On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 3:10 AM, JW <[email protected]> wrote: > > I do. And this screams bluff on so many levels, it's not worth taking > > seriously. > > This. I suspect the problems with their NFL contract would be enough > to make the threat a non-starter.
Exactly. Fox signed a 9-year extension with the NFL in 2011 that runs their contract through 2022. They have 4 more Super Bowls to air under that contract. I am not sure if any of the broadcast networks actually run a profit on the NFL deal, given how much they have to pay for it, but if there is profit or value in it, surely it comes from those Super Bowl years. I have not seen the actual contract, but I highly suspect that ESPN has been promised that, with a few exceptions (for the NFL Network), they will be the only cable operator showing NFL games. If Fox becomes a cable operator it seems likely they would not be able to air those Super Bowls, and would probably be in breach of a pretty huge contract, which would open them up to who knows how much in punitive damages. There are other reasons to think this is an empty threat, but the NFL deal was the first one I thought of too. -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
