Please tell me NBC will run 100m final Live

[dbirds]

Costas is a genius, he just sucks in his audience and they keep coming back for more. So they tell me.

It's easy to blame Costas bc he's the face of prime time TV but I guarantee you - he doesnt make the decision to "hold" results until prime time. I actually think he does a pretty good job at what he does.

[Marlow]

It's easy to blame Costas bc he's the face of prime time TV but I guarantee you - he doesnt make the decision to "hold" results until prime time. I actually think he does a pretty good job at what he does.

What's not to like - he's glib, witty, affable, easy-going. He's better than Jim McKay, who is held up as the paragon of Oly anchoring.

[Conor Dary]

NBC's ratings are big. But the question is whether or not they could be bigger.

I know FIFA took less money for the Workd Cup from ESPN than was offered by NBC, because NBC wasn't going to do the matches live. It might not be the first time in history that FIFA turned down extra cash, but it doesn't happen often.

I hadn't heard that. But if true bully for FIFA. Taped delayed soccer matches? What a bore. FIFA knows their audience a lot better than NBC.

[rhymans]

The problem in London isn't - is it live? (of course it is), but what are you going to watch. The BBC for the duration of the games has added 24 additional satellite channels, enabling you to watch a large range of sports. Once the track and field starts, all races will be shown live, and there are separate channels covering each field event - so you have to have a DVR, as you can't watch everything live.

[jamaica50]

BTW, Youtube has been deleting uploads of the Olympic events as soon as people upload them to youtube(a note says as per the IOC)

[TN1965]

What would really be nice would be if they showed both the live event as it's happening and then had their normal prime time airings as they do now. Seems to me that they'd still get massive prime time ratings, but would also get a spike in viewership during the day and early morning hours.

But NBC will lost more money this way. If I am not mistaken, the price for a commercial spot is not proportional to the ratings. (i.e. 20% ratings generates more advertising revenue than 10% x 2) So having 20% ratings in one show is better than having 12% each in two shows. And of course, the alternative to Olympics during daytime is not zero rating.

[Conor Dary]

What would really be nice would be if they showed both the live event as it's happening and then had their normal prime time airings as they do now. Seems to me that they'd still get massive prime time ratings, but would also get a spike in viewership during the day and early morning hours.

But NBC will lost more money this way. If I am not mistaken, the price for a commercial spot is not proportional to the ratings. (i.e. 20% ratings generates more advertising revenue than 10% x 2) So having 20% ratings in one show is better than having 12% each in two shows. And of course, the alternative to Olympics during daytime is not zero rating.

I thought it was pretty obvious. They are making more on commercials in the evening than during the day. That is why it is called prime time.

[TN1965]

I thought it was pretty obvious. They are making more on commercials in the evening than during the day. That is why it is called prime time.

I am not sure if you actually read what I wrote...

[tgs3]

What would really be nice would be if they showed both the live event as it's happening and then had their normal prime time airings as they do now. Seems to me that they'd still get massive prime time ratings, but would also get a spike in viewership during the day and early morning hours.

But NBC will lost more money this way. If I am not mistaken, the price for a commercial spot is not proportional to the ratings. (i.e. 20% ratings generates more advertising revenue than 10% x 2) So having 20% ratings in one show is better than having 12% each in two shows. And of course, the alternative to Olympics during daytime is not zero rating.

I thought it was pretty obvious. They are making more on commercials in the evening than during the day. That is why it is called prime time.

I thought it was called prime time because that's when more people are available to watch TV. I don't disagree with what you're saying, but it's not terribly logical. Why should an advertiser care whether 25 million people see their commercial at 1pm or 9pm?

Personally, I feel like they'd get more overall viewers by showing both live events AND their current prime time wrapup style. This should generate more revenue, but I'll admit that there is a good chance that it wouldn't.

[Conor Dary]

I thought it was pretty obvious. They are making more on commercials in the evening than during the day. That is why it is called prime time.

I am not sure if you actually read what I wrote...

I did and I reread it and it still is confusing. The vast majority of the people who watch the Olympics do it in the evening, which I guess was your point.

What else is new?

It is being streamed live. So who cares when it is on tv.

[Riff80]

Even if you are somehow able to get through the day without hearing the results, NBC will probably ruin it for you just as they have been doing with many of the gymnastics routines. Seconds before a routine is finished or a split second before someone takes a vault they just have to let you know if it was a good or successful completion.

You can also have this happen:
NBC spoils Missy Franklin’s gold medal race

7:07 am July 31, 2012, by Joel Provano

Missy Franklin is the star of the London Olympics for the United States, so naturally NBC wanted to delay her 100-meter backstroke race for prime time Monday night.

But the network spoiled the event for millions of viewers just six minutes before the race, airing a promo for Tuesday’s “Today” show that began, “When you’re 17 years old and win your first gold medal, there’s nobody you’d rather share it with. We’re there when Missy Franklin and her parents reunite …”

And for the benefit of those who might have had their TV muted, NBC showed a full-screen photo of Franklin posing with her gold medal.
http://blogs.ajc.com/atlanta-georgia-sp ... edal-race/

[gh]

Humorist Andy Borowitz, in his New Yorker column, with a letter pretending to be written by NBC:
<<...If you’ve been watching NBC in prime time the past few nights, you’ve probably noticed how, night in, night out, we’ve been wrecking the Olympics for you. All we can say is, our bad. At NBC we’re just not used to broadcasting things that people want to watch....>>

[TN1965]

Why should an advertiser care whether 25 million people see their commercial at 1pm or 9pm?

You'd better ask them. Maybe the assumption is that people are more likely to be actually watching the TV (as opposed to just having the TV set on) during the prime time.

[TN1965]

I did and I reread it and it still is confusing. The vast majority of the people who watch the Olympics do it in the evening, which I guess was your point.

And that was definitely NOT my point.

My point was that the ad revenue is not proportional to the ratings generated. The ad rate for a 20% show is more than twice the ad rate for a 10% show. So NBC could raise more ad revenue by having 50 million people watching one show than 25 million people watching an afternoon show and another 25 million watching the replay in the evening. Is this so hard to understand?

[Conor Dary]

I did and I reread it and it still is confusing. The vast majority of the people who watch the Olympics do it in the evening, which I guess was your point.

And that was definitely NOT my point.

My point was that the ad revenue is not proportional to the ratings generated. The ad rate for a 20% show is more than twice the ad rate for a 10% show. So NBC could raise more ad revenue by having 50 million people watching one show than 25 million people watching an afternoon show and another 25 million watching the replay in the evening. Is this so hard to understand?

Swell.

They make more money showing it only in the evening. What else is new?

[Conor Dary]

As a history lesson, NBC in 1988 did show everything, in track at least, live, on TV. It was great coverage, even though it was early in the morning. Since they never did it again, except for the TripleCast, I suspect they didn't think it was worth it.

[DrJay]

Once the track and field starts, all races will be shown live, and there are separate channels covering each field event.....

Cool! The History Channel, the Military Channel, the Home Shopping Channel, the Shot Put Channel, the Triple Jump Channel....

[110hedgeNYC]

NBC is effed in the head for not showing the 100s live this weekend.

I hate the time delay, though I can understand it a little more for the weekday events. On the weekend, however, it just f upped.

bugger off, NBC.

[j-a-m]

I know FIFA took less money for the Workd Cup from ESPN than was offered by NBC, because NBC wasn't going to do the matches live. It might not be the first time in history that FIFA turned down extra cash, but it doesn't happen often.

That was a smart move by FIFA. Would be great if USATF or USOC learned something from this.

[j-a-m]

For the last three days, sports guys on local and national radio as well as national TV have been complaing about the tape-delayed coverage.

Yes, it's not only t&f fans complaining about NBC's lack of live coverage, it's also average sports fans who only follow swimming or t&f every four years.

[j-a-m]

They make more money showing it only in the evening.

Maybe in the short run, but what about damaging their reputation, which is gonna cost them in the long run. Again, there are plenty of average sports fans who are annoyed.

[j-a-m]

wants to SCREW over an entire nation of sports fans, who ask little more than to watch their favorite sports as they occur!

And it shows a complete lack of respect for the athletes, trying to repackage their great efforts into mindless pieces of entertainment.

[jazzcyclist]

NBC is effed in the head for not showing the 100s live this weekend.

I hate the time delay, though I can understand it a little more for the weekday events. On the weekend, however, it just f upped.

bugger off, NBC.

One thing going for us this time is that it isn't just track fans that are complaing but the national sports media as well.

[jhc68]

You guys all need to join the 21st Century...
NBC is providing the best coverage in Olympic history, far and away, bar none, in all sports!
Not on TV but on the internet.
Just crank up your computer and find the NBC site.
It streams in real time without the drivel commentary.
It has replays of events already concluded.
The quality is not bad, depending on your provider and your own equipment.
If you want to see it on a big screen just follow Randy Treadway's process on an earlier posting (is this really the first time you people have linked your computer's streaming video to a big screen TV??? Really???)
And if you want your very own replays captured on your computer just download snagit or some similar program and capture away.
All you need for access is a participating cable provider and your user name and password for that cable company.
In point of fact you, if you don't have such a provider, can borrow your worthless brother-in-law's user name and password (trade him a six-pack for the personal info) and use it to sign in on the NBC site.
My guess it that you should enjoy it all for free this time because when NBC sees the real potential here it will be an expensive pay-per-view deal next time around.So what's all the wanking about?

[fromage]

I have deliberately not watched one second on the main TV in the living room, so as to avoid all the BBC presenters and stuff I do not want to watch.

