Streaming Wars For Live Sports, Entertainment, and Gambling

The YouTube Quitting Trend of 2024

Here’s an article with some candour on the subject from Thailand and that is not paywalled. Maybe you can find one based in North America or the UK, but I could not that was not paywalled.

Other than burnout, of course the obvious reason would be financial for the sake of the recent trend in mass quitting, which goes beyond fewer people watching because there is no more audience as captive, which was at hand from the spring of 2020 until about the summer of 2022 in much of the world.

And then there is this sinister nugget.

Imagine your employer taking 30% of your tips beyond their rake for hosting pursuant to their agreement! Well, that’s part of the YouTube deal too.

Talk about pigs getting slaughtered before too long, which Google otherwise has in various class action litigation and under record government scrutiny and associated fines like all Big Tech.

She revealed that her 2023 income from posting 3-4 video clips per month, each about 10-minutes long, earned her 40,000 baht a month on average. “Yes, there is the SuperThank button that fans can use to give me money (like a tip) but that is subject to a 30% deduction by the platform owner.”

Pakboong can survive as she has enough loyal fans contributing money directly to her bank account back in Thailand. She also produces video all by herself, a real solopreneur.

Then there is more about that algorithm, which even as a user I notice easily has changed for the worse for all parties but for YouTube, for it means you see less than ever recommended for your customized preferences as YouTube pushes more at you lest you actually opt out of a channel via a number of clicks.

Ah, we are reminded again of the price of FREE, of course.

Oh well, the recent experiment and revolution in original or uncommon video content on social media is over and they all come to an end of course, much as it goes in cycles with any given new or elevated trend such as happened during the pandemic.

The platform algorithm changes have also affected many veteran YouTubers as they feel that after reaching one level, their videos have been buried. Newcomers may get seen more easily. On the other hand, the creative restriction as well as terms and conditions have discouraged YouTubers from pursuing the business.

A user named Madutarot commented on YouTube that the algorithm has been very hostile for the past two years, and many have seen the number of views drop drastically. “Unless you have a solid fan base, it is almost impossible to start a channel. It’s good if you do it just for fun and not as a career to earn a living.”

Manop whose M935 Channel specializes in Indian series told his audience that he might suspend creating content until May or June if things don’t improve.

“Revenue has decreased due to fewer ads and lower views, and I have to pay translators and sometimes even add money for translation. This month, I have to give up everything again.”


How Netflix Killed Facebook’s Video Content Business Before YouTube Prevailed. And Millions Cheered Too.

It’s a great article here that explains how Facebook Watch was killed also with the efforts of Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings, who was on Facebook’s board when plans were unveiled in 2017 to make Facebook a full-scale video platform.

The matter came up in discovery via a class-action lawsuit against Facebook parent company Meta, and now Netflix has to respond to the court.

Anybody remember when the NFL streamed a game on Facebook? I remember, but I sure didn’t bother to watch. Ditto Twitter and Yahoo!

Mind you these efforts were also the time when both Facebook and Google were trying to become news organizations, but without the liability that goes with defamation via libel or slander, by using an antiquated law that provided an exception for technology companies.

Enter the social media disaster especially in the summers of 2015 and 2016 before the 2016 election and beyond. It could not have happened any other way given such a flawed application of an old law.

I for one don’t mind that none of these other Big Tech firms, except for Apple, have a hand in the video business as far as content creators, and fewer care about Apple TV+ much like almost all other paid streaming services.

The NFL Put Its Big Butt On The Scale Again for Comcast’s Peacock, or The Service Would Be Fading Out Faster Already

The owner of the Eagles, Jeffrey Lurie, spoke to the effect that streaming of games won’t ever be a mainstream offering of most games of the NFL, such as via Amazon Prime for Thursday nights and which is an outstanding production altogether.

