NHL experimenting with increasing tv timeouts by 30 seconds

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
This will net 2 and a half minutes to every game...this is some serious cloud yelling in this thread.
images
 
I hate commercials but if it gets rid of 2 minutes of listening to the boring and often annoying talking heads in the intermission I'm all for it!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Duder54
More commercials equals more revenue for the NHL. More revenue equals higher salary caps.

An entire game will be 2.5 minutes longer. Not a big deal at all.

The NHL is a far ways away from NFL, NBA and MLB in terms of salaries and revenue. The NHL is making minor changes to generate more revenue. Ads on jerseys, helmets, more commercials, digital boards. All of the other sports leagues have increased advertising over the last decade. NHL is just keeping pace.
 
The NHL is a far ways away from NFL, NBA and MLB in terms of salaries and revenue.

And the product for those three sports is the dogs breakfast. An NFL game is like 4 f***ing hours because there are so many commercial breaks, the NBA has 40,000 time outs which makes the games an hour longer than they need to be (let's also ignore the fact the final 2 minutes also takes 45 minutes to take place). MLB has 40 trillion commercial breaks because every pitcher change, every little thing warrants a 4 minute commercial break.

Cheapening your product for commercial revenue when your ratings are massively down this year is such old man thinking. But the sport is run by people who graduated from business school in the 1950's so they don't know anything other than to go full Mad Men.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Suntouchable13
I thought the prevailing wisdom right now was for advertising money to be dedicated to things that will be in the viewer’s field of vision while watching live play (on-equipment advertising, rink board and on-ice overlays, score bugs) because it’s becoming more and more clear that the ad breaks between play are when people aren’t actually watching the screen. They’re using their phones, they’re grabbing a snack, they’re taking a leak.

Making the in between play breaks longer just further encourages people to … walk away from their tv during a tv timeout because now they have reliably more time to do that away-from-screen thing.
Add to that what I'm assuming is increased on-demand streaming viewership where you just fast-forward all the breaks.
 
Gross but totally unsurprising.

This joke league is run by money-hungry old carnies that don’t give 2 shits about the integrity of the game and just see fans as wallets-on-legs.
 
If this happens I’ll be a lot less likely to watch games. I’d gladly trade European style jerseys for no commercials at all.
I assume the NHL is all on pay tv now. The whole point of pay tv was that you paid and didn't have any commercials. It's this slow steady creep to where we are now paying to watch more and more commercials that is annoying. The high seas put out a much better product than any of these paid services. I am paying for it in the old fashioned way of seeing these commercials. Would rather not watch anything than pay for the shit they are cramming down our throats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MadLuke
Yuval Harari makes a strong argument that we were better off (or at least more sustainable) as semi-agrarian/nomadic folks, but that’s a whole ‘nother matter. All I know is that there’s a “man” worth $400 billion wondering where all the money went. Hmm. Big mystery there.

Yuval Harari openly regards all of us peasants as "useless eaters", so his priorities might not quite match yours or mine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SnowStorm
Yuval Harari openly regards all of us peasants as "useless eaters", so his priorities might not quite match yours or mine.

Source? I think his books are brilliant and don’t even hint at that sorta thinking, but I also don’t put people on pedestals. He could be right on 95% and then have abhorrent views for the other 5%, wouldn’t be the first.
 
Source? I think his books are brilliant and don’t even hint at that sorta thinking, but I also don’t put people on pedestals. He could be right on 95% and then have abhorrent views for the other 5%, wouldn’t be the first.

IIRC it comes from some public talks he's given, but a piece like this also clearly reveals his purely utilitarian view of humanity, zero concept of any intrinsic value of life:

You're not wrong though, he'd fit right in with some other "great thinkers."
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad