The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Why would you watch an illegal stream when a legal one is available?
I didn't say I would. I just said that I wouldn't watch it tape delayed and that people watching illegal streams because live versions of the games they wanted to watch wasn't readily available was a problem for NBC.
Of course some people would do that, but that is still a minority for multiple reasons. And the fact that people watched the events in prime time in large numbers does not suggest that Americans don't care enough; most viewers didn't have another easily accessible choice -- it was either watch in prime time or don't watch it at all.
Go tell that to advertisers and see if they're still willing to pay the same rates. Keep in mind that NBC almost always loses money on the Olympics anyway, you think they should take this risk why? As you say, people are going to watch regardless.
NBC's internal research has continually shown that knowing the results of events makes no impact whatsoever on viewing patterns... people will just say "I want to see how Phelps lost that race!". And as long as that's still true and as long as people are going to watch NBC regardless, there's absolutely zero incentive for anything to change. These past Olympics were the best rated EVER... even Beijing, whose timezone allowed for live events in primetime, didn't even come close to them. It's possible NBC knows what it's doing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandR
As for airing things live online, most people still prefer to watch TV on their TV. And needing to embrace it? Forget it... why should I pay for a more expensive internet service every month just to be able to stream the Olympics online once every 2 years?
Sucks for them, it's the way of the future... I also prefer sporting events on my TV, but I know if I want to watch QPR play Swansea on Saturday, I'll have to do it online. If I can make that "sacrifice", why isn't it good enough for you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandR
Nice one. You just compared the rights paid for this year's games with a significant time zone difference to the rights paid for 4 future Olympics, at least one of which will take place in a similar time zone. And you've also compared rights paid in two different countries where broadcast rights carry vastly disproportionate potential for direct and indirect revenue streams.
You're right! Ok, so NBC paid $2.2 billion for Vancouver and London. At the very least, then, London cost them $1.1 billion (likely more considering the relative value of Winter Olympic rights are lower). So that's still about 30 times what CTV paid.
And I think you missed the point of the comparison. The complaint was that every other country does it one way... no other country even comes close to paying what NBC does for the Olympics. And of course the potential for revenues is higher, however they decrease when you start mortgaging those huge primetime audiences to keep a vocal minority pacified.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PensFanSince1989
....Except they don't show them live during the day... (on-line excluded).
NBC aired 5535 hours of coverage from London. Only ~80 of those were tape delayed.
I've always said NBC should offer every single thing live via dedicated VOD channels. And that's not even the most pressing issue with NBC's abysmal coverage.
but realistically, what you're asking them to do is allow people to DVR the Phelps race at 10 am and then watch it when they get home while fast forwarding through the commercials. Tell me again why they should do this when they're being paid assloads of money? And if people really hate knowing who won an event before they see it so much, they need to start voting with their remotes. The fact that the exact opposite is happening suggests that the vast majority of Americans simply don't care enough not to watch anyway.
Every single event except the opening ceremonies was aired live online. There were a lot of kinks, but those will be worked out in time. This is the way forward for their Olympics coverage, and people need to be ready to embrace it.
I agree with this. My biggest complaint with the olympics were the volume of Comercials. It was a bit rediculous how many comericals were on durring prime time. I was satisfied with the coverage other than that. Oh, and that stupid theme song for the gymnastics that they played over and over and over again.
The olympics are one of the few events I can watch on tape delay and still enjoy while knowing the results?
Usain Bolt broke a world record? Gotta see it.
Michael Phelps lost a race? Gotta see it.
Michael Phelps broke the record for most gold medals? Gotta see it.
Upset in gymnastics? Gotta see it.
Upset in diving? Gotta see it.
The events in the Olympics can still get the same viewership as tape delayed events because there are upsets, world records, olympic records being broken pretty much every day. People want to watch that.
The only thing I didn't like was that thing with Tom Brokaw on how the English fought the Nazis and how the U.S. didn't want to get involved until Pearl Harbor was attacked. That's something for the History Channel. Not primetime during the Olympics.
I agree with this. My biggest complaint with the olympics were the volume of Comercials. It was a bit rediculous how many comericals were on durring prime time. I was satisfied with the coverage other than that. Oh, and that stupid theme song for the gymnastics that they played over and over and over again.
How dare one of the biggest quadrennial events have a lot of advertising
I'm in Canada and I got CTV but I switched to NBC at times to see what the hate was about and to me it's unwatchable. If you think NBC coverage you haven't how the rest of the world watches the Olympics, my wife's American and she was absolutely floored by the live coverage in Canada, nothing she ever watched on NBC has even come close.
Constant switching to commercials, tape delay, annoying announcers and barely any coverage of non-US teams/athletes. You don't feel you watched the Olympics, you watched a censored, edited version instead. It's like a reality show rather than a major sporting event.
Don't forget they tape delayed the opening and closing ceremonies and edited them so you could not even see them in their entirety. The cut a portion of the opening ceremony for a taped interview with Phelps and (ugh) Ryan Seacrest. They cut to a stupid Animal Practice partway through the closing ceremony, you could watch the rest later but they still didn't show the whole thing.
