James Hritz (@jameshritz)

By now, it’s well documented (http://tcrn.ch/9xTwux) that NBC’s coverage of the Vancouver Olympics took an absolute beating on Twitter, across social networking and around the office water cooler.  While everyone has voiced frustration and annoyance with NBC’s coverage, the issue begs the question why?.

For decades now, the networks who broadcast the Olympics (summer or winter) have had a simple formula:

1. Take story worthy American athletes and make their stories the face and story of each of the events.  This creates appeal for Olympic events that are outside the norm of American viewing habits. This is almost every non-team Olympic event.  How much bobsledding do you think you will watch between now and 2014? Ok, maybe a little biathlon.
2.  Take advantage of location time zone differences to repackage the games and its events with tape delay around the chosen athletes to put each event into a nice, neat prime time package that has a feeling of immediacy and real time.

This was the only way broadcasting the Olympics could work. Put yourself in the shoes of a Fortune 100 brand advertiser. Would you be willing to pay a premium price for an hour of curling, while another advertiser pays the same rate and gets an hour of a compelling story like Apolo Ohno? Not likely. Nor, would you be willing to pay, in advance a premium ad rate if no one at the network could tell you what events and content your product would be identified.  Things were good for Olympic broadcast networks. This formula worked for a very long time.  Until, of course now.

If this worked for decades, then what went wrong for NBC in 2010? 

First, thanks to the internet, we live a in a long tail world.  The age of content scarcity is over.  Consumers now live a world of Hulu, multi 100s of satellite channels and Apple iTunes.  They can basically search or download almost anything they want instantly. Consumers don’t accept being told you will get 15 minutes or curling, then 15 minutes of downhill and then 15 minutes of speed skating. They expect to watch as much as they want for as long as they want and find on their own, the stories they are interested in.  Strangely, just like they do on the web.  NBC’s coverage model is not geared for this.

Second, increasingly we live in a real time, always on world driven by the internet, smart phones etc. People now want to know things instantaneously.  Tape delay doesn’t cut it, unless, it’s a consumers own Tivo tape delay.  

In the past, no one in America was particularly fussy about seeing tape delayed coverage of games in faraway places like Nagano or Torino.  There might have been some fussiness about the Salt Lake coverage, but being 6 months after 9/11 and close to the invasion of Afghanistan, people’s minds were understandably elsewhere.

Since the Vancouver Olympics were going to be available live in most of the US time zones, the natural viewer expectation was to watch events live or semi real time.  Once again, this doesn’t work for NBC’s coverage model. When your ad sales force is geared to sell artificially scarce time slots to high end brand advertisers, how are they going to sell 20+ hours of Curling? They can’t. This is how they’ve always done it. Changing the direction of a large organization like this is like turning a super tanker.  It takes time.

Third, NBC overpaid for the Broadcast rights in 2002 ($820 million) and this essentially put a financial gun to the head of programming execs.  At such a steep price, the network was forced to optimize Olympic content to maximize advertising rates and opportunities.  Much like a website that plasters display ads all over the page has a poor user experience, NBC’s coverage left viewers with a poor experience and feeling exploited by relentless commercial breaks.

Of course you are going to ask: surely, some of the execs at NBC know this right?  The next natural question is:  couldn’t they have course corrected?  The answer to the former is yes and the later, no. They probably know these things, but there isn’t much they can do about it. This is because advertising for events like the Olympics isn’t sold real time. Rates, schedules, time etc are all figured out months and months in advance and contractually once signed, NBC is obligated to deliver what it has promised to the advertiser.

In the final analysis, NBC’s situation with the Olympics is not unlike the situation many Newspapers find themselves.  Readers still want to read the news. It is one of the most popular content categories on the internet, but readers want to interact with news content in a way and time they choose and this isn’t consistent with the business model of news organizations.  Somebody has to change and I don’t think its going to be the readers. 

