A Trick That Lets You Get NFL Sunday Ticket Without DirecTV

John wanted online access to DirecTV’s NFL Sunday Ticket, which lets viewers watch just about any NFL game that isn’t blacked out, but he didn’t want to have to order DirecTV for the privilege. When he read that the company started selling the service online — but only to those who are restricted from ordering DirecTV — he thought of a ruse that would get the provider to give him the nod of approval.

He told DirecTV that his landlord wouldn’t allow a DirecTV dish on the home he’s renting:

You had reported last month that NFL Sunday Ticket would be available this year from DirecTV WITHOUT getting a DirecTV dish/subscription. The service would be streamed over your internet connection or mobile phone through the inernet, no dish required. Later, details emerged from DirecTV that this service would ONLY be available to persons who cannot get full DirecTV service at their residence, through dish restrictions or lack of sightlines. Customers who wanted to sign up for the internet-only service would have to call in to DirecTV and “verify” to a CSR through a series of questions that they are not eligible for DirecTV service, and DirecTV is not planning to advertise this new program. Well, I went through the trouble and got the skinny for your readers.

I called in and talked to a nice lady who actually had an inkling of what this was all about. I gave her my story unbidden about being denied the right to place a satellite dish on my rental property, which she accepted. After placing me on hold to check with her supervisor, she directed me to a web address hidden on the DirecTV server, wherein I could sign-up for the internet-only service. Easy sign-up, one simply has to attest that one does not have DirecTV service at their address, has NEVER had it at their address, and CANNOT have it at their address. The cost is $350, which is outrageous of course, but football fanatics like our family will pay it. After payment, you’re in, and able to access the video streams. The internal address is here:


Hopefully your readers who wanted this service but are bummed about the prohibitive requirements DirecTV looked to be putting on it will be able to sign-up for the service without much hassle.

If you try this, let us know how it works out.

PREVIOUSLY: $350 And An Internet Connection Will Get You NFL Sunday Ticket Without Subscribing To DirecTV


Edit Your Comment

  1. Trollez says:

    Love football, but I will just get my updates through my fantasy site and halftime recaps. Way too much money to stare at the computer when football is on.

    • rpm773 says:

      So is it legit or not? I don’t want to drop $350, only to have my service cut a few weeks later when DTV decides that anyone signing up via this website shouldn’t get the service.

      Actually, $350 is little too much for me to justify spending to sit around all Sunday. I’d be courting trouble from the wife.

  2. apd09 says:

    how long until the first story is sent in regarding someone who did this same thing, was caught, and now Direct TV will not refund their money?

    • aaron8301 says:

      Do you really think DirecTV will take the time to research through the County Auditor who the owner of the renter’s house is, contact said owner, and ask said owner if he will grant them permission to install a dish? They don’t even do this for renters that DO try to sign up with regular DirecTV service (they require the customer obtain a permission letter from their landlord), why would they do it for a customer that is going to give them $350 just for access to some online content?

      The reason they have this restriction is probably because the content provider requires it, not because DirecTV requires it. Thus, I think they’ll look the other way so long as they get their $350.

    • Franklin Comes Alive! says:

      If my wife says I can’t have DirecTV, am I really lying on the form?

  3. Loias supports harsher punishments against corporations says:

    I guess it’s not all that outrageous when football fanatics like your family are willing to pay for it.

  4. Dyscord says:

    It’s good that they offer it, but I still say that 350 bucks for a webstream is ridiculous.

    • doctor_cos wants you to remain calm says:

      How about $60 to stream Wrestlemania? Makes $350 for all the games seem economical.

      And NO it was not me.

  5. ryan89 says:

    Except I thought a landlord could not deny a tenant a satellite dish? Any DirecTV sales rep should know this.

    • RevancheRM says:

      Oooh, I’d like to see the federal law that prevents me from forbidding alterations to my property. If its in the rental contract, then I’m at risk of losing a potential renter…my choice. Not the governments’.

      /apostrophe is correct

    • RevancheRM says:

      Oooh, I’d like to see the federal law that prevents me from forbidding alterations to my property. If its in the rental contract, then I’m at risk of losing a potential renter…my choice. Not the governments’.

      /apostrophe is correct

      • Superunlikely says:
        • thrillcook says:

          wow, that was quick. Face! to that guy

          • RevancheRM says:

            Actually, you just got ‘faced’. Changing the intent of my statement and then disproving it is not a ‘burn’.

        • Liam Kinkaid says:

          From that link:

          Q: Are there restrictions that may be placed on residents of rental property?

          A: Yes. A restriction necessary to prevent damage to leased property may be reasonable. For example, tenants could be prohibited from drilling holes through exterior walls or through the roof…

          RevancheRM said “I’d like to see the federal law that prevents me from forbidding alterations to my property.” This specific question and answer does not refute the assertion that RevanceRM made that there is no federal law forbidding alterations.

      • fatediesel says:

        It’s in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and was amended in 1999 to include rental properties. As long as the tenant has an exclusive area to place the dish, such as a patio, balcony, or deck, a landlord cannot forbid dish service.

      • Dutchess says:

        Actually, I would disagree. Your apostraphe is not correct. That’s the plural possesive.

        When would you ever say “the governments” when referring to a single legislative body?

        You could be referring to multiple governments and those governments’ authority BUT that wouldn’t make sense in the contect of your reply.

        So wouldn’t “Not the government’s” be correct.

        • aaron8301 says:

          Your last sentence was a question but was not proceeded by a question mark.

