Also
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
CU has rejoined the Big 12 and broken college football - talking out asses continues
- Thread starter InTheBuff
- Start date
Tons of people have prime. One of the limiting factors I’d read was high speed internet. That’s going to be a choke point. What i remember is something like 50% of prime members have high speed internet.
Last edited:
With NFLST moving to streaming those yokles in their red counties still on dial up are not gonna be happy.
Internet is getting faster and I think all of suburbia has at least cable modem speeds available to them.
Big Jim
WTF?
473
Why do you keep saying that? I made one comparison to the Pac 12 Network; that while I will go out of my way to watch the Buffs and P12 no matter where it’s on, most won’t, just like they don’t currently with the P12N.
Im also not insisting on anything. I’m trying to understand how you think another subscription app is going create broad distribution? If it’s simply that you believe there is high demand to watch P12 football outside the footprint, that’s fine, but you just said you didn’t think that.
I feel like I’m being totally reasonable in this conversation, and you’re not just not really making much of a case for your argument.
Last edited:
According to Google, there are 131 Million households in the US. something isn’t adding up here.
Because it's not just a Pac-12 app.
And I’m asking what else is going to be on there that people will want to pay for? If you tell me it will be on YouTube TV with NFL ST, then I agree, but what else is going to be appealing on the app?
I suppose we will find out. But I'm going into this with the assumption that the people running Amazon are not complete fvcking idiots who would bet their success on the Pac-12 being able to carry a streaming channel as the main driver for subscriptions.
Amazon is trying to get the app off the ground, as it currently has no inventory, and they are possibly using the Pac 12 as a Guinea pig. I’m sure if Amazon wants it to be successful, it will eventually be successful, but that doesn’t mean widespread distribution for the Pac 12 Conference in the first handful of years, which is all we care about and what we are discussing here… as it compares to Big 12 distribution that we know is in most every household and bar.
I’m just saying there are reasons to be concerned about distribution with the streaming. I’m glad you apparently have none
Well Prime did broadcast NFL as of this season so there is a precedent for thinking it will be more than a PAC-12 only offering
They’ll continue to have TNF on Amazon Prime Video, but no word yet on whether they have the right to move it to Amazon’s Sports Streaming App that is being discussed as the likely destination for Pac 12
Just saying they are not just going down the road of some lame pac 12 app. Amazon has bigger plans than that with live sports. To believe or go on with the thoughts it will be small time seem pretty counter to how Amazon operates. Will be interesting if this is the road the Pac goes down. Will be a major upgrade for the conference is much more likely than status quo or step backwards. As @Buffnik said above, get paid comparable to the ACC/Big 12, allow all recruit families be able to watch their kids and position yourself for the next round of expansion.
I don’t think you are understanding my point. There are more Amazon subscriptions than households. That doesn’t make sense.
How many people subscribe to ESPN because it’s part of the cable package?
Sure it makes sense, more than one person lives in most households. Memberships and households aren’t a 1:1 thing. For instance, we have a prime membership for personal use and a prime for my wife’s business. I’m sure the kids will want their own prime membership too as they get older. Well… they may not want their own membership, but they’re going to get one. (AKA pay for your own **** LOL). I’d bet most younger people who still have roommates each have their own membership.
I hate cable but my wife loves it. It's stupid to me. I don't like streaming sites either but I have five of them due to subs I am a part of
i suspect a lot of this is more nuanced than it appears...
first, i feel confident that the number of high bandwidth prime subscribers in the pac footprint over indexes compared to out of footprint. and, i know that the number of pac alums living in the pac footprint over index compare to the rest of the country. so user acquisition, retention, etc. in the pac footprint for a streaming amazon service should be more than just ok-- it should be good.
next, i am not really following arguments about "what else would they bundle the pac with that matters?" the prime app is embedded in smart tvs, consoles, and of course available via a dedicated piece of hw that they practically give away. the "other" content is everything else the prime service offers-- like the nfl on thurs night for example.
next, live sports are differentiated from other content-- it is appointment viewing and draws a **** ton of concurrent eyeballs. everyone, whether a network, a cable company, a sat company, a telecom, or a true streaming service wants more of it because it draws and retains an audience for content that the audience cannot otherwise access. this is why amazon "overpaid" for the thursday nfl game and why the rights to the nfl out of market package are so valuable. CFB is not the nfl, but it still moves the needle for someone trying to fight their way into the top viewership numbers amongst all tv content providers.
there isn't going to be some separate pac app that causes more friction for viewers; there isn't going to be a huge pushback amongst likely viewers about access either--- it is going to be FAR more available than the ****ty p12 network and all the clumsy cable style deals.
the 10 remaining pac schools are collectively more valuable in this context than, for example, a lot of the b12 footprint... lower disposable income, worse bandwidth, less interest among the footprint fans, etc. amazon and the pac are a really good fit.
play it out and see where it all lands. the opportunity for getting ****ed is still very high if someone bolts the pac or something...
first, i feel confident that the number of high bandwidth prime subscribers in the pac footprint over indexes compared to out of footprint. and, i know that the number of pac alums living in the pac footprint over index compare to the rest of the country. so user acquisition, retention, etc. in the pac footprint for a streaming amazon service should be more than just ok-- it should be good.
next, i am not really following arguments about "what else would they bundle the pac with that matters?" the prime app is embedded in smart tvs, consoles, and of course available via a dedicated piece of hw that they practically give away. the "other" content is everything else the prime service offers-- like the nfl on thurs night for example.
