The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

The NFL has reportedly asked Super Bowl Halftime performers to  pay them a percentage of their earnings subsequently to their performance.  Halftime performers are not paid to perform at the Super Bowl, however their expenses are covered.  Last year more people tuned into the halftime show, than actually watched the game, so it seems to me that the NFL should be paying the performers since its the performers that bring in more viewers, which in turn generates higher ad revenue.  I think this will backfire on the NFL.

The being in the half time show is can be a huge boom for the performer, particularly for acts that were huge 10-20 years ago and are now on the decline get a big resurgence, so it make sense that many people want to perform. 

Basic law of supply and demand, there is one slot for half time and multiple people want it you can charge for it. 

But it could backfire, if best performers decide they are willing to do it for free, but not if they have to pay. 

I heard the NFL has plans to ask the president to abdicate his power to them.

See, kiddies? This is what happens when you totally commit to The Gordon Gecko College of Business. Sometimes, greed is not so good.

I'm not saying that I like it, but this is capitalism at work.  The NFL has so much power that they can call the shots.

The thing is that the top notch acts they have had in recent years don't need the Super Bowl publicity, I doubt its going to help them sell more tickets than they already do.  Furthermore, I doubt they will pay to play at the Super Bowl; so the NFL would be relegated to mid level acts...then the viewership wouldn't be as high...so I doubt Pepsi would want to pay as much to be the half time sponsor if there were 100,000 fewer viewers.  So the only thing they've done is f*ck up a good thing because they are greedy.

I think it really helped Bruno Mars.  I don't know about before that, but I'm sure it was big for his career.

I think it is quite the opposite. Bruno Mars was already huge before the Superbowl half time show. People were tuning in to see him.

Huge with certain groups, sure, but not with people like me or my parents.  I remember thinking -- wow, that guy is really talented, only hearing a little about him.  The exposure of the Super Bowl is enormous.

The halftime show drew higher ratings than the rest of the event.

Why?

Bruno Mars.

So why should he pay the NFL to raise the NFL event's ratings?

That he got exposure from it so people like you and your family got to see him for the first time, that's good. He didn't get paid to perform but he singularly bumped up the ratings at half time. So why exactly should he pay????

Because if he doesn't, the NFL can find someone else.  It's mutually beneficial, sure, but I think that the artist has more to gain from exposure than the NFL does from the halftime ratings bump.  But it doesn't really matter what I think; it's what the NFL things.  It's their show and they call the shots.

If they want to get paid for that, they have the clout to make that happen.

Yeah, they can put Tom Petty up there and put the crowd to sleep.


You couldn't be more wrong on this. Advertisers will be more willing to spend the money on ad space during halftime if they know there is an act that people will watch. Before the Superbowl, Bruno Mars already had multiple hits and was one of the hottest pop stars in the market.

If the Superbowl starts requiring acts to pay to play, they'll start getting has beens rather than the current hot acts.

And advertisers aren't going to want to spend as much if they know Ringo Starr is headlining the half time show.

You're absolutely right. Except that the level of entertainment doesn't need the NFL.  At the same time, you don't pull this after a halftime act outperformed the main event. That's just backwards. Personally, I don't think their serious about this. If they are, get ready for a whole bunch American Idol finalists when it's on Fox.

LOL

I'm not saying that they should or that it's smart.  I'm saying that it's the NFL, so they can do it if they want to.  That's capitalism.  They can demand it, they'll get someone to do it, and then the market will ultimately decide if it was the right choice.

Fair enough, but it will be a bad choice. They finally started getting some good acts at halftime after years of snoozers.

I am 37 with no real connection to Bruno Mars, but I did enjoy that show.  However, I really enjoyed previous years as well: Prince, McCartney, etc.

What I really hate is when they do that combo act where they have like 5 different groups singing 1/3rd of a song.  Aerosmith/BRittney Spears, etc.

Bruno Mars was awesome. Madonna almost falling and biffing it was a close 2nd. If she had actually fallen, that would go to the top of my list.

It seems like I am in the minority here but I don't give a frogs fat ass about the halftime show. But I think the NFL asking to be paid for a performance is ridiculous!!!!!

It's not a minority of one...

Some on here may be to young to remember it, but back in 1992 when the Fox channel was pretty new, the TV show In Living Colour hyped that they were going to have a live half time show to compete with the Super Bowl halftime show.  They actually stole over 20 million viewers from the Super Bowl broadcast.  So the NFL should be careful or they are going to screw up a good thing.

I do remember that. And I was one of the 20 million. 2 snaps & a twist.

I'm with ya, man...I haven't watched more than a couple minutes of SB halftime shows in the past decade.


I'm not with ya on this one. I have a hard time faulting any business entity for wanting to make money on anything that not only has value, but a market willing to pay for it.

Me too. I am pretty much a heavy metal guy, but I thought he was great and started listening to his music.

That being said, paying to play the halftime show would make you seem desperate and perhaps hurt your career, so I don't think you will get Adam Llevine doing this. Not to mention I think the classic acts like Aerosmith and the Stones would just laugh at the notion.

Right now the NFL thinks it is too big to fail so they will make some ballsy choices. It seems kind of silly but could pay off for them in the long run. There is no doubt it exposes whatever band to a much wider fan base than they would have had before. Yes, that goes for the Stones and Aerosmith too.

Wonder how the NFL would react if Coldplay, Katy Perry and Rhianna announced a free to the public concert exactly to be aired at halftime of the Superbowl, and sold the rights to one of (or all of ) the networks not broadcasting the game? -EK

I don't think it would matter in the long run. There has been a bunch of things that have tried to compete with the halftime show. Like the commercials themselves, the halftime show has become a tradition for many.

That would be the ideal scenario for the NFL.  I'm surprised they aren't doing it already.

- NFL can make even bigger demands to non-established performer
- Idol contestant would never dare do anything risque
- "current events" young demographic popularity (as opposed to booking Paul McCartney or the Rolling Stones)
- (for Fox) tie in for their other programming

In terms of competition for the NFL, I don't think that anything is really viable.  All of that Living Color stuff didn't last.  Bud Bowl or Dog halftime show or any of that.

Those things have to advertise so much to get the word out that it's probably not even profitable.

Only way it would work is if the Superbowl Halftime show was really bad like Rascal Flatts and some American Idol runner up and the other network had Kanye and Rhianna or some shit. I could actually see that working, but everything has to align properly.

Not sure what the NFL's end-game is here. Or what leg they have to stand on. The performers get paid by the sponsor (ie Bridgestone or whoever) and the NFL is getting a free performance that increases their ratings. Now to try and send the performer a bill makes little sense.

All this will do is scare away the bigger name acts (cause its not like they need to be on the halftime of the super bowl they are already big stars) and dilute the pool of singers/bands who will want to perform just because they are struggling in their career and want to get their name out there anyway they can.

To me the NFL is only hurting their own product with this idea