How Can We Make The NFBC Primetime Better2?

[Greg Ambrosius]

The other thread has been hi-jacked, so let's try this again here:

It has been a fantastic start to the 2015 NFBC season and we wish everyone best of luck the rest of the way. We have almost $3 million in prize money on the line during these last 2+ months and we wish everyone the best from here on out.

We are proud of the record numbers we achieved this year and happy to see all of the contests with fantastic races. But unquestionably the one contest that fell short of goals this year was the NFBC Primetime, which finished with 204 teams and has a grand prize of $80,000. We are committed to this 12-team national contest and believe that hosting two live events with different league formats is the way to go. Now we just need to find the perfect solution for it.

We know the 12-team format can work as we have 1,500 teams in our Rotowire Fantasy Baseball Online Championship. But at 360 players per team, that leaves a deeper free agent pool and requires a lot of time and effort from each owner during the season. Still, the $350 price point works well there and the contest continues to grow each and every year, so we know the format works.

The rules are exactly the same for the NFBC Primetime, but at $1,500 per team it's not attracting the same type of love as the Online Championship. So is it best to change this format slightly to make the in-season management a little less time consuming? Is it the price point? What is the answer to making this a contest that can grow like we've seen happen in football? In the NFFC, we had 14-team leagues for the first five years before adding the 12-team Primetime and now the 12-team format has doubled in size compared to our 14-team Classic. But we haven't seen that trend in baseball.

I'm definitely not against tweaking the rules to make this game different from the Online Championship. I actually think a slightly different game might help here. There was a suggestion to make the roster sizes bigger, which reduces the amount of in-season time and factors in bigger benches without adding a DL list. Would the Primetime at 35 rounds and 420 total players be a more manageable game and a better game for our users? It's a question worth asking, especially with so many injuries during the season, or at least a roster size bigger than the current 30. Thoughts?

Price is a tough one because we all want a bigger carrot when battling hundreds of teams in a national contest. We've tried this contest at $500, $750, $1,000 and $1,500. We had the grand prize at $50,000 and we had it at $100,000. This year it is at $80,000. Nobody wants to spend so much time and effort on a contest that has a minimal grand prize, yet spending as much as the Main Event for lesser prizes isn't ideal, either. We understand both sides.

Those owners who participate in the NFBC Primetime at our live events or even online know that these are fun, quick drafts where everyone leaves with a pretty good team. They are really fun additional drafts to the grueling Main Events. I love the doubleheader that we're offering and there is no doubt that we are committed to this live/online format. I'm now looking for feedback to make these better and to find that happy landing spot for everyone so that we sell it out next year, no matter what final numbers we all agree to. It's no fun to plan for one number and fall far short of that with the guaranteed prizes we put out there. No fun at all.

Enjoy the All-Star break, but when you have time post your thoughts here or shoot me an email at [email protected]. We have time to think this through before launching the 2016 NFBC in November, but I want to have that strong game plan in place by then and get folks stoked about this contest again. And if we need a little extra time on Draft Day to finish these in order to make the contest more appealing to you folks, we'll do it. Let's star the discussion and let's get baseball games rolling again. Damn, this All-Star break is too long!!!

Thanks all. You're the best.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Here's a suggestion from KJ: Bump the league size from 12 to 15 teams and raise the overall prize to $200K.

I'll gladly respond to that here. Basically the suggestion is to kill the NFBC Primetime and make the grand prize even bigger in the NFBC Main Event.

It's certainly an option and one that management has suggested not only here at STATS but it was Ryan's suggestion at Fanball as well. Why are we knocking ourselves out over two contests when others have just created one MASSIVE contest?

The answer is simple: We believe in the two different formats in each sport because each provide different skill levels. In baseball you folks feel like the 15-teamer provides the most skills, while in football the larger format has just too big of a churn rate. We aren't getting any new members to the 14-team format. In baseball, we still get some new members to the 15-team format, but honestly we believe more new members want the smaller league size and right now they are joining us in the Online Championship but not as much in the NFBC Primetime.

I guess time will tell if we do this, but killing the 12-teamer won't necessarily mean everyone will gravitate to the only game around. It might not even lead to bigger grand prizes in the Main Event. It just might mean less people are playing with us and looking for other games to play.

So yes, I will list this as one of the options, but it's the easiest one to do -- kind of like Bud Selig asking for contraction several years ago, including the Minnesota Twins who now have a new stadium and a playoff caliber team -- and it's not our first option. But it is an option. Thanks.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Here's a good suggestion from a first-year NFBC Primetime player who hopes to see the contest grow:

I personally felt the 12 team 30 player roster made sense. The 90 extra free agents when compared to the main event gave me a chance to fix a bad draft.

What if you allowed 2 prospect positions. As a possibility for someone like me since I had the 12th pick I would get the 1st prospect in the prospect portion of the draft. In that scenario I get someone like Carlos Correa. Even 1 prospect would make it interesting. Only offer this in the Primetime.

What about some sort of package deal if you enter a Primetime by a certain date you get an entry into your DC draft or something along that line.

What about a lottery into one of the really high stake drafts. If you guys reach a certain number every member is entered into a lottery making them eligible.

What if some sort of arrangement could be made where one of the Primetime drafts gets some love on Sirius fantasy channel.

Your live drafts exceeded my wildest expectations. Could you do YouTube testimonials, tape live events and put them on YouTube. That experience Is worth every penny.


These are all good suggestions and the kind of feedback we are looking for. Thanks to this owner for his feedback here.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Here is another suggestion from a veteran NFBC owner that has me thinking about some possibilities. Thanks much:

1. I think you should offer some league in Rotowire Championships with first place being a Free Seat at a Prime with the live events fee waived if they decide to come to a live event.

2. Make FAAB only $500 instead of $1000. (Could cut down on the roster turnover more)

4. Add an OF, UTIL, CI, MI, and 2 P active spots, and add 4-5 bench spots (Creates a different roster and cuts down some of the FA pool)

5. Also why not have different league structures to filter in to it. So you can have $500, $750, $1000, $1250, $1500, and $2500 leagues that all contribute to the overall prize structure the same but the league payouts would be different or non-existent. I think that way, you may have teams try to go for $500 teams to try and win overall for cheap but have no room for error because they would have to place in the top 10 to get money back etc. I can expand on this more over the phone if it relatively interests you, but I think you can get the gist of what I'm trying to say here. I'll be available all day if you do.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Here's another suggestion that came in via email:

First, lets look at the success of the Online Championship. It is derived from two factors.

1. The price point is first and foremost. This price point allows many folks to compete at what is considered the highest level without forking out $1,500. This pulls in many players. I believe it is 75% of the pull to this event.

2. The overall prize. I think this is about 25% of the folks and does draw veterans into due to the weaker fields. It induces many to go after multiple teams, which is positive.

Here is my idea for the overall health of your business. You have 3 overall championships that I will address.

1. The Online championship which attracted 1500 teams as a 12 team event. (80K overall prize)

2. The Main Event which attracted 450 teams as a 15 team event. (125 overall prize)

3. The Primetime which attracted 204 teams as a 12 team event. (80 k overall prize)

So I think the goal would be (at a bare minimum) 1500 online teams and 654 teams main event teams. So now how do you grow the business?

Keeping in mind that the biggest draw to the online is the price point, I believe you split the online into 2 different contests. a 15 team and a 12 team. In a perfect world both contests draw the same number of entrants. That won’t happen as the 12 team has built it. Lets say in that perfect world you had 1500 entrants, you would offer a 40k overall prize to each of the winners. I truly believe that you would build on the number of people playing in the online championship for multiple reasons.

1. You wold be offering a 15 team format.

2. This is a contest that players could graduate to the Main Event from. (point I should make later)

3, 15 team vetrans would be attracted to it because of the perceived weaker fields.

The bottom line is it the first year it may be tough to gauge the response. I think 2 100k main events and 2 40k online events could work. Year 2 you will know what your dealing with. It’s not really a big gamble you have the opportunity to provide the smaller entry point that that will feed both main events. I think that both both events would grow in year one. By that I mean significantly more than 1500 online championship teams and at very minimum the same number of main event and primetime teams.

Year two the main event numbers grow significantly. Year one they may come together.

[JohnP]

I'm with Coz....like the 12 team event. It surely is a different animal than the 15s and I am sure one can make arguments about the time FAAB takes in a 12 vs a 15 but I think no matter how deep the Free Agent list is....there will always be deliberation and time. For me....I am not finding that it is taking more time (if any) in FAAB time for 12 team vs. 15 team. While on the FAAB topic, love the FAAB software. I was stubborn as a mule when it first came out, refused to use it, clamored against it and now I love it.

I think the problem with the Primetime is that we already have a national contest for the 12 team contest. Why do we need two? Replace the live Primetime drafts with auctions! Or maybe have some live "online championship" drafts if there is demand. Part of what needs to happen I think is for more people to experience a live draft. There is nothing like it. Getting that to happen at a $1500 price point is not easy.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Okay, let me ask two pertinent questions, with the idea of continuing with a live 12-team event, and get your feedback:

1. Should we consider a different roster size to grow the Primetime? Again, there was a suggestion by an NFBC veteran to make the Primetime 35 rounds for a total of 420 drafted players. That would allow for 12 bench players and allow owners to hold onto more prospects and have depth for when the injuries occur. This would make the Primetime very different from any other contest at a time when even some NFBC veterans are clamoring for DL lists or more roster spots.

2. Price. What's the ideal entry price for what we consider our 12-team Main Event with a grand prize of $75,000 or more?

It's not economically feasible to host live drafts in New York City and in Las Vegas anymore at $1,000 or under. The costs have really increased to host these in the last couple of years and hotels are demanding more for each event we host there. Plus, we know that grand prizes are the worthy goal of each participant and we know what happens if your grand prize is $50,000 or less.

Feedback on these two items will help us a lot. Thanks.

[Fourslot40]

The rules are fine in my opinion. I do enjoy the format. At the similar price point, it's noted that the 12-team can't compete with the 15-team. It's not so much about the rules, but the preference of play vs. price point. In my opinion, volume is the issue simply due to price point. Too much emphasis is being placed on the carrot.

Reduce the carrot, but gain more entries at the $1,000 price point. It deserves to be lower due to the popularity amongst the players. DFS has figured this out with volume generating contests at lower price points. They always fill. It generates a decision on whether to take on more teams whether you're in the Main Event or not. In a situation where you might have a budget, two Primetime entries for every one Main Event entry for a difference of $500.... or maybe four Primetimes over two Main Events or an extra $1,000. It's reasonable to think that regardless of format preference, some would prefer more shots at a still sizable carrot of $75,000 in a smaller field. In general, some players prefer to have more teams overall. A carrot of $125K is nice, but I'll gladly take additional shots at $75K with league prizes.

[DOUGHBOYS]

I think it may be about price point.
Lesser amounts have been tried in the past, yes, but in the past the Primetime was just an experiment or fledgling idea.
When it comes to Live Events, participants have to buget their money and time. Between the Mains, auctions, primetime, supers, and now the super dupers, there are a lot of events to choose from.
The folks that don't have to budget their resources will play in the super dupers and whatever else tickles their fancy.
Those that do budget are trying to get the most bang for their money. For a lot of these folks, it isn't about the carrot for first place money overall. It is about what they realistically can return on their investment.
I know of at least three players that feel as if they have to choose between the Main or Primetime and each case, the Main Event was chosen.

For some going to the Live Events, it also isn't about the carrot or grand prize. It is about trying to squeeze as many events as they can in a weekend while having a budget that doesn't overflow and pleases not only themselves, but their wives or significant other as well.
I don't think the rules for the Primetime have to be tinkered with at all. It's a good contest that just needs more participation.
Just my opinion.

[DOUGHBOYS]

The rules are fine in my opinion. I do enjoy the format. At the similar price point, it's noted that the 12-team can't compete with the 15-team. It's not so much about the rules, but the preference of play vs. price point. In my opinion, volume is the issue simply due to price point. Too much emphasis is being placed on the carrot.

Reduce the carrot, but gain more entries at the $1,000 price point. It deserves to be lower due to the popularity amongst the players. DFS has figured this out with volume generating contests at lower price points. They always fill. It generates a decision on whether to take on more teams whether you're in the Main Event or not. In a situation where you might have a budget, two Primetime entries for every one Main Event entry for a difference of $500.... or maybe four Primetimes over two Main Events or an extra $1,000. It's reasonable to think that regardless of format preference, some would prefer more shots at a still sizable carrot of $75,000 in a smaller field. In general, some players prefer to have more teams overall. A carrot of $125K is nice, but I'll gladly take additional shots at $75K with league prizes.

Ha! I wrote mine the same time you did.
COMPLETELY AGREE

[Greg Ambrosius]

Here's another viewpoint from a veteran NFBC owner who drafted live in Las Vegas:

My 2 cents are nothing needs to be changed. I like the league prize structure. I know everyone wants to keep pushing for more for first and the overall prizes, but it's a long damn season, and if I finish 2nd in my league, I want to be rewarded.

Anyhow, I only did the event initially to make my vegas trip more worthwhile, but I'm glad I did! As is, I'll definitely keep playing the format. Too many tweaks might turn me off.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Here's another suggestion received via email:

Maybe differentiate the Primetime with rules. Could the Primetime be a contest with a bigger roster? Could it even be a contest where you could do the Friday change on pitchers?! Whoa. That would be interesting.

[Greg Ambrosius]

The rules are fine in my opinion. I do enjoy the format. At the similar price point, it's noted that the 12-team can't compete with the 15-team. It's not so much about the rules, but the preference of play vs. price point. In my opinion, volume is the issue simply due to price point. Too much emphasis is being placed on the carrot.

Reduce the carrot, but gain more entries at the $1,000 price point. It deserves to be lower due to the popularity amongst the players. DFS has figured this out with volume generating contests at lower price points. They always fill. It generates a decision on whether to take on more teams whether you're in the Main Event or not. In a situation where you might have a budget, two Primetime entries for every one Main Event entry for a difference of $500.... or maybe four Primetimes over two Main Events or an extra $1,000. It's reasonable to think that regardless of format preference, some would prefer more shots at a still sizable carrot of $75,000 in a smaller field. In general, some players prefer to have more teams overall. A carrot of $125K is nice, but I'll gladly take additional shots at $75K with league prizes.

Thanks for the feedback John and price is a worthy discussion. Unfortunately, when we tried the Primetime at $1,000 the prizes were still 4x for first in your league and 2x for second, but the grand prize was only $40,000 and $50,000. We failed both years at that price point. Again, time is a big factor for our owners at live events and folks just didn't feel that the time and effort were worth it. And others said they'd just take 3 Online Championships for that price.

That being said, maybe there's something we can do in conjunction with the Primetime at a lower entry point. All of these suggestions has me pondering on that.

There was no smaller field this year than the Primetime, with only 204 participants. Still, people didn't jump in. But it's on us to make this work and hopefully we can make this work better at the live events. No doubt that these were enjoyable 3-hour quickies in Las Vegas and Online, but for the second straight year we didn't sell a single one in New York City. Hopefully we can figure it out.

[KJ Duke]

You have 4 clear-cut winning products:

1) The Main Event, now the only of its kind in the industry and the standard for all high stakes baseball players.
2) The ancillary live event high-dollar and auction leagues, which seem to be growing every year.
3) The draft champ format, everyone's favorite preseason prep tool.
4) The online championship, which hits a key mass market price point and has proven popular.

That is a solid and diversified roster. You can keep beating yourself up trying to revive products that are going in the wrong direction, but from a business standpoint the strategy of choice is to focus more resources on winning products, shed the losers and keep doing R&D on new products. Most businesses have marginally-profitable or worse products for which they're reluctant to cut the cord, even though they should. Not only do they provide no economic return, they waste management time.

How does Primetime become successful?
• Merge it into the OCS and make it a $350 price point.

How does the Main become more successful?
• Create bigger carrots and Incentivize multiple teams. As is, you've got a lot of players spending valuable and finite time in Vegas drafting teams that are unprofitable for you when they could be taking more Main Event teams, auction teams or higher stakes teams, all of which are profitable. No business should have unprofitable products taking up shelf space, but it's even more damning when those products are taking dollars directly the sale of highly-profitable products.

[Bronx Yankees]

There was no smaller field this year than the Primetime, with only 204 participants. Still, people didn't jump in. But it's on us to make this work and hopefully we can make this work better at the live events. No doubt that these were enjoyable 3-hour quickies in Las Vegas and Online, but for the second straight year we didn't sell a single one in New York City. Hopefully we can figure it out.

Having drafted in NYC the last two years, it definitely seemed that the interest was focused on 15-team leagues (Main Event and higher satellites) and auctions, all of which sold out pretty quickly from what I recall.

I like the 15-team format better, and so I just don't see myself paying a comparable amount of money for a 12-team entry if I can use that money on a 15-team entry. I also may jump into my first live auction next year, so I'm not sure a 12-team entry is in my immediate future regardless.

That being said, I think the biggest issue right now is that among the longstanding players who attend the live drafts, there appears to be a preference for the 15-team format over the 12-team format. I know that is not universal, and that is fine, but at practically the same price points ($1,600 v. $1,500 last year), the two formats compete head-to-head and even with a stronger ROI due to less participants, the preference for the Main Event over the Primetime was significant. Therefore, it seems to me that if the NFBC wants to grow the 12-team format, it either needs to distinguish it from the Main Event (either on price, rules, or both) or really grow the format with folks that currently do not play in the higher-stakes entries.

In terms of recruiting new folks to the format, has the NFBC thought about expanding the concept it is using now with the Tuesday night daily fantasy contests? Specifically, I mean the idea of offering as a prize a Main Event entry as opposed to straight cash. For instance, if you keep the Prime Time price at $1,500, maybe offer a league winner of an Online Championship league the option of the current $1,400 cash prize or a $1,500 entry to next year's Primetime. This concept could be expanded to other formats as well. Take the Draft Championship leagues. Those $150 leagues pay $1,000 to league winners. Maybe offer league winners a choice of the $1,000 cash prize or $1,100 (or something) credit towards a live event or online Main Event or Primetime league. In other words, make it easier for the wider range of players competing in Online Championship and Draft Championship leagues to step up to the higher-price formats. For some, this option might not matter. But I have to think some Draft Championship league winners pocket their $1,000 check in October and are not quite ready to cut a $1,500 or $1,600 check to the NFBC for a single live event. Give them an incentive to take a entry at a higher-stakes league instead of the cash pay-out and you might get more folks trying the live format for the first time. I know psychologically, taking that step up from a $150 or $350 entry point to $1,500 or $1,600 is difficult for some (I was going to suggest a lower priced event to give folks the taste of live drafting - which is awesome - but based on Greg's post above I guess the lower priced events do not work economically).

Good luck.

Mike

[Money]

The bottom line is that the only way to grow the main events is through the 12 team format. It’s what more players can compete at. The churn level is significantly reduced. You want to keep players around. Its similar to the daily game, the longer you can keep them around the more revenue you will generate. The 12 team game is your ticket to growth and I say that from a business standpoint Greg. My idea may not be the right one but you need to come with one that is.

I doubt you can sustain continued growth within the Main Event format simply by eliminating the 12 teamer. Both are great games and there is room for both.

The rules are just fine by the way. Although a (minor) pitching change on Friday's would only enhance both events.

[King of Queens]

Simple solution: bring back the Roman Numeral marketing

#XII

[King of Queens]

Greg, how many unique owners do you have for the main event? Same question for the Primetime.

[King of Queens]

There was no smaller field this year than the Primetime, with only 204 participants. Still, people didn't jump in. But it's on us to make this work and hopefully we can make this work better at the live events. No doubt that these were enjoyable 3-hour quickies in Las Vegas and Online, but for the second straight year we didn't sell a single one in New York City. Hopefully we can figure it out.

Even at 204 teams, the ROI opportunity most likely drove sales. How many people took a team (or more than a few) with that specific opportunity in mind?

[KJ Duke]

Simple solution: bring back the Roman Numeral marketing

#XII

Let's start with a small test run ... "Can We Make the NFBC Primetime Better II"

You make a good point KOQ on the 204 number, the higher ROI probably added a good number of those 204 as did the Lindy $75k bonus opportunity ... wasting resources to prop up a product in decline from very unprofitable to marginally unprofitable. Not good business.

[King of Queens]

I'll piggyback on two ideas presented here:

(1) Merge the Primetime into the Online Championship (you'll obviously need a new name)

(2) Offer a higher price point for the live 12-team events

You need the masses to prop up an overall prize, and you already have that with the $350 Online Championship. However, for obvious reasons, you can't do a live event for $350/team. Figure out the minimum price you can offer ($1000?), and make these leagues eligible for the same overall prizes as the $350 teams but with higher league prizes. With a massive grand prize -- which you've never been able to offer -- you might have some success.

You're already doing this with the Draft Championship ($150, $400, $1000) and the Auction Championship ($1200, $2500). If you really want to take another shot at a live 12-team event, this is the most logical plan to me.

[KJ Duke]

I'll piggyback on two ideas presented here:

(1) Merge the Primetime into the Online Championship (you'll obviously need a new name)

(2) Offer a higher price point for the live events

You need the masses to prop up an overall prize, and you already have that with the $350 Online Championship. However, for obvious reasons, you can't do a live event for $350/team. Figure out the minimum price you can offer ($1000?), and make these leagues eligible for the same overall prizes as the $350 teams but with higher league prizes. With a massive grand prize -- which you've never been able to offer -- you might have some success.

You're already doing this with the Draft Championship ($150, $400, $1000) and the Auction Championship ($1200, $2500). If you really want to take another shot at a live 12-team event, this is the most logical plan to me.

Funny, I was just going to suggest the same. Have an overall Primetime contest with a $350 entry, then have a live option PrimetimePlus at $1,000 with 80% of the extra $650 per team plowed into higher league-only prizes.

[Greg Ambrosius]

I'll piggyback on two ideas presented here:

(1) Merge the Primetime into the Online Championship (you'll obviously need a new name)

(2) Offer a higher price point for the live 12-team events

You need the masses to prop up an overall prize, and you already have that with the $350 Online Championship. However, for obvious reasons, you can't do a live event for $350/team. Figure out the minimum price you can offer ($1000?), and make these leagues eligible for the same overall prizes as the $350 teams but with higher league prizes. With a massive grand prize -- which you've never been able to offer -- you might have some success.

You're already doing this with the Draft Championship ($150, $400, $1000) and the Auction Championship ($1200, $2500). If you really want to take another shot at a live 12-team event, this is the most logical plan to me.

Well, this probably makes the most sense if we decide not to prop up a standalone contest. Right now in the Online Championship each league contributes $1,260 towards the overall prize pool. So with that in mind, you could easily run a $750 entry fee live league and still have around $6,000 left for league prizes or run a $1,000 entry and have $8,340 in league prizes. It certainly allows for bigger league prizes than any other national contest we run while also allowing the grand prize to easily top $100,000. I mean, at $750 per team you could have $4,000 for 1st place in the league and $2,000 for 2nd, while at $1,000 per live event you could have $5,600 for 1st and $2,740 for 2nd. Those are solid league prizes, while also allowing each owner to now compete for $100,000+ in grand prizes.

Not a bad plan.

Economically for the live events we can make this work in Las Vegas if we host all of these in the Penthouse Suites at the Bellagio rather than in the ballrooms. Those worked out great for the 12-team leagues last year and it would make it much more doable for us at this price point. It definitely has some merit and the larger league prizes with a smaller entry fee definitely has some merit. And I think we'd all like to have the grand prize for this event over $100,000, which it already is on pace to be.

I think it has potential. Thanks for the suggestion.

[COZ]

Great idea. Love the price point, not sure which entry fee I would prefer but that $750.00 entry fee has a nice feel to it. My concern...be careful what you wish for...will this inevitably lead to ultimate cannibalization of the Main Event? I could see people taking 2 entries fees in place of a Main Event Entry. As a guy who never plays the OL Championships, this is intriguing to me and gives it a big Event feel to it. Just my thoughts...

COZ

[Greg Ambrosius]

Great idea. Love the price point, not sure which entry fee I would prefer but that $750.00 entry fee has a nice feel to it. My concern...be careful what you wish for...will this inevitably lead to ultimate cannibalization of the Main Event? I could see people taking 2 entries fees in place of a Main Event Entry. As a guy who never plays the OL Championships, this is intriguing to me and gives it a big Event feel to it. Just my thoughts...

COZ

Again, I don't see how you can do a live event at $750 per team in New York or even Chicago unless you do a BYO on food and drink. Anyone can do the math and see what is left for costs that include ballrooms, facilitators, Internet, screens, staff and then some food and beverage. It's not doable unless like I said we squeezed out multiple suites in Las Vegas and did it that way. But the concept is intriguing and worth exploring.

My goal is to still have a live 12-team event with a major grand prize because that's how we're going to attract new users to the NFBC. It's tough to jump right into a 15-team Main Event at $1600 per team. And sometimes we lose folks who get burned out by the 15-team format and want to remain in the NFBC but can't do that format anymore. This is a solid alternative. So there are many reasons to figure this out and to keep a live 12-team Main Event option. I'm not sure if this is the answer, but a combination of online and live is what the Primetime has become anyways.

Could we cannibalize the Main Event? Sure we could. But that's what people said about the Online Championship. And both events have grown through the years, so hopefully this trend will continue. The Main Event remains our signature event and the most prestigious event to win in the season-long fantasy baseball space.