NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
That's irrelevant. The advertising dollars, which fund the broadcasts, which pay the rights fees to the NFL, are tied to viewership. If viewership is down there will quickly be a reduction in revenue for the league.
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
That's irrelevant. The advertising dollars, which fund the broadcasts, which pay the rights fees to the NFL, are tied to viewership. If viewership is down there will quickly be a reduction in revenue for the league.
Math is culturally insensitive to economists.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
That's irrelevant. The advertising dollars, which fund the broadcasts, which pay the rights fees to the NFL, are tied to viewership. If viewership is down there will quickly be a reduction in revenue for the league.
Math is culturally insensitive to economists.
Economists have only hindsight, can't see what's coming ahead.
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
Yeah, but that could also be that you don't have a few TV shows with elite ratings stealing a lot of thunder, but instead have a bunch of shows with average ratings.
NFL Sunday night football's rating is up slightly over the last 10 years (from 10.5 to 11.1), but completely gone are the dominant ratings of American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, and CSI.
Has anyone here watched a show that was new this season? I can't think of a one other than Orville that was any good and it is more of a cult show than one with broad ratings success.
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
That's irrelevant. The advertising dollars, which fund the broadcasts, which pay the rights fees to the NFL, are tied to viewership. If viewership is down there will quickly be a reduction in revenue for the league.
Not if it is the game in town. If all else is crap (which it is) and you want to reach the max audience (you do) it's the NFL.
Initial reports are that revenue was up about 2% this year. I'm not arguing they have challenges, just that they aren't failing.
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
That's irrelevant. The advertising dollars, which fund the broadcasts, which pay the rights fees to the NFL, are tied to viewership. If viewership is down there will quickly be a reduction in revenue for the league.
Not if it is the game in town. If all else is crap (which it is) and you want to reach the max audience (you do) it's the NFL.
Initial reports are that revenue was up about 2% this year. I'm not arguing they have challenges, just that they aren't failing.
They're certainly not failing. They just peaked a couple years back for the time being and are coming back down to earth.
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
Yeah, but that could also be that you don't have a few TV shows with elite ratings stealing a lot of thunder, but instead have a bunch of shows with average ratings.
NFL Sunday night football's rating is up slightly over the last 10 years (from 10.5 to 11.1), but completely gone are the dominant ratings of American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, and CSI.
Has anyone here watched a show that was new this season? I can't think of a one other than Orville that was any good and it is more of a cult show than one with broad ratings success.
It's all the more impressive that the NFL can still get eyeballs on a TV when no one else can. The "same" reality shows would draw 18 million viewers now draws a lot less. The drama that drew 15 million draws a lot less. The NFL puts a lot of eyeballs on TV.
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
That's irrelevant. The advertising dollars, which fund the broadcasts, which pay the rights fees to the NFL, are tied to viewership. If viewership is down there will quickly be a reduction in revenue for the league.
Math is culturally insensitive to economists.
No PhD here so not really an economist, but yeah I understand that the NFL is a monopoly. I understand there are a number of different distributors of content. I understand there are a lot of companies that like to advertise to the football demographic. I understand that no one puts more eyeballs on a TV than football, and it isn't even close.
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
Yeah, but that could also be that you don't have a few TV shows with elite ratings stealing a lot of thunder, but instead have a bunch of shows with average ratings.
NFL Sunday night football's rating is up slightly over the last 10 years (from 10.5 to 11.1), but completely gone are the dominant ratings of American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, and CSI.
Has anyone here watched a show that was new this season? I can't think of a one other than Orville that was any good and it is more of a cult show than one with broad ratings success.
It's all the more impressive that the NFL can still get eyeballs on a TV when no one else can. The "same" reality shows would draw 18 million viewers now draws a lot less. The drama that drew 15 million draws a lot less. The NFL puts a lot of eyeballs on TV.
And the NFL...draws a lot less.
Less does not mean more. The total dollars aren't fixed and dispersed prorata. If I'm getting 10% fewer viewers I'm going to pay 10% less for my advertising. I have to put those ad dollars elsewhere, beyond TV, to pick up that other viewer contact.
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
That's irrelevant. The advertising dollars, which fund the broadcasts, which pay the rights fees to the NFL, are tied to viewership. If viewership is down there will quickly be a reduction in revenue for the league.
Math is culturally insensitive to economists.
No PhD here so not really an economist, but yeah I understand that the NFL is a monopoly. I understand there are a number of different distributors of content. I understand there are a lot of companies that like to advertise to the football demographic. I understand that no one puts more eyeballs on a TV than football, and it isn't even close.
Yet fewer eyeballs than before so the ad costs are less.
