Cassandra sent me this article today, which is an interesting history on the anti-trust history of the NFL and why they end up playing Thursday nights on national TV but you don’t see any Friday or Saturday games until the College Football season is over. If you don’t want to read it, basically it says that there are anti-trust laws protecting the NCAA member schools from NFL games being broadcast in their markets on Saturdays because it would have an adverse effect on both attendance at the game and viewership of a telecast of the game. For that reason, the NFL can’t broadcast a game in any household within 75 miles of any college stadium in which a game is being played on a Saturday. That’s a lot of land coverage.
After I read it, we ended up talking about it, and trying to decide whether the government was justified in protecting college (and high school) football by limiting the broadcasts of NFL games. Read what we had to say, then let us know what you think. Here we go:
12:02 PM sir?
me: What
Cassandra: did you look at that article i sent you at all about the nfl?
12:03 PM me: I’m reading it now
Cassandra: ok
|
|
7 minutes |
12:11 PM me: Done done
I think I had heard that before
Cassandra: oh ok.
very ridiculous.
me: I don’t really think so
12:12 PM Cassandra: how not?
me: Because colleges would lose a lot of TV viewership if the NFL was allowed to play Saturdays
Most people would watch NFL
Cassandra: yeah, so..
why is that the governments business?
12:13 PM me: Not only that, but CBS probably wouldn’t pay the SEC big money for that TV contract
Cassandra: letting them play on saturday actually encourages competition
me: Because the NFL would essentially become a football monopoly
Cassandra: separating them does the opposite
bascially they aren’t even letting them compete.
me: But college football is fundamentally a lesser product than pro.
Cassandra: anti-trust is supposed to encourage competition.
12:14 PM me: Competition won’t change that, it will just kill off college football.
Cassandra: so the gov’t should protect the lesser product
?
me: There’s no way to make NCAA football better than NFL football
Cassandra: right, so maybe it shouldn’t be on tv.
if peole would rather watch pro.
me: But I think the point is, the consumer wants to be able to watch both.
Cassandra: then they wil
l
12:15 PM don’t need laws to enforce that
me: Not if college isn’t on TV
Cassandra: if they want to watch it on tv and there is demand for it.
then it doens’t matter what the nfl does
me: If the NCAA can’t make money by putting it on TV, they won’t
And then the consumer misses out.
12:16 PM You’re not accounting for the demand by the same person for both offerings
Most people don’t have 2 TVs
Cassandra: then those companies should be aware of that.
the nfl doesn’t want to take over college football.
that was never the intent.
me: But if they play games on Saturday, they would
12:17 PM College would ose most or all of their TV revenue
If NFL only plays on Sundays, then they both make money
Cassandra: maybe that is true, but the answer isn’t the gov’t coming to the rescue of a product that is obvisouly not as desired as another.
that’s just ridiculous.
12:18 PM me: I think it’s more the government keeping a product with very high demand and a product with moderately high demand both alive instead of letting the one with very high demand killing the one with moderate demand
12:19 PM Cassandra: i think they should get the f out of the business, though
but that’s just me.
me: By making the law, they allow the consumer to watch both, rather than choose.
Cassandra: but the gov’t doesn’t exist to provide consumer choice.
it exists to protect rights.
me: Protects the consumer’s interests, though
12:20 PM Cassandra: you don’t have a right to watch any football you want at any time.
should only protect the consumer if fraud is involved.
me: No, but it’s better for the conusmer to have both products.
Cassandra: yeah, but it isn’t a right.
me: It doesn’t have to be.
Cassandra: so you want the gov’t making decisions about what is best for all consumers?
me: There are tons of laws that make things easier and better for consumers.
12:21 PM Cassandra: there are tons of useless laws.
12:22 PM me: I don’t think that government should allow monopolies.
Cassandra: ok.
me: Everyone gets screwed by that.
Cassandra: maybe..
12:23 PM but the law doesn’t necessarily prevent monopolies.
me: That’s what antitrust law is
Cassandra: you don’t know for a fact that it would take away college football
me: I’m pretty sure.
Cassandra: why not wait until it has happened or is about to, but not make a law to prevent what might make somehting happen.
companies are very wiling to adapt… or should be.
