FCC to end black outs it's a done deal, breaking news

[bbb]

Does anyone know what percentage of the Bills revenue comes from ticket sales and anything else related to home game attendance, how much comes from their share of away games, and how much comes from television?

 

Of course the teams want to sell tickets and get money, but beyond paying for the privilege of getting in to the game, the other function the fans provide is a free staging and sound track. Imagine watching an NFL game on television, being played in a huge empty stadium. No fans in the stands, no cheering. No wall of sound when the home team does something right, and no blast of silence when the visitors score. No Elvis, no funny hats, no babes. The experience for the TV viewer would be cut way back, regardless of the quality of play on the field.

 

I think the real reason for the blackout rule is to enhance the television experience by coercing more fans to attend.

 

You are exactly right. I pointed that out to one of our fine monkeys last time we argued this, and he said he wouldn't care if it was played in front of an empty studio.

 

IMO, you are exactly right - and if TV is where the money really is, they have to do their best to make sure people like me are there to provide the viewing audience with what they want (except for I guess a few people) - the passion in the stands.

[CodeMonkey]

You are exactly right. I pointed that out to one of our fine monkeys last time we argued this, and he said he wouldn't care if it was played in front of an empty studio.

 

IMO, you are exactly right - and if TV is where the money really is, they have to do their best to make sure people like me are there to provide the viewing audience with what they want (except for I guess a few people) - the passion in the stands.

A lot of the time I either have audio off (because of hating the announcers) or I'm not paying attention to them so it really would make no difference to me if people are there or not. I could not care less if there is the background noise of a crowd there or not. That's just me though.

 

But if they played a crowd noise soundtrack behind the announcers and didn't pan to the stands after a touchdown or big play, would you really notice the difference on TV? I don't think many would. Except the Lambeau Leap perhaps

Edited September 10, 2014 by CodeMonkey

[bbb]

Sports is a communal thing.

[Orton's Arm]

Those who are calling it a monopoly: Aren't there other monopolies, such as utilities and such. I bet some even get tax breaks and subsidies.

 

Do they give you free electricity then?

 

All businesses, regardless of monopoly status, are prohibited from engaging in anti-competitive business practices. Monopolies--such as utilities--are subjected to especially heavy scrutiny in that regard; because their opportunities for anti-competitive behavior are greater.

 

At least, that's the way it's supposed to work. In practice, businesses have sometimes used successful lobbying (regulatory capture) to redefine what is or isn't considered anti-competitive. Anti-competitive behavior is a direct threat to a free market; because a free market creates economic efficiency only to the extent there is competition or threat of competition.

 

The NFL clearly has a monopoly over professional football. The only purpose of the blackout rule is to prevent one portion of this monopoly (televised games) from competing against another portion of the monopoly (tickets). The goal is to allow NFL teams to charge higher prices for tickets than they otherwise could have, had television been allowed to fully compete with tickets.

 

The above is blatantly anti-competitive behavior. There isn't even an attempt to pretend otherwise. As such, there is no question it should be illegal; just as all anti-competitive business practices should be illegal. This would remain true even if taxpayers were not subsidizing NFL owners and players via publicly funded stadiums.