Super Bowl's live stream debut draws online record 2.1M viewers

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/football/nfl/02/07/super.bowl.online.stream.ap/index.html#ixzz1lkzQR8UL 

I'm pretty sure that they have thought of this, but find their television contracts to be more lucrative. The NFL does seem to be behind the times on this.

Originally Posted by: rabidgopher04 

You're most surely right. But I have an easy answer for that one! You make the streaming available to fans who's team is out of their market region! That doesn't effect the TV viewership much...ahem DirecTV.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

I find paying for commercials morally objectionable.

If they want to put commercials in, fine.

If they want to sell subscriptions, fine.

I just don't want to pay to watch commercials.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 

Say a quarter of that would watch their team play every weekend via stream. NFL could charge $4.99 a game, or a discounted $60 for the whole season. I think that would be a helluva profit for the NFL, plus ... PLUS you get a different brand of commercials to market to potential marketers. You could track viewership by region, etc much more accurately than the TV Nielsen (sp) guestimation.


25% of 2,100,000 = 525,000 viewers
12 games per week = 6,300,000 total viewers a weekend
@$4.99 per game = $31,437,000 a week!!

Maybe 525,000 viewers a week per game is not realistic? I went with 12 games a weekend, because there's two network televised games, the NFL network game, plus a chance your team is playing locally.

I seriously, SERIOUSLY wish I had a partner who owned a streaming company because I could go on an on and sell this idea to the NFL within 15 minutes. I mean, my head is exploding with $$$ potential here for the NFL that would ultimately expand the viewership worldwide and make fans tremendously happy!

The only loser ... DirecTV and honestly, fuck them!

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool