It may start out like that, but it also creates a slippery slope too.

Let's assume the first year the networks identify 10 games each for the entire year to test the PPV model. Those 10 games generate a significant amount of money for the networks, so they decide to increase to 15-20 for the second year. A cycle starts to form where the networks add a few more games each year because of how much extra money was generated the previous year. Eventually it will get to a point where over %50 of the games for a particular sport or league are televised exclusively on PPV. Since Pandora's box has been opened. I don't think the networks will be able to go back to the pre-PPV days.

Something to consider, which could add a whole another wrinkle to the situation, is the pro leagues could decide at some point that all of their games will be televised exclusively on their network.

In response to this post by reestuart

Posted: 02/15/2017 at 1:29PM

Could a pay per view model work for regular sports? -- VamPIre Turkey 02/13/2017 2:37PM

I could easily see it for "big games" if and when the current model -- reestuart 02/13/2017 6:48PM

The problem will then become what is considered to be a "big game." ** -- VTHokie2000 02/14/2017 1:03PM

I am not sure the PPV model is justifiable either since the cable/satellite -- VTHokie2000 02/13/2017 4:00PM

Watch ESPN shows more games then ever. I do not watch UFC PPVs... -- VamPIre Turkey 02/13/2017 4:30PM

From what I can tell, WatchESPN still has a limit on what sporting events -- VTHokie2000 02/13/2017 4:54PM

I wonder what would be the perfect price for The CFB Championship. -- VamPIre Turkey 02/13/2017 7:54PM

Not enough to offset the lost revenue from broadcast/cable model. (Link) -- seekoHoG 02/14/2017 12:15PM

The network could probably charge $59.99 for the big game -- VTHokie2000 02/13/2017 11:10PM

I would not pay that kind of money for PPV game. -- Atlee Hokie 02/22/2017 12:43PM

Sports are still high on my list especially since I don't watch -- VTHokie2000 02/24/2017 12:13AM

Viewership would plummet -- EDGEMAN 02/14/2017 09:21AM

Or listen to the game on radio or satellite ** -- fordham 02/21/2017 10:47AM

I completely agree if the networks went to the PPV model -- VTHokie2000 02/14/2017 1:02PM

It won't matter if the money is there. ** -- reestuart 02/14/2017 11:15AM

It matters for ad revenue. ** -- Stech 02/14/2017 1:23PM

Fans, alum, major contributors would not allow PPV. ** -- seekoHoG 02/14/2017 5:00PM

What say would they have? Especially if this would bring in more $$$. ** -- reestuart 02/14/2017 5:09PM

Stop watching, stop caring, stop paying. ** -- chuckd4vt 02/14/2017 6:23PM

Exactly what I did with baseball after the last big strike. -- Byting Gobbler 02/16/2017 7:51PM

There'd be a mild uproar at first, maybe. Then, after $$$ rolls in, -- reestuart 02/15/2017 08:26AM

You have to build up a fanbase. You want kids to see the games. -- chuckd4vt 02/15/2017 10:53AM

I don't think every game would be PPV, but there's certainly a market -- reestuart 02/15/2017 11:58AM

It may start out like that, but it also creates a slippery slope too. -- VTHokie2000 02/15/2017 1:29PM

Yeah, I really hope it never happens, but I can't imagine the idea -- reestuart 02/15/2017 1:47PM

The networks have already figured out ways around the ad revenue -- VTHokie2000 02/14/2017 2:01PM

For a single event, they'll be able to figure out the numbers. -- reestuart 02/14/2017 2:17PM

It may start out like that, but it also creates a slippery slope too.

Insert a Link

Tech Sideline is Presented By:

Our Sponsors