Yes, how dare they mostly show coverage of Americans on an American channel.
Not everyone in the US is American, lots of immigrants who'd like to know how their home country is doing.
My in-laws had to set up 3 laptops around the living room to get any kind of decent coverage for Japan because NBC barely showed anything unless they were competing against the US in some fashion. We showed them how to get good streams from the BBC, because NBC live streams are silent with no commentary, hard to follow along.
Not everyone in the US is American, lots of immigrants who'd like to know how their home country is doing.
My in-laws had to set up 3 laptops around the living room to get any kind of decent coverage for Japan because NBC barely showed anything unless they were competing against the US in some fashion. We showed them how to get good streams from the BBC, because NBC live streams are silent with no commentary, hard to follow along.
There are a ton of Americans participating in the games. Americans make up the vast majority of the United States. NBC is an American station. I'm not sure what your problem is here.
There are a ton of Americans participating in the games. Americans make up the vast majority of the United States. NBC is an American station. I'm not sure what your problem is here.
It's like CNN only covering news stories that concern the US.
If you're going to cover a major event like the Olympics, then cover the event, don't pick and choose portions of events and fill the rest with P&G commercials etc. It's basically censorship (see my comments on how the opening/closing ceremonies are butchered by NBC editors).
CTV covered a large amount of events(in their entirety) regardless whether Canadians were participating.
People in the US view the Olympics differently than most of the rest of the world (to a degree)... viewership is motivated primarily by patriotism and women make up the majority of the audience. It's less a sporting event than a two week long celebration of American exceptionalism with lots of (artificial) drama thrown in on the side. We really couldn't care less who wins gold in women's all around unless she's American or has a really cool story.
And, of course, every country has their bias in event selection. In India, coverage focused heavily on field hockey and badminton. In Korea, archery was shown on every channel both live and in primetime. The BBC, while avoiding the jingoism inherent in NBC's coverage, were openly cheering for British athletes. NBC isn't THAT exceptional.
Go tell that to advertisers and see if they're still willing to pay the same rates. Keep in mind that NBC almost always loses money on the Olympics anyway, you think they should take this risk why? As you say, people are going to watch regardless.
NBC's internal research has continually shown that knowing the results of events makes no impact whatsoever on viewing patterns... people will just say "I want to see how Phelps lost that race!". And as long as that's still true and as long as people are going to watch NBC regardless, there's absolutely zero incentive for anything to change. These past Olympics were the best rated EVER... even Beijing, whose timezone allowed for live events in primetime, didn't even come close to them. It's possible NBC knows what it's doing.
I wouldn't correlate those increased ratings as evidence of anything other than increased numbers of potential viewers and expanded avenues for content delivery; Olympic ratings were dramatically increased (by 88% over the Beijing games) in Canada too.
There may be no financial incentive for NBC to do whatever the heck they please to maximum revenue from a monopoly position in respect to broadcasting Olympic rights. However, I suspect that brand loyalty towards broadcast networks does exist amongst U.S. television watchers though (it certainly does in Canada although that is partly because one of our largest broadcasters is public and the other is private), and the bad press and customer complaints that NBC has earned doesn't help to engender that.
In Canada, CBC just bought the rights to the next 2 Olympics, and I am thrilled about that largely because I prefer HOW they cover the games. That will likely translate into even longer viewing hours from me and my being potentially more receptive to whatever other content that they are cross-promoting.
Quote:
I also prefer sporting events on my TV, but I know if I want to watch QPR play Swansea on Saturday, I'll have to do it online. If I can make that "sacrifice", why isn't it good enough for you?
Not enough value for money. I am a Tottenham fan myself, but it isn't worth it for me to pay extra to watch them online or to pay for extra specialty channels just to be able to see them a few more times during the year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy77
CTV covered a large amount of events(in their entirety) regardless whether Canadians were participating.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brodie
People in the US view the Olympics differently than most of the rest of the world (to a degree)... viewership is motivated primarily by patriotism and women make up the majority of the audience. It's less a sporting event than a two week long celebration of American exceptionalism with lots of (artificial) drama thrown in on the side. We really couldn't care less who wins gold in women's all around unless she's American or has a really cool story.
And, of course, every country has their bias in event selection. In India, coverage focused heavily on field hockey and badminton. In Korea, archery was shown on every channel both live and in primetime. The BBC, while avoiding the jingoism inherent in NBC's coverage, were openly cheering for British athletes. NBC isn't THAT exceptional.
I agree with you there. In Canada coverage always (and rightfully) focused on events where Canadians were competing. Of course, there was also lengthy coverage of events where there were no Canadians participating, but that should be no surprise when the vast majority of the marquee event finals had no Canadians in them. (Canada does much better in the winter games.)
You just compared the rights paid for this year's games with a significant time zone difference to the rights paid for 4 future Olympics, at least one of which will take place in a similar time zone. And you've also compared rights paid in two different countries where broadcast rights carry vastly disproportionate potential for direct and indirect revenue streams.
