If the Super Bowl was $100 PPV would you pay for it? (1 Viewer)

[TLEF316]

I 100% think this is where this is going. Been saying it since the scumbags at NBC pulled half the EPL games off regular TV and moved them to Peacock.

While I'm not some crazy NFL super fan, I unfortunately would have to bend the knee and pay. Sucks, but I'm not gonna not watch the super bowl.

 

[-OZ-]

no, as it is mostly background noise for me when watching at home. But if I was going to a watch party, I would split the cost with the host with no issues.

Yep. Get a few families together or head to a bar.

 

[Todem]

It's closer than we think.

And we host a family Super Bowl party every year....ok folks pony up $25 per sister. My sisters and their kids want all that awesome free food we provide? Welp if the game is gonna cost $100 $25 per sister....it's a bargain. I will swallow $50.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Here is some info for those wondering how PPV money could potentially be significantly more revenue than commercials.

In the US, ~50m households watch the Super Bowl.

The Super Bowl does ~$500m in ad revenue.

If even only 10m home paid for the PPV, they would double their traditional ad revenue at $100 a pop.

Plus, I have no expectations the network would forgo that ad revenue.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

Voted yes. If it was just me, would probably go to a bar. But more likely pay the $100 and have a party. Last year, the SB party I went to, most people there were part of a Poly community, and didn't even understand football, but they all were excited to be watching, be it the game, halftime or commercials.

Its a Friday so let's hear more about the poly party.

 

[B Maverick]

Here is some info for those wondering how PPV money could potentially be significantly more revenue than commercials.

In the US, ~50m households watch the Super Bowl.

The Super Bowl does ~$500m in ad revenue.

If even only 10m home paid for the PPV, they would double their traditional ad revenue at $100 a pop.

Plus, I have no expectations the network would forgo that ad revenue.

Oh you thought it would be commercial free on PPV? Oh no, they will most definitely charge $100 to you on PPV while still collecting all that ad money.

 

[Runkle]

Yes, especially if it was commercial free.

No way would it ever be commercial free. Putting aside the money grab from it being the biggest game of the year, the tradition of super bowl commercials, etc.... there's still all the dead ball time, timeouts, injury stoppages, etc. They have to fill all that air time. Cris Collingsworth isn't going to just fill time with anecdotes while they reset between quarters. It's 30 minutes of actual gameplay and another 30 minutes of the clock moving without the ball in play... the rest of the two hours is filler. They're gonna always have ads.

 

[Cowboysfan8]

We are all saying no yet we all would. And the NFL knows it.

This

It’s only ****in money boys

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Definitely not. I've skipped the last few super bowls when they were free.

So have the Bills.

Okay, I'll take my ribbing like a man, but you're not actually that far off. Since the Bills got good, I've found it depressing to watch playoff football after they're eliminated. In all seriousness, I have absolutely nothing at all against the Chiefs or Ravens, both of which are excellent teams that I respect. I enjoy watching those teams most weeks. I'm just not particularly looking forward to watching them in the AFCCG when, well, you know.

I know it's not rational, but I'm okay with that.

 

[Eephus]

Oh you thought it would be commercial free on PPV? Oh no, they will most definitely charge $100 to you on PPV while still collecting all that ad money.

The price to buy a 30 second Super Bowl ad is high because of the audience size but also because of its broad demographics. As long as the networks can demand high advertising rates, it's in their interest to put the game on the medium with the broadest reach. If it were moved to a PPV platform, it would be seen by a smaller but also narrower and likely less desirable demographic.

I doubt the direct revenue generated by a PPV stream at any price would be able exceed the ad revenues of an OTA Super Bowl broadcast. For that reason, I think the Super Bowl is one of the last events that will move away from free OTA although every year we'll see more movement in this direction.

 

[pecorino]

One of my neighbors would obviously pay for it and I'd watch the game there. No way would I pay for it

 

[Bogart]

Voted yes. If it was just me, would probably go to a bar. But more likely pay the $100 and have a party. Last year, the SB party I went to, most people there were part of a Poly community, and didn't even understand football, but they all were excited to be watching, be it the game, halftime or commercials.

Its a Friday so let's hear more about the poly party.

Wasn't nearly as exciting as you would think. Poly doesn't equal swinging, for better or worse. Your basic party, 20 or so people, except most people there had slept with MOST of the people there at some point. I needed flowcharts for who was dating who currently at the time, and in the past.

 

[UncleZen]

I voted no but by 2032 I may change my mind. I don't like Superbowl parties because they distract from the event so getting everyone together to pay for it is not an option.

