Vin Scully on NFL protests: I’ll never watch another game

[bilo]

...He’s every baseball fan’s favorite grandpa. And he had a front-row seat as the game was racially integrated in the 1950s, having begun his broadcasting career in Jackie Robinson’s fourth season and become a friend of Robinson himself. Now just shy of 90, he’s essentially the pope of the sport. For him to say that the spectacle of black players kneeling during the anthem to protest police brutality is an offense sufficient for him never to watch another NFL game is brutal. If the league wants to tell itself that only crazed Trumpers are willing to boycott the games to protest the protesters, that’s one thing. But gentlemanly Grandpa Vin? Good lord. Repent.

https://hotair.com/archives/2017/11/06/vin-scully-nfl-protests-ill-never-watch-another-game/

[bilo]

There is an incredible video at the link where Rick Monday snatches the flag away from some idiots that wanted to burn the flag.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbr1hNp-nI4

Vin Scully was the announcer.

[truth_seeker]

Rick Monday was in the announcer box, during the recent World Series games.

[bilo]

Rick Monday was in the announcer box, during the recent World Series games.

I did enjoy the series and didn't even realize that.

[musiclady]

The idea that it's only because of Trump that the NFL is being boycotted, or that it's only Trump supporters who are doing so, is absurd.

Equating Trump with love for country, respect for the troops and the flag, and saying that it's only his influence making people ignore the NFL is offensive.

I'm glad Grandpa Vin is speaking up.  The NFL is slitting its own proverbial throat.

But they won't "repent."   Because leftists never admit they were wrong.

[Concerned]

All these boycotts folks are talking about don’t seem to be negatively affecting advertising rates for the Super Bowl.  From 2007 to 2016, 30 second ads for the Super Bowl, went from $2.39M to $4.8M.  This year, Comcast is selling them for even more (“north of $5M”), and Comcast is expecting $350M in revenue from this year’s game.  The VP of ad sales said the following:

“Our marketplace is healthy,” said Lovinger, speaking with reporters Monday. He characterized sales for both events as “brisk,” and suggested NBC had only a “handful” of 30-second spots left in its Super Bowl inventory. “If an advertiser is interested in a premium position within the game, they really need to be in discussions with us,” he said.”

http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/super-bowl-winter-olympics-tv-advertising-nbc-1202602368/

[truth_seeker]

All these boycotts folks are talking about don’t seem to be negatively affecting advertising rates for the Super Bowl.  From 2007 to 2016, 30 second ads for the Super Bowl, went from $2.39M to $4.8M.  This year, Comcast is selling them for even more (“north of $5M”), and Comcast is expecting $350M in revenue from this year’s game.  The VP of ad sales said the following:

“Our marketplace is healthy,” said Lovinger, speaking with reporters Monday. He characterized sales for both events as “brisk,” and suggested NBC had only a “handful” of 30-second spots left in its Super Bowl inventory. “If an advertiser is interested in a premium position within the game, they really need to be in discussions with us,” he said.”

http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/super-bowl-winter-olympics-tv-advertising-nbc-1202602368/

My BIL sells advertising in a medium sized western market area, and he says their IS CONCERN.

Stadium and viewership figures are down substantially, and if an ad is paid for based on certain estimated viewer figures, and they underperform, the company is due a CREDIT.

That is effectively a reduced price paid for the ad, and a reduction of industry revenue.

And reduced income to the industry, comes off the top. The lost attendees and viewers are those which represent the greatest profit per unit, since fixed costs have already been covered (in terms of a breakeven analysis).

[Night Hides Not]

All these boycotts folks are talking about don’t seem to be negatively affecting advertising rates for the Super Bowl.  From 2007 to 2016, 30 second ads for the Super Bowl, went from $2.39M to $4.8M.  This year, Comcast is selling them for even more (“north of $5M”), and Comcast is expecting $350M in revenue from this year’s game.  The VP of ad sales said the following:

“Our marketplace is healthy,” said Lovinger, speaking with reporters Monday. He characterized sales for both events as “brisk,” and suggested NBC had only a “handful” of 30-second spots left in its Super Bowl inventory. “If an advertiser is interested in a premium position within the game, they really need to be in discussions with us,” he said.”

http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/super-bowl-winter-olympics-tv-advertising-nbc-1202602368/

Apples and oranges, comparing the demand for Super Bowl advertising vs. regular season games. Whether the audience is 50 million or 150 million, that's one helluva audience worth advertising to.

