Peacock to exclusively stream a playoff game

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
9,375
I'm very curious to see how this goes.

The league and NBCUniversal announced Monday that the Saturday night game on wild-card weekend will be on Peacock.

The Peacock exclusive game on Jan. 13 will start at 8:15 or 8:30 p.m. ET. The game will be broadcast on NBC stations in the markets of the two teams. It will also be available on mobile devices through the NFL+ package. It will be preceded by a late-afternoon playoff game on NBC and Peacock that will kick off at 4:30 p.m. ET.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/37657287/peacock-exclusively-carry-nfl-playoff-game?platform=amp
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
9,601
Just a horrific idea for Peacock (other streaming services are cutting costs), and fans. Short term thinking.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
9,375
Just a horrific idea for Peacock (other streaming services are cutting costs), and fans. Short term thinking.
The really wild thing is that you know all the value is premised on people signing up for a free or reduced-rate week and then forgetting about it.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
13,003
Peacock has been doing this with many of the best Premiere League games.. IMO equally short sighted.. just when the game is becoming as popular as it's ever been in the US.. NBC decides to put it on its inferior streaming service.
 

DrBlinky

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 18, 2002
842
Cranston, RI
Do they still have the free tier with the commercials? I know that’s what I originally signed up for.
I believe that they recently did away with the free tier entirely. Even with that tier, what was available was limited.

Now, their Premium tier has everything has all their content, but with ads.

Premium Plus is their "no-ads" tier that allows downloads and access to your local NBC affiliate.
 

Preacher

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 9, 2006
6,830
Pyeongtaek, South Korea
I believe that they recently did away with the free tier entirely. Even with that tier, what was available was limited.

Now, their Premium tier has everything has all their content, but with ads.

Premium Plus is their "no-ads" tier that allows downloads and access to your local NBC affiliate.
Yeah, we have premium plus now. My wife pays for it but gets reimbursed the cost from her credit card so it’s effectively free.
 

jtn46

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 10, 2004
9,996
Norwalk, CT
Peacock has been doing this with many of the best Premiere League games.. IMO equally short sighted.. just when the game is becoming as popular as it's ever been in the US.. NBC decides to put it on its inferior streaming service.
Why is it short-sighted? Isn’t having them on Peacock more of a big picture idea than putting them on USA, where people can… watch Law and Order SVU repeats 14 hours a day? I understand with NFL games it’s different, but if you love Premiere League and want to watch it in America, Peacock is and has been the absolute best way to do that for awhile now. NBC is paying billions of dollars for PL specifically so it can drive Peacock subscriptions.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
64,368
Nothing engenders brand loyalty like making customers feel they’re being forced by dystopian corporate overlords. Of course, I’ll be one of those assholes forgetting to cancel the service after the game, so.

I’d feel better about a ppv option I think. Feels more honest, at least.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,650
Last year on black friday you could get a year of peacock for $1 a month. Though some people on twitter seem to think that this game will be free on peacock. I know they have a free tier which has some things, but I don't know if they've said what tier the playoff game will be tied to.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
13,003
Why is it short-sighted? Isn’t having them on Peacock more of a big picture idea than putting them on USA, where people can… watch Law and Order SVU repeats 14 hours a day? I understand with NFL games it’s different, but if you love Premiere League and want to watch it in America, Peacock is and has been the absolute best way to do that for awhile now. NBC is paying billions of dollars for PL specifically so it can drive Peacock subscriptions.
Because the fans aren't even set yet on watching the PL on NBC's channels. When you're constantly moving games around the casual fan is going to give up.. and new fans of the game may think to look on peacock but a lot of people won't. IMO you want as many people as possible stumbling across the biggest games on your regular channels.

Also.. watching PL games on Peacock doesn't make me want to watch more on Peacock.. it does the exact opposite. Their streaming service isn't good enough to make the picture quality great all of the time so that in the past it's been a more frustrating experience than pleasurable one.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,606
That's one game I won't be watching unless Patriots happen to be playing.
Not adding another streaming service
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,425
Tuukka's refugee camp
Because the fans aren't even set yet on watching the PL on NBC's channels. When you're constantly moving games around the casual fan is going to give up.. and new fans of the game may think to look on peacock but a lot of people won't. IMO you want as many people as possible stumbling across the biggest games on your regular channels.

Also.. watching PL games on Peacock doesn't make me want to watch more on Peacock.. it does the exact opposite. Their streaming service isn't good enough to make the picture quality great all of the time so that in the past it's been a more frustrating experience than pleasurable one.
NBC is also owned by a profitable cable company that is pushing its unprofitable cord cutting service. Peacock is dumb from a strategic perspective.
 

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
6,739
CT
That's one game I won't be watching unless Patriots happen to be playing.
Not adding another streaming service
With my luck, Miami will finally win their first playoff game in 23 years and I won’t see it. No way I’m adding peacock for a single game.
 

CantKeepmedown

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,676
Portland, ME
A lot of times, I'll sign up for a free trial for whatever channel/service and then immediately cancel. They almost always allow you to continue to watch until your trial is over. That way, you don't have to remember to cancel.

Or, just remove your payment information after you sign up. That way they can't charge a card when the free trial is up. Granted, I haven't tried that so not sure if it works or not.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,274
NBC is also owned by a profitable cable company that is pushing its unprofitable cord cutting service. Peacock is dumb from a strategic perspective.
Not for long. Saw that even when you include Youtube TV/Sling/etc, the % of households with "Pay TV" is tanking rapidly.

I’d feel better about a ppv option I think. Feels more honest, at least.
That's what NBC is banking on, I'm guessing. The PPV being whatever a month of Peacock is at the time.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
24,167
NBC is also owned by a profitable cable company that is pushing its unprofitable cord cutting service. Peacock is dumb from a strategic perspective.
Peacock (and a lot of these other streaming services) are seen as loss leaders by company's preparing for a tremendous reduction in the profitability of cable and linear TV. Right now, that area is profitable for Comcast but the trends suggest that customer base is shrinking every year; and the future is going to be through streaming services.

I don't really know if Peacock is dumb from a strategic perspective or not, but there is a clear logic company's like Comcast are using while pushing it.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
55,463
I wonder how sports bars and the like feel about this. It's one thing for a sports bar to get Sunday Ticket during the season, but I doubt they're subscribing to things like Peacock and Paramount+, etc.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
34,910
I wonder how sports bars and the like feel about this. It's one thing for a sports bar to get Sunday Ticket during the season, but I doubt they're subscribing to things like Peacock and Paramount+, etc.
I think it’s any easy math problem for them. If they thinks they will make more cash showing the game than otherwise, they’ll buy it.
 

Preacher

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 9, 2006
6,830
Pyeongtaek, South Korea
I think it’s any easy math problem for them. If they thinks they will make more cash showing the game than otherwise, they’ll buy it.
I wonder if NBC/Peacock will figure out a way to charge bars extra. DIRECTV charged bars extra for Sunday Ticket based on their occupancy limits. I'm not sure how that works for a streamer when you can just log in with a smart TV (or cast to a TV). It's probably easier when someone has to come out and mount a dish to your roof.
 

BusRaker

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 11, 2006
2,972
MLS moving to Apple TV was a big issue for the sports bars around my hood. Some still don't have it.
Well we're back to the Columbia House "Get 15 cds for $.01" days of having to cancel things
 

trekfan55

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 29, 2004
11,879
Panama
This may be a similar strategy to the old network one.

Get people to either try out the service or pay 1month subscription. Have them see what the service offers and hope some of them stay.

Networks were also looking to retain viewers by showing what they offered when people tuned into games. At the end of the day a lot of fans will pay the 1 month subscription to stream Peacock and watch the game, and since most services let you staythe entire month, maybe they check out what else is on?
 

Time to Mo Vaughn

RIP Dernell
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
7,582
I was getting peacock free from a Comcast subscription. Since that is ending in June, I'll probably just wait until August/September and sign up for it for the premier league anyway and cancel for next summer.

It's getting really annoying with cable offering less for the same money as these streaming services pop up. I signed up for Paramount+ for a month to watch the CL last October/November and cancelled when the tournament paused for two months for the World Cup.

The biggest issue I have with Peacock is watching it on a delay vs DVR. I frequently record games and tune in 1/3 to halfway through. Between commercials and halftime I often catch up close to the end. That doesn't currently work with Peacock, if you turn it in late you can join live or "catch up with key plays" that they select and I'm sure they won't allow any fast forwarding over commercials.
 

DisgruntledSoxFan77

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 12, 2015
1,887
Quincy
This may be a similar strategy to the old network one.

Get people to either try out the service or pay 1month subscription. Have them see what the service offers and hope some of them stay.

Networks were also looking to retain viewers by showing what they offered when people tuned into games. At the end of the day a lot of fans will pay the 1 month subscription to stream Peacock and watch the game, and since most services let you staythe entire month, maybe they check out what else is on?
Only reason I signed up for Peacock was because I wanted to watch Halloween Kills upon release, figured I’d pay the $10 (still cheaper than seeing it in the theaters) and then cancel. Next day I was like “what else is even on h… oh man, I haven’t seen THAT in years!” Fast forward 2 years and I’m still subbed and it’s now my go-to streamer
 

biff_hardbody

New Member
Apr 27, 2016
332
Peacock was $.99/mo for 12 months on Black Friday last year. It may not be cheap again next year given this news, but I have found it to be great value.
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
27,028
Los Angeles, CA
Nothing engenders brand loyalty like making customers feel they’re being forced by dystopian corporate overlords. Of course, I’ll be one of those assholes forgetting to cancel the service after the game, so.

I’d feel better about a ppv option I think. Feels more honest, at least.
Guys, there's no reason to forget to cancel. Make the cancellation part of your sign up process, and then you never have to remember anything. It's not like they cut you off as soon as you cancel - you still get the full time period you signed up for. This is what I do for trials of anything. If I like the product so much that I want to keep it, well, they always make sure to remind you.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,425
Tuukka's refugee camp
Not for long. Saw that even when you include Youtube TV/Sling/etc, the % of households with "Pay TV" is tanking rapidly.



That's what NBC is banking on, I'm guessing. The PPV being whatever a month of Peacock is at the time.
Peacock (and a lot of these other streaming services) are seen as loss leaders by company's preparing for a tremendous reduction in the profitability of cable and linear TV. Right now, that area is profitable for Comcast but the trends suggest that customer base is shrinking every year; and the future is going to be through streaming services.

I don't really know if Peacock is dumb from a strategic perspective or not, but there is a clear logic company's like Comcast are using while pushing it.
The issue is (1) it is extremely difficult to get users at a decent cost, (2) no streaming service outside of Netflix is profitable because it’s expensive as hell, and (3) they’re accelerating the death of their profitable business and have only created a bottom-tier streaming service. Peacock is neither niche or a “one-stop-shop” like Netflix or the Hulu / Disney+ / ESPN+ bundle (which is struggling itself) and doesn’t have a great path there outside burning a bunch of money on fire. There’s going to be consolidation in the industry the next 1-3 years IMO and likely the Paramount+’s and Peacocks of the world.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,274
$110M though??

I wonder if Peacock was told they would get a decent matchup. Last year, Sat Night got the worst game (Chargers-Jags). The best game was Mon night (Cowboys-Bucs)
 

the1andonly3003

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,915
3/4 Chicago, 1/4 Boston
The issue is (1) it is extremely difficult to get users at a decent cost, (2) no streaming service outside of Netflix is profitable because it’s expensive as hell, and (3) they’re accelerating the death of their profitable business and have only created a bottom-tier streaming service. Peacock is neither niche or a “one-stop-shop” like Netflix or the Hulu / Disney+ / ESPN+ bundle (which is struggling itself) and doesn’t have a great path there outside burning a bunch of money on fire. There’s going to be consolidation in the industry the next 1-3 years IMO and likely the Paramount+’s and Peacocks of the world.
Sounds a lot like bundled cable...
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
63,588
New York City
That Chargers-Jags game ended up being amazing
And the Cowboys Bucs was absolutely terrible and the only reason anyone can happily claim they watched it is because it's probably Tom Brady's last game as a player. Even Dallas fans have nothing to cheer about considering the following week.
 

Bigdogx

New Member
Jul 21, 2020
286
It's a move that you could see coming from a mile away, just wait until the entire league is paywalled from preseason till the superbowl.

Of course our whole economy in a nose dive right now might be a severe monkey wrench in their plans for this. I know for myself when the belt starts to tighten up and it is looking like it will, my first looks for cutting my spending will be subscription based sevices.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
63,588
New York City
Are all Prime members NFL fans? Is that US only or worldwide? Is this a global stream?
To your first question, all I can say is what? Obviously not every prime member is a fan of the NFL. Nothing has 100% approval.

And clearly 200 million Prime members is a worldwide figure. 200 million in the US (population 330 million) would be something else.