 

[Rustoleum]

Voted yes. If it was just me, would probably go to a bar. But more likely pay the $100 and have a party. Last year, the SB party I went to, most people there were part of a Poly community, and didn't even understand football, but they all were excited to be watching, be it the game, halftime or commercials.

Its a Friday so let's hear more about the poly party.

Wasn't nearly as exciting as you would think. Poly doesn't equal swinging, for better or worse. Your basic party, 20 or so people, except most people there had slept with MOST of the people there at some point. I needed flowcharts for who was dating who currently at the time, and in the past.

At first glance I thought Poly meant “of Polynesian ancestry”.



Actually sounds like a kickass party.

 

[Ilov80s]

Only if the Lions were in it

 

[Ghost Rider]

Only if it features the Manningcast with Taylor Swift being the featured guest for all four quarters.

 

[The Z Machine]

Nah. Prolly won't watch unless the Ravens are in it. Haven't watched many these last few years.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

No. I watch the NFL now because it is free and it is enjoyable. For $100 I can think of a lot more things that I’d rather do than watch a football game.

 

[pollardsvision]

May consider it if the Falcons were playing, otherwise no. So, thankfully I'll be dead before I have to make that call.

I wouldn't do it because I can't stay up late enough to watch the SB anyway.

In fact, I fell asleep at halftime the last time the Falcons were in the Super Bowl.

You and I both would have preferred to keep the $100 that night.

 

[FairWarning]

No because I’ll watch it on another country’s feed. All of these Thursday night and peacock games are shown in other countries for free.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

No because I’ll watch it on another country’s feed. All of these Thursday night and peacock games are shown in other countries for free.

Not even that- just wait 10 minutes after its over and it will be posted all over the internet. I havent ever paid to watch a UFC fight- as 10-15 minutes after the live airing- dozens of people post recordings of the fights on YouTube.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

Yes, especially if it was commercial free.

Unpossible. Unless you’re cool with watching the players stand around and take breaks all the time. or you really like the sound of the announcers talking to fill the gaps.

 

[Wingnut]

I'd stream it illegally like I do every other PPV and subscription broadcast. No shame in my game.

 

[kupcho1]

We are all saying no yet we all would.

Speak for yourself sport

You'll see Goodell in Mensa before you see me pay $100 to watch the super bowl.

 

[FairWarning]

No because I’ll watch it on another country’s feed. All of these Thursday night and peacock games are shown in other countries for free.

Not even that- just wait 10 minutes after its over and it will be posted all over the internet. I havent ever paid to watch a UFC fight- as 10-15 minutes after the live airing- dozens of people post recordings of the fights on YouTube.

That isn't an option is you have a SB party though.

 

[Major]

I may pay for the Conference Championship games since streaming sites aren't an option. I always enjoy this week more than the actual Super Bowl. Normally two great games with the energy of a team's home field and fans. Something is always lost with the neutral field and huge corporate aspect of the Super Bowl. I mainly enjoy the big game for the parties and social aspect.

 

[NutterButter]

No because I’ll watch it on another country’s feed. All of these Thursday night and peacock games are shown in other countries for free.

Not even that- just wait 10 minutes after its over and it will be posted all over the internet. I havent ever paid to watch a UFC fight- as 10-15 minutes after the live airing- dozens of people post recordings of the fights on YouTube.

That isn't an option is you have a SB party though.

Why not? Just have the party 4 hours later. lol.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

No because I’ll watch it on another country’s feed. All of these Thursday night and peacock games are shown in other countries for free.

Not even that- just wait 10 minutes after its over and it will be posted all over the internet. I havent ever paid to watch a UFC fight- as 10-15 minutes after the live airing- dozens of people post recordings of the fights on YouTube.

That isn't an option is you have a SB party though.

Why not? Just have the party 4 hours later. lol.

Especially on the east coast - "Superbowl party at my place Sunday night! Kickoff at 11:00 p.m."

 

[Ptomaine]

I stopped watching a few years ago, but, If they are willing to pay me $100 to view it, I'm in.

 

[Mr.Pack]

Voted yes. If it was just me, would probably go to a bar. But more likely pay the $100 and have a party. Last year, the SB party I went to, most people there were part of a Poly community, and didn't even understand football, but they all were excited to be watching, be it the game, halftime or commercials.

Wait you went to an orgy and they had the Super Bowl on?

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Voted yes. If it was just me, would probably go to a bar. But more likely pay the $100 and have a party. Last year, the SB party I went to, most people there were part of a Poly community, and didn't even understand football, but they all were excited to be watching, be it the game, halftime or commercials.