[Emjay]

Yeah, Vin, don't blame you, but Go Cowboys!

[Concerned]

My BIL sells advertising in a medium sized western market area, and he says their IS CONCERN.

Stadium and viewership figures are down substantially, and if an ad is paid for based on certain estimated viewer figures, and they underperform, the company is due a CREDIT.

That is effectively a reduced price paid for the ad, and a reduction of industry revenue.

And reduced income to the industry, comes off the top. The lost attendees and viewers are those which represent the greatest profit per unit, since fixed costs have already been covered (in terms of a breakeven analysis).

If the numbers or the source I posted are wrong, hopefully, you (or your BIL) will provide an authoritative source with correct and verifiable numbers.  I know Comcast has addressed those numbers with a variety of shareholder groups and they've gotten widespread press coverage.  I also know, for example, the NFL team split with their 32 teams, $7.25B in contract revenue.  Each team, for example, got $226.4M in 2014.  I suspect that's simply "found money" for most owners.  I would think those numbers would have be drastically cut to have any real impact on most owners. 

The fact that this year's Super Bowl, despite all the hoopla from the President, has apparently no trouble selling ads and at rates higher than the past 10 years, is a pretty good indication to me about the economics of these boycotts.   

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/7/20/9006401/nfl-teams-revenue-tv-deal-7-billion

[Concerned]

Apples and oranges, comparing the demand for Super Bowl advertising vs. regular season games. Whether the audience is 50 million or 150 million, that's one helluva audience worth advertising to.

It might be "worth advertising to", but if the audience is really likely to be significantly down (e.g., 50m versus 150 or whatever), simple supply and demand would indicate that ad rates should NOT be higher than the past 10 years:  yet, apparently they are ("north of $5M" for a 30 second ad and $350M in forecasted ad revenue forecast for Comcast). 

[Cyber Liberty]

From what I've seen in the media, the ad revenue for the game goes something like this:  There are assumed ratings for the games, which makes the basis points for the TV contracts the advertiser purchase.  In recent weeks, I've seen media reports that the advertisers (to either the companies or the advertising syndicates) have been paying refunds because the ratings weren't up to expectations.  To me, this makes the cash value of the ads a "lagging indicator" of the actual ratings.

That means the boastful "North of $5M" numbers being touted for this next year's Super Bowl are just pie in the sky that may or may not be realized, depending on the actual viewer ratings.  It's bass-ackwards to say the ratings are up because ad revenues are up.

[Concerned]

From what I've seen in the media, the ad revenue for the game goes something like this:  There are assumed ratings for the games, which makes the basis points for the TV contracts the advertiser purchase.  In recent weeks, I've seen media reports that the advertisers (to either the companies or the advertising syndicates) have been paying refunds because the ratings weren't up to expectations.  To me, this makes the cash value of the ads a "lagging indicator" of the actual ratings.

That means the boastful "North of $5M" numbers being touted for this next year's Super Bowl are just pie in the sky that may or may not be realized, depending on the actual viewer ratings.  It's bass-ackwards to say the ratings are up because ad revenues are up.

@Cyber Liberty

Did someone say ratings are up because ad revenues are up? 

It isn't in Comcast's best interest to set shareholder expectations about ad revenue with "pie in the sky" numbers only to disappoint them later.  If these boycotts are having such a significant effect on ratings, I'd expect that to be reflected in, what you call, the "assumed ratings". 

Is viewership down?  Yes, slightly from the data I’ve seen:  down this year about 7% compared to last year.  If it were really significantly down, I would expect to see rates for the upcoming Super Bowl to reflect the effect of these boycotts in the "assumed ratings" yet that doesn’t seem to be the case.   

As I mentioned before, the owners each got over $220M in TV contract revenue in 2014.   If ad rates for the Super Bowl aren’t going down (in fact, their up), how much should we expect the next TV contracts (and the associated money to be split among the owners) to go down?   Down 7% (to reflect the decrease in viewership this year? 10%?  30%?  50%?  If future TV contract revenues are down 50% (which is nonsensical to me), the owners “only” would receive, as their share, a little over $100M per team (using 2014 as a guide).  I doubt that would significantly impact the number of Lamborghini’s they have in their garages.

