IBJNews

  • Home

Super Bowl live stream online attracts 2.1 million viewers

Associated Press
February 7, 2012
Keywords
Digital TV, Indianapolis Super Bowl, Media & Marketing, Sporting Events, Sports Business, Super Bowl, Web Sites
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

The first live stream of the Super Bowl drew 2.1 million unique viewers, NBC said Thursday.

That's a small fraction of the record 111.3 million viewers that watched NBC's broadcast of the big game. But it was still enough to make it the most-watched single-game sports event online, according to the network.

Kevin Monaghan, managing director of digital media for NBC Sports Group, said the live stream "exceeded our expectations in every way."

The New York Giants 21-17 win over the New England Patriots was streamed on NBCSports.com and NFL.com. The Internet webcast included optional camera views, tweeting from a handful of personalities and HD-quality video. But it didn't feature the live TV broadcast commercials (they were clickable for on-demand viewing) or the Madonna halftime show, and the feed lagged behind the broadcast.

The webcast was available on some mobile phones from Verizon.

Monaghan framed the live stream not as an alternate viewing option from broadcast, but as "a complementary 'second screen' experience" to the televised game.

Previous major sporting events streamed live include the 2010 World Cup by ESPN, the 2010 Olympics by NBC and the annual NCAA men's basketball tournament by CBS and Turner Sports. More recently, ESPN offered live streams of this year's Rose Bowl and the Fiesta Bowl, though both of those games were watched by less than 400,000.

In the 2010 World Cup, ESPN said 1.1 million people watched at least some part of the USA's win over Algeria on its website.

But no sporting event is bigger in the U.S. than the Super Bowl, and NBC's first live stream of the game was surely a milestone in sports viewing. The Super Bowl stream had an average user engagement of 39 minutes per visit.

Hans Schroeder, senior vice president of media strategy and development for the NFL, said the league "will continue to look for more ways to reach our fans."

ADVERTISEMENT

  • "a complementary 'second screen' experience"
    RickFebruary 9, 2012 12:24 PM
    I used the nfl.com app on my Verizon smartphone (enabled vcast for the day) to watch the first half as my "primary" screen for I could not be in front of a tv until shortly before half-time.

    I find the above referenced quote to be marketing speak. I use social media but what value does one get from having the SB streamed on a smartphone/PC/tablet as the "second screen experience"? A "second screen experience" would likely for me be a constant stream of stats or other relevant information.

    I can't speak for how the nbcsports.com site worked but I was queried about every 10 minutes "if I was still there". With the 3G network the feed would just stop for several seconds.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

ADVANCED SEARCH
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ

  1. So the Mayor adds another non value added layer to having a vehicle towed? Whereby the City Government RECIEVES AN ILLEGAL KICKBACK FROM A LGOISTICS COMPANY THAT SUBS THE WORK TO LOCAL TOW COMPANIES? What is the service the City performs for receiving the "tribute"? This is RICO!!!!! What a corrupt and unnecessary layer. What a dirtbag Mayor and his cronies.

  2. Owner occupied housing. Clear enough?

  3. So people think I am paranoid. It's from experience in dealing with puds requested by developers who make major donations themselves to representatives, have nice fund raisers for those running for office and hide through pac's. then there are the public relation firms. You will note some pr comments below. You there Clyde Lee? My opinion. Commercial along 421, great. Multifamily housing, terrible idea that will change the town. Senior condos or zero lot line homes west, great. I suggest keeping all entries to commercial areas at 421. All entries to owner occupied on sycamore. Will keep the traffic on sycamore down some. Two other things. You can't trust what will be there in 10 years. Steve builds quality stuff, but areas change over time. Look at the changes at the wall mart center at 86th and 421 over the last 10 years. Look at the apartments and neighborhoods behind St Vincent's. Raintree properties WILL decrease in value if commercial and multifamily goes in near. It has already been happening around the bridges area. The houses that have been sold recently are way below market. Several deals not closed due to the Illinois construction and the whole unsurety of the bridges. It's pretty simple, Zionsville will approve the whole thing because the city council has been groomed over a LONG period of time for this. I might even suggest some are in their position as a result of this.

  4. Esta, do you have a dog in this fight? You seem to really want to knock anyone against this project. No, I didn't move to Indiana for the architecture. I moved here for that red barn in the field. The horses and fields of corn. A place that is NOT overdeveloped. There are plenty of nearby places in Indianapolis that could be REDEVELOPED instead.

  5. RKW - OK, we get it, you're paranoid. The question is, are you paranoid enough? Greg - Yes, Pittman(s) is (are) at it again. They are developers, they build things. It's what they do. So when you go to work tomorrow, Greg, you're at it again too. Cliff - Really? You moved to Indiana for its progressive architecture? That's like moving to England for the cuisine. Zionsvillain - The house you moved to was once a field or woods. I'm willing to bet folks were upset when that ground was plowed under and a house was built. But I guess now that you are in, everything should stop? "My house was OK, but the next one is sprawl." SE Guy - Please don't paint us with such a wide brush. Most reasonable Zionsville residents welcome planned, measured development.

ADVERTISEMENT