SCBills Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Really strong number for the Bills game, given it was at 4:30 on a holiday that half the country was still at work for. 15 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balln Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Very strong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuba guy Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Well at least we got the bronze metal 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 I’ll add that it was against an opponent that nobody gave a shot in hell to win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PetermansRedemption Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 (edited) Can’t wait to see what Bills Chiefs pull in. Number should be absolutely massive. Also, does this number even include parties? I know a ton of people from Buffalo have watch parties with many many people. I’d assume that just counts as one viewer. Edited January 18 by PetermansRedemption 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mango Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Also KC v Miami’s was the most compelling game of the week and had the lowest viewership. I didn’t realize Peacock was such an anchor. I know everybody was complaining but I assumed they were watching. Worth noting that both Buffalo and Pittsburgh are smaller than every metro market but GB and they out drew a bunch of them. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSBill Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 5 hours ago, PetermansRedemption said: Can’t wait to see what Bills Chiefs pull in. Number should be absolutely massive. Also, does this number even include parties? I know a ton of people from Buffalo have watch parties with many many people. I’d assume that just counts as one viewer. Over/Under = 43 million? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobbRiddick Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Wow, I see 23 million people were a part of HISTORY on peacock. Do they all get sent an 'I helped make history' badge? 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Claude Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 (edited) 13 minutes ago, RobbRiddick said: Wow, I see 23 million people were a part of HISTORY on peacock. Do they all get sent an 'I helped make history' badge? I guess that Peacock and the NFL is pretty happy with the 23 million viewership. It was the most stream event ever in the US and viewership was just a little bit lower than might be expected if it was on live TV (80% of Browns-Texans while the Sunday evening game was 90% of viewership of the Sunday afternoon). It shows the NFL that a lot of people are willing to pay $6 to see a playoff game. Expect to see more of the same in the future. Edited January 18 by Billy Claude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgewaycynic2013 Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 51 minutes ago, RobbRiddick said: Wow, I see 23 million people were a part of HISTORY on peacock. Do they all get sent an 'I helped make history' badge? No, they get a bill: Please remit $6. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cincinnati Kid Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 I mean, the NFL already was streaming with Prime and required a cable subscription for games on ESPN (The simulcasts on ABC were a result of the Writers Strike and won’t continue next season). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not at the table Karlos Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 50 minutes ago, Billy Claude said: I guess that Peacock and the NFL is pretty happy with the 23 million viewership. It was the most stream event ever in the US and viewership was just a little bit lower than might be expected if it was on live TV (80% of Browns-Texans while the Sunday evening game was 90% of viewership of the Sunday afternoon). It shows the NFL that a lot of people are willing to pay $6 to see a playoff game. Expect to see more of the same in the future. Or they already had the service. They offered a year for like $20 not long ago. Most people I know have had it since then. 9 minutes ago, Ridgewaycynic2013 said: No, they get a bill: Please remit $6. If you were smart and planned ahead it’s $1.67 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobbRiddick Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 2 hours ago, Billy Claude said: I guess that Peacock and the NFL is pretty happy with the 23 million viewership. It was the most stream event ever in the US and viewership was just a little bit lower than might be expected if it was on live TV (80% of Browns-Texans while the Sunday evening game was 90% of viewership of the Sunday afternoon). It shows the NFL that a lot of people are willing to pay $6 to see a playoff game. Expect to see more of the same in the future. They always win Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Jones Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 2 hours ago, Billy Claude said: I guess that Peacock and the NFL is pretty happy with the 23 million viewership. It was the most stream event ever in the US and viewership was just a little bit lower than might be expected if it was on live TV (80% of Browns-Texans while the Sunday evening game was 90% of viewership of the Sunday afternoon). It shows the NFL that a lot of people are willing to pay $6 to see a playoff game. Expect to see more of the same in the future. I signed up when they were running a deal on Black Friday in November. $1.99 a month, and can cancel at anytime. I wanted to see Bills/Chargers from my home. So basically cost me $6 to see both NFL games from my couch instead of spending many many times that $6 to go to a sports bar to watch. Plus, my wife has found some things she likes on there, so we may even keep the service. NOTE: this was/is the first time we had EVER signed up for ANY streaming service. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Claude Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Bob Jones said: I signed up when they were running a deal on Black Friday in November. $1.99 a month, and can cancel at anytime. I wanted to see Bills/Chargers from my home. So basically cost me $6 to see both NFL games from my couch instead of spending many many times that $6 to go to a sports bar to watch. Plus, my wife has found some things she likes on there, so we may even keep the service. NOTE: this was/is the first time we had EVER signed up for ANY streaming service. I think that's the whole point -- they hope that enough new subscribers keep their subscription to make money. If 10% of the 23 million subscribed to get that particular game and 20% of those keep the subscription, that would be almost half a million new long term subscribers. I think they would be pretty happy with that. They paid 110 million for the game but they get some of that back from advertising and so forth. Edited January 18 by Billy Claude 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 2 hours ago, Not at the table Karlos said: Or they already had the service. They offered a year for like $20 not long ago. Most people I know have had it since then. If you were smart and planned ahead it’s $1.67 Ditto. Knowing the Bills had a game (Chargers) and the odds they might show up in the Peacock time slot for the playoffs I signed up for that $20 deal too. Sirius XM used to brag about their subscriber numbers but they included new cars that had free introductory subscriptions. They never talked about what happened when 98% didn't renew. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Renko Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 I know people still use cable and cable-like streaming services but I much prefer having to shell out for a fairly cheap streaming service than having to pay for full cable when a game is just on ESPN. OTA is free and carries most games and the occasional $6 or whatever is better than a $60 a month cable bill with channels I don’t watch. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aimee75 Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 10 hours ago, PetermansRedemption said: Can’t wait to see what Bills Chiefs pull in. Number should be absolutely massive. Also, does this number even include parties? I know a ton of people from Buffalo have watch parties with many many people. I’d assume that just counts as one viewer. I would not be surprised if The Chiefs/Bills pull in anywhere from 55-65 million viewers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Process Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Very surprising number. I wonder if the NFL sees this and decides to do MLK double header every year now. No more 1pm Sunday game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmart128 Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Wow they were flexing that 23 million viewership and they were by far the least watched game... even loosing to a 4:30 monday game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiotAct Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 3 minutes ago, Kmart128 said: Wow they were flexing that 23 million viewership and they were by far the least watched game... even loosing to a 4:30 monday game a ton of people likely either streamed the Miami-KC game illegally or just said “F it” and didn’t watch at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Claude Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 (edited) 1 hour ago, Kmart128 said: Wow they were flexing that 23 million viewership and they were by far the least watched game... even loosing to a 4:30 monday game The Saturday night game is usually the lowest rated game. This year's 23M is 7% higher than last year's game in the same time slot though that is mainly because last year was Chargers Jaguars. Edited January 18 by Billy Claude 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RosenNOTchosen1 Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 1 hour ago, Process said: Very surprising number. I wonder if the NFL sees this and decides to do MLK double header every year now. No more 1pm Sunday game. That wouldn't be a good decision... gotta have a Sunday game at 1pm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 1 hour ago, Kmart128 said: Wow they were flexing that 23 million viewership and they were by far the least watched game... even loosing to a 4:30 monday game It's a massive number for a one off PPV, new format. What are you talking about? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HomeskillitMoorman Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 1 hour ago, Kmart128 said: Wow they were flexing that 23 million viewership and they were by far the least watched game... even loosing to a 4:30 monday game It's kind of a big number for streaming though. Most people were hoping it would totally flop. It didn't. They're going to do this again. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Claude Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 (edited) 8 minutes ago, HomeskillitMoorman said: It's kind of a big number for streaming though. Most people were hoping it would totally flop. It didn't. They're going to do this again. NFL is definitely pushing it big time. If it was network tv the Saturday night game would have been Browns-Texans. Edited January 18 by Billy Claude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HomeskillitMoorman Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 1 hour ago, Billy Claude said: NFL is definitely pushing it big time. If it was network tv the Saturday night game would have been Browns-Texans. It’s a huge payday, they got like $100 mil for just that one game 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmart128 Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said: It's a massive number for a one off PPV, new format. What are you talking about? Still lower than all the other viewership by a substantial margin. You can twist it no matter how you like. It may be good streaming numbers but honestly doesnt have much competition. And when compared to games shown on both its not even in the same ballpark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chongli Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 (edited) Edited January 18 by chongli Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Claude Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Kmart128 said: Still lower than all the other viewership by a substantial margin. You can twist it no matter how you like. It may be good streaming numbers but honestly doesnt have much competition. And when compared to games shown on both its not even in the same ballpark As noted up thread, the Saturday night game is always the lowest rating game. People actually have stuff they would rather do on Saturday night. The 23M is 7% higher than last year's game in the same time slot. Edited January 18 by Billy Claude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOUSE Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 NFL owners gave the fans the weiner with Peacock and you guys are loving it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Just now, chongli said: Looks like a lot of networks "made history" But that said, think about the matchups and the respective media market sizes: (taken from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_television_stations_in_North_America_by_media_market) Houston and Cleveland: #6 and #19 Philly and Tamps: #4 and #12 KC and Miami: #18 and #34 Dallas and Green Bay: #5 and #69 LA and Detroit: #2 and #14 Buffalo and Pittsburgh: #28 and #54 In spite of of the the lowesr populations, the Bills punched *way* above their weight class for a 4:30 Monday game 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metal Man Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 I assume that number from the MIA/KC is the total viewership. I wonder how much of that 23 million is from the local market OTA? Seeing those separated would be the more interesting number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 38 minutes ago, Kmart128 said: Still lower than all the other viewership by a substantial margin. You can twist it no matter how you like. It may be good streaming numbers but honestly doesnt have much competition. And when compared to games shown on both its not even in the same ballpark well...the money generated for the broadcaster for that one game is a direct cash infusion. Not so network broadcasts, where there is no direct link between any one game and revenue. The network games are prepaid by the network to the NFL for years in advance, so the per game cost is fixed for them. The revenue made back is on advertising and (if cable or streamer) subscription fees (which do not cover any one game in particular, but the entire streamer's or network's costs of doing all their business) over the subsequent years. So this is a HUGE deal for streamers---would people pay to watch a single game (or better yet, sign up and forget to cancel their annual subscription!). The answer is a resounding "yes". That one game had as many viewers as the entire 5 game World Series in 2023---which was broadcast on network TV. It's a proof of concept that will pave the way to actual per game PPV for playoffs or the Super Bowl. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HomeskillitMoorman Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 (edited) 1 hour ago, Kmart128 said: Still lower than all the other viewership by a substantial margin. You can twist it no matter how you like. It may be good streaming numbers but honestly doesnt have much competition. And when compared to games shown on both its not even in the same ballpark Dude, nobody's trying to twist anything. I doubt literally ANY person here is on Team Peacock. This is just reality. Considering that this was purely on streaming and on Saturday night...they are very happy with these numbers. Given the context, they are good numbers. And that's something that pretty much all of us were rooting against. 14 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: well...the money generated for the broadcaster for that one game is a direct cash infusion. Not so network broadcasts, where there is no direct link between any one game and revenue. The network games are prepaid by the network to the NFL for years in advance, so the per game cost is fixed for them. The revenue made back is on advertising and (if cable or streamer) subscription fees (which do not cover any one game in particular, but the entire streamer's or network's costs of doing all their business) over the subsequent years. So this is a HUGE deal for streamers---would people pay to watch a single game (or better yet, sign up and forget to cancel their annual subscription!). The answer is a resounding "yes". That one game had as many viewers as the entire 5 game World Series in 2023---which was broadcast on network TV. It's a proof of concept that will pave the way to actual per game PPV for playoffs or the Super Bowl. I doubt it'll ever happen for the Super Bowl, but for the playoffs were are definitely going to see more of this in the future unfortunately. My biggest