BLOG

Sprint is in the NFL Radio Business

Here’s yet another tidbit you won’t read about in the radio trades:

Sprint Offers Subscribers NFL Radio – The live, cell-phone-accessible radio broadcasts will be available to all Sprint wireless subscribers who purchase a basic data plan as part of their services.

Details:

Sprint Nextel subscribers will be able to listen to live radio broadcasts of National Football League games this season as part of new partnership between the wireless provider and sports league.

The live, cell-phone-accessible radio broadcasts—the centerpiece of the new NFL Mobile Live platform–will be available to all Sprint wireless subscribers who purchase a basic data plan as part of their services. In addition, as part of the agreement a select group of premium subscribers will be able to view live broadcasts of the NFL Network’s eight Thursday Night Football games on their phones starting on Nov. 6.

There are a few lessons to take away from this:

1. Content, content, content.

For some reason, many broadcasters confuse the term “content” with “the stuff that’s on our air.” When I use the term “content” I mean the material that’s of serious interest to listeners. Stuff they will seek out. Not filler. Not commodities. McDonalds and NOBU may both offer “food,” but that’s where the similarity ends, and don’t think for a moment the patrons don’t know the difference.

In this case, the content is owned in its entirety by a third party – not a radio company. When it comes to professional sports play-by-play, radio is a distribution channel, not a content owner. Thus we will lose out to the owners of content in deals like this.

Our solution – yours and mine – is to develop our own content – magnetic, unique content – and license it across all distribution channels.

Note that this does NOT necessarily mean you are limited to the brands you have over-the-air.

2, Do mobile phone companies need radio?

And by that I mean radio companies.

The answer is “yes” only if your content is unique enough to make yourself essential to the mix, or if you offer wraparound benefits that are non-trivial, such as a network of advertising and the capacity to sell it.

3. Mobile service providers recognize that strong content can move equipment and subscriptions.

This is great news if you’re in the “content” business and lousy news if you’re in the distribution channel business.

I’ll let you decide which one you want to be in.

Yes, “the content business” is easier said than done. Like everything that’s worth anything.

4. Isn’t this kinda like satellite radio?

…in the sense that a deal is made to offer content as a driver for subscriptions to the service itself.

Yes it is. In fact, this is very bad news for satellite radio, where professional sports play-by-play is a major subscription driver.

And it doesn’t help that satellite has – until recently – viewed itself as being in the business of selling radios.

When I can hear my football on the phone in my pocket instead of the radio sealed in plastic at the Best Buy, which do you think I’m more likely to choose?

View Comments
  • Erik and I both blogged about this apparently: http://fourthspeaker.com/2008/08/20/sprint-nfl-make-mobile-deal-to-reach-a-few-phones/
    Which is interesting that more and more we are monitoring the same sources and weighing in at the same places. I agree with him that accessibility trumps the carrier guarded channels. As we pioneer a movement that shares the best qualities of radio and adds to them, the content makers will win because the listeners win.
  • George
    If you investigate, you'll get it. It's not a mystery.
  • I don't get the relevance. Or the mystery.
  • George
    What this release does not say is where is Sprint getting their NFL radio feed. You might think it's from the NFL. It's not. Look into it, and tell us the source.
  • No question the carriers are paying to get this deal (but for how long?). They're trying to increase their ARPU, voice is flat, they want to sell data. The problem is for the carriers to get this deal they want exclusivity from the content provider. The content provider is trying to make quarterly numbers so they take it. But it's a bad deal for the consumer. If the internet has proven nothing else to us it's that consumers want choice about how they consume media.
    Also, the carriers have been doing this stuff for years and people still are not ponying up for data plans quickly. The only thing that's moved the needle on data is the iPhone.
    As far as how radio fits in this:
    Radio has two primary assets; one has stable value, one is depreciating rapidly.
    The depreciating asset is the transmitter, the tower, and the FCC license. The stable (or even appreciating one) is people who can use their voice and minds to influence, educate and entertain.
    For some reason radio execs are married to the depreciating asset. If I had to hazard a guess it's because they overpaid for it, are leveraged to the hilt trying to service that debt, and are terrified to walk away from it.
    For radio to survive radio needs to embrace their talent (both on air and off), talking is hard. Radio also needs to embrace their localism (despite what David Rehr says).
    At the end of the day it's all about a channel between content provider and the listener. Solutions that offer choice are good. Only fools do exclusive deals.
    More and more programmers are coming to us directly and asking about end running their network and the stations to own a direct connection with their audience via the cell phone.
    I think on the whole we agree, it's just after dealing with the cell carriers I see them as little different than the radio groups in how they see the world.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Sign Up For Blog Email Updates

About

MRM President Mark Ramsey has worked with innumerable television and radio broadcasters over his career, including all the biggest names, from Clear Channel, CBS, Bonneville, Sirius XM...

Mark Ramsey