NBA working w/ Draftkings & Fanduel to introduce betting into the League Pass app

[dougthonus]

I think they need to negotiate non-exclusive rights which would open up a lot of possibilities

The exclusivity is what has historically driven up the price, but I'd wager a guess it's just wild speculation for either of us on whether that is a good or bad decision on their part.

What we can say for sure, is if they keep wanting to grow revenue with a disintegrating affiliate model that they need to find a new way to package and sell the product and face some significant challenges.

[League Circles]

I think they need to negotiate non-exclusive rights which would open up a lot of possibilities

The exclusivity is what has historically driven up the price, but I'd wager a guess it's just wild speculation for either of us on whether that is a good or bad decision on their part.

What we can say for sure, is if they keep wanting to grow revenue with a disintegrating affiliate model that they need to find a new way to package and sell the product and face some significant challenges.

Agreed, but they need to understand that it's them that have the desirable product. I think they should drive a hard line with espn, tnt etc. they need to force the issue and force tnt and espn to allow to offer streaming.

I won't pay 75/month for YouTube tv until the Bulls get over 500 record, but I WOULD pay most of that for a real direct streaming package. The reason is that I see all the other stuff on cable as actually decreasing the value, not even as a small bonus. I don't want that programming in my house, period. In effect, I'd pay MORE for 100% nba streaming than I would for cable which is already 100% nba coverage plus all of the other diarrhea that I actively don't want.

[dougthonus]

Agreed, but they need to understand that it's them that have the desirable product. I think they should drive a hard line with espn, tnt etc. they need to force the issue and force tnt and espn to allow to offer streaming.

I won't pay 75/month for YouTube tv until the Bulls get over 500 record, but I WOULD pay most of that for a real direct streaming package. The reason is that I see all the other stuff on cable as actually decreasing the value, not even as a small bonus. I don't want that programming in my house, period. In effect, I'd pay MORE for 100% nba streaming than I would for cable which is already 100% nba coverage plus all of the other diarrhea that I actively don't want.

I would guess you are exceptionally rare. I can't imagine even 1% of people would pay more money to remove stuff even if they never use it. I would also guess that many people who like the NBA like at least one other sport (like I also love watching Bears games) and so my value for streaming is something like
30% Bulls
30% Bears
15% NBA other teams (including playoffs)
15% NFL other teams (including playoffs)
10% Other channels I watch sporadically (sometimes sports radio talk shows during the day, or NBA TV or occasional NHL / MLB / Tennis / Golf event or even more rarely recording some show I want to watch for on demand viewing later)

At any rate, I'm sure they are negotiating hard, but those affiliates are not able to turn profits on the prices they used to pay anymore and without exclusivity probably will be able to turn even less profits. ESPN has been getting absolutely killed and so has TNT financially. It's going to be tough to extract more out of them, which is why I think the solution is Amazon buying exclusivity over the product or Apple.

[League Circles]

Agreed, but they need to understand that it's them that have the desirable product. I think they should drive a hard line with espn, tnt etc. they need to force the issue and force tnt and espn to allow to offer streaming.

I won't pay 75/month for YouTube tv until the Bulls get over 500 record, but I WOULD pay most of that for a real direct streaming package. The reason is that I see all the other stuff on cable as actually decreasing the value, not even as a small bonus. I don't want that programming in my house, period. In effect, I'd pay MORE for 100% nba streaming than I would for cable which is already 100% nba coverage plus all of the other diarrhea that I actively don't want.

I would guess you are exceptionally rare. I can't imagine even 1% of people would pay more money to remove stuff even if they never use it. I would also guess that many people who like the NBA like at least one other sport (like I also love watching Bears games) and so my value for streaming is something like
30% Bulls
30% Bears
15% NBA other teams (including playoffs)
15% NFL other teams (including playoffs)
10% Other channels I watch sporadically (sometimes sports radio talk shows during the day, or NBA TV or occasional NHL / MLB / Tennis / Golf event or even more rarely recording some show I want to watch for on demand viewing later)

At any rate, I'm sure they are negotiating hard, but those affiliates are not able to turn profits on the prices they used to pay anymore and without exclusivity probably will be able to turn even less profits. ESPN has been getting absolutely killed and so has TNT financially. It's going to be tough to extract more out of them, which is why I think the solution is Amazon buying exclusivity over the product or Apple.