Then again there is that NFL Sunday Ticket now that is a streaming product on YouTube with substantial delays after the real time play. And 1.3M actually pay for that!? Oh I get it for example if somebody does not have steady access to NFL games somewhere in the US, especially if working on Sunday, but that can’t be too many people can it?

Most NFL games, including always local games and those of one’s home team on the road, will continue to be FREE, as they should be as I would add on a personal level, but that’s another rant that goes with the failing regional sports network racket by local cable companies for too long.

Here’s what I think was the rationale for having this game in Brazil exclusively on Peacock:

  1. GREED
    :unamused: :rage:

This is another shameless money-grab by Comcast and the NFL. Games on CBS, NBC, and ABC or ESPN are already simulcast onto their respective streaming platforms. There is no reason for an NFL game to be exclusively on streaming other than GREED.

  1. Greasing Philly Palms

Comcast is a local player in pro sports here in Philadelphia, with a good relationship with all teams and ownership of the company that owns the Wells Fargo Center, plus the Flyers, where the Sixers and Flyers play right next to Lincoln Financial Field in the sports complex.

Here the Eagles wanted to throw them another bone beyond the NFL’s relationship with NBC for the #1 rated television program in the US for years now on Sunday nights.

This is Comcast’s artificially-engineered way to prop up its lagging and crappy platform Peacock for its future, much like was that playoff game with the Chiefs in it in January.

  1. Skewing Valuation of the Peacock Brand and Service
    :fu: Peacock

As an unprofitable business on its own, Peacock is due for a merger and rebrand in time. The NFL and Comcast are gearing it up with metrics to set it up perhaps down the road of sports. The NFL is also interested in having more options for streaming services rather than fewer. The demographics skew younger of course, which Lurie mentioned in his comments.

  1. The First Payback Action Aimed at Fox, ABC, and WBD for Proposing To Unify Their Streaming Services without “Consulting” the NFL

Much as the NFL has made its displeasure known to media partners with action in the past, as it did to ESPN starting in 2003 in brutal fashion as ESPN paid multiples more for games and took its punishment with a beaming poop-faced grin, there is this secondary element to let the other media partners know again who is the boss:

“Oh I see. You want to have streaming for more sports now, but you don’t want to discuss it with us? Okay then, have it your way. Hmm. Let’s get another game on Amazon. Or Peacock. Or Paramount+. Yeah. How about that for discussion now, hmm?”

Meanwhile, I have no doubt the NFL has its operatives and legal teams helping the Department of Justice deal with the proposed merger of streaming services - to its favour of course.

Repeat items 1 and 4. And don’t piss off the NFL more if you value your media business.
:partying_face: :roll_eyes:

As the streaming population is growing and more NFL inventory is being placed on a streaming service, Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie doesn’t see a significant amount of games getting taken off broadcast television. The NFL’s bread and butter is being over-the-air.

“I don’t see it more and more, but what I do see is population embraces streaming in certain ways, tremendously,” Lurie said at the NFL Annual Meetings this week. "So technically it was the wild-card game on Peacock that was a huge success. I think they had 21, 22 million viewers, technologically it was excellent. And so it’s also a younger demographic.

“The NFL like other sports leagues but we’re proactive when itself comes to demographics, we want to be younger at times, streamers and Amazons have the ability to deliver younger audiences. The beauty of NFL is most of it is on free television and it’s going to remain that way a long, long time, that’s the basis of the popularity of the NFL.”

Lurie doesn’t want fans to be concerned the league will have a bulk of its inventory on streaming.


NIL and the transfer portal have broken the stranglehold of the blue bloods on the sport. The rich didn’t get richer the talent has been spread out more.


Even The NFL Makes Cuts To Cable

It’s a sign of the times. I remember in 2004 soon after the network launched that it was early in the battle on cable against the effort by ESPN to simply take over the dominant coverage of the NFL, which ESPN did in great part for other sports and leagues with usually shoddy delivery.

Well here we are now, as the NFL Network may sell a stake to ESPN as Disney and ESPN undergo their own reorganization for a direct-to-consumer service beyond anything like ESPN+.


Yeah they are winding down aren’t they? I wonder if they wouldn’t be better served by putting together their own over the air broadcast network and going that route and selling advertising. Show NFL games year round. Best of, old superbowls etc.


Go figure, the NFL already has a direct channel on Pluto TV, which is owned by Paramount, and it is awesome especially during the season, for they show the quick run of the days’ games late night for a few days all week.

For the rest of the year, they simply show replays of classic games. I don’t watch much in the off-season, but it’s nice it’s there on occasion like a bunch of the other free channels and all with not as many commercials either.


@Paolo_X - the more I think about this and the downsizing or demise of other cable channels and delivery systems, the more I am inclined to think that over the air (OTA) broadcasting and delivery methods are where sports are heading.

I am wondering if the Fox/WBHBO/ESPN streaming app is going to be all that successful? Does that thing turn into a cash cow? Or Peacock streaming app part 2? Or something in between?


Why Not Simply Streaming Channels, Like Already, Instead of App and Lags for Content on TVs, Kind of Like Websites Already?

I’m already seeing this direction clearly for much content including niche sports, for they are simply streaming the content as a channel to modern TVs with no app, no sign-up.

Even as late as 2021, some of these were cable channels mind you though to be clear, many of those “cable channels” were actually internet streams rebroadcast by your cable company, which of course you could go to the website for FREE, and included in that magic cable “bundle.”

Now there is zero need for any middleman to access such content just because it’s a TV.

The core question and quest for sake of PAID content I think is setting that capability up right to a channel, no need for another app, no absurd lags to load the app and then all those clicks to get to the content that all goes into MINUTES, which is why paid streaming apps SUCK and overwhelmingly most apps are losing money.

Somebody will solve this issue and have it such that there is a more uniform sign-up process to access embedded channels in a device, much like we already simply go to a website to sign up for a service instead of having to download an app for every single service and deal with all the absurd lags after we have had infrared remote controls all of our lives.

Some of the content is already there on the internet, so with a device we simply sign up and voila.

Why can’t that be the case also on ANY TV, without of course having to sign up for Pirate Sports Network as millions do anyway?

All that AI and magic solutions promised and they have not solved this have they!?

I would defer to somebody with more technical expertise on this front if they wish to add with no expectation given the current work flow here and beyond.

Anybody else come to mind as well?


The first part of this video is an excellent overview of the financials of the streaming industry and Wall Street’s bearish view, including even of WBD that turned a profit.

The second half with regards to optimism has one great chart on growth of discretionary spending on streaming services.

In the last section, the rest of the analysis is flawed or incomplete on matters of industry consolidation.

The presenter totally ignores the pending deal for a new live sports streaming service via collaboration by three major players, which irked even the NFL, as well as Disney’s own ESPN direct relaunch in conjunction with its sports book ESPN Bet, which is planned for autumn 2025.

The general conclusion is on track with prior commentary in this thread.

For 2025, we’re headed for fewer major streaming services, not more, besides Netflix, YouTube, Amazon Prime, and AppleTV+ that all look like they will continue to grow at often the expense of these struggling competitors.


The Quest for Paramount Global, Its Studios, and Its Sports Rights: Connect More Dots

I can’t keep track of this all, but apparently since January as noted above, there has been an alternative and competing deal to the more recent $11B offer of Apollo Global for only the studio operations of Paramount Global.

The offer by Skydance Media is rather for ALL of Paramount Global.

Skydance Media, with CEO David Ellison, is a firm also partly owned by RedBird Capital that is in a partnership with the NFL to produce content, so like RedBird Capital with its commercial NFL Sunday Ticket deal with the NFL and ownership stake in the UFL, these are no newcomers to media ownership and working with the NFL.

Another potential mega-merger is poised to change the landscape of sports media, and likely in ways not yet fully understood.