NBC’s problem is similar in that interest and enthusiasm amongst US TV viewers is high for the Olympics, but these viewers are no longer willing to accept the old model of pre packaging Olympic content for maximizing ad dollars.  This means some ugly realities for the IOC and its broadcast partners. For the IOC, they may not be able to get ever increasing TV rights revenue from the US market. (http://bit.ly/dpA5NS ) For NBC or whichever network does the Olympics, it means a wholesale reengineering of how they present the Olympics and how they earn revenue from it.  Good luck networks. You’ll need it.

A few years back, the ending of the HBO hit series, The Sopranos, was met with derision and criticism for its ambiguous ending.  More specifically, the public wanted to know exactly what happens to fan favorite mobster Tony Soprano.  While I admit I was jarred by its abruptness, after thinking about it, it made total sense. You didn’t need an ending because you already knew how it ended for Tony Soprano.  Based on the way Tony lived, it is a pretty safe assumption he dies at some point, some horrific way. That is the only way out of the life he was leading. So, whether it happened at the restaurant or anywhere else, it didn’t matter. It ended in death.  Nothing the director Chase could have done would have satisfied the public. Even if they shot, dismembered and burned Tony, nothing would be enough to satisfy the public’s voyeuristic fascination with the life and death of a made man.  Chase recognized this and just closed the window on the narrative.

What has Tony Soprano got to do with Tiger Woods? Well it’s the same voyeuristic fascination in our society that’s driving the calls for Tiger to explain, apologize and “face the music.”  Except, in this instance, these voyeuristic needs are driven by the conflicted position sex and sexuality holds in our society. The cacophony of social commentators and sports journalists calling for Tiger to say he is sorry is not really driven by true moral indignation, but instead by the same “ooh that’s dirty, but tell me more” attitude adolescents have when they hear a dirty joke or some lurid tale about a classmate.  On one hand, it’s completely naughty and forbidden, but they are desperate to know as much as they can. The real agenda behind the calls for a Tiger Woods apology isn't to get closure, rather it is to get as many more juicy details as possible without looking like there is true interest. 

Just as David Chase, knowing full well he would be derided, had the courage to turn the other cheek and not give into the most base desires of our society, Tiger should do the same and stay silent.  Hypothetically, let’s just say that Tiger has decided to come clean. How much detail and explanation is enough?  Admit to two, twenty, two hundred or two thousand girls? Admit to banging strippers and cocktail waitresses two and three at a time? Give specific sexual positions and techniques used?  What level of detail would be enough? We already know the answer. No amount would satisfy. So, why engage at all? The damage to his marriage and professional persona are already done and irreversible.  What does forgiveness by John Q. Public look and feel like? Does it feel the same as the forgiveness of his wife?  How does an explanation change the life of average Joe golf fan? It doesn't one bit. The moral proctors in our society calling for this explanation or apology know this, but its their hypocrisy that is the real driver here. They just want to know a dirty secret.

Just like the tale of Tony Soprano, we already know how it ends for Tiger. The stories, text messages and whatever else can’t be taken back. Sometimes things just end without explanation and abruptly. This is one of those things that should just end.

Many of you horseracing folks who follow me on Twitter probably caught my tirade on the choice to run the Apple Blossom Race on April 9^th.  I’m not going to rehash the short sightedness of this choice.  My feelings about this subject are only rooted in an agenda of loving this sport and wanting to see it prosper.  

After my initial blasts, Ed DeRosa (@EJXD2) of Thoroughbred Times was quick to point out that this was the only date that made sense for Oaklawn and this setup would provide two big days of racing rather than one.  According to Ed, having a second big day and the potentially large on-track handle was in best interests of Oaklawn. Ok, got it.  

I will confess that I do not know all of the ins and outs or nuances of track economics, but I do know a couple things intuitively:

1. There is no possible way horseracing as a sport is better off having a race of this potential magnitude at a time when people really aren’t inclined to watch.
2. If Oaklawn is better off by doing it on a Friday, but the industry as a whole could do much better by having it on a Saturday, it seems to me there is an opportunity for a deal to make the pie bigger.

Who has to gain here?  Well, namely the ADWs, simulcast outlets and ESPN.  I am sure Youbet.com has a pretty firm analytical understanding of their customer betting patterns, life time value  of their customers and acquisition costs. Not so sure the simulcast outlets are as sophisticated, but the economics are probably similar.  ESPN certainly knows the value of different sports content. So, this begs the question why NTRA and/or the Breeders Cup Ltd can’t get involved as a mediator and facilitator between at least of a couple of these parties and negotiate an agreement that compensates Oaklawn for what they think they’ll lose, but allows for the upside of having a larger, more engaged Saturday audience in a period of time that is basically a sports vacuum? March madness will be over. No football. Baseball is just starting.

The math is pretty simple. Figure out the upside for the outlets and ADWs for a Satruday vs. a Friday card, and then figure out the incremental value of the additional ad revenue based on a better time slot for ESPN.  These parties would then compensate Oaklawn for their loss. 

Before everyone howls and screams, these deals are done all the time in business.  This is nothing new.  Well, maybe to the horseracing industry. There are so many ways to mix and match to make the overall pie available to everyone bigger.   Second, not everyone has to come to the table. If the NTRA or Breederscup could just get a few of large players like Youbet, whoever or whatever is running NYRA, maybe a track or two and ESPN, these entities would be big enough to have gains of the magnitude to do the offset to make the situation optimal.  Just remember, we are not talking about billions of dollars here. In fact, I’d be surprised if we were even talking about $10’s of millions. Probably it’s a couple million.  By no means an insurmountable obstacle.

Finally, NTRA is powerless?  Maybe so from an official standpoint, but power is often earned rather than given or usurped.  I can’t even begin to count the instances I’ve seen of people who were anointed as ”in charge” , but couldn’t get a thing done.  Conversely, I’ve seen 100s of instances where individuals through credibility and earned respect were able to exercise influence and get things done far beyond their organizational station.  So, NTRA/Breeders Cup, not having a piece of paper, badge or whatever saying you are in charge or have a mandate to promote the sport is no excuse.  You are full of credible horse racing people who love the sport. So, go to it! Seize this opportunity. Who knows when or if the next one will come?  NTRA/Breederscup has an opportunity to insert itself and collaborate and educate the parties involved so there is a better outcome for everyone. Not just one park in Hot Springs, Ar.

OUT!

Recently, I was playing some online poker on what will be an unnamed social network and I had the pleasure of watching in my chat window as a 30 year man awkwardly tries to smooth in on an 18 year old girl. There really is no punch line, the whole thread is just kind of entertaining and awkward in a Woody Allen/Seinfield pointless sort of way.  The best part is the random dude Rohan commenting at the guy Scott.

So here is the unedited chat transcript:

Scott: hi there shylee

Shylee: hi

Scott: how are you doing today

Shylee: im ok how about u

Scott: good, so far

Shylee: good

Scott: are you married

Shylee: no lol im only 18 haha

Rohan: hitting on people via facebook poker chat = worst possible thing ever

Shylee: lol

Scott: not hittim=ng on anyone, just conversating

Shylee: i go on myspace one and have met some nice people

Scott: sounds cool.

Shylee: yea i guess lol

Scott: have you met anyone nice

Shylee: yes my ex 

Scott: sorry to hear that

Shylee: its k he was really nice tho 

Scott: maybe since i'm not hitting on you, we could become friends

Rohan: smooth

Scott: hahahahahahaha

Shylee: lol how old r u?

Scott: i'm in my early 30's

Shylee: lol ummm i like older guys but i dont date old then 26 srry

Scott: no dates ,just friends

Rohan: how many 18 year old friends do you have, scott?

Shylee: lol

Shylee: at lest hes talking lol

Scott: i have alot of friends. conversation never hurt anyone