[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by kennylc321

I honestly don't know if I buy into the "the NFL won't allow it narrative." For instance... the "NFL won't allow more relocation cities." I heard that somewhere and it just doesn't make any sense. The NFL thinks that users creating the Nebraska Corndogs will really hurt their product yet the Dublin Celtic Tigers is ok? Nah... I don't even buy into the whole narrative about the NFL wanting exclusivity. The NFL (and the NFLPA) make more money by having three companies pay $5M (or whatever it is) as opposed to one company paying $3M (or whatever it is) and we all know the NFL is all about the dollar. EA has been the one to say the NFL wants exclusivity but I have never read anything directly from the NFL saying that's what they want. So when EA tells me that "the NFL won't allow it" I have to take that w/ a grain of salt... it is a good excuse for not getting anything done.

Since you joined in 2018, I don't think you were around when a former EA employee explained things pretty clearly at the onset of the exclusive license.

This is as further down the rabbit hole this discussion will enter because it's the beating of the dead horse syndrome and threads become closed and people become banned in the past. It's been pretty good the last few years as far as discussions go.

The NFL, by going exclusive, made more off of one company, EA, than all 4 or 5 companies combined. And by the way, the NFL Players Union also chimed in a few years ago and stated they have a strong relationship with EA. This relationship is now 15 years strong on the business end of things.

So, to keep things simple, let's say all of those companies had a million dollar licensing fee to pay the NFL. The NFL eliminated all of the companies except EA and charged EA 100 million licensing fee. I'm keeping the figures simple to save time.

You don't have to buy anything, but, it is what it is. The NFL, for the most part, has a exclusive licensing business model across the board.