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
That's irrelevant. The advertising dollars, which fund the broadcasts, which pay the rights fees to the NFL, are tied to viewership. If viewership is down there will quickly be a reduction in revenue for the league.
Math is culturally insensitive to economists.
Economists have only hindsight, can't see what's coming ahead.
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
Yeah, but that could also be that you don't have a few TV shows with elite ratings stealing a lot of thunder, but instead have a bunch of shows with average ratings.
NFL Sunday night football's rating is up slightly over the last 10 years (from 10.5 to 11.1), but completely gone are the dominant ratings of American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, and CSI.
Has anyone here watched a show that was new this season? I can't think of a one other than Orville that was any good and it is more of a cult show than one with broad ratings success.
It's all the more impressive that the NFL can still get eyeballs on a TV when no one else can. The "same" reality shows would draw 18 million viewers now draws a lot less. The drama that drew 15 million draws a lot less. The NFL puts a lot of eyeballs on TV.
And the NFL...draws a lot less.
Less does not mean more. The total dollars aren't fixed and dispersed prorata. If I'm getting 10% fewer viewers I'm going to pay 10% less for my advertising. I have to put those ad dollars elsewhere, beyond TV, to pick up that other viewer contact.
Where did I say less was more?
The NFL is a monopoly. They can get more viewers than anything else. There are numerous broadcasters that will pay for rights and expanding with Amazon, Twitter, Facebook. The NFL will do a good job of extracting the majority of the surplus so advertisers will be paying more per eyeball. They may get less from their next TV deal but they're now getting other deals they didn't get five years ago - see Amazon.
NFL games accounted for 37 of the year's top 50 broadcasts, or nearly three-quarters (74%) of the most-watched programs on TV. That marked a 32% increase compared to 2016, when the NFL had 28 of the top 50 most-watched programs, and was flat versus the 37 top broadcasts the NFL had in the previous year.
That's right, no one puts eyes on television like the NFL. While ratings were down for the NFL, it was consistent with the drop with all other broadcasts (don't ignore the denominator).
Yeah, but that could also be that you don't have a few TV shows with elite ratings stealing a lot of thunder, but instead have a bunch of shows with average ratings.
NFL Sunday night football's rating is up slightly over the last 10 years (from 10.5 to 11.1), but completely gone are the dominant ratings of American Idol, Dancing with the Stars, and CSI.
Has anyone here watched a show that was new this season? I can't think of a one other than Orville that was any good and it is more of a cult show than one with broad ratings success.
It's all the more impressive that the NFL can still get eyeballs on a TV when no one else can. The "same" reality shows would draw 18 million viewers now draws a lot less. The drama that drew 15 million draws a lot less. The NFL puts a lot of eyeballs on TV.
And the NFL...draws a lot less.
Less does not mean more. The total dollars aren't fixed and dispersed prorata. If I'm getting 10% fewer viewers I'm going to pay 10% less for my advertising. I have to put those ad dollars elsewhere, beyond TV, to pick up that other viewer contact.
Where did I say less was more?
The NFL is a monopoly. They can get more viewers than anything else. There are numerous broadcasters that will pay for rights and expanding with Amazon, Twitter, Facebook. The NFL will do a good job of extracting the majority of the surplus so advertisers will be paying more per eyeball. They may get less from their next TV deal but they're now getting other deals they didn't get five years ago - see Amazon.
Their collective deal will be less. And the majority of viewers are not part of the Amazon, Facebook, Twitter crowd but traditional cable TV. Again, it's all about the total number of viewers and that is currently down and, even with expanded media options, is likely to continue downward. If the eyeballs are less the dollars are less.
133743Hokie wrote:Their collective deal will be less.
Maybe.
133743Hokie wrote:And the majority of viewers are not part of the Amazon, Facebook, Twitter crowd but traditional cable TV. Again, it's all about the total number of viewers and that is currently down and, even with expanded media options, is likely to continue downward. If the eyeballs are less the dollars are less.
They are a monopoly. They will be able to get more money out of the suppliers of content (per eyeball) because they draw the most viewers. Will their next package be worth more money overall, I'm not sure.
133743Hokie wrote:Their collective deal will be less.
Maybe.
133743Hokie wrote:And the majority of viewers are not part of the Amazon, Facebook, Twitter crowd but traditional cable TV. Again, it's all about the total number of viewers and that is currently down and, even with expanded media options, is likely to continue downward. If the eyeballs are less the dollars are less.
They are a monopoly. They will be able to get more money out of the suppliers of content (per eyeball) because they draw the most viewers. Will their next package be worth more money overall, I'm not sure.
You have no idea how media works. No one will pay more for less. The whole perspective is whacky, advertisers will just spread dollars across more platforms and shows to get eyeballs. They're online anyway.