I know some people want these boycotts to have a devastating impact on the NFL, but my real point is that until it’s reflected in a significant change in the economics of the league, which I don’t anticipate, it’s largely just some anecdotal stories to make some people feel better.  JMO.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/2017/11/02/nfl-ratings-fall-second-year/107282008/

[Cyber Liberty]

@Cyber Liberty

Did someone say ratings are up because ad revenues are up? 

Yes.  You did:

All these boycotts folks are talking about don’t seem to be negatively affecting advertising rates for the Super Bowl.  From 2007 to 2016, 30 second ads for the Super Bowl, went from $2.39M to $4.8M.  This year, Comcast is selling them for even more (“north of $5M”), and Comcast is expecting $350M in revenue from this year’s game.

I'm not going to argue this with you, you have a point of view and won't be budged from it until after the ratings reports are in after the Super Bowl weekend (and then only maybe).  Good luck, hope your team does well.

[GrouchoTex]

Granted, the Texans have had a slew of injuries to some of their top players, (J.J. Watt and DeShaun Watson, to name 2), but I don't think Texan fans appreciated the kneel down before the previous week's road game.
Texans have sold out every game since their inception in 2002, but there were empty seats yesterday.
Sports is an entertaining diversion from the real world.
If I can't have my few hours of escape, I'll go do something else.

[Concerned]

Yes.  You did:

I'm not going to argue this with you, you have a point of view and won't be budged from it until after the ratings reports are in after the Super Bowl weekend (and then only maybe).  Good luck, hope your team does well.

I asked the following:

@Cyber Liberty
Did someone say ratings are up because ad revenues are up? 
 

You replied:  “Yes.  You did:” and highlighted the following:

This year, Comcast is selling them for even more (“north of $5M”), and Comcast is expecting $350M in revenue from this year’s game. 

I’ll note the above says nothing whatsoever about ratings.  In fact, in reply number #12, I note ratings are down 7% this year.  It’s probably a good thing for you aren’t going to argue with me because I certainly never said that “ratings are up because ad revenues are up.”  Never.  Facts are your friends.

[Cyber Liberty]

I asked the following:
You replied:  “Yes.  You did:” and highlighted the following:I’ll note the above says nothing whatsoever about ratings.  In fact, in reply number #12, I note ratings are down 7% this year.  It’s probably a good thing for you aren’t going to argue with me because I certainly never said that “ratings are up because ad revenues are up.”  Never.  Facts are your friends.

Normally we have very good discussions, so I have great respect for your arguments, but we're talking past each other here and I don't see much point to it.  Maybe on another day, on something else I'll be more fun.   

[truth_seeker]

As I stated above, my BIL stated the advertisers are already, issuing credits, for viewership shortfalls.

[Cyber Liberty]

As I stated above, my BIL stated the advertisers are already, issuing credits, for viewership shortfalls.

There have been stories to back that up.  It's already amounted to hundreds of thousands.  It's measurable.  Will it be enough to affect any behavior?  That's the $64,000 question in all this.  I dunno.  Don't have a dog in the hunt, I never liked football, so I'm not a target of either side in this. 

I just think the behavior of the players is wrongheaded.  They are insulated from having to learn the lesson that chick who flipped the bird to a Trump motorcade did, then relished the attention she got when a picture of it went viral.  She got sacked by her employer, the cause/effect was immediate.

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,289922.msg1506620.html#msg1506620

[truth_seeker]

There have been stories to back that up.  It's already amounted to hundreds of thousands.  It's measurable.  Will it be enough to affect any behavior?  That's the $64,000 question in all this.  I dunno.  Don't have a dog in the hunt, I never liked football, so I'm not a target of either side in this. 

I just think the behavior of the players is wrongheaded.  They are insulated from having to learn the lesson that chick who flipped the bird to a Trump motorcade did, then relished the attention she got when a picture of it went viral.  She got sacked by her employer, the cause/effect was immediate.

It has gone on for far, far too long. The full impact will take longer to learn. Season tickets were bought, before it turned out tot behavior would continue this year.

My guess is many small/medium businesses bought tickets, and are using them since they paid for them. But they may forego purchasing next time.

Is a 20 percent drop in viewership and attendance significant? It sure is, since it is the high profit portion above the breakeven line of a chart.

Twenty percent drop in viewers/ attendees might translate into 50 percent drop in profit.

[Cyber Liberty]

It has gone on for far, far too long. The full impact will take longer to learn. Season tickets were bought, before it turned out tot behavior would continue this year.

