- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Peacock wildcard game was the most-streamed live event in US history
Posted on 1/16/24 at 11:26 am to sourgrapes18
Posted on 1/16/24 at 11:26 am to sourgrapes18
quote:
I refuse to download another streaming service to watch NFL
or pay for one. The NFL model will not support this long term. There may be a short term gain but the losses in viewership plus value of brand will take a serious beating long term if they ever move off of free TV. It doesn't mean they won't try.
0
Posted on 1/16/24 at 11:28 am to Diseasefreeforall
Hope they put more playoff games on there
Posted on 1/16/24 at 11:30 am to TrueTiger
quote:Thecaw was right again! Told u all that all the boycott virtue signaling online was bullshite and ppl were going to watch it anyways.
get ready for every game to be PPV
Posted on 1/16/24 at 11:41 am to Diseasefreeforall
Sports Media Watch
@paulsen_smw
·Jan 14
Includes out-of-home viewing
——-
How do they know how many viewed out-of-home? Do restaurants and bars provide numbers of people? It would seem to me that more than the usual viewers in those locations made the attempt to watch the game at them.
——
Sports Media Watch
@paulsen_smw
·Jan 14
Nielsen panelists carry portable people meters that are able to track audio in bars, restaurants, etc.
——-
So they just guess?
If I’m sitting at a bar and there are 3 TVs behind the bar and one had hockey, one had college basketball and one had the Dolphins on how would they possibly know what I’m watching?
—————
That last comment wasn’t replied to. How would they know the numbers at bars and food establishments? It would be biased based on where the collection person sat and what their device picked up. Very sketchy. I don’t trust that they got those numbers correctly.
And who can actually dispute them? Thats the problem with ratings. Its very subjective with adding on outside of home viewers. And the random people they use to monitor too.
It is impossible to dispute their numbers. And to come out with numbers less than 24 hours later and pimp it on another football telecast? This seems like it was prearranged to have an ad ready in less than 24 hours on a holiday weekend. Its like they made it before the game even happened.
With ratings agencies adding out of home viewers to ratings its very sketchy info imo. Too many variables that can be taken advantage of as needed.
Also, the local markets had over the air telecasts and those are added to the “streaming” numbers not deducted. Misleading again.
They have money reasons to show high numbers and therefore I don’t trust them. SMW predictcted 17m and they do this for a living. To be that much off is unheard of and another reason I don’t trust reported numbers.
@paulsen_smw
·Jan 14
Includes out-of-home viewing
——-
How do they know how many viewed out-of-home? Do restaurants and bars provide numbers of people? It would seem to me that more than the usual viewers in those locations made the attempt to watch the game at them.
——
Sports Media Watch
@paulsen_smw
·Jan 14
Nielsen panelists carry portable people meters that are able to track audio in bars, restaurants, etc.
——-
So they just guess?
If I’m sitting at a bar and there are 3 TVs behind the bar and one had hockey, one had college basketball and one had the Dolphins on how would they possibly know what I’m watching?
—————
That last comment wasn’t replied to. How would they know the numbers at bars and food establishments? It would be biased based on where the collection person sat and what their device picked up. Very sketchy. I don’t trust that they got those numbers correctly.
And who can actually dispute them? Thats the problem with ratings. Its very subjective with adding on outside of home viewers. And the random people they use to monitor too.
It is impossible to dispute their numbers. And to come out with numbers less than 24 hours later and pimp it on another football telecast? This seems like it was prearranged to have an ad ready in less than 24 hours on a holiday weekend. Its like they made it before the game even happened.
With ratings agencies adding out of home viewers to ratings its very sketchy info imo. Too many variables that can be taken advantage of as needed.
Also, the local markets had over the air telecasts and those are added to the “streaming” numbers not deducted. Misleading again.
They have money reasons to show high numbers and therefore I don’t trust them. SMW predictcted 17m and they do this for a living. To be that much off is unheard of and another reason I don’t trust reported numbers.
This post was edited on 1/16/24 at 11:45 am
Posted on 1/16/24 at 11:47 am to TrueTiger
Here it is 2024 and it's becoming infinitely more difficult to just watch a ball game on TV.
Gone are the days of just turning TV on and flipping a few channels
Gone are the days of just turning TV on and flipping a few channels
Posted on 1/16/24 at 11:58 am to Diseasefreeforall
Not sure why anyone would be happy about this. I have no problem with Peacock, but pretty insane imo for the NFL to agree to this. The poor and middle class are what built the NFL for decades, now they are pushing those folks aside. Dont understand why you’d make it more difficult for your fans to watch a playoff game.
I mean, I do get it, money. Such a 2 faced, hypocritical organization.
I mean, I do get it, money. Such a 2 faced, hypocritical organization.
Posted on 1/16/24 at 12:09 pm to East Coast Band
quote:
Here it is 2024 and it's becoming infinitely more difficult to just watch a ball game on TV.
Yet you can get it on your phone in 30 seconds & watch anywhere
Posted on 1/16/24 at 12:11 pm to East Coast Band
quote:
it is 2024 and it's becoming infinitely more difficult to just watch a ball game on TV.
There was a time where you had to have a sizable technology investment to get multiple satellite feeds for games and sports bars pioneered the multi-game venue.
Then the time came where people could duplicate this in their home without spending a fortune.
Now it looks like we are going back to the old sports bar model where one venue will invest in multiple games because they can afford to and get a return for it.
Posted on 1/16/24 at 12:12 pm to JimTiger72
quote:
Yet you can get it on your phone in 30 seconds & watch anywhere
Watching a playoff game on your phone or laptop seems miserable. That’s going backwards from being able to watch it on an actual television on a regular network
Posted on 1/16/24 at 12:22 pm to Diseasefreeforall
quote:
23 million total viewers (including local TV broadcasts)
So based on prior numbers it's among the least-watched playoff games in recent history.
Frick you NBC for thinking I'd sign up for your useless Peacock service just to watch one out-of-market game.
Posted on 1/16/24 at 12:32 pm to footswitch
quote:
bullshite
I agree. In December Peacock was touting how they had 30MM subscribers. Yahoo Finance
I am sure some people signed up to watch the game, but even still, the math just doesn’t make a lot of sense. I wonder if they included everyone that was watching Peacock as watching the game (even if they were watching something else).
Posted on 1/16/24 at 12:35 pm to Diseasefreeforall
quote:
but it didn’t reveal how many new subscribers were added.
Probably because a lot of those viewers used a 7-day trial account. I wonder how many folks will remember to cancel that subscription.
Posted on 1/16/24 at 12:53 pm to Zanzibaw
quote:
So by streaming the game, they lost out on roughly 15 million viewers. Smashing success.
The linear TV model is dying a slow death. Sports are the only thing keeping linear TVs head above water.
Ultimately, it was probably a good bit of business to test the waters of streaming for future endeavors.
Posted on 1/16/24 at 12:57 pm to Diseasefreeforall
quote:
For comparison the Cowboys/Packers game had 40 million viewers.
These numbers never seem believable. There's roughly 250 million adults in the US and I'm expected to believe that 16% of the entire US adult population was watching that football game? A blowout on top of it.
Posted on 1/16/24 at 1:13 pm to footswitch
quote:
bullshite
Posted on 1/16/24 at 1:13 pm to Diseasefreeforall
NFL crushing it per the usual
Posted on 1/16/24 at 1:26 pm to Diseasefreeforall
lol what happened to all the boycotts?
Posted on 1/16/24 at 1:37 pm to Deactived
quote:
These numbers never seem believable. There's roughly 250 million adults in the US and I'm expected to believe that 16% of the entire US adult population was watching that football game? A blowout on top of it.
My TV was on during it, but I feel asleep in my recliner early on, watching that snoozefest.
Posted on 1/16/24 at 2:02 pm to NorthshoreTiger76
quote:
lol what happened to all the boycotts?
On paper, this was the best game of the weekend and it pulled about 2/3 of what the average wild card game pulls. That's not a huge success- this game would have easily gotten 40M on broadcast
Posted on 1/16/24 at 2:21 pm to NorthshoreTiger76
quote:
lol what happened to all the boycotts?
Not sure about anyone else but the NFL might be the least woke thing on TV.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News