FCC wants blackout rules to change

[-X-]

BUFFALO, N.Y. -- A commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission says it's time to repeal NFL television blackout rules.

Ajit Pai says the FCC needs to "be on the side of sports fans" regarding league rules that prevent games that are not sold out from being broadcast in the home team's market.

Pai is one of five FCC commissioners, and was in Buffalo on Tuesday to make the announcement alongside congressman Brian Higgins, who has urged the FCC to change the rules. The FCC has spent the past year seeking public input regarding blackout regulations.

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell has said there is no reason to change the blackout policy put in place in 1975. Goodell says repeal could affect future TV contracts and lead to fewer games broadcast for free.




Copyright 2014 by The Associated Press

 

[ChrisW]

What's the direct effect on ticket sales because of the blackout rule?

 

[jimitroutboy]

I think its very small if any, winning has a helluva lot more to do with it

 

[ChrisW]

I think its very small if any, winning has a helluva lot more to do with it

That's what I was thinking, but I've never read anything close to an actual study on it.

 

[Akrasian]

Goodell says repeal could affect future TV contracts and lead to fewer games broadcast for free.

Heh. Yes, because the networks would want to pay less if they are able to show more games in the team's home market.

How cynical is Goodell to even suggest that? Yes, it might affect ticket sales some - no more of those car dealerships buying the last 1000 tickets to give away to ensure the game is shown locally. But the networks would LOVE the repeal, and there is no way they would pay less for rights for larger viewership.

Or is Goodell suggesting that the NFL will throw a hissy fit, and put games where the FCC wouldn't have a say, even though that would hurt the league long term?

 

[ChrisW]

Heh. Yes, because the networks would want to pay less if they are able to show more games in the team's home market.

How cynical is Goodell to even suggest that? Yes, it might affect ticket sales some - no more of those car dealerships buying the last 1000 tickets to give away to ensure the game is shown locally. But the networks would LOVE the repeal, and there is no way they would pay less for rights for larger viewership.

Or is Goodell suggesting that the NFL will throw a hissy fit, and put games where the FCC wouldn't have a say, even though that would hurt the league long term?

I guess he is saying that FOX and CBS would lose their tv contracts and the games would be shown on paid networks.

Realize that Goodell is like a CEO, and the owners are share holders....all he has to do is keep the profits rolling in for the owners...That not for profit organization.

 

[Akrasian]

I guess he is saying that FOX and CBS would lose their tv contracts and the games would be shown on paid networks.

Realize that Goodell is like a CEO, and the owners are share holders....all he has to do is keep the profits rolling in for the owners...That not for profit organization.

I don't mind them making profits - but Goodell is smart enough to know that it's an empty threat for the foreseeable future. There is no way they take the games off of network TV. All the more so since the tide of history is going against cable networks - more and more people are doing without cable, and using over the air and internet streaming for their tv. Especially among the young. Taking most of the games off of over the air would inevitably reduce their market among more casual fans, as well as reducing revenues short term too. He's bluffing, because they LIKE pressuring businesses to buy up a bunch of tickets at the last second and giving them away. It's more ticket revenue, more food and beer sales.

 

[ChrisW]

I don't mind them making profits - but Goodell is smart enough to know that it's an empty threat for the foreseeable future. There is no way they take the games off of network TV. All the more so since the tide of history is going against cable networks - more and more people are doing without cable, and using over the air and internet streaming for their tv. Especially among the young. Taking most of the games off of over the air would inevitably reduce their market among more casual fans, as well as reducing revenues short term too. He's bluffing, because they LIKE pressuring businesses to buy up a bunch of tickets at the last second and giving them away. It's more ticket revenue, more food and beer sales.

I agree with everything you said here. Empty threats.

 

[Jorgeh0605]

Heh. Yes, because the networks would want to pay less if they are able to show more games in the team's home market.

How cynical is Goodell to even suggest that? Yes, it might affect ticket sales some - no more of those car dealerships buying the last 1000 tickets to give away to ensure the game is shown locally. But the networks would LOVE the repeal, and there is no way they would pay less for rights for larger viewership.

Or is Goodell suggesting that the NFL will throw a hissy fit, and put games where the FCC wouldn't have a say, even though that would hurt the league long term?

I think he is referring to the drop in ticket sales. The fear has always been that people may start to prefer to watch games at home and completely forego attending lives game. To hyperbolize their fear, imagine watching a game where there are no fans in the seats because we are all at home enjoying the game where overpriced food and unbearing temperatures can't effect us. Back in the day before these MASSIVE tv contracts, this could have put the NFL in a bad financial spot.

His threat for less games broadcast for free, IMO is him trying to recuperate costs from the lack of revenue of live game attendance. I'm still not sure how credible the threat is, as stadium revenue doesn't impact much of the total NFL revenue anymore. I also think most people will still find enjoyment in being in a stadium. But I wouldn't bet on that trend continuing, since younger America seems to enjoy staying on their couch more more. I mean, people now watch other people competing in computer video games from the comfort of there own home. So this reality is at least somewhat believable. Even if it is after our lifetime.

Truth is, NFL may need to adapt in other ways to make attending live games more appealing. Shouldn't be hard. Live games rock.

 

[Alan]

Greed

 

[CGI_Ram]

I guess he is saying that FOX and CBS would lose their tv contracts and the games would be shown on paid networks.

Realize that Goodell is like a puppet, and the owners are share holders....all he has to do is keep the profits rolling in for the owners...That not for profit organization.

Fixed.

 

[Ram Quixote]

Goodell says repeal could affect future TV contracts and lead to fewer games broadcast for free.

smdh

Goodell is full of shit. Like someone said, the networks would love to be able to get larger viewership for home teams. Would they pay for it? Probably.

 

[Thordaddy]

reduce it to 25 miles

 

[MrMotes]

No blackout = more viewers = bigger tv contract.

What is Goodell's logic?

 

[junkman]

No blackout = more viewers = bigger tv contract.

What is Goodell's logic?

+1.

Move viewers not just on the short term but long term. Growing than fan base by making their product more available to the masses.

The TV networks must lose beaucoup bucks putting on infomercials rather than an NFL game. The local car dealers co-ops probably do well buying up the extra tickets so that more people will see their TV commercials.

it just makes sense.