But the entire Olympics is streamed on line so I have watched the Swimming morning and evening, Rowing, Volleyball, Weightlifting ( great to watch the dramas), Gymnastics etc.Awaiting great track cycling and track and field Friday. Heaven without the accompanying bull; just the background commentary by people who know their sport; the Rowing in particular with Dan Topolski and Garry Herbert

Whats with the ""all you need is cable"" etc. Millions in the UK have no access to cable feeds,I certainly wont pay the exhorbitant Sky or Virgin charges; living in the country I pay extra for an excellent Broadband speed but, sadly, with the demand for Olympics viewing some alternatives like TVcatchup.com have failed to cope adequately with demand.

[shivfan]

Actually, you don't have to pay "exorbitant" cable rates to get the Olympics. I've paid the cheapest possible price for Virgin, without the sports package, and I'm getting the full works.

I don't know about you guys, but I don't like watching hours of Olympics action on a computer screen, with all the buffering and loss of internet connection, etc. I like to watch my Olympics live, and on television, with my mother, my wife, etc, so we can all talk about it together. Thankfully, I get that with the BBC this year, and with the additional feeds, I can watch swmming for example, on a separate feed that doesn't have the usual what-went-wrong-I-feel-gutted interviews that you get on BBC1....

I just can't understand the NBC concept of forcing viewers to watch events delayed. When the last Olympics were in Beijing, which is a god-awful time of the day for Brits to watch, these events were still shown live, with a highlights package shown later in the day. At least in this regard, British TV seems to care more about its viewers than making money.

[nunusguy]

I'm just as interested in the mens 200, 400, 800, & relay finals as I am the "century" climax. Where can we find the schedule for these final events ? And also, to what extent will we get to see prelims in these events ?

[Ned Ryerson]

I just can't understand the NBC concept of forcing viewers to watch events delayed. When the last Olympics were in Beijing, which is a god-awful time of the day for Brits to watch, these events were still shown live, with a highlights package shown later in the day. At least in this regard, British TV seems to care more about its viewers than making money.

The BBC gets 76% of its income from the television license fee put on ever household with a television. They're getting a lot of their money whether or not people watch. NBC has to rely on the sales of commercials and cable subscriptions for its revenue.

[Marlow]

I'm just as interested in the mens 200, 400, 800, & relay finals as I am the "century" climax. Where can we find the schedule for these final events ? And also, to what extent will we get to see prelims in these events ?

http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/images ... nsched.pdf

[jazzcyclist]

NBC Sports Chairman Mark Lazarus defends decision to tape delay marquee events.

“As programmers, we are charged to manage the business. And this is a business,” he said. “It’s not everyone’s inalienable right to get whatever they want. We are charged with making smart decisions for our company, for our shareholders and to present the product the way we believe is best.”

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/SB-B ... stape.aspx

[shivfan]

I just can't understand the NBC concept of forcing viewers to watch events delayed. When the last Olympics were in Beijing, which is a god-awful time of the day for Brits to watch, these events were still shown live, with a highlights package shown later in the day. At least in this regard, British TV seems to care more about its viewers than making money.

The BBC gets 76% of its income from the television license fee put on ever household with a television. They're getting a lot of their money whether or not people watch. NBC has to rely on the sales of commercials and cable subscriptions for its revenue.

It's not my fault that the US have an inferior system of providing TV coverage of major sports events....

Seriously, having gone thru the mill with both American Olympics coverage (in the Caribbean in 1988, 1992, 1996 and 2000), and then having watched the Olympics in Britain on British TV (2004 and 2008), I can say as someone who's experienced both, that I much prefer the way the Brits do the Olympics....

None of this 'delayed coverage' rubbish....

[jazzcyclist]

It's not my fault that the US have an inferior system of providing TV coverage of major sports events....

Seriously, having gone thru the mill with both American Olympics coverage (in the Caribbean in 1988, 1992, 1996 and 2000), and then having watched the Olympics in Britain on British TV (2004 and 2008), I can say as someone who's experienced both, that I much prefer the way the Brits do the Olympics....

None of this 'delayed coverage' rubbish....

I'll do you one better. I was in Europe in July 2000, and Eurosport had better, more extensive coverage of the U.S. Olympic Trials than American TV did.

[TN1965]

My guess it that you should enjoy it all for free this time because when NBC sees the real potential here it will be an expensive pay-per-view deal next time around.So what's all the wanking about?

We will be lucky if we are allowed to purchase the product we want. That's not how NBC has conducted its business. They are more likely to "bundle" the Olympic streaming with a whole bunch of other services we do not need nor want, and charge the customers for everything they want to sell.

[Conor Dary]

My guess it that you should enjoy it all for free this time because when NBC sees the real potential here it will be an expensive pay-per-view deal next time around.So what's all the wanking about?

Wasn't that what the TripleCast was? That didn't go over so well.

I find it hard to believe that NBC will go down the pay-per-view route. Viewership would go down the toilet. Who would pay? I wouldn't.

[jazzcyclist]

I find it hard to believe that NBC will go down the pay-per-view route.

Unless it's a la carte.