You're right in the sense that I accidentally conflated. Some things. I'd pay more for commercial free streaming (as I used to with LP broadband before I lived in the Chicago market), but of course that would then cost that much more.

If ESPN and TNT can't pay as much as they used to in an inflationary environment with an increasingly popular product (I assume), that's just proof that they aren't the right carrier for the product anymore. I don't really see why the NBA should sell to amazon or apple as opposed to just offer it themselves direct to consumer.

Fwiw, I like watching the Bears too, but the majority of their games can be watched OTA or on Amazon.

[dougthonus]

If ESPN and TNT can't pay as much as they used to in an inflationary environment with an increasingly popular product (I assume), that's just proof that they aren't the right carrier for the product anymore. I don't really see why the NBA should sell to amazon or apple as opposed to just offer it themselves direct to consumer.

Fwiw, I like watching the Bears too, but the majority of their games can be watched OTA or on Amazon.

The full TV product isn't increasingly popular from what I can tell. TV is not increasingly popular. People are just ditching TV and people are not watching sports in general in greater numbers. The best thing about sports is that they were able to singlehandedly drive cable subscriptions, but they are starting to fail at that.

The amount of money that justified those ratings were the fact that people had to buy all this stuff they didn't want just for it, but that era is ending, because younger people aren't watching sports in the same way.

The NBA will probably have to figure out how to capitalize on money on Tic Tok or Instagram or whatever, because the audience is moving in other directions IMO. I'm not an expert in social media monetary value, but I'd guess monetizing that is where they need to make their bread in the future.

I use apple/amazon as examples because they are the carriers that have the money and profitability to pay which (to your point) is why I think they may be the right carriers. They may want the property not because of its direct profitability but for what it can do for them in a more holistic sense like ESPN / TNT may have felt like in the past when affiliate subscriptions had more value.

I could be wrong on that, but I'm not sure who the right carrier is if it isn't one of those guys.

Agree to your point theoretically on OTA for Bears games, but I don't know many people with OTAs. If CBS/FOX started streaming games on smart TV channels but were still freely available, I think that would be different.

[DropStep]

I wonder how long as a society that we continue to let this slide? I mean, 'we' (societal collective) pushed back on tobacco and forced them essentially out of the sponsorship avenue for many sports... I think a time will come for gambling.

We're going the other direction, though. Tobacco was fine, then it wasn't. Gambling wasn't, now it will be. We would have to boomerang in the other direction to rein it in, and will take a lot to make that happen, especially once there is a whole ecosystem of people making money off of it. Nobody got cancer from gambling, and the moral majority types have moved on to ... other culture war things. There will have to be three or four major scandals to derail this train. Even then, the gambling scandals might just bring the sport down with it, rather than causing a divorce. They are getting so intertwined that they may just live and die together at this point.

[League Circles]

If ESPN and TNT can't pay as much as they used to in an inflationary environment with an increasingly popular product (I assume), that's just proof that they aren't the right carrier for the product anymore. I don't really see why the NBA should sell to amazon or apple as opposed to just offer it themselves direct to consumer.

Fwiw, I like watching the Bears too, but the majority of their games can be watched OTA or on Amazon.

The full TV product isn't increasingly popular from what I can tell. TV is not increasingly popular. People are just ditching TV and people are not watching sports in general in greater numbers. The best thing about sports is that they were able to singlehandedly drive cable subscriptions, but they are starting to fail at that.

The amount of money that justified those ratings were the fact that people had to buy all this stuff they didn't want just for it, but that era is ending, because younger people aren't watching sports in the same way.

The NBA will probably have to figure out how to capitalize on money on Tic Tok or Instagram or whatever, because the audience is moving in other directions IMO. I'm not an expert in social media monetary value, but I'd guess monetizing that is where they need to make their bread in the future.

I use apple/amazon as examples because they are the carriers that have the money and profitability to pay which (to your point) is why I think they may be the right carriers. They may want the property not because of its direct profitability but for what it can do for them in a more holistic sense like ESPN / TNT may have felt like in the past when affiliate subscriptions had more value.

