Packers to Play in Brazil

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,608
Reaction score
8,183
Location
Madison, WI
If it's on Netflix; will they make you pay even if you already have Netflix?
I doubt it. Amazon Prime didn't. But hey, you never know.

If it wasn't for Amazon, I would drop Prime TV. Content is no longer commercial free, unless you pay them an additional $3/month. Sounds like peanuts, but its the principle of the matter. People signed up for Amazon and Netflix, for commercial free TV viewing.
 

Thirteen Below

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
641
Reaction score
459
If it wasn't for Amazon, I would drop Prime TV. Content is no longer commercial free, unless you pay them an additional $3/month. Sounds like peanuts, but its the principle of the matter. People signed up for Amazon and Netflix, for commercial free TV viewing.
Same here, that's why we switched to Roku (although I'm starting to see signs that they're moving in that direction too).

Enough is enough. 34 dollars here, 2 dollars there, a buck fifty service fee for accepting a payment.... I've had enough. I don't have anything against a business trying to make a decent profit; my wife and I have both been entrepreneurs our entire lives, and it's been good to us. (She started running her first side hustle when she was 6 years old; it was way beyond some low-key lemonade stand or whatever, and she never stopped).

But when some ******* who's wealthy enough to own his own friggin' space program starts fishing around in my pocket to see if I have another 3 dollar's worth of spare change to give him, I get real cynical real fast.
 

Thirteen Below

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
641
Reaction score
459
Just a heads-up for anyone who is pissed that the game is on Peacock and you don't want to pay the fare... they're "offering" a one-year trial period trial period for $19.99. The reason I put "offering" in quotation marks is because they phrase the advertisement pretty cleverly. Something like "check it out" or something similar, looks like maybe you're just going to click on the link and get information... and next thing you know, it's "thank you for signing up! Welcome to Peacock!"

It hasn't hit the credit card yet, but sometimes it takes a while for that to work through the layers. But I'm pretty sure I did get fleeced, and screw it, I won't fight it. There's the principle of the thing, but then again there's also the question of value. And in all honesty, I guess I'll get 20 bucks out of it over the space of a year.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,608
Reaction score
8,183
Location
Madison, WI
Just a heads-up for anyone who is pissed that the game is on Peacock and you don't want to pay the fare... they're "offering" a one-year trial period trial period for $19.99. The reason I put "offering" in quotation marks is because they phrase the advertisement pretty cleverly. Something like "check it out" or something similar, looks like maybe you're just going to click on the link and get information... and next thing you know, it's "thank you for signing up! Welcome to Peacock!"

It hasn't hit the credit card yet, but sometimes it takes a while for that to work through the layers. But I'm pretty sure I did get fleeced, and screw it, I won't fight it. There's the principle of the thing, but then again there's also the question of value. And in all honesty, I guess I'll get 20 bucks out of it over the space of a year.
If I had to guess, the $19.99 + taxes will appear on your CC. I don't think Peacock charges any other BS fees, but I could be wrong. What you want to look for is when your subscription automatically rolls into the normal price (currently is $59.99/year) unless you cancel.

I have friends that have Peacock and they like it. Of course they also have Hulu, Prime, Netflix, Apple TV and a huge antenna on the top of their house for a clear signal for local channels. They used to boast "We don't need cable, lots of stuff on local TV and if we want to watch a movie, we rent one, the library is only 10 miles away."
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
5,072
Reaction score
1,321
Just a heads-up for anyone who is pissed that the game is on Peacock and you don't want to pay the fare... they're "offering" a one-year trial period trial period for $19.99. The reason I put "offering" in quotation marks isck things out because they phrase the advertisement pretty cleverly. Something like "check it out" someth similar, looks like maybe you're just goin click on thee linkexy on and get information... and next thing you know, it's "thank you for signing up! Welcome to Peacock!"

It hasn't hit the credit card yet, but sometimes it takes a while for that to work through the layers. But I'm pretty sure I did get fleeced, and screw it, I won't fight it. There's the principle of the thing, but then again there's also the question of value. And in all honesty, I guess I'llw ll get 20 bucks out of it over the space of a year.
I went to their website just to check it out and saw the offer you were referring to. I clicked on it on the first page but didn't on the next one because of what you said. Still, if you didn't enter a cc number I don't see how you could be charged.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,608
Reaction score
8,183
Location
Madison, WI
I went to their website just to check it out and saw the offer you were referring to. I clicked on it on the first page but didn't on the next one because of what you said. Still, if you didn't enter a cc number I don't see how you could be charged.
Agree.

That said, many sites will take your CC info. (if saved on your device) pretty sneakily. So you have to be careful what you click on. Most "introductory deals" are banking on people taking them and not realizing that they have just agreed to renew each year, unless they go through whatever the process is for stopping service. Personally, I hate autorenewal contracts, but they are a way for businesses to make a ton of money.
 

Thirteen Below

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
641
Reaction score
459
I went to their website just to check it out and saw the offer you were referring to. I clicked on it on the first page but didn't on the next one because of what you said. Still, if you didn't enter a cc number I don't see how you could be charged.
The ad appeared on the user interface while I was watching Amazon Prime, so I suspect Amazon will tag us with the card we have on file for them. That's the main reason Amazon tries to shove all that crap down our throats; they get a cut of every extra service they sell us.

Bastards.
 

Voyageur

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 10, 2021
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
1,961
What I've found ironic is that the NFL gets paid by networks to air games, and the networks get paid by advertisers to support their airing the games on TV. It's broadcast all over the team's viewing area for free. But, if you don't live outside that area, if you watch the games you're still exposed to the same TV ads, and watching it on the prescribed network. That begs the question as to why there should be a surcharge like Sunday Ticket, to watch the games because you're viewing it with the ads no matter where you are?

I keep hearing how it's because the local team should take precedence, but let's face it, those who want to watch them aren't suddenly going to choose watching another team's game just because it's on. They'll watch the team they support.

Reality is, the NFL and the broadcasting community found a way to squeeze more money out of the people who want to watch their favorite team play, but are out of territory. It's simply a money squeeze, and always has been.

I look back at the black out days for NFL games, and realize that it didn't do anything to improve the attendance at games, and actually hurt the viewer totals when they weren't blacked out. Fans found other things to do, and it took quite a while to get those fans back. Then I look at the covid years, and saw empty stadiums. Yet, NFL teams made money, didn't lose it. So, the truth is, game attendance, and protecting territory isn't really as important as they'd like to make everyone believe. The only thing involved is the cash registers for more money coming into the system, for more team profits, and more inflation to player salaries, and the ticket prices keep going up, because there's always someone out there willing to pay the price to attend games.

In the scheme of things, fans don't matter to the NFL directly. They just want them to spend their money. It's just like the new uniform bit, where they sell so darned many variety of uniforms a team wears during the course of a year. It's all about the money.
 

Voyageur

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 10, 2021
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
1,961
If I had to guess, the $19.99 + taxes will appear on your CC. I don't think Peacock charges any other BS fees, but I could be wrong. What you want to look for is when your subscription automatically rolls into the normal price (currently is $59.99/year) unless you cancel.

I have friends that have Peacock and they like it. Of course they also have Hulu, Prime, Netflix, Apple TV and a huge antenna on the top of their house for a clear signal for local channels. They used to boast "We don't need cable, lots of stuff on local TV and if we want to watch a movie, we rent one, the library is only 10 miles away."
I totally understand those comments about people not needing anything but local TV. Then they end up with a million different services adding to their viewing bills. I was one of those suckers, until I went to IPTV.

I can enjoy so much for free, and as far as commercials, I do the same thing as I did way back when all we had was regular TV. I tune myself out, when the commercials come on. Another thing I like about all these freebie services is that I can watch what I want, when I want. I don't have to schedule my life around watching a show at 8PM, and to guarantee I do, turn my phone off.

My wife and I watch two shows on regular TV, that's it, and we watch those when we want, over our Spectrum Demand, which is part of our Spectrum TV/Cable package that's free. We use Awesome, Fawesome, Hulu, and a dozen different sources, and each of them will have a lot of shows that are different. Then there's also You Tube, where we can pick up a lot of what we want that's available, including full length movies, TV shows, and other entertainment we enjoy.

We have Amazon Prime, because we spend over $3,000 every year on things we want, that aren't available in stores, or are over priced in stores. The free shipping pays for the service plus. Add in our getting the video service, and to us, it's a steal.

You just have to dig, and be creative, and you can set yourself up with a viewing library you'll love. We quite often will binge entire seasons of a show, because it helps following the continuity.

Anyhow, it's all what you make of it. I won't have to pay a penny for the games on Peacock, anymore than I do for watching the Packer games every week, despite being out of territory. Or, for that matter, after discussing viewing habits with a friend from New Brunswick, Canada, told him while we were communicating out here that I was watching his local TV station at the time, and I live in South Texas, a mere 2,613 miles away,

You just need to do your homework.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,608
Reaction score
8,183
Location
Madison, WI
Reality is, the NFL and the broadcasting community found a way to squeeze more money out of the people who want to watch their favorite team play, but are out of territory. It's simply a money squeeze, and always has been.
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
 

Voyageur

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 10, 2021
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
1,961
It took you how many years to figure out capitalism 101?

How would that be different than say PlutoTV or Freevee or Tubi? I have all three btw.
All those you mentioned are just services available over IPTV, not IPTV in it's entirety. You need to google IPTV and go from there.
 

Sanguine camper

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,966
Reaction score
598
The NFL insists that watching the Brazil game is inconvenient to say the least. I'll just skip it and watch the highlights on YouTube when it's over. It's like going into the grocery store and seeing a package that was 16 oz now downsized to 13 oz's for the same price. An underhanded, shell game rip off.

Another reason to think twice about paying for the NFL's shenanigans is that Lafleur teams don't travel well. They can win road games when they're close by in Chicago, Detroit or Minneapolis or in the Central time zone but when they travel over a time zone or two, watch out. Last year they lost to bad teams on the road like the Giants, Broncos and Raiders and nearly got beat by Carolina. In previous years, they got curbstomped in SF in the playoffs and crushed by New Orleans in Florida and were terrible in London that lead to a stretch of bad games. I don't expect Lafleur to now figure out how to prepare his teams for long road trips after five years of stinking it up.
 

Firethorn1001

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Messages
1,571
Reaction score
1,117

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
5,072
Reaction score
1,321

If even a little bit of truth behind it, I can imagine Goodell in a meeting... "Ok.. how about this. Take the teams that wear the most green along with the city that has Green in the name and ship them off to Brazil"
The thing is the NFL could have prevented all this BS, or at least a lot of it, by saying this in the first place. Controversy creates cash flow though so why bother to put out accurate information until it absolutely necessary. It seems JJ's comments about it not being safe was finally enough to make them set the record straight.
 

Sanguine camper

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,966
Reaction score
598
Jacobs isn't being unreasonable to bring up safety issues. Brazil isn't Mexico, but it's big cities have lots of violent crime. While there's plenty of crime in most big cities in the USA, it's the first game in Brazil and there is no track record of the authorities being able to provide adequate security to NFL football. In it's greed to wring out more money from a foreign country, the NFL is going to play a game whether security is adequate or not.
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
5,452
Reaction score
1,309
Is it even a controversy? Has the stadium said absolutely no green? Anyway, probably a bad idea to wear green. All the fans might hate them. All white.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,608
Reaction score
8,183
Location
Madison, WI

If even a little bit of truth behind it, I can imagine Goodell in a meeting... "Ok.. how about this. Take the teams that wear the most green along with the city that has Green in the name and ship them off to Brazil"
Most important part of the article and something we constantly see in the world today on other topics is this:

"Apparently, Jacobs got his information from someone who had no idea what they were talking about, because the NFL said the part about not leaving the hotel and traveling in armored vehicles is also "not true.""
 

Poppa San

* Team Owner *
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
12,979
Reaction score
2,848
Location
20 miles from Lambeau
Most important part of the article and something we constantly see in the world today on other topics is this:

"Apparently, Jacobs got his information from someone who had no idea what they were talking about, because the NFL said the part about not leaving the hotel and traveling in armored vehicles is also "not true.""
You must be logged in to see this image or video!

https://xkcd.com/386/
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,717
Reaction score
1,855
What I've found ironic is that the NFL gets paid by networks to air games, and the networks get paid by advertisers to support their airing the games on TV. It's broadcast all over the team's viewing area for free. But, if you don't live outside that area, if you watch the games you're still exposed to the same TV ads, and watching it on the prescribed network. That begs the question as to why there should be a surcharge like Sunday Ticket, to watch the games because you're viewing it with the ads no matter where you are?

I keep hearing how it's because the local team should take precedence, but let's face it, those who want to watch them aren't suddenly going to choose watching another team's game just because it's on. They'll watch the team they support.

Reality is, the NFL and the broadcasting community found a way to squeeze more money out of the people who want to watch their favorite team play, but are out of territory. It's simply a money squeeze, and always has been.

I look back at the black out days for NFL games, and realize that it didn't do anything to improve the attendance at games, and actually hurt the viewer totals when they weren't blacked out. Fans found other things to do, and it took quite a while to get those fans back. Then I look at the covid years, and saw empty stadiums. Yet, NFL teams made money, didn't lose it. So, the truth is, game attendance, and protecting territory isn't really as important as they'd like to make everyone believe. The only thing involved is the cash registers for more money coming into the system, for more team profits, and more inflation to player salaries, and the ticket prices keep going up, because there's always someone out there willing to pay the price to attend games.

In the scheme of things, fans don't matter to the NFL directly. They just want them to spend their money. It's just like the new uniform bit, where they sell so darned many variety of uniforms a team wears during the course of a year. It's all about the money.
I had Sunday Ticket for the 20 years I lived in CA and thought it was worth it. We had to put up with commercials because the game was carried live, so no way to edit those out. That didn't bother me. Allowed time for me to get another beer, at 11AM in the morning.......
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,717
Reaction score
1,855
Is it even a controversy? Has the stadium said absolutely no green? Anyway, probably a bad idea to wear green. All the fans might hate them. All white.
Yeah they take their soccer seriously down there. Didn't Rodgers hate the color red because of the Cal rivalry with Stanford? Something to do with UW's colors - red and white. I'm not sure but I get it.

We should all be able to relate. Tell almost anyone you support the green and gold and they'll know you're a Packers fan. And name a solid Packer fan who doesn't abhor purple.
 

Sanguine camper

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,966
Reaction score
598
Yeah they take their soccer seriously down there. Didn't Rodgers hate the color red because of the Cal rivalry with Stanford? Something to do with UW's colors - red and white. I'm not sure but I get it.

We should all be able to relate. Tell almost anyone you support the green and gold and they'll know you're a Packers fan. And name a solid Packer fan who doesn't abhor purple.
Why do the Vikings wear the color purple? You'd be purple too if you choked for 63 years. Never a bad time for a joke on the Vikings.
 

Members online

Top