Connect with us

Business

Is Peyton Manning’s Sports Media Company Omaha Productions The Next Billion Dollar Company?

mm

Published

on

In September 2020, sports media executives Jamie Horowitz and Josh Pyatt boarded a plane from Los Angeles to Denver with a very specific goal. They wanted to ask former NFL quarterback and Hall of Famer Peyton Manning to launch his own media production company.

Jamie Horowitz, former VP at ESPN and president at Fox Sports, is responsible for developing some of the most popular sports programs today, including Undisputed, First Take, and SportsNation. He had played an instrumental role in the rise of sports media personalities Colin Cowherd, Stephen A Smith, and Shannon Sharpe. Pyatt had been the agent that helped LeBron James and Kobe Bryant build their massive media companies. 

Horowitz believed that Manning had a point of view on the world that sounded like a company’s mission statement – Manning wanted to uplift and unify people (that did end up the mission statement and is on the website).

Horowitz and Pyatt were some of the more successful players in sports media, yet Manning wasn’t convinced at first. He had dedicated his life to being the best football player he could be. He didn’t know anything about running a production company.

“From what everyone had told me, he wasn’t interested,” said Pyatt.

But “everyone” didn’t deter Pyatt and Horowitz.

Manning did his research and eventually decided to try his hand at leading a media company. And to the surprise of basically no one, in a matter of months, the new company, named Omaha Productions after Manning’s famed audible call, had become one of the world’s fastest-growing media properties.

In its first 3 years, the programming developed by Omaha Productions has represented a departure from traditional sports media. Instead of men in suits discussing stats in fancy studios, Omaha makes more casual television. Shows like ManningCast feature Peyton and Eli mostly in quarterzips and they broadcast from a garage and a basement. Omaha’s most successful show on Netflix – Quarterback – documents NFL star players on the gridiron but also playing with their kids and taking out the trash. Omaha Productions content seems to work particularly well for a new generation – the average viewer of ManningCast is six years younger than the average Monday Night Football viewer (Netflix wouldnt disclose the demographics on Quarterback).

The unscripted and unfiltered style of Omaha programming seems to have been inspired by shows that Jamie Horowitz has been developing on NBC, ESPN, FOX, and DAZN for over 20 years. Horowitz is credited with reimagining sports TV in the 2000s by producing shows that feature big personalities and spirited talk — a style of programming that’s become the norm on TV today. Horowitz has guided Omaha to make shows where the on-camera talent is the key to the show and often the executive producer.

Earlier this year, Horowitz and Manning added a 3rd partner to Omaha when Peter Chernin’s North Road company invested in Omaha. Chernin has had a magic touch with a variety of media companies and connected quickly with Manning and Horowitz. The partnership was intended to supercharge the growth of Omaha and drive more scripted content deals.

In his recent newsletter Huddle Up, sports business expert Joe Pompliano recognized how Omaha Productions was shifting viewer trends and predicted that it could soon become a dominant player in sports media.

“I don’t see any reason why Omaha can’t be a $1 billion-plus company,” Pompliano wrote. “Streaming services are acquiring unscripted sports content at a premium and Omaha’s close relationship with ESPN provides them with a unique advantage.”

The combination of Manning and Horowitz, guided by the leadership of Pyatt, and the partnership of Peter Chernin makes us believe that Omaha Productions’ meteoric rise is only the beginning for the brand — and that a $1 billion valuation may be around the corner.

The idea of Bigtime Daily landed this engineer cum journalist from a multi-national company to the digital avenue. Matthew brought life to this idea and rendered all that was necessary to create an interactive and attractive platform for the readers. Apart from managing the platform, he also contributes his expertise in business niche.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business

Click for Counsel: YesLawyer Wants to Make Lawyers as Accessible as Wi-Fi

mm

Published

on

Photo Courtesy of: YesLawyer

Byline: Andi Stark

For many people facing a legal problem, the most difficult part is not understanding their rights but finding a lawyer willing to speak with them in the first place. Long wait times, unclear pricing, and administrative hurdles often delay even the most basic consultations. YesLawyer, an AI-enabled plaintiff firm operating across all 50 states, is testing whether technology can shorten that gap.

Founded in 2024 by 25-year-old entrepreneur Rob Epstein, the platform offers free intake, automated screening, and, in many cases, same-day conversations with licensed attorneys. The idea is simple: reduce the friction between a client’s first request for help and an actual legal discussion. In this interview, Epstein explains how the system works, where artificial intelligence fits into the process, and what problems the company is trying to address in the broader legal system

Q: When you say you want lawyers to be “as accessible as Wi-Fi,” what does that mean in practical terms?

A: It’s a way of describing speed and availability. Someone dealing with a workplace dispute, a serious injury, or an immigration issue should be able to move from an online form or phone call to a real conversation with counsel in hours, not weeks. YesLawyer is structured so that a client begins with a free case evaluation, goes through automated conflict checks and basic screening, and, in many instances, speaks with a lawyer the same day.

Q: How does the process work once someone contacts the platform?

A: We use a structured workflow. It starts with a short questionnaire and an initial conversation to capture basic facts. That information feeds into conflict checks and internal review. The system then proposes a match with a licensed attorney and provides a calendar link for a virtual consultation, often within 24 hours. After the meeting, the client receives a written legal plan outlining next steps, deadlines, and estimated fees.

Q: Where does artificial intelligence fit into that process, and where does it stop?

A: AI is used for organizing and routing information, not for giving legal advice. It helps with conflict checks at scale, case categorization, and structured summaries so attorneys can focus on the substance of the matter. Every consultation is conducted by a licensed lawyer, and all decisions about strategy or next steps are made by humans.

Q: What problem is this model trying to solve in the current legal system?

A: Delay and cost are still major barriers. Many civil plaintiffs face long waits just to get a first appointment, along with high retainers and hourly billing that make early legal advice risky. We try to respond with faster consultations, flat-fee options, and financing. The idea is to remove administrative friction so lawyers spend less time on logistics and more time speaking with clients.

Q: Some critics say platforms like this blur the line between a technology company and a law firm. How do you describe YesLawyer?

A: We describe ourselves as a national, AI-enabled plaintiff firm that connects clients with independent attorneys. That structure does raise regulatory questions, especially around responsibility and oversight. We focus on licensing verification, attorney-written case plans, and clear communication about fees and services.

Q: You’ve said the main bottleneck is “systems” rather than people. What do you mean by that?

A: The issue isn’t that lawyers don’t want to help more people. It’s that the systems around them make it hard to scale their time. Intake, scheduling, and document handling take hours. Automating those parts means attorneys can handle more matters without being overwhelmed by repetitive tasks.

Q: Does this model risk favoring only the most profitable cases?

A: That’s a real concern in legal technology. Automation often works best for repeatable, high-volume disputes. Our view is that lowering administrative cost can actually make it easier to take on smaller or more complex cases that might otherwise be turned away. Whether that holds over time depends on the data.

Measuring Impact Over Time

YesLawyer’s attempt to compress the timeline between inquiry and consultation reflects broader changes in how legal services are being delivered. As artificial intelligence becomes more common in administrative work, firms are experimenting with new ways to reduce wait times and clarify costs.

The company’s early growth suggests that many clients value faster access to an initial conversation, even before considering long-term representation. Whether this platform-based model becomes widely adopted or remains one of several emerging approaches will depend on regulatory developments, lawyer participation, and measurable outcomes for clients. For now, YesLawyer’s experiment highlights a central question in modern legal practice: how quickly can help realistically be made available to the people who need it.

Continue Reading

Trending