Wait you went to an orgy and they had the Super Bowl on?

"Hold on for a second ladies, I just need to see this 4th down play"

 

[GroveDiesel]

It’s the year 2032. 6 years after the liquidation of China’s Evergrande caused a cascade of failed Chinese real estate developers collapsing China’s economy. With no Chinese purchasing of US debt, the US defaulted on payments and the dollar’s value plunged. The world is in chaos.

Those left cling to the memories of better times. A small group in the shadows of a ruined city in the South gather for the first ever Nashville Foraging League Souper Bowl. Each entrant must present a $100 bill, proof that they can scavenge and find this now worthless piece of paper, to receive the clue that will lead them to one of the last cans of soup remaining on the planet. Many will die today. But somebody will get that bowl of Campbell’s Chunky Soup and fill their belly today. Soup That Eats Like a Meal.

 

[stbugs]

I voted no in a vacuum. If I’m hosting people (might agree with friends to all chip in) of course I’d pay or if I am going somewhere, I’d chip in a few bucks. Personally, I don’t care enough outside of my team (Panthers, very low odds) to spend $100 to watch a random football game.

Also, in 2032, all my boys will be past college so less pressure if just my wife and me.

 

[Fat Nick]

I'm already at my limit for streaming service costs...I think I'd pass at $100 unless my team was in it or I was hosting a party.

 

[nirad3]

Not sure how to vote. I wouldn't pay the $100 for me to just sit and watch at home alone... I rarely do that anyways. I am either at a party or a bar, where the cost would be spread out among the viewers wherever I was at.

 

[Bogart]

Voted yes. If it was just me, would probably go to a bar. But more likely pay the $100 and have a party. Last year, the SB party I went to, most people there were part of a Poly community, and didn't even understand football, but they all were excited to be watching, be it the game, halftime or commercials.

Wait you went to an orgy and they had the Super Bowl on?

Again, Poly doesn't equal swinging. At one point on the large couch sitting was me, my date, her primary partner, his girlfriend, his girlfriend's girlfriend, and his girlfriend's girlfriend's date. But everyone was dressed and no testing was needed after.

 

[Pipes]

Now that I know who's playing voted No. Really depends on the matchup.

 

[Willie Neslon]

144 votes in and 4 out of 5 say they would not pay the $100.

 

[Gr00vus]

Wouldn't pay unless my team (the Chargers) were playing. So I'm not paying.

I might consider paying if they got rid of the stupid half time extravaganzas, but I think the casual fans like that, so it'll never happen.

 

[bagger]

most people there were part of a Poly community,

What’s this now?

 

[Leroy Hoard]

might consider paying if they got rid of the stupid half time extravaganzas, but I think the casual fans like that, so it'll never happen.

Unfortunately that and the ads themselves are hugely popular with the more casual fans. So those those 2 things will probably never go away, If people are paying it will be on top of all that.

 

[Eephus]

might consider paying if they got rid of the stupid half time extravaganzas, but I think the casual fans like that, so it'll never happen.

Unfortunately that and the ads themselves are hugely popular with the more casual fans. So those those 2 things will probably never go away, If people are paying it will be on top of all that.

What would you replace it with? Marching bands? A bunch of ex-jocks behind a big desk?

The spectacle helps to make the Super Bowl the event it is. Otherwise for a lot of people (including me), it's just another football game.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

might consider paying if they got rid of the stupid half time extravaganzas, but I think the casual fans like that, so it'll never happen.

Unfortunately that and the ads themselves are hugely popular with the more casual fans. So those those 2 things will probably never go away, If people are paying it will be on top of all that.

What would you replace it with? Marching bands? A bunch of ex-jocks behind a big desk?

The spectacle helps to make the Super Bowl the event it is. Otherwise for a lot of people (including me), it's just another football game.

During the regular season I usually use halftime as a break and miss most of it. The last couple of Superbowl parties/sports bar events I have used the extended time to drive home so I can actually watch the end of the game.

 

[Gr00vus]

might consider paying if they got rid of the stupid half time extravaganzas, but I think the casual fans like that, so it'll never happen.

Unfortunately that and the ads themselves are hugely popular with the more casual fans. So those those 2 things will probably never go away, If people are paying it will be on top of all that.

What would you replace it with? Marching bands? A bunch of ex-jocks behind a big desk?

The spectacle helps to make the Super Bowl the event it is. Otherwise for a lot of people (including me), it's just another football game.

I wouldn't replace it with anything, just have a regular 15 minute half time. I just want to watch a football game, not a military parade and an Usher concert.