NBA to offer games on PPV basis

[tims4wins]

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/13300681/nba-offer-single-game-pay-per-view-telecasts-699
 
This is interesting. Wish the NFL would do this for out of market games. The link also notes that you can buy a team pass (for $120) instead of a league pass (for $199) to see all of one team's games. Again, another concept I wish the NFL would adopt.

 

[TheRooster]

The NFL will get there.  They just need to make sure they've tapped out the league pass subcribers and get pricing right such that overall revenue increases.  The NBA will provide some valuble learnings.

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

$7 to watch one NBA game? One that would presumably not be on national TV? I'm skeptical they will find much of a market for this.

 
Why? Pay-per-view charges roughly that for a movie, and I think there are plenty of people who don't have the time to merit a full season subscription but would be happy to bay $7 bucks to watch a game when the opportunity arises. 

 

[McDrew]

I just want all 4 leagues to offer an online-only subscription with no blackouts.  I don't care if they just show me the local feed, I hate being tethered to cable because that's the only place I can legally watch B's games. 

 

[Ale Xander]

One team being over 50% of the league cost is highway robbery. That said, I'd probably pay $1.75 for the 4th quarter if I could.
 
NFL and NBA isn't incomparable.  NBA and Boxing/Movies isn't even in the same arena

 

[bowiac]

I guess I don't understand the potential consumer. If I'm in the Boston market, I get all the c's games. If I'm a C's fan in NY and I'm really into them, I will order league pass. Otherwise, I would just watch them when they are on TNT, ESPN or the local RSN vs the Knicks or nets.

It may appeal to people who don't subscribe to cable and are NBA fans but not enough of a fan to order league pass. That's a pretty small market.

So this is pretty right on the nose for me. I'm a C's fan in NY, and I'm a pretty huge NBA fan, but realistically don't have the time to watch enough games to justify league pass. Now last year I bought league pass and just had games on in the background, and may do that again, but I could end up doing this instead.

 

[Drocca]

One team being over 50% of the league cost is highway robbery. That said, I'd probably pay $1.75 for the 4th quarter if I could.
 
NFL and NBA isn't incomparable.  NBA and Boxing/Movies isn't even in the same arena

 
Actually a lot of really big fights have been in Madison Square Garden. 

 

[tims4wins]

One team being over 50% of the league cost is highway robbery. That said, I'd probably pay $1.75 for the 4th quarter if I could.
 
NFL and NBA isn't incomparable.  NBA and Boxing/Movies isn't even in the same arena

 
I disagree with you on the first point. I'd happily save the $80 to not have access to the other teams games. I know the NFL isn't comparable, but call Sunday Ticket $240 for the season. I am an out of market Pats fan. I would definitely rather pay say $150 to only have access to Pats games vs. the rest of the league.
 
As to the point about $7 per game being too high - I definitely agree with this. I think they will eventually reduce that to an equilibrium somewhere below $5. Maybe $3 or $4.

 

[Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat]

I'll definitely use this, either game by game or just the Celtics season.  I haven't bought the league pass in a couple years, and wasn't planning to do it this year either.

 

[Traut]

I get it. As someone who doesn't have cable, I could see myself paying $7 to watch a game some night if the matchup interested me. I would have no interest in a season or team pass.

 

[mauf]

The NBA probably views this as a test market. This program won't make much money, but the NBA will learn a lot about the market without putting its existing revenue streams at risk.

 

[DJnVa]

I guess I don't understand the potential consumer. If I'm in the Boston market, I get all the c's games. If I'm a C's fan in NY and I'm really into them, I will order league pass

 

This will be anecdotal--I'm not in the Boston market and I cannot afford League Pass to watch the Celtics, Extra Innings to watch the Sox, and Center Ice to watch the Bruins.
 
But if I'm sitting around one night and the Celtics have a good game that night and there's nothing else going on? Hell yeah.

 

[swingin val]

I am in Minneapolis. Celtics fan. Don't have a TV, so mostly rely on streaming links. However, those mostly are shitty quality. I also only watch a game when I do not have other plans, so I catch random games here and there, so league pass or team pass is a waste of money.

I could see myself paying 7 bucks for a game here and there. Although, I think a 5 dollar price point would be more enticing.

 

[DJnVa]

Perhaps even something like $30 gets you 5 games of your choice.
 
I like the a la carte idea.

 

[RG33]

I will totally do this.

I'm in California and have historically gotten the NBA, MLB, NFL, and NHL League passes. Last year, I finally let it dwindle to just the NFL and MLB since I was watching 3-5 NBA/NHL Bruins/Celtics games per year. If MLB did this, I would probably get rid of the MLB pass as well (You'd have to take the NFL pass out of my cold, dead hands).

For big games or for days where I actually have the free time to watch the game, I would be totally fine with paying $7 to watch the game.

 

[Dehere]

$7 to watch one NBA game? One that would presumably not be on national TV? I'm skeptical they will find much of a market for this.

 
They don't want to find much of a market for this. All they need it to be is incremental revenue for minimal effort without undercutting League Pass or the national partners. Say they do a really modest number like 5000 buys a night - which would be less than 1% of a typical UFC PPV, for example. That would be $5-6m a season in basically found money. Not a huge market but $5m isn't bad for almost no work and no damage to existing relationships.
 
I could see myself using this. I'm from New Orleans and I like watching Anthony Davis but I'm just not home enough or interested enough to buy League Pass, but I can certainly see there being <7 nights a season that I'm home and there's nothing better on and I buy a single game.
 
The pricing is a useful window into the reality of unbundling / a la carte. The price of a single game is close to 6x what you would pay on a per night basis for League Pass (~$1.25/night). That's what a la carte cable would look like. You can have what you want, but you're going to pay multiples more than what you would pay for it as part of a bundle.
 
MLB seems like a more likely next market for this than the NFL. Tons of games, mostly coming from RSNs, and maybe they could offer it at a little bit lower price. Think there are some logical markets for an MLB a la carte offering: Boston fans who would only buy Sox-Yankees games, Dodgers fans who would only buy Kershaw starts, fans who only really get interested at the end of September.
 
Seems like a smart offering to me overall.

 

[swingin val]

I watch most Sox games on mlb.tv and its a blank screen on every commercial break. Wasted opportunity

Same here. They could just a still photo of Doritos and the amount of time I stare at that screen would have probably resulted in multiple bags purchased so far.

 

[Dehere]

Yeah that's a fair point. That would probably be a smart adjustment. It costs them nothing to give you the whole night's worth of games and "$7 for up to 15 games" sounds better than "$7 per game".
 
I'm pretty sure they'll just show whatever ads are airing on the local RSN. More trouble to take them out then to leave them in.

 

[DJnVa]

I think a daily basis would be a better idea than a game pass. I could imagine paying $7-$8 to have access to all the games on air that night, but that much for one game seems too high.

 
But it's not. I'd rather pay less, but you have multiple people here telling you they'd pay it.
 
 

 

[scott bankheadcase]

I think a daily basis would be a better idea than a game pass. I could imagine paying $7-$8 to have access to all the games on air that night, but that much for one game seems too high.

They really need to figure out ads on there things though. I watch most Sox games on mlb.tv and its a blank screen on every commercial break. Wasted opportunity

 
HUGE Adam Silver priority... If you watched NBA League Pass at the end of last season, there was always something programmed (sometimes ads, when not totally sold they had in-arena feeds, ect) during breaks.
 
Everyone here is also thinking way too domestically. This is a very successful international product.

 

[ishmael]

I think a daily basis would be a better idea than a game pass. I could imagine paying $7-$8 to have access to all the games on air that night, but that much for one game seems too high.

They really need to figure out ads on there things though. I watch most Sox games on mlb.tv and its a blank screen on every commercial break. Wasted opportunity

 
Agreed. With pro sports you have to imagine a high percentage of ppl streaming would be in the target market for the RSN ads (i.e. former, traveling, and/or future Bostonian for Sox games on the NESN broadcast).

 

[mikeford]

its $200/year for league pass to get every team
 
how on earth do they get away with that price point? MLBtv, a vastly superior product in virtually every way, is 130/year.

 

[brs3]

I just want all 4 leagues to offer an online-only subscription with no blackouts.  I don't care if they just show me the local feed, I hate being tethered to cable because that's the only place I can legally watch B's games. 

 
Amen. This drum beats louder. They can ignore it, but eventually we'll get what we want. blackouts are idiotic.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

I think a daily basis would be a better idea than a game pass. I could imagine paying $7-$8 to have access to all the games on air that night, but that much for one game seems too high.

They really need to figure out ads on there things though. I watch most Sox games on mlb.tv and its a blank screen on every commercial break. Wasted opportunity

I agree with your point but how many times are you sitting down and watching back to back NBA games? This seems targeted at people who want to watch *their* team but not pay for League Pass. If you're that big a junkie, aren't you just forking over for all access? How many times is there that many compelling matchups that aren't nationally televised that you or someone else would be tuning in for more than one game?

I don't watch a ton of NBA, it's well behind football and baseball for me, so I'm not the best judge. But I have trouble envisioning someone saying "wow, my team is playing at 7 and then there's this awesome matchup on the west coast at 10 that somehow isn't on national feed, I'm spending the next five hours watching NBA". That person seems to me like they'd just buy the pass.

I dunno, I think it's a cool move and wish the NFL would do it. I'll never spend money on Sunday Ticket again now that I've moved back to NE but I do miss not being at the mercy of the networks decision on which games I get to watch.

 

[cardiacs]

I live in Europe now and am extremely busy at work and home. The only games I could feasibly watch are day games (evening games in EU) on weekends or holidays when my kids are preoccupied. I will absolutely be using this service - probably for 4 or 5 games next season when the stars are aligned. 

 

[TheRooster]

$7 only seems high when you think of it as would "I" pay that. Instead think: me and 2 of my buddies have an hour or two to kill before going out on Friday night and the Spurs are hosting the Clips. We just paid $30 for a case of beer. What is $7 to see the game we want? Sure, the NBA might find it gets twice as many hits at $5, but you might as well start on the high side and work your way down if you need to.

 

[zenter]

Consider that the NBA is heavily data-driven and pricing is most likely strictly by design.
 
The old LP 5-team package costed $149. Data probably showed that most users only watched one team regularly... I know I did.
 
I bet the data also showed a large enough proportion of people actively watched more than 30 minutes of ~15-30 games using this plan, or $5-10/game... I was pretty close to the high end of that.
 
So, yeah, the pricing doesn't look way off.

 

[zenter]

To be fair, it's the "national" games that are only on cable (ie, all "national" games) and the Cs playing BKN and NYK 8 times a year that severely limits my game-watching.

 

[scott bankheadcase]

 
Amen. This drum beats louder. They can ignore it, but eventually we'll get what we want. blackouts are idiotic.

 
As much as digital keeps growing and making money in this fashion, it's still no where near the money maker that live TV is, due to the crazy amount of money RSNs, Disney and Turner are happy to pay. Blackouts aren't going anywhere until TV money starts to dwindle.

 

[ALiveH]

I wouldn't buy the $150 package and i live out of market so i only get to see a handful of games per year when the Cs are bad.  I'd pay $7 once or twice a month to be able to catch more games.