issue isn't for the money necessarily, it's all the different apps and things you have to sign up/sign in for. I have these old neighbors I used to have that I still keep in touch with that love the Bills but they're just old and signing into all this stuff is hard for them and I get on the phone with them and try to walk them through all the different things they have to do and it just sucks. The NFL is just making this so difficult. These are people that would probably pay any price, they just have trouble with all the technology. Edited January 18 by HomeskillitMoorman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chongli Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 https://www.si.com/nfl/2024/01/15/peacock-chiefs-dolphins-23-million-viewers [limited free views] "Here’s what I wrote in May when the NFL decided to put a playoff game on Peacock: “The NFL can do whatever it wants. The NFL is Teflon. If the NFL put a game on at 3 a.m., we’d watch. The NFL has a grip on this country that gives them the power to do whatever it wants without any ramifications.” [...] Everyone was outraged that the NFL would sell a postseason game to a streaming service. Fans, media members and players b----ed and complained about the NFL taking advantage of its customers. And yet we all watched. And the NFL knew we would because this country is addicted to the NFL. The league and Peacock, though, must have gotten a little fed up with all the backlash because they used halftime of Sunday’s Los Angeles Rams–Detroit Lions game on NBC to take a victory lap and congratulate themselves for fleecing fans and making them fork over money to subscribe to Peacock to watch the Chiefs beat the Dolphins." [...] Poor Mike Tirico was forced to utter the words, “Congratulations to our Comcast and NBCUniversal teammates, thanks to commissioner Roger Goodell and our partners at the NFL and all of the fans on this record-setting collaboration. A milestone moment in media and sports history.” A milestone moment? History? Here’s the real version of what Tirico should’ve said in that embarrassing video: “Roger Goodell sold an NFL playoff game to Peacock for $110 million, and NFL fans subscribed to Peacock to watch the game. We knew this would happen because Americans love the NFL more than anything, so thank you for going along with our plan of holding you hostage. And you might as well make sure you’re subscribed to Paramount+ and ESPN+ now because the NFL will be selling playoff games to those streaming services, too.” 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_In_NH Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 That is interesting...Sunday had clearly better ratings, not sure why we conclude really strong numbers for the Bills game. On each day the 4:30 game outperformed the 8:30 game. It would seem to me the NFL lost some viewers by the game moving which explains why the NFL wanted to move the game to Atlanta to be played at the original time slot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chongli Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 Yes! The Buffalo market wins SNF viewership! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 4 hours ago, chongli said: https://www.si.com/nfl/2024/01/15/peacock-chiefs-dolphins-23-million-viewers [limited free views] "Here’s what I wrote in May when the NFL decided to put a playoff game on Peacock: “The NFL can do whatever it wants. The NFL is Teflon. If the NFL put a game on at 3 a.m., we’d watch. The NFL has a grip on this country that gives them the power to do whatever it wants without any ramifications.” [...] Everyone was outraged that the NFL would sell a postseason game to a streaming service. Fans, media members and players b----ed and complained about the NFL taking advantage of its customers. And yet we all watched. And the NFL knew we would because this country is addicted to the NFL. The league and Peacock, though, must have gotten a little fed up with all the backlash because they used halftime of Sunday’s Los Angeles Rams–Detroit Lions game on NBC to take a victory lap and congratulate themselves for fleecing fans and making them fork over money to subscribe to Peacock to watch the Chiefs beat the Dolphins." [...] Poor Mike Tirico was forced to utter the words, “Congratulations to our Comcast and NBCUniversal teammates, thanks to commissioner Roger Goodell and our partners at the NFL and all of the fans on this record-setting collaboration. A milestone moment in media and sports history.” A milestone moment? History? Here’s the real version of what Tirico should’ve said in that embarrassing video: “Roger Goodell sold an NFL playoff game to Peacock for $110 million, and NFL fans subscribed to Peacock to watch the game. We knew this would happen because Americans love the NFL more than anything, so thank you for going along with our plan of holding you hostage. And you might as well make sure you’re subscribed to Paramount+ and ESPN+ now because the NFL will be selling playoff games to those streaming services, too.” lol PGA busting on the NFL for selling one game to a streamer....while they sold their whole existence to the Saudis. PGA...some huge golf balls on those guys. they wish they had anything close to the NFL's pull with the public (and cash). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 10 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: lol PGA busting on the NFL for selling one game to a streamer....while they sold their whole existence to the Saudis. PGA...some huge golf balls on those guys. they wish they had anything close to the NFL's pull with the public (and cash). It's a satire account but their point is still valid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.