A federal judge indicated on Wednesday that he is likely to overturn the $4.7 billion damages award recently granted by a jury to NFL Sunday Ticket subscribers.
The verdict was returned last month in a case alleging that the National Football League (NFL) conspired with DirecTV to artificially inflate the price of the Sunday Ticket bundle.
During a hearing in Los Angeles, U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez addressed the NFL’s motion for judgment as a matter of law or, alternatively, for a new trial.
While no formal ruling was issued, Judge Gutierrez expressed skepticism about the jury’s damages award, stating that the amount calculated—$4,707,259,944.62—was unsupported by the evidence presented at trial.
Judge Gutierrez criticized the jury’s approach, noting that they used a damages model that had not been introduced during the trial.
“There’s no doubt about what they did,” he said. “They didn’t follow the instructions.”
The key issue is whether Judge Gutierrez will rule in favor of the NFL or order a new trial. Brian Stekloff, representing the NFL, argued that the plaintiffs’ damages models were inadequate and lacked a factual basis.
He contended that the jury’s model was flawed and not grounded in reliable evidence.
Stekloff highlighted discrepancies in the damages calculations, including the jury’s reliance on a comparison of NFL pricing with college football, which he described as a “fantasy world” scenario.
The jury’s model involved subtracting an average “discount” from the listed price of Sunday Ticket and multiplying this by the number of subscribers—a method Stekloff criticized as irrational and not supported by trial evidence.
Plaintiffs’ attorney Mark Seltzer defended the jury’s decision, arguing that jurors have the right to determine a fair damages amount within the range of evidence presented.
He likened the NFL’s situation to college football’s transition from pooled TV rights to individual negotiations, asserting that this supported the plaintiffs’ expert testimony.
Judge Gutierrez appeared unconvinced by the plaintiffs’ arguments, particularly the comparison to college football.
He noted that even as a Notre Dame fan, he must subscribe separately to watch some games, questioning the relevance of the college football comparison.
The subscribers’ case alleged that the NFL, in conjunction with DirecTV, CBS, and Fox, engaged in anticompetitive practices to control the pricing of the Sunday Ticket bundle.
They presented internal documents and communications to support claims that the NFL manipulated pricing to secure high advertising revenues and exclusive broadcasting deals.
The NFL’s defense also pointed out that the league had resisted attempts to lower prices and rejected proposals to offer more flexible subscription options, including a reduced rate and the ability to subscribe only to specific teams.
As the case progresses, the court’s forthcoming decision on whether to overturn the verdict or grant a new trial will be closely watched by legal experts and industry observers.
