I bet they would have been satisfied if DIRECTV had renewed with their exceedingly limited streaming availability.
By the way I did not “invent” that term “co-exclusive” I read it in an article about DIRECTV possibly reaching out to the winning bidder to have that sort of arrangement where they could keep the package for people who don’t have reliable internet service yet.
That's not the point at all. My question was when did it replace anonymous sources? My question is independent of the NFLST negotiations unless the answer is the NFLST negotiations.
In using the term, you are perhaps perpetuating the problem. If the term is nonsense, so too are its applications.
Ok .. so the answer is "years ago". Not a recent occurrence.
Yep ... six more weeks of service and several months before anyone needs to know who has it next. No requirement that a deal be cut by any arbitrary deadline set by anyone here (or on the speculation "news" sites).
This thread isn't the guilty party in that. The rebloggers are largely responsible (though in some cases, it is the major new outlets and Roger Goodell himself) for stirring the pot just because they are getting pressure to produce.
That's not a fair statement. Some group of people does know. Those who do know and are respectful of the process will not share what they know (even under the guise of anonymity).
The magical part of this is that you probably won't have to "worry" unless you're currently involved in a long term commitment with DIRECTV. Whomever does carry NFLST will almost certainly be eminently more "available" than DIRECTV.
What DirecTV wants to do is the point, for whoever gets the contract, what would they want to do.
Good Question. I have no idea. All I know is my area here in Extreme Rural Mississippi does not have it. There are roads here that are still gravel if that tells ya anything. Not even Black Top.
And then that proves it, all that **** you have been posting about inside info and a little birdie told you that ST will be staying with DirecTV is just fake.
You are just now figuring that out? 🤣
The current deal with Directv was for $1.5 billion a year, so getting $2 billion in the next one would still be an increase from the previous contract.
It is an increase, but is it what the NFL wants? The buzz was that the NFL was going to be asking $2 billion or more of DIRECTV.
Who knows? Right now the reverse situation exists. You can buy ST as a streaming service only from Directv by entering your address and they magically know you can't get Directv service at that address.
Knowing an address CAN get Directv is one thing...knowing it CAN'T is totally different.
In that it was probably a token gesture to get some element (either the NFL or potential customers who couldn't use satellite) off their backs, it was offered as an option. Not a very certain option, but a glimmer of hope that an XXL pizza dish wasn't going to be required.
They start with the assumption that every address CAN get DIRECTV. It isn't as easy as submitting an address and getting access.
