I used to be a media analyst so let me shed a little light on this bogus threat that Woody is already backing away from: (1) The current blackout rule came into being in 1974. Before 1974, the NFL (actually the NFC) did NOT allow TV to show the local team even if the game was sold out. The AFL (AFC) had waived their rule in order to promote their league, but was bound by the NFL rule once the merger went through in 1970. Because of the old blackout rule, nobody in the NY area saw the 1958 Colts-Giants Championship game. Had the Giants been a good team in the late 1960's/early 1970's, the rule might have upset Giants fans alot sooner. As it was, they probably didn't miss the team. (2) Congress threatened to remove the NFL's anti-trust exemption in negotiating for all the teams under 1 banner (what Wellington Mara and other big market teams had let happen for the good of the league). As a result, the NFL agreed to allow in-market home TV broadcasts as long as the game was sold out 72 hours before kickoff. Congress allowed the anti-trust waiver for TV negotiations. (3) During the late 1960's and early 1970's, TV revenue was only 10-20% of a teams TOTAL revenue. The fear was that allowing broadcast of home games would kill the primary revenue source, the ticket sales. This is what had happened with baseball and also with television killing movie theater ticket sales (drive-ins, especially). (4) As the TV revenue exploded, it eclipsed the ticket, suite, and club seat revenues. NFL teams averaged $240 MM in revenue in 2009 and TV revenue was $120 MM per team, 50% of gross average per team revenues. This was a much higher percentage than the old 10-20% from 40 years earlier. (5) The Jets -- or Giants -- could NEVER do a blackout of the local market today, except for maybe an isolated game when the team was mediocre. A full-year blackout of even a mediocre team -- let alone an expected contender like the 2010 Jets -- would result in HUGE REBATES from the NFL back to DirectTV, ESPN, and the 4 networks. You cannot blackout the #1 market even though the Jets don't have the market in our area that the Giants do. In addition, CBS is not paying billions to have their franchise affiliate -- WCBS -- not broadcast the rights to the local home game. You're talking about a metropolitan area comprising 30 MM people or about 1/10th of the country's entire population. This isn't Jacksonville with 1.25 MM people in the metro area; this is NY, 20x larger. CBS can live without Jacksonville, they cannot live without the NY market and the NY team(s). Bottom Line: Even if Woody Johnson and the Jets wanted a blackout...and even if Goodell gave them the go-ahead for the blackout, it isn't happening because: (1) CBS (and the other rights payer) will demand at least 10-20% of the AFC rights fees rebated which could amount to billions over many years ($12-$20 MM per weekend, depending on how you apportion it) and (2) the Congress would threaten to yank the anti-trust exemption, which would allow the Jets and Giants and Redskins and Cowboys to negetotiate SEPARATELY locally and nationally for the rights to their games (and so would Kansas City, and Oakland, and Jacksonville and all the other small-markets). Goodell would nominate Ben Rothelisberger as the National Organization of Women's "Man Of The Year" before he let that comes to pass.
You put an awful lot of effort into writing something not a single person is going to read because you felt it warranted its own thread. Once it gets merged into the appropriate one, it will be pages back and no one will go backward to see it.
Ok, so how do they get around it since we will have 7-10K unsold seats every week? You can't just lift the blackout, not after denying the fans in Detroit who had a good reason not to go .... as in no job. What you said is not news, I know the history and understand the ramifcations, but the NFL can not buy the tickets and give them away, nope, not after blacking out all the other NFL cities last year, the media would kill them. Plus Woody said, you don't buy a PSL, you don't get a ticket. Tell me how they can get around the blackout if the tickets are not sold and the NFL or Networks can't buy them. A rule is a rule
Wow, great post thanks. Definitely deserved it is own thread despite what some anal thread nazis may say. Where did you get this information?
Used to talk with the folks who negotiated these contracts and went to school with one of the heads of CBS Sports.
(1) CBS is not paying billions so their flagship station here in NYC -- WCBS -- can air infomercials in the fall. Do you think Goodell wants to rebate hundreds of millions of dollars every year ? (2) Congress will get involved. Detroit is one thing -- the city has lost 1/2 it's population in the last 40 years. NYC is 10X larger. (3) Remember the Pats-Giants game at the end of the 2007 season ? Goodell and the NFL initially said "No NFL Network, no game." Politicians raised the specter of removing the anti-trust exemption -- meaning Snyder and Jerry can sell their teams TV rights SOLO for probably $300-$400 MM a year instead of the $120 MM they get currently -- and Goodell folded. Goodell and Woody won't tell you these facts. I did. So don't worry -- no blackouts happening unless Roger and 280 Park Avenue (where I worked for a few years, BTW) want to write out a check for alot more $$$ than what they gave the USFL.
Anal thread nazis? Based on a suggestion? Get over yourself. It's a free country and perhaps he did not see the existing topic.
No, I did see the other topic but I felt this was legally and historically so important that it warranted it's own thread. Here's another reason it deserves its own thread: if the Jets and the NFL and other teams have NOT issued an offering circular or prospectus with the PSLs, they are LEGALLY LIABLE for sellling 'investments' without being licensed and without adequate disclosure. Goodell and the NFL and the individual teams can be SUED by any individual who claims fraud because they were told PSL's were a 'good investment.' I was a licensed broker for 20+ years and if I said that about something as speculative as PSLs without adequate disclosure and a prospectus I would lose my license. You guys who have bought PSL's: did the Jets give you a prospectus or other legal document ? Because if they didn't -- and even if they did they may still fall short on the licensing part -- it's an SEC violation of the 1933 and 1934 Investment Acts. I have seen NUMEROUS statements from Goodell stating that PSL's are a 'good investment' -- you CANNOT say that unless it is an EXEMPT SECURITY (municipal bonds and/or U.S. government securities). When someone who realizes this and is underwater on their PSL finds and enterprising lawyer, watch out !!!
Can I get a confirmation on any legal document or prospectus PSL buyers get regarding the 'investment' qualities of the PSL ? Regardless, Goodell is on shaky ground talking about them in public as 'good investments' -- I can't believe the NFL lawyers haven't told him to clam up.
It is a free country...but it is a private board. And from one private member to another, I am tired of the new thread whining clogging up theads I want to read. It is one thing when an attention whore troll posts a meaningless new thread when the board is busting with new and other related ones. But 1. The board is dead. 2. It was an unusually well written insightful thread. The new thread complaint is geared to reduce wasteful threads the clog the board, yet the post itself clogs the thread. So, who is it that needs to get over themselves?
Probably because there aren't enough smart people out there to challenge him on it. I'm no lawyer but what your saying makes alot of sense.
I'm confused. Wouldn't the Jets have to put all unsold tickets up for sale on an individual game basis before they can black it out ?
as a licensed broker myself he has a point. they may in fact be in violation of the securities act, except for one thing that might apply: the jets are not a publicly traded company. neither is the NFL. so i would think that the psl is not subject to the securities acts of 1933 and 1934.