David Ellison, the CEO of Skydance Media and son of billionaire tech mogul Larry Ellison, is making a push to acquire National Amusements, the Shari Redstone (above, left) family company that controls CBS parent Paramount Global. In a complex two-stage transaction now under discussion, Redstone would receive more than $2 billion in cash, and then Paramount Global would acquire Skydance in an all-stock deal worth about $5 billion, with David Ellison likely leading the new entity.

If Ellison is able to complete a deal, it would bring under one corporate umbrella a media company that has rights to the NFL, half of the men’s March Madness, several top college conferences, and golf’s Masters, among other assets, along with a fast-growing documentary unit behind such projects as the highly popular Kelce on Amazon Prime Video. The NFL is also an investor in Skydance Media.


David Ellison is worth 2 billion but daddy - Larry Ellison is worth $151 billion dollars so being a bay area technocrat in 2024 there does not seem to be much of a path forward without some kind of studio or streaming mechanism in place.

And as @Paolo_X has been screaming from the rooftops for some time - the NFL is pulling the strings on the UFL/XFL/USFL etc. in setting up a feeder system for the NFL and also providing the degenerate gamblers of the world something to bet on.

Anyone out there betting on the UFL not seeing the end of the season? Like the AAF? Or not seeing season #2 - or whatever it is? The 2025 season?


I’m reminded again of that meeting between Michael Corleone and Moe Green in Las Vegas.

This is shaping up to be a case in which the NFL is showing up at Paramount, with its CBS unit wanting to buy some NFL rights including for more streaming like to those special edition games, but the NFL is countering with, “You don’t buy us out. We buy YOU out.”

Right now this looks like the NFL Godfather arriving heavy, for as you know “you come heavy, or you don’t come at all,” to ensure they have a significant stake in an entity for sake of streaming more games, minus all the headaches of managing such a media company as the NFL wants to divest NFL Media in separate efforts.

I also see NFL now aiming its second round of payback at the proposed joint sports streaming venture between its other media partners Fox, Disney, and newcomer WBD.

Brace yourself for more gorilla moves by the NFL Godfather down this road to enhance, control, and secure their thriving product.

Ion and Scripps are pivoting to women’s sports - which is a good starter kit if you are getting into acquiring sprots broadcast rights. A good place to figure out the logistics of doing TV broadcast sports. If you mess them up you are not going to face the wrath of an angry nation.

Also if you get your sports network set up and then RSN’s keep unraveling you might be able to find some broadcast properties that are a bargain in the next few years.


I was responding to a question about CFL media rights in the following, and I used the example of the Masters coverage in the US this weekend as an example of a major step to the future now that does not involve 1) cable or satellite TV and 2) downloading yet another app whether it is crappy or not.

Direct streaming is the direction already for the niche sports, and it’s going to be the direction for the major sports unless media firms, more often free antenna TV than cable any more, is going to go ahead and pay for those exclusive rights.

Earnings will be far more from advertising and from associated gambling, and not so much subscriptions and deals with cable companies for coverage on a mere cable channel.

1 Like

I’m putting this here because this is the only thread I am aware of that incorporates gambling issues.

Although I don’t follow the NBA very closely, today one of their recent (but unremarkable) players who played for the Raptors was banned for life by the league for numerous gambling violations, including betting on league games, including those in which his own team played, and passing along insider info on at least his health status. This was discovered when an algorithm picked up unusual prop bets in a large amount on this player that were affected by his health status, which he disclosed to known gamblers.

So the NBA now has their very own Pete Rose, although he isn’t nearly the prominent player Rose was and Rose didn’t cross the line nearly as bad as this guy did.



Also a summary of gambling violations in sports since 2018:


The algorithm picked up funky numbers on some lower tier player. I am thinking this dude is not too smart. Big brother is watching you in a big way if you are an athlete and thinking of betting on your own games.