I could be wrong on that, but I'm not sure who the right carrier is if it isn't one of those guys.

Agree to your point theoretically on OTA for Bears games, but I don't know many people with OTAs. If CBS/FOX started streaming games on smart TV channels but were still freely available, I think that would be different.

If the NBA product isn't in increasing theoretical demand (let's call it interest), I don't know what to think about the insane contracts that the players are getting.

I'm saying that the right carrier is the NBA itself, just like they already have been for NBALP broadband (not sure if that's still a thing, I last had it like 10-12 years ago when I lived out of state). Why let amazon or apple skim off your product? That's kinda my whole point, the content is king. That's why Netflix went all-in on creating their own high value content years ago when they were ruling the roost on streaming platform interface etc. delivery mechanism is a relative small factor - I'm guessing it's pretty straightforward to build a high performance streaming platform now days, which again, I'm pretty sure the NBA already has. Maybe they could get a little more exposure being directly on amazon or apple, but what I'd suggest they do is sell direct to consumer and then also sell individual games and slightly marked up or differently bundled, non exclusive packages to users of apple, amazon, netflix, cable, tnt, espn etc.

It's kind of a weird shame that people don't use OTA. It's significantly better video quality and 100% free and fuss-free. I'm a hypocrite though cause I've been planning on getting one for many years with the intent that for 5-6 months a year at least it would be my only tv service (plus Netflix, amazon, hbo max), and then just turn on and off YouTubeTV during Bulls season, or use a VPN mask and get LP. But then basketball season ends and I don't care about any TV til the fall when the Bears start, and then I never find the time to install it on my roof before the weather gets bad. The right equipment which will cast the feed from your wifi router to any smart tv or device and record stuff and everything is only about $200 one time fee. And we're talking 4K uncompressed video with much better color range than streaming or cable. It's like watching a blu ray.

[Ccwatercraft]

They should grow up and figure out how to price and package their product correctly. I know I'd pay waaaay more for a true streaming product than they'd get as my share of a cable/satellite bundle. Obviously I'm just one person and perhaps somewhat of an outlier, but it shouldn't be impossible for them to get adequately creative and analytical with what they should offer and charge in order to maintain revenue.

In the end, people who don't watch sports have been subsidizing sports for a long time. Now that this subsidy is ending with cord cutters, you need to pay probably need to pay $50 a month to watch just the NBA to make up for the lack of subsidy.

It's a huge problem for them. The couple obvious bailouts they have potentially are:

1: Big tech company basically buying it for their platform (Amazon / Apple) and they get subsidized based on that company wanting the property.

2: Gambling income

Might be another option, but unlikely they can start charging you like $500 a year for NBA league pass with local game options.

$500 seems nuts, but I think people pay close to that for Football don't they?

[ImSlower]

Here's another wrench in the system of broadcast revenue:

The vast majority of live sports I've seen televised in my life is at my back as I bartend. Every bar or restaurant I've ever worked, and every bar all of you have ever visited, has had a sketchy relationship with broadcasts. In theory, prices of cable memberships, MLB packages etc all go up in price *vastly* if it's theoretically meant for public viewing.

Specifically, Pay-Per-View events may cost a household 60 bucks, but a sports bar, to legally show a Saturday night fight, might have to spend 3000 dollars or more. This is why the high volume Irish pub I worked 2 doors down from Madison Square Garden charged $30 covers to watch big boxing events happening live not 200 feet away. My bosses had to pay like $10 grand - for one night - just to have the fight on their TVs because the pub was so big. As streaming services inevitably take over, I have no idea how they will charge businesses airing their content to a crowd, versus a household account.

[dougthonus]

Here's another wrench in the system of broadcast revenue:

The vast majority of live sports I've seen televised in my life is at my back as I bartend. Every bar or restaurant I've ever worked, and every bar all of you have ever visited, has had a sketchy relationship with broadcasts. In theory, prices of cable memberships, MLB packages etc all go up in price *vastly* if it's theoretically meant for public viewing.

