Spinoff of DIRECTV from AT&T is now completed

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by NashGuy, Aug 2, 2021.

  1. Aug 4, 2021 #81 of 268
    Steveknj

    Steveknj Icon

    1,806
    235
    Nov 14, 2006
    I don't recall that tournament. How long ago was that? How many subs are there now for YTTV, Hulu, and AT&T TV? A lot of the problems of the "Internet' in regards to streaming have long been solved. I watch DirecTV and it rain, I get nothing. So there are problems there too.



    Again, you make these statements. How do you know? Are you an insider? Do you have links to support your statement, and sorry someone posting something in Reddit is not a viable link. Show me from reputable article. The NFL recognizes the landscape has changed or they have their head in the sand. But again, they can easily take money from multiple sources and go non-exlcusive. The only reason why they've kept exclusivity is because they got paid a lot to do it. If DirecTV balks at paying that, they will take what they can get, wherever they can get it. Like you said, the NFL won't take less, but they also won't be stupid and hold out for something that's just no longer viable. They've done this with the networks for years. They sell "smaller" packages to each network so they have a piece of the pie. You don't think if NBC decided they wanted it all and paid more than what all the networks combined now pay they wouldn't do it? Of course they would. But they know, their best deal is to spread it out. And if DirecTV won't pay, that's probably what they will do. I have no inside information either, but I have read some articles, like the one posted a bit earlier in this thread that back that up.

    Again, you might be right and DirecTV is blowing smoke up the NFL's butt to try and get exclusivity for cheaper, but, then again, they might not be.
     
    NashGuy likes this.
  2. Aug 4, 2021 #82 of 268
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    1,811
    445
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Amazon Prime Video may not currently be licensed but there's ZERO reason why Amazon couldn't create a special NFL ST app for commercial accounts to stream the service. Anything's possible, but Amazon making a distribution deal with DTV or Dish to outsource commercial accounts doesn't sound to me like something they would do. They'd either handle it themselves using their own resources or they would just insist on only taking the residential portion of the deal and leave it up to the NFL to find a commercial distributor(s). There's no reason why commercial accounts wouldn't receive a dedicated live support telephone number from Amazon. If you haven't noticed, they're a pretty big company. They have the technology and resources to do basically whatever they decide to do.
     
  3. Aug 4, 2021 #83 of 268
    JoeTheDragon

    JoeTheDragon Hall Of Fame

    5,373
    138
    Jul 21, 2008
    Will senatorers or congress make an fuss about it?

    Will network neutrality or antitrust issues come up?

    what is the plan for nfl amazon thursday night exclusive rights and commercial use?

    Will they have lot's of agents to stop bars from importing an canada sat tv?
     
  4. Aug 4, 2021 #84 of 268
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    1,811
    445
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Uh, you know that Prime Video will be the exclusive home of Thursday Night Football -- "primetime's second most-watched show" -- starting next season, right?

    nfl.com/news/amazon-prime-video-to-be-exclusive-tnf-home-starting-in-2022
     
  5. Aug 4, 2021 #85 of 268
    Steveknj

    Steveknj Icon

    1,806
    235
    Nov 14, 2006
    I assume this is what he meant:

    Tiger Woods-Phil Mickelson pay-per-view golf gaffe exposes weakness of online sports

    It was 2018, things have changed exponentially since then. Streaming has been built up much greater in those three years and we've seen multiple OTT services, an increase of other streaming platforms. And I'm also sure that since then, the issues that happened in that case have been hashed out. Not to mention that was a one time PPV situation, not a full season (unless the NFL plans on selling a weekly service, which I haven't heard). So I think that the "internet" is "fine" for Sunday Ticket, especially bundled with OTT services, as an add on.
     
  6. Aug 4, 2021 #86 of 268
    SamC

    SamC Hall Of Fame

    2,455
    167
    Jan 20, 2003
    Which, of course, brings up the other issue.

    There is no way to differentiate between a personal and commercial account when it is just a user name and a password.

    Now are big chains like BWW, or casino or whatnot going to risk it? Nah. But short of placing spies in every mom and pop bar in the country, no way to enforce it.

    Exactly. A tiny niche event that only a handful of people were interested in, crashed the not-ready-for-prime-time, PPV internet system.

    You sir have it exactly backwards.

    The idea that ANY provider would pay ANYTHING for non-exclusive access to ST, and the insane figure of “$50M” were just pulled out of someone’s a** upthread. Link to any bid for such a thing.

    Heck, I will even take a logical reason why any company would say “hey, lets pay the NFL $50M (or $5) so we can lose money selling NFLST, which they can also buy from any of our competitors.”
     
  7. Aug 4, 2021 #87 of 268
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    1,811
    445
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    This article raises an interesting possibility: that DTV might renew the deal but only as the exclusive DBS (or maybe non-streaming) distributor of NFL ST. That would leave the door open for Amazon or Apple or whoever to be an exclusive streaming distributor.

    We've been breaking things down in terms of residential vs. commercial distribution. I guess it's possible that DTV continues on with NFL ST for both residential and commercial accounts as the sole DBS/non-streaming distributor.

    But I doubt that would make financial sense for DTV. Because if, say, folks with access to broadband can get NFL ST for the same, or maybe lower, price as an add-on to the incredibly popular Amazon Prime membership, then I don't see how paying lots of money to carry NFL ST helps DTV retain or attract many residential customers.

    It's a foregone conclusion that DTV's satellite service will continue to lose customers, at least at the same rate as the overall cable TV industry, probably faster. I think they know this. I think TPG understood this when they bought their 30% stake, which is part of the reason they insisted that the streaming version of the service be included in the deal. Adding the cost of NFL ST, which must be partially subsidized via higher base prices by the great majority of their customers who don't choose to subscribe and pay for NFL ST, only makes DTV *less* price competitive with competing cable TV services.
     
    glrush and Steveknj like this.
  8. Aug 4, 2021 #88 of 268
    Steveknj

    Steveknj Icon

    1,806
    235
    Nov 14, 2006
    Nevermind, you continue to make statements as facts that you have no proof that they are. Anything I've said is based on articles like the one I've posted above, is speculation (which I've said is speculation) and common sense. You just say things as they are facts. The one example you gave was THREE years ago. THREE years in tech is like 20 years in most industries. The number of people using streaming services in the last three years has probably more than doubled (notice I said PROBABLY, I don't have the numbers). The dollar numbers I posted is not based on anything, just hypothetical and I posed them that way. But I based them on what the last contract was with DirecTV. You state that there's ZERO chance that the NFL would split up ST to multiple providers. You've said there's ZERO chance that any provider would PAY for non-exclusivity. Again, how do you know? If that's just your opinion, please say so, because I've seen nothing to back that up. I respect opinions and your reasoning, but I have a differing opinion that I have not stated as absolute either. I would think it's better to pay something for a piece of the pie than nothing for NO piece of the pie. Everything has a price, it's just a matter of what that is. When the last contract was signed, Comcast and others were whining about the DirecTV exclusivity and would be dying to offer that to their subs. I don't think that changes. It's another selling point to try and keep customers.

    Again, I and many others here have moved over to a streaming solution and are pretty happy with it. It works, it's not a "problem" and whatever little glitches there might be are minor and I had plenty of DirecTV glitches in my day as well.
     
    mjwagner and compnurd like this.
  9. Aug 4, 2021 #89 of 268
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    1,811
    445
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Sure there's a way to differentiate. Here's what Amazon could do. For personal use, the NFL ST streams would be embedded in their Prime Video app. Unlike regular Prime Video streams, the NFL games would be limited to 2, maybe 3, simultaneous streams per account *and* per IP address. For commercial use, customers would pay more, submit info about their business, and use a separate app that would have only NFL ST in it. That app would allow a much higher number of simultaneous streams per IP address. Perhaps there would be tiered pricing per stream, which would mean larger establishments with more TVs pay more money. For further security, maybe the commercial app would only run on a special version of their Fire TV device and customers would get as many devices as the number of streams they pay for.

