.50 pounds) that UK citizens pay in order to be able to see the BBC the way it's broadcast.
     
  19. Aug 2, 2012 #459 of 578
    fluffybear

    fluffybear Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    7,316
    38
    Jun 19, 2004
    Peachtree...
    what amazes me is the number of people who still think they can get top dollar for their out-dated SD sets on garage sales. Mrs. Fluffybear and I were at one last weekend where they were selling an 50" Mitsubishi (manufactured in 2003) for $1200.
     
  20. Aug 2, 2012 #460 of 578
    boukengreen

    boukengreen Legend

    519
    32
    Sep 22, 2009
    I know that I have defiantly enjoyed hearing the British annoucers while streaming for swimming over the ones that NBC uses for the prime time coverage
     

Share This Page