My guess is many small/medium businesses bought tickets, and are using them since they paid for them. But they may forego purchasing next time.

Is a 20 percent drop in viewership and attendance significant? It sure is, since it is the high profit portion above the breakeven line of a chart.

Twenty percent drop in viewers/ attendees might translate into 50 percent drop in profit.

I don't know if it's true or not, but I read the profit margin in professional sports is tight, so somebody's feeling the pain.  Probably the owners.

[bilo]

My BIL sells advertising in a medium sized western market area, and he says their IS CONCERN.

Stadium and viewership figures are down substantially, and if an ad is paid for based on certain estimated viewer figures, and they underperform, the company is due a CREDIT.

That is effectively a reduced price paid for the ad, and a reduction of industry revenue.

And reduced income to the industry, comes off the top. The lost attendees and viewers are those which represent the greatest profit per unit, since fixed costs have already been covered (in terms of a breakeven analysis).

I just saw that Sunday night's game was the lowest rated ever and the first time it was in single digits for market share.

If the owners want to fix the problem Goodell has to go. Put in a commissioner who will set clear rules and enforce them fairly.

One thing I'm finding is I'm missing the games less and less.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

All these boycotts folks are talking about don’t seem to be negatively affecting advertising rates for the Super Bowl.  From 2007 to 2016, 30 second ads for the Super Bowl, went from $2.39M to $4.8M.  This year, Comcast is selling them for even more (“north of $5M”), and Comcast is expecting $350M in revenue from this year’s game.  The VP of ad sales said the following:

“Our marketplace is healthy,” said Lovinger, speaking with reporters Monday. He characterized sales for both events as “brisk,” and suggested NBC had only a “handful” of 30-second spots left in its Super Bowl inventory. “If an advertiser is interested in a premium position within the game, they really need to be in discussions with us,” he said.”

http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/super-bowl-winter-olympics-tv-advertising-nbc-1202602368/

Couple thoughts:

1) The Superbowl is a completely different animal.  How many people "watch" it who would never watch football/sports to begin with (possibly even just for the ads).  It's an event in itself.

2) I don't know that I'd take the VP of sales' word on that.  It's not like he's going to announce that they're having trouble finding buyers, so please take advantage of our desperation.  Claiming that time/resources are running out, and now is the time to act sounds like pretty much every other ad I've ever heard.  I get fliers from realtors all the time, and it's the same story -- because of XXX, if you're looking to buy/sell NOW is the time (I've yet to see one that says maybe you should hold off a bit).

[Concerned]

Couple thoughts:

1) The Superbowl is a completely different animal.  How many people "watch" it who would never watch football/sports to begin with (possibly even just for the ads).  It's an event in itself.

2) I don't know that I'd take the VP of sales' word on that.  It's not like he's going to announce that they're having trouble finding buyers, so please take advantage of our desperation.  Claiming that time/resources are running out, and now is the time to act sounds like pretty much every other ad I've ever heard.  I get fliers from realtors all the time, and it's the same story -- because of XXX, if you're looking to buy/sell NOW is the time (I've yet to see one that says maybe you should hold off a bit).

Couple of thoughts:

1.  Event or not, I would think that many of those who claim they'll never watch another football game would include the Super Bowl in their proclamation.  After all, it is a football game.  My point is that I think those numbers are pretty small and the 7% decline in TV audience at the halfway point of the season seems to support that.

2.  If anyone has data that contradicts the Comcast VP from a reliable, verifiable, non-anecdotal source, I'd love to see it.  I doubt Comcast would claim to their shareholders that they expect $350M in Super Bowl ad revenue if it was significantly at risk.  That's a good way to see your market cap take a big hit in February.   I think Comcast is smarter than that. 

[roamer_1]

Couple of thoughts:

1.  Event or not, I would think that many of those who claim they'll never watch another football game would include the Super Bowl in their proclamation.  After all, it is a football game.  My point is that I think those numbers are pretty small and the 7% decline in TV audience at the halfway point of the season seems to support that.

2.  If anyone has data that contradicts the Comcast VP from a reliable, verifiable, non-anecdotal source, I'd love to see it.  I doubt Comcast would claim to their shareholders that they expect $350M in Super Bowl ad revenue if it was significantly at risk.  That's a good way to see your market cap take a big hit in February.   I think Comcast is smarter than that.

It's sales. They'll polish the turd. It's what they do.