leadcounsel wrote: I'll refrain from the name calling which the NFL fanatics here love to engage in. Instead, they're just once again flat wrong. 20% ratings decline and TV partners losing hundreds of millions this year spells big trouble for the NFL. The NFL was PROJECTED back in March to bring in $14 billion in 2017, months before the season started. This was based on complex long term contracts and paid in complex payments from a host of sources. And guess what, that's exactly what has happened. Unless they were fortune tellers, here's their predictions preseason. Here's a trusted business article that proves it. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonbelze ... n-in-2016/Quote: NFL revenue reaches $14B, fueled by media
By Daniel Kaplan, Staff Writer
The NFL will take in roughly $14 billion of revenue this season, over $900 million more than last year.
Increased media payments, a new “Thursday Night Football” package, and the opening of the new U.S. Bank Stadium in Minnesota all contributed to the increase.
And in spite of tanking ratings, those complex pre-paid contracts and such still kick in. Even thought the NFL is taking a pounding hemorrhaging fans. Five days ago, it was reported that NFL partners are losing $500,000,000 this year. https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/nfl- ... s-decline/Quote: NFL TV Partners Set To Lose Up To $500 Million On Ratings Decline
Posted on November 16, 2017 by Clay Travis
NFL, TV partners at CBS, ESPN, Fox and NBC are staring at their own internal conflicts — namely a substantial decline in NFL ratings that is on pace to cost the four networks up to $500 million in lost revenue.
Already several hundred million in lost revenue has been booked in 2017 and it has the league’s top executives and television partners scrambling to figure out what went wrong. How did a league that was setting ratings records in 2015 suddenly see its audience fall by nearly 20% just two years later.
You keep leading with the phrase that you won't use name calling, while calling people here names, like fanatic, yet no one called you a name since your last post.
Sympathy card denied.
I do have to ask, though, are you SURE you're a lawyer?
The reason I ask is, NOTHING in your 2nd quote refutes your first quote, yet you act like its a victory.
Your repeated claim is that the NFL is losing money. Over, and over, that's been your mantra.
Then you march out your second quote, as if that's proof.
It's not.
Your first quote confirms MY statement that the NFL will be up over $900 Million this year, to bring in $14 Billion.
Thanks for confirming my statement.
You then try to use the phrase "it was reported that NFL partners are losing $500,000,000 this year..."
The NFL isn't losing anything, they are up nearly a billion...it's "NFL PARTNERS THAT ARE LOSING..."
That's NOT the NFL. That's NFL PARTNERS.
If you followed football, you would know that 5 and 10 years ago, all the networks tried to outbid ESPN for broadcast rights to NFL games. Everyone had to overpay to keep ESPN from exclusivity.
Since you don't know, I will tell you, that ESPN (now owned by ABC/Disney), has layed off nearly 500 people, including a lot of on air talent, even though they spent millions building new studios, due to their overbidding, and overpayment.
All networks failed to see the impact online viewing, cord-cutting, DVR, and Fantasy Leagues would have on monitored viewership.
When ESPN overpaid, all the networks claimed they were overpricing the market, and they were right. But, they also didn't want to be left out, so they overpaid, too.
Despite all the political crap going on, the financial impact FOR THE PARTNERS (networks, sponsors, etc.) is nothing more than a market adjustment, just like you would see on Wall Street, if something is overvalued.
And with negotiations currently ongoing for new TV deals, having networks 'float information' that they are losing money, is neither new, nor necessarily accurate.
So, if next year they make $13 Billion, instead of $14 Billion, they aren't losing money; they just aren't making as much as they did this year.
Thanks for fully supporting my point, though, you're 'da greatest 
Go Hawks! 
|