12:24 PM shouldn’t rely on the government to make the viable.
*them
me: If you’re CBS and you have to all of the sudden choose you Saturday programming, do you take 2 random SEC games or do you take two NFL games?
12:25 PM So some other network might pick up the SEC, but then people won’t be watching, because unless I went to one of the schools, I’ll watch Cowboys Giants over Alabama vs. LSU every single time.
Cassandra: ok.
that’s fine.
12:26 PM me: So no other networks would touch those college games that they know will compete against the NFL either
Cassandra: I don’t care if college football is on tv.
me: So now the NCAA is out of luch.
But you watch college football sometimes on Saturdays
Cassandra: only caust it is on.
12:27 PM me: Yeah, but you’re watching it instead of ALL other programming that is on on a Saturday afternoon
So there is demand for it without the NFL competing
And that’s for you personally
Cassandra: so if there is demand for it, there will be someone that picks it up and someone that watches it.
12:28 PM me: There is demand without the NFL.
Cassandra: if they lose money, i don’t care
well, we can agree to disagree
me: Except that you lose college football
12:29 PM You essentially lose the chance to watch college football at the expense of spreading NFL games out over two days instead of one.
Cassandra: it is like saying you can only have dr pepper on sunday because if you can have it any day, then you won’t drink anything else.
because it is a better product than coke.
who cares? if dr pepper is better, then coke should lose money.
12:30 PM me: It’s not a better product.
Cassandra: and if everyone in the world like dr pepper better than coke, why should coke make money.
(that was an assumption by me for apoint)
12:31 PM me: The difference is that Coke can make itself better if it chooses to, by changing flavors, adapting, etc.
College football can’t
Cassandra: then why should they make money via tv?
me: Lowering prices
Because consumers still want to see that product, even if it isn’t as good as the NFL.
They don’t want to have to choose.
12:32 PM They want both available on different days.
Cassandra: i see your point, but I can’t bring myself to agree with it.
12:33 PM at leas tthe enforcement of it.
you are right that most people want to watch both.. i just disagree with gov’t involvement with it.
me: In this case, moderate enforcement protects both offerings, rather than having one go away.
Cassandra: yeah.. i see that.
12:34 PM me: And, in this specific case, the consumer ends up with a better selection of products, and the football market overall ends up more profitable even.
12:35 PM It’s a case by case thing, I don’t think you can really apply this exact situation to many other things and say “It’s always like this”
Cassandra: yeah.. i definitely see that point, it just goes against what I beleive in at a foundation.
me: In general, I agree about government getting involved, but in this case, it helps random sports fan X more than it hurts.
12:36 PM Cassandra: i have to give the whole anti-trust thing more thought, also.
there is a group of people that believe the gov’t shouldn’t disallow monopolies.
I’m not sure yet if I fall in that category.
me: I like limited involvement
Cassandra: i see where it is applicable, but some cases are unwarranted.
12:37 PM me: Like I said, specific cases.
Cassandra: yeah.
perhaps.
me: I was against the government getting involved with Microsoft.
Cassandra: yes, me too
or most anything anti-trust really.
me: To me, that’s a clear “This company is just running their business better”
12:38 PM Cassandra: AND, if there’s any sector of the economy that has plenty of competition, it is technology.
i mean, look at prices falling all the time
someone always doing something better to improve.
that’s the whole point.
me: But I agree with the airline policies, because there are such a limited amount of companies that are able to get into that business because there is a finite amount of airport space.
12:39 PM So without regulation on that, it would cost $2,500 anytime you wanted to fly anywhere.
Cassandra: maybe, that’s where i need to do more thinking/research.
12:40 PM me: It’s a difference of regulation becacuse one company is better than the other (not okay) and because of special circumstances.
12:41 PM Cassandra: ok
me: And now… It’s time for me to try to turn Qdoba into a monopoly.
12:42 PM Cassandra: hehe
ok.
i should eat too before my meeting.
me: Eat poo before your meeting
Cassandra: ewwwww.
It’s my duty.
12:43 PM duty duty duty
me: Call of Duty