    My guess is that the vast majority of sports bars willing to pay for NFL ST have more than 2 or 3 TVs that they want to show it on. There are typically 8-10 noontime games playing at the same time. Yes, very small bars who want to show only one or two out-of-market games, on one or two TVs, could get away with cheating if they wanted to risk it. But how many establishments fit that description?

    Now, if Amazon thought it was worth it to take further steps, sure, they could scan the web (including social media sites) to generate a list of establishments that advertise or appear to be offering NFL ST but which aren't registered paying users. And then just selectively send agents into those places to notify them that they have X days to pay up or get sued. BMI has a bunch of music copyright enforcers that they send out to bars (including little mom and pop ones) and all other kinds of commercial establishments that play recorded music to ensure that they pay royalties. I wouldn't see Amazon doing that level of enforcement because it probably wouldn't be worth it.
     
  10. Aug 4, 2021 #90 of 268
    James Long

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

    52,625
    2,796
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    The NFL can only sell exclusive rights if they find a sucker willing to pay for exclusive rights. DIRECTV has made it clear that they will not be that sucker.

    $50 million isn't a bad minimum payment to be able to offer ST as a non-exclusive. $5 billion would be bad.

    If ST isn't an exclusive it will be sold like any other sports package. The MVPD collects money from their customer and passes most of it on to the league. If having SD attracts 10,000 DIRECTV customers then the NFL gets paid for 10,000 customers. (Minimums and other conditions can apply, but "non-exclusive" isn't DIRECTV paying $1.5 billion and having other companies also able to sell the package.)
     
    Steveknj and slice1900 like this.
  11. Aug 4, 2021 #91 of 268
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    11,148
    1,716
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    And exclusive rights only work if they're, you know, exclusive. Why would Directv pay a flat rate for a "satellite exclusive", knowing there will also be a "streaming exclusive" (and maybe also a "cable exclusive" and "mobile streaming exclusive") Directv would certainly want to know exactly who else would get exclusives and on what platforms since each one devalues it for Directv.

    Directv has used the exclusive for years to help subscriptions for residential customers, both by being the only way to get NFLST and by using it as a freebie to obtain/retain customers since they're paying a flat rate and it costs them nothing to give away. That's worth much much less if everyone who has broadband and Amazon Prime can get it for less (or maybe even free, if Amazon wants to go crazy)

    The commercial offering would be more "sticky" than residential, so long as Directv offers it most places will keep getting it via Directv even if they could save a few bucks with streaming - because they'd have to buy a set top for each TV, have the hassle of switching inputs, and risk finding out the hard way whether delivering NFLST via streaming will have the problems that "The Match" and other big streaming events have had.

    I don't think it is feasible to have more than one exclusive if the NFL wants to sell it at a flat rate. They could do something like "pay $100 million and then x per subscriber" but not a deal like Directv currently has. The only split for exclusives that makes sense is residential and commercial, since there is zero overlap between the customers. There is plenty of overlap between the people who could choose Directv or choose streaming if both were offered as an "exclusive" by different providers.
     
  12. Aug 4, 2021 #92 of 268
    James Long

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

    52,625
    2,796
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    You are too kind. The article sounds like a summary of our NFL 2023 thread. An exaggeration, but some days I feel every third post in that thread is "DIRECTV will be exclusive satellite for business".


    I see three main possibilities. 1) Sunday Ticket becomes non-exclusive and is sold like MLB/MLS/NHL/NBA, or 2) Sunday Ticket becomes exclusive to a streamer who rents space on DIRECTV (or DISH) to serve commercial customers, or 3) Sunday Ticket ceases to exist. There are other options but I expect one of those three will be the outcome.


    We do have a nice thread where this has been hashed over a few times. The issue isn't specific to the new ownership.
     
    Steveknj likes this.
  13. Aug 4, 2021 #93 of 268
    JoeTheDragon

    JoeTheDragon Hall Of Fame

    5,373
    138
    Jul 21, 2008
    but chains like BWW are not going to want local staff at each site to deal with stuff like 2fa / sso / password rules like an domain login. Also multi login from 8-16+ boxes. and we going to need amazon to cover the $$$ matrix switch upgrade to handle more in puts. And we may need HDCP OFF.

    and in put long password with an on screen keyboard with an remote?
     
  14. Aug 4, 2021 #94 of 268
    NashGuy

    NashGuy Well-Known Member

    1,811
    445
    Jan 30, 2014
    Nashville, TN
    Amazon could just include, as part of the commercial licensing cost per stream/TV served, a locked-down Fire TV stick (with support for wifi 6, HEVC decoding, and geo location services turned on so that it only works in the general area where your business is located) that only streams NFL ST (no other apps) and is pre-configured for that commercial account. Just plug it into the TV and power, connect it to your wifi (which could be done on a phone by scanning a QR code), and you're ready to stream football.

    You have 12 TVs in your sports bar and want to stream NFL ST on each of them? You pay for 12 streams and get 12 sticks. It probably wouldn't cost Amazon more than $50 for those devices, so it wouldn't really make much difference in terms of the price they'd charge commercial establishments, which I assume pay thousands to license NFL ST.
     
  15. Aug 4, 2021 #95 of 268
    JoeTheDragon

    JoeTheDragon Hall Of Fame

    5,373
    138
    Jul 21, 2008
    e-net may be needed as well and needs work on an matrix switch. Also NFL ST ONLY? so way less useful then an cable / sat box?
    and with 8-16 HD / 4K streams I want e-net not WIFI.
     
  16. Aug 4, 2021 #96 of 268
    codespy

    codespy Go Pack Go!!!! DBSTalk Club

    2,275
    491
    Mar 29, 2006
    Seasonal
    I see this right now on DirecTV's homepage- now there are activation fees. :rage:

    ALL DIRECTV OFFERS REQUIRE 24-MO. AGREEMENT. $19.95 ACTIVATION, EARLY TERMINATION FEE OF $20/MO. FOR EACH MONTH REMAINING ON AGMT., EQUIPMENT NON-RETURN & ADD’L FEES APPLY. New approved residential customers only (equipment lease req'd). Credit card req'd (except MA & PA). Restr’s apply.
     
  17. Aug 5, 2021 #97 of 268
    slice1900

    slice1900 Well-Known Member

    11,148
    1,716
    Feb 14, 2013
    Iowa
    Yeah anyone that is talking about running a dozen or more streams over wifi in a sports bar as a one size fits all solution doesn't have the first clue how many problems there are with that idea.
     
    ThaPhenom likes this.
  18. Aug 5, 2021 #98 of 268
    krel

    krel New Member

    736
    90
    Mar 20, 2013
    They used to waive the activation fee when you ordered online. I wonder if there still waiving it when ordering online
     
  19. Aug 5, 2021 #99 of 268
    compnurd

    compnurd Hall Of Fame

    4,570
    950
    Apr 23, 2007
    Evans City PA
    Nope
     
  20. Aug 5, 2021 #100 of 268
    Steveknj

    Steveknj Icon

    1,806
    235
    Nov 14, 2006
    I would think, if Amazon is all in on this, they may have a solution, and probably one we don't know about. I don't think the NFL would sell this to Amazon if they didn't have this worked out. The NFL is very methodical in everything they do. I think it is ONE of the reasons they were so willing to give DirecTV exclusivity all these years. Well that and the exorbitant fee that DirecTV was willing to pay. But if DirecTV is not willing to pony up this time (and that seems likely as of right now, things could change), they will have to work with other suitors on a solution. But, like I said, I don't see DirecTV giving up the package completely, just giving up exclusivity, which means that if a commercial establishment is happy with how things are, they could keep it. But without exclusivity, they could also look at other possibilities that may or may not work for them too. Imagine having a choice of keeping things how they are, or perhaps switching to a cable company or, if it works for them a streaming service? The landscape is changing quickly. New solutions are being worked on for so much of this stuff that we can't even fathom.
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements