One of the biggest nights in Television history is by far
the Super Bowl. No matter what team is playing the ratings have always reached
sky-high numbers and last years Super Bowl is all the proof anyone needs. NBC
studios hosted last years Super Bowl with record-breaking numbers in attendance
and viewership across the country. It was the most watched program in American
history reaching 118.5 million people at the half time show and then peaking to
120.8 million during the Patriot’s fourth quarter victory comeback.
The cost of a 30 second commercial for Super Bowl 49 was
about 4.5 million and this year commercials are going for about 5 million. This
year CBS is to host Super Bowl 50 with the hopes of reaching as many viewers as
possible. “For us, our goal is to expose the game to the largest audience
possible for the Super Bowl,” said Jeffrey Gerttula, a senior vice president of
CBS Sports Digital, in an interview. Of course this means that the network has
to maximize the number of viewers on the profitable commercial ads that air
during the game.
However trying to increase the amount of viewers for the
Super Bowl given the circumstances of television today will come at a price as
well. Now a days many households have cut the cord of cable, as there are now
plenty of options for entertainment through numerous platforms. For the second
time CBS will be streaming the game for free through their free CBS Sports or
National Football League apps and be able to watch the Super Bowl at your
convenience on any device. Not only that but the apps will for the first time
stream the commercials while they are shown on television.
This bold move could be rather dangerous for cable
companies. The Super Bowl is one of the biggest, most watched events in
television history and now that it is so easily accessible and free it could
accelerate the consumer revolt against big cable. In recent years there have
been numerous options for television viewers to watch common programs without a
cable subscription. Also many over the top digital streaming services now offer
original content such as Netflix and Amazon. With so many options available for
those who have cut cable it is more than likely cable cutting will become a
popular option.
Although this benefits those who make the decision to cut
the cord, cable companies can greatly suffer. This also means bad news for
advertisers as well. Trying to reach viewers through traditional media such as
television and cable is not as effective as it once was. Now a day’s technology
has advanced and watching or streaming programs can be available on any device.
“Audiences will choose the device that is most compatible with their needs at
the time they want to watch. Therefore, content must seamlessly flow across
time, location and device.” (11, Nielsen) Television is still the primary
source for video consumption but other devices are starting to come close.
It is no surprise with the surplus of options for media
viewers that don’t include cable younger viewers are walking away from
broadcasts of sports games. The average audience for NFL broadcasts across
every network it is viewed on has declined about 10.6 % over the last four
seasons according to Nielsen’s data. This decline is also affecting cable
companies such as Comcast, CBS, Fox and many more who pay millions in rights to
broadcast big audience television events. If the league and networks can’t find
a way to regain a larger audience among 18-49ers, their exodus is likely to
make some advertisers reconsider the value of the NFL games, and force networks
to wonder why they continue to fork over huge amounts of cash to televise it
all.
The Super Bowl continues to break records with the highest
viewership in television history. Yet the NFL has had a difficult time keeping
the younger audiences viewership. It raises the question if the NFL turns off
the younger audiences or if they are just turning off the television set in
general as part of larger shifts in culture and technology. Super Bowl 50, one
of the biggest nights in television will be available and free for people in
more ways than one. However if the super bowl is free and audiences can stream
the game without the commercials, which companies are paying millions for, it
could hurt the NFL as a business.
Articles Used:
https://quinnipiac.blackboard.com/bbcswebdav/pid-1616565-dt-content-rid-11168763_1/courses/MSS495A_16SP/comparable-metrics-report-q3-2015.pdf
http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/25/news/companies/super-bowl-tickets/
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/04/technology/personaltech/how-to-watch-the-super-bowl-when-you-dont-have-cable.html?_r=0
https://quinnipiac.blackboard.com/bbcswebdav/pid-1616565-dt-content-rid-11168763_1/courses/MSS495A_16SP/comparable-metrics-report-q3-2015.pdf
Works Cited:
Chen,
Brian X. "How to Watch the Super Bowl When You Don’t Have Cable."The
New York Times. The New York Times, 03 Feb. 2016. Web. 07 Feb. 2016.
"Insights ." The Comparable Metrics Report: Q2 2015. N.p., n.d. Web. 07 Feb. 2016.
"Insights ." Screen Wars: The Battle for Eye Space in a TV-Everywhere World. N.p., Mar. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2016.
"Super Bowl Tickets Heading for a Record." CNNMoney. Cable News Network, n.d. Web. 07 Feb. 2016.
Markella Damianos
ReplyDeleteWhile today’s society has become one emphasized on using multiple devices and multiple platforms, I do not think the Super Bowl has to worry. Unlike many other shows that are live, the Super Bowl provides a different atmosphere for viewers. One of the biggest aspects of it is the Super Bowl party. All around the United States, people are getting their friends together and sitting around a television surrounded by food and drinks to watch the game. This experience is not something that can simply disappear with chord cutting. It also has no limits to age ranges. For example, last night during Super Bowl 50 the people upstairs threw a party (people aged 20-22). Even at college, these kids could not escape what they are used to at home. The Super Bowl is an event.
Another issue with focusing on the chord cutting path is that many people do not watch the Super Bowl or other sporting events at home. I do not just mean going to a friends to watch games. Many people go to their local bars to watch games. Similar to Super Bowl parties, there is a certain atmosphere watching it a bar. The bar atmosphere allows people to talk and cheer with their fellow fans as well as debate with those who disagree that their team is the best.
In your post, you mentioned Jeffrey Gerttula, a senior vice-president of CBS Digital. He stated, “For us, our goal is to expose the game to the largest audience possible for the Super Bowl” (Chen). This year they have done that by providing a free streaming app: “Owners of Roku’s set-top boxes, Apple TV, Google’s Chromecast, Microsoft’s Xbox One and Amazon’s Fire box can download the free CBS Sports or National Football League apps and watch the Super Bowl with no login credentials required, the company said” (Chen). The question does not seem to be whether the Super Bowl will survive chord cutting rather how will CBS gain more profits from streaming?
As we have seen with Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu, they do not just stream to viewers for free. I think CBS has given viewers a taste for change since their ways of viewing are changing. Since they have given them a taste, it is not hard to assume that CBS will follow the ways of Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu and have viewers pay for the apps and maybe even charge more to stream the game live.
Another question that comes from looking at this app is will CBS change how they advertise? The app could provide marketers to find new ways to show their ads during the Super Bowl. Saqib Shah emphasizes that because the ads have become “an event unto themselves,” there are new ways that the ads are being watched. He highlights how this year two sites gained early access to the ads: “A YouTube channel and separate website, AdBlitz- which has been available for the past seven years- is already seeing brands upload sneak peeks and clips of their Super Bowl 50 ads, weeks before kickoff” (Shah). He also mentioned that by next year Google will also boost advertisements: “Google… announced that it is launching a real-time advertising tool. The new feature will work across all of Google’s platforms, allowing brand and marketers to run ads timed to big moments during live events” (Shah). CBS with their new app can also begin to market these ideals on their apps and making deals with the various companies so that they could gain even more profit not just by viewers but by the companies.
I do not think as of right now chord cutting will be an issue for the Super Bowl, I think it is only the beginning of a way for them to increase their audience.
Works Cited:
Chen, Brian X. “How to Watch the Super Bowl When You Don’t Have Cable”. The New York Times. The New York Times, 08 Feb. 2016. Web. .
Shah, Saqib. "YouTube Gets Super Bowl 50 Ads Weeks before the Main Event." Yahoo Finance. Yahoo Finance, 20 Jan. 2016. Web. 07 Feb. 2016.
Michael Corigliano
ReplyDeleteWhat a lot of people are realizing in todays world is that there are other forms of media that make more sense for people to watch their favorite programs (sports, dramas, etc.). While CBS used a free streaming app for the Super Bowl this year, it mostly gives them good publicity for people who are not able to watch with cable (whether it is because they cut the cord or not). The free subscription was only for the Super Bowl, which only helps CBS’s reputation and in turn would not necessarily hurt the Super Bowl. The only problem I have with CBS’s free streaming of the Super Bowl is that viewers can stream it without the commercials as well. I understand that not including the commercials gives the viewer a focused view on the game, but each company pays upwards of 5million dollars to show their ads on national television. Not to mention most viewers watch the Super Bowl simply for the advertisements, as they are known to be entertaining even for non-sports fans. Even with that problem, the Super Bowl will always have great viewership and turn out to be a good investment for the companies involved.
I thought one specific point that was important was when you mentioned that other forms of media are going to hurt the NFL overall. If people really do “choose the device that is most compatible with their needs at the time they want to watch” I think they will end up choosing to purchase sports subscriptions, which would still bring in revenue for organizations like the NFL. The only way it would truly hurt professional sports leagues would be if networks like CBS continue free streaming for more then just the Super Bowl.
That leads into regular season games, which is where a lot of professional sports leagues are losing viewership to other forms of media providers. For example, in the MLB, Comcast has dropped the Yankees because Comcast says that the team is not gaining enough viewers to keep them on their cable provider. If teams continue to get dropped from cable providers I think that is when sports fans will really turn to other forms of media such as subscriptions to MLB.TV and NBA League Pass.
Although numbers from Nielsen say, “65% prefer watching video programming live”, those number drop frequently because a large number of the younger generations watch with non-cable subscriptions (Netflix, Hulu, NFL Red Zone, etc.) (Screen Wars). Reasons for cutting the cord and switching to non-cable subscriptions range from saving money in cable costs to simply having each program at your fingertips. According to Saqib Shah’s article, “In 2015, people watched the equivalent of 1,600 years of Super Bowl ads on Youtube” (Shah). Allowing Youtube to show a few ads early gives the Superbowl early publicity, which only bodes well for the NFL and their companies that paid for ad space. I also believe that these non-cable subscriptions such as CBS’s app could turn to more creative ways in order to gain revenue from more then just viewership. I believe that will prove to be extremely important when cord cutting becomes more of an issue down the road for professional sports leagues.
Work Cited:
"Insights ." Screen Wars: The Battle for Eye Space in a TV-Everywhere World. Nielsen, 01 Apr. 2015. Web. 08 Feb. 2016.
Shah, Saqib. "YouTube Gets Super Bowl 50 Ads Weeks before the Main Event." Yahoo Finance. Yahoo Finance, 20 Jan. 2016. Web. 08 Feb. 2016.
I would also agree that the Super Bowl is an iconic sports event in the American culture. Certain people block out the whole day to attend the bar with friends or prepare festivities at their household to have friends over. “Super Bowl Sunday” has become almost a holiday. Advertising is a prominent component of the Super Bowl, because many people will only watch the game for the commercials. Since the Super Bowl has become so engrained in the culture, it’s an opportunity that several marketers feel is worthwhile to invest in.
ReplyDeleteThere are two parts to the Super Bowl: audience and advertising. The Super Bowl audience for 2015 was 14.4 million, which is the highest number yet (Kalb, 2016). The platforms in which the game is watched varies by household and individual. As discussed in the Nielsen Advertising and Audiences Report, nearly “86 percent of U.S. smartphone owners say they use their devices as second-screens while watching TV” (2015, p.5). I am certainly guilty of doing this. In fact, I watched the Super Bowl last night on TV but at the same time was doing homework on my laptop and texting on the phone. I think this is the concern marketers have when it comes to advertising. The question is how do you get the audience attention through all these layers of distraction? Marketers use several tactics to grab audience attention such as “the use of a relatable storyline, a connection through humor or emotion or attention-grabbing sights and sounds” (Nielsen, p.13). The report also explains that these are proven tactics for the “success quotient”.
However, others argue that Super Bowl advertisements are not worthwhile investment opportunities. In fact, Kalb states in his article, “Super Bowl Ads Provide a Great Way for Advertisers to Waste $6 Million”, that companies should look elsewhere for greater return (2016). Kalb discusses that the average cost for 30-second spot in the 2016 Super Bowl was $5 million, which also doesn’t include the production costs (2016). So does advertising in the Super Bowl actually improve sales for companies? Kalb presents the argument that it doesn’t. He states that a study done by Ad Age, showed that 80 percent of Super Bowl ads don’t improve sales (2016). I am curious to see if the 2016 Super Bowl ads will see a shift in sales and responses from the audience. I did not pay as close attention this year to the ads; however, in past years I really enjoyed the Doritos commercial. It didn’t entice me to buy Doritos but it resulted in some laughter. Obstacles marketers face are whether the Super Bowl is a beneficial investment and if the audience will actually remember these companies products.
References
Advertising and Audiences Report. (2014, May). The Nielsen Company, 28.
Kalb, I. (2016, Jan. 20). Super Bowl Ads Provide a Great Way for Advertisers to Waste $6 Million. The Huffington Post. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ira-kalb/super-bowl-ads-provide-a_b_9034060.html
Rachel LaRotonda
ReplyDeleteWhat’s better then the Super Bowl? Nothing. Think about it, you and all your friends crowded around one TV with what feels like an endless supply of food and drinks, it doesn’t get much better than that. With that being said, the Super Bowl is an event, an event that revolves around none other than a TV. With more and more people “cutting the cord” there isn’t a problem with how people watch the Super Bowl, but rather are advertisers profiting from this shift in viewing?
You had said that this is the second time CBS will be streaming the game for free. If I was to just download the CBS Sports app or even the National Football League app, which is also free, I could watch the Super Bowl on any device. The cherry on top is that the commercials would be streaming too. I don’t think there is anything wrong with using this. Like I said before, the Super Bowl is without a doubt a “TV event” but given that it’s 2016 if watching TV requires me to stream the game live from an app, I’m going to do it.
Just because we are starting to watch TV differently, it doesn’t mean we aren’t watching. It’s easy to claim that everyone who is a cord cutter isn’t watching live TV, but that isn’t the case. This goes back to wondering if cord cutting affects the amount of viewers live events generate. Jeffrey Gerttula, senior vice-president of CBS Digital said “For us, our goal is to expose the game to the largest audience possible for the Super Bowl” (Chen). With all the technology we have, they could definitely reach the largest audience possible, but with the use of multi-screens, is everyone really watching? Ira Kalib from The Huffington Post said, “It is true that the Super Bowl affords advertisers the opportunity to reach a huge audience at a time when audiences are fragmented over too many different media. The tragedy is that too many viewers do not remember very much about the brands or products advertised. While many say they like the commercials in the moment, they do not remember the products for very long afterwards, and they certainly do not buy them as a result” (Kalib).
A free streaming service is probably going to appeal to every cord cutter, the problem is who profits from the streaming? Let us not forget that even though we are streaming is the NFL really engaging its younger audience during game time and commercial breaks? Victor Pineiro said, “When it comes to social and digital marketing, 2016 is going to be an adapt-or-die year, one in which marketers will need to evolve as tectonic shifts in the way people use social networks and consume media on them will force massive change”.
I think in order to keep pushing forward and keep big businesses happy, there has to be a better way to track people who stream live events and who is an engaged viewer. I agree that unless something is done soon, advertisement companies are going to stop paying millions of dollars for a chance to reach a larger audience.
Works Cited:
Chen, Brian X. “How to Watch the Super Bowl When You Don’t Have Cable”. The New York Times. The New York Times, 08 Feb. 2016. Web. .
Kalb, Ira. "Super Bowl Ads Provide a Great Way for Advertisers to Waste $6 Million." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 20 Jan. 2016. Web. 08 Feb. 2016.
Pineiro, Victor. "Five Social Trends Marketers Won't Be Able to Ignore in 2016." Advertising Age DigitalNext RSS. Ad Age, 16 Dec. 2015. Web. 08 Feb. 2016.
The Super Bowl has consistently been one of the larger scale events on television every year. Millions of people tune in to watch, either the football game or the famous commercials that are worked on year round just for this event. And as well they should, when you’re paying 5 million dollars for 30 seconds of airtime, you’re going to want to make sure whatever you create is of best quality. But this year, the super bowl juggernaut had a bit of a slip up. During the peak of last years super bowl, during the 4th quarter comeback as stated, viewership broke the record and landed at 115.5 million people. Over one third of America had tuned in for the game. But this year, during its busiest time, viewership landed at about 111.9 million people. It may not seem like a huge difference, but 3 million people sure does make a large difference.
ReplyDeleteSo what attributed to this? Well, there are numerous factors, which could have affected this outcome. As the Neilson people said during their presentation, cord cutting is occurring, especially in households with people under 30. Many of these people are young and just starting out or moving around, so why pay for the hassle of monthly cable when you can just subscribe for digital streaming services, like Netflix or Hulu. There are two issues, however. CBS did decided to stream the game on their streaming app, so there’s no “I don’t have cable so I couldn’t watch the game” excuse, and many of the people who opt out of cable subscriptions are those who don’t really enjoy sports anyway. A percentage of cable viewers keep paying for the monthly service because they like to watch sports and news, two things which are scarcely available on streaming services. So what then, why fewer viewers? In my opinion, the game was just a little bland. None of the commercials were really that memorable, the super bowl half time show wasn’t all that exciting, and the two teams playing didn’t draw the biggest crowd. Don’t get me wrong, the Broncos and Panthers respectively have millions of fans, but if I were a betting man, I’d say that if a big, controversial team like the Patriots had played, there would have been a much higher viewership. Overall, it wasn’t the worst turnout. Super Bowl 50 had the third largest viewership in history, which is still something to be proud of. Will the broadcasted game continue to decline as the years go by? We’ll just have to wait and see.