next, live sports are differentiated from other content-- it is appointment viewing and draws a **** ton of concurrent eyeballs. everyone, whether a network, a cable company, a sat company, a telecom, or a true streaming service wants more of it because it draws and retains an audience for content that the audience cannot otherwise access. this is why amazon "overpaid" for the thursday nfl game and why the rights to the nfl out of market package are so valuable. CFB is not the nfl, but it still moves the needle for someone trying to fight their way into the top viewership numbers amongst all tv content providers.
there isn't going to be some separate pac app that causes more friction for viewers; there isn't going to be a huge pushback amongst likely viewers about access either--- it is going to be FAR more available than the ****ty p12 network and all the clumsy cable style deals.
the 10 remaining pac schools are collectively more valuable in this context than, for example, a lot of the b12 footprint... lower disposable income, worse bandwidth, less interest among the footprint fans, etc. amazon and the pac are a really good fit.
play it out and see where it all lands. the opportunity for getting ****ed is still very high if someone bolts the pac or something...
also, we are getting close to decision time--- when the contract details are finalized, pretty much any pac program who KNOWS they can get a better deal NOW in another conference is going to bolt at that time.
i expect the hold ups right about now are how long the GoR is going to run, what outs are available, how is the rev split among the programs, and how will additional programs be handled...
if uw or oregon or stanford or whomever was going to get a big invite it would have already happened by the way.
i expect the hold ups right about now are how long the GoR is going to run, what outs are available, how is the rev split among the programs, and how will additional programs be handled...
if uw or oregon or stanford or whomever was going to get a big invite it would have already happened by the way.
Very few young people can afford to live alone these days. Even 20 years ago, my well educated sister had to share a place with three other people to afford to live in Manhattan. Roommates split the internet bill, rent & utilities. They'd be crazy to share Amazon accounts with non-family members.
And there are millions of working poor who will never afford a house of their own.
but attendance
Ok, but taken in the context of the comparison to ESPN subs, it still is misleading. A business with an Amazon subscription isn’t interested in streaming football games. If you have two or three subs in one household, only one will be streaming - if that. Using the number of subs as an indicator of distribution is inaccurate, IMO.
I’ll say it again: What is being proposed is not simply putting the Pac 12 inventory on Prime Video like they did with Thursday Night Football (which was a disaster for ratings, btw). They are going to put it on their not launched yet, Amazon Sports App, that is ANOTHER paid subscription outside of Prime. It is yet to be known whether TNF will also be moved there or if it will remain on Prime video. It’s not a “Pac 12 app”, but until they get more live content, that is going to be the main draw.
Amazon is going to make it successful, but the timeframe is concerning. They lost money for a long time when they launched free 2 day shipping, but it was worth it for the long term vision and plan. That could eventually be the case for this app, but the Pac 12 needs distribution in the short term, not the long term, which is why there are concerns being raised.
The NFL TNF was a disaster in year one, and that was on a service that has 150m US subscribers already, so I don’t understand this flippant, “Trust Amazon” attitude that millions of people out of the Pac 12 footprint are going to subscribe to another app with Pac 12 football (without SC and UCLA) as the main draw.
All of the reports about a standalone Amazon Sports App came out at the end of December and really just quote a singe source “that CEO Andy Jassy has discussed a standalone sports app”. The same article says that Amazon may or may not pursue it. It’s very vague.
And if the sports app does come to fruition, it would likely house all their sports content including NFL, Yankees. Premier Soccer League, and probably much more because they would need a lot more content.
Last edited:
I'm skeptical of the NFL allowing their nationally televised inventory to be placed behind a start up subscription app after the disaster that was 2022 TNF, but maybe they don't have a choice with the $1B/year contract they are getting from Amazon. Regardless, as I said last night, if you tell me the Pac 12 inventory will be on an app that also has NFL, and apparently the Yankees and Premier League, then that eases concerns.
Regardless of the exact implementation here (it would be helpful if you could link to something reputable that's talking about a additional standalone subscription to watch P12 on Amazon), I think characterizing TNF on Amazon as a "disaster" is a bit extreme. Yes, viewership was down, but context matters- 11/17 games in 2021 were available on 3 carriers (NFLN, Amazon, and Fox- the latter of which is theoretically available in every household via OTA transmission). In addition, ratings from TNF 2021 included two Saturday Christmas Eve games, one of which was available on three channels and featured the Packers. The TNF numbers from 2021 also included the Bucs/Cowboys game to start the season when there was no Week 1 TNF game on Amazon this year.
https://www.nexttv.com/news/streami...-dropped-whopping-41-for-the-season-on-amazon
More importantly:
TNF moving to Amazon bumped viewership in the most important demographic to advertisers. That has to account for something.
Additionally, the matchups offered made a difference: Week 2 featured the best game (Chiefs/Chargers) and drew 13M viewers, a season high for TNF. The matchups in the second half of the season were brutal. Only three games featured 2 teams competing for a playoff spot: Bills/Pats in Week 13, 49ers/Seahawks in Week 15, and Cowboys/Titans in Week 17. The rest featured at least one team that was playing out the string.
Ratings were down for 2022 as compared to 2021, but context matters.
Most relevantly to this discussion, the lowest viewed matchup was Falcons/Panthers at 6.8M viewers. Only one game involving a P12 team (the Rose Bowl) had more viewers, and only 5 regular season games involving P12 teams last year got even HALF that many viewers (Oregon/Georgia, WSU/Wisconsin, Washington/Oregon, USC/UCLA, ND/USC). Distribution availability is not going to be the limiting factor- interest is.
This.
And there's not much margin for error, i.e. a speed bumpy start, as the next year or two are important for CU football.