Godfrey touched on the gambling sponsors / segments, just wanted to say nothing is worse than listening to podcasts force in a gambling segment, and this is from someone who gambles a lot on sports. If I want gambling content I’ll find it, doesn’t need to be forced. Don’t make a turn like Spittin Chiclets which was great listen until it started forcing in gambling picks.
Godfrey touched on the gambling sponsors / segments, just wanted to say nothing is worse than listening to podcasts force in a gambling segment, and this is from someone who gambles a lot on sports. If I want gambling content I’ll find it, doesn’t need to be forced. Don’t make a turn like Spittin Chiclets which was great listen until it started forcing in gambling picks.
I appreciate this point. We haven't had a gambling sponsor for a while now for the reasons Steven has covered on the SW, but just a matter of personal preference, I've always felt the best use of gambling info in podcasts is to provide an entry point to talk about the game. (That's how we've most often used it, both when sponsored in years past and not.)
For sure, if Draftkings wants to throw money around then obviously secure the bag. I think referencing a spread as a talking point is certainly different ,and fine, compared to tuning in to hear about what side of the spread the hosts think is the pick though, which is usually the gateway drug to listening to someone put together a nauseating same game parlay.
Nothing is worse than hearing the people that you know that do gamble on sports talk about all of the parlays they almost hit or what games they have action on.
Godfrey touched on the gambling sponsors / segments, just wanted to say nothing is worse than listening to podcasts force in a gambling segment, and this is from someone who gambles a lot on sports. If I want gambling content I’ll find it, doesn’t need to be forced. Don’t make a turn like Spittin Chiclets which was great listen until it started forcing in gambling picks.
I appreciate this point. We haven't had a gambling sponsor for a while now for the reasons Steven has covered on the SW, but just a matter of personal preference, I've always felt the best use of gambling info in podcasts is to provide an entry point to talk about the game. (That's how we've most often used it, both when sponsored in years past and not.)
For sure, if Draftkings wants to throw money around then obviously secure the bag. I think referencing a spread as a talking point is certainly different ,and fine, compared to tuning in to hear about what side of the spread the hosts think is the pick though, which is usually the gateway drug to listening to someone put together a nauseating same game parlay.
Nothing is worse than hearing the people that you know that do gamble on sports talk about all of the parlays they almost hit or what games they have action on.