          If you’re going to be a grammar cop, you should police yourself as well.

      • tbax929 says:

        You’re incorrect; I’m sure you know that since you’ve already been corrected.

        However, some renters don’t have a line of sight to get a satellite anyway. This provision would be good for such a person.

      • mrscoach says:

        I am assuming you meant more than one government, so plural possessive would be correct, as you have noted. This is if you are separating local, state, and federal government bodies, which are generally grouped into one “government” entity.

    • Liam Kinkaid says:

      There are enough provisions in the FCC rules regarding satellite dishes that many renters are not able to take advantage of satellite TV, not including line of sight issues. For example, you probably can’t drill into the structure’s wall, so if you don’t have a balcony that can accommodate non permanent fixtures, you’re out of luck. Fortunately for me, my apartment can get a good line of sight and my balcony has metal railing that a bracket can be attached to. Unfortunately for me, my complex is now charging a mandatory $45 a month for cable, so it’s not really economically feasible to have both. :(

      • ElleAnn says:

        Mandatory cable tv? THAT should be illegal! I have never subscribed to cable, and never plan to.

      • Bizdady says:

        Ya I rent a duplex and I get charged a basic cable fee then have to get extra services from the cable company. Kinda sucks but the wifey really likes the place so I have to make this sacrifice :(

    • MaxH42 thinks RecordStoreToughGuy got a raw deal says:

      It has to be on a part of the building that is “within the exclusive use or control of the antenna user”, like a private balcony. The landlord does not have to allow you to use the roof, for example. http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html#QA

    • keepntabs says:

      I am not sure about dishes for satellite service, but a landlord cannot deny a tenant from putting up an antenna for OTA television reception.

  6. Geekybiker says:

    Or you can probably say you have trees blocking the southern view on your property and can’t get a good enough signal.

  7. John Gage says:

    So the OP doesn’t want to order Direct TV so he (apparently) lies to Direct TV to get NFL Sunday Ticket.

    If we are saying it is okay for the OP to lie to Direct TV, I would assume that it would be okay for Direct TV to lie to their customers.

  8. quail says:

    In the 90s I had a step-cousin who got an address in Wyoming, ordered a dish for his mobile home, but lived in L.A. In the end he could take his box out of his mobile home and set it up anywhere to watch any blacked out game he wanted. This of course was before all of the packages the satellite people require you to buy now.

  9. seth.gl says:

    The NFL sells it own online package for $250 called gamepass that is available to most of the world outside of North America. If you are technically savvy enough to setup your computer to use a proxy, there is no reason why you can’t buy the service directly from the NFL and save $100.

  10. AnonymousCoward says:

    All I gotta say is that $350 is a whole lotta football love…

    • tbax929 says:

      I paid $179 for the baseball package, but I think it’s a much better value. Almost every one of my home team’s games are on it (162 a season). If you multiply that by the number of teams, that’s a lot of bang for the buck.

      I don’t think I’d spend $350 for the NFL package, even if I were a big fan. There just aren’t enough games to justify that price tag.

  11. Pooterfish says:

    $350? For that money, I could take my sons to one football game!

    • Gramin says:

      Hahaha… maybe to a Detroit Lions game but defintely not to a Steelers game… or Bears… or Packers… or Cowboys… or most any other team.

  12. Blious says:

    Chances are DirecTV will see more and more do this (as stories get told like this) and try to stem the tide a bit

    • Griking says:

      Yup, I’m sure that somebody that works for DirectTV has already read this post by now.

    • Gulliver says:

      The cost to get it over DirectV is LESS. DirectV owns the right to exclusive distribution, so they get paid wither way. DirectV will currently give you 5 months free service if you sign up for the Sunday ticket.

  13. MedicallyNeedy says:

    Sprint Palm Pre had a free NFL app that allowed you to track games live, play highlight videos and even watch some games live. It’s buried somewhere in the app catalog or just gone 1 year into my 2 year promotion!

    • Im Just Saying says:

      Verizon does too. I haven’t watched a game but I did watch a stream of NFL Network the other day and it was seamless.

  14. mistersmith says:

    Anyone want to go in on shares? 7 people go in $50 and share a Sunday Ticket? Hopefully they won’t notice all the simultaneous access from different IPs.

    Watching football on the West Coast sucks!

  15. Blow a fuse? I can fix that... says:

    Wait… People are willing to lie and cheat for the privilege of paying $350 for a crummy web stream? Quick, anyone know a good stock broker? I gotta buy shares in DirecTV!

  16. ma1234 says:

    So a blog that is all about “exposing” companies for lying to consumers, is perfectly okay showing consumers how to lie and steal from corporations? Seriously? Shame on you.

  17. supersat says:

    Blackout restrictions still apply, but I bet you could get around those by buying a Visa/MC gift card for $350, registering it with a fake address out in the middle of nowhere, and providing that as your payment method.

  18. Gulliver says:

    Or you could go ahead and get Directv and pay $50 less, AND get 5 months of all other programming FREE with current promotions. I also pay $150 for my Sunday ticket, because I tell them I will cancel it for anything more than that. They have agreed for 8 years running.

  19. Unnamed Source says:

    Given 47 C.F.R. Section 1.4000, I’d imagine this only applies to people that live in apartments with balconies that face north? It’s illegal otherwise to be denied the opportunity to install and make use of a satellite dish.

  20. DanGarion says:

    So did he lie to get the service this way?

    *and CANNOT have it at their address*

    Is this a suggestion for people to lie to get service they normally wouldn’t be able to get?