Specifically, Pay-Per-View events may cost a household 60 bucks, but a sports bar, to legally show a Saturday night fight, might have to spend 3000 dollars or more. This is why the high volume Irish pub I worked 2 doors down from Madison Square Garden charged $30 covers to watch big boxing events happening live not 200 feet away. My bosses had to pay like $10 grand - for one night - just to have the fight on their TVs because the pub was so big. As streaming services inevitably take over, I have no idea how they will charge businesses airing their content to a crowd, versus a household account.

Probably you end up in the same boat of you PPV the fight on an app, but you have to register separately based on whether you are a business or individual.

[SalmonsSuperfan]

"nba working to destroy itself in the long run to make a few bucks next year"

when are people going to actually catch on to the fact that it's purely evil and greed

[Mk0]

My sig somehow gets truer every day

[Michael Jackson]

"nba working to destroy itself in the long run to make a few bucks next year"

when are people going to actually catch on to the fact that it's purely evil and greed

What was it when where they guy always bet on Rocky?

[d boy gentleman]

Just goes to show that the socially conscious NBA will go in bed with anyone if the money is right.

All of this still means games will be blacked out

[RagingBull316]

I'm sure that won't influence any calls

You think the refs are all going to be wearing those secret service ear pieces now?

"Betting just went up on Boston -3 for the 3rd quarter. Ice them."

*The ref gently taps his nose twice and then wipes his brow*

It's only a matter of time before someone starts banging on a trash can to signal a ref much like the Astros did to win a World Series, or perhaps flashing a phone flashlight to give them a signal.

All this gambling without any oversight to the officials is just going to cause even more corruption in the league. It's only a matter of time until another ref gets caught and we will see if the league survives it.

[SalmonsSuperfan]

"nba working to destroy itself in the long run to make a few bucks next year"

when are people going to actually catch on to the fact that it's purely evil and greed

What was it when where they guy always bet on Rocky?

I don’t understand the reference (I think this was a reference to something) but I’m not complaining about the gambling environment prior to Murphy vs NCAA. Any non-addict American who cares about his fellow man and the state of society would be supporting creating federal laws to restrict the idiocy of trump’s court.

[dougthonus]

It's only a matter of time before someone starts banging on a trash can to signal a ref much like the Astros did to win a World Series, or perhaps flashing a phone flashlight to give them a signal.

All this gambling without any oversight to the officials is just going to cause even more corruption in the league. It's only a matter of time until another ref gets caught and we will see if the league survives it.

Why do you think there is no oversight to officials? That seems like a pretty wild assumption unless you have some explicit reason to think it. I mean as a general rule, there is oversight of all employees, and we certainly know the league is actively tracking officials and call accuracy already.

It'd probably take about a week to set up some integration with that data and gambling results and algorithmically find cheating without even looking hard.

I think the bigger risk is that the NBA is complicit in the cheating itself.

[RagingBull316]

I could just as well ask the same, why do you think there is oversight? Having the NBA watch over and grade it's refs is definitely not oversight, especially when they don't release 99% of that information to anybody outside the league. The fact that people in the league office have all the inside data of how each official calls a game and what notes they are given prior to the games make's it all the more likely that someone in the league office can use that information to gamble and influence games.

[Michael Jackson]

"nba working to destroy itself in the long run to make a few bucks next year"

when are people going to actually catch on to the fact that it's purely evil and greed

What was it when where they guy always bet on Rocky?

I don’t understand the reference (I think this was a reference to something) but I’m not complaining about the gambling environment prior to Murphy vs NCAA. Any non-addict American who cares about his fellow man and the state of society would be supporting creating federal laws to restrict the idiocy of trump’s court.

I had to look it up. lol it was actually. Chevy Chase in Dirty Work and he tells Norm McDonald he bets on Mr T. lol.

[SalmonsSuperfan]

What was it when where they guy always bet on Rocky?

I don’t understand the reference (I think this was a reference to something) but I’m not complaining about the gambling environment prior to Murphy vs NCAA. Any non-addict American who cares about his fellow man and the state of society would be supporting creating federal laws to restrict the idiocy of trump’s court.

I had to look it up. lol it was actually. Chevy Chase in Dirty Work and he tells Norm McDonald he bets on Mr T. lol.

never heard of the movie but both of those guys are awesome so I'll be watching it tonight