The original numbers released showed Bad Bunny with respectable viewership on for the Super Bowl halftime.
Meanwhile, TPUSA took a chunk of the viewers who tuned in to their halftime presentation. Over 25 million viewers watched the TPUSA pro-American lineup.
But Samba TV reported startling numbers this morning.
According to Samba, NEARLY HALF of the Super Bowl audience tuned out at halftime rather than watch Hispanic act Bad Bunny whose entire act was in Spanish.
This was a shocking report.
The Super Bowl lost 22.1 million viewers during the halftime entertainment.
Actually more people watched bad bunny than the game.
“Bad Bunny‘s Super Bowl halftime show — or the “Benito Bowl,” as it was affectionally named by his fans — reached an average of 128.2 million viewers on Sunday
The original numbers released showed Bad Bunny with respectable viewership on for the Super Bowl halftime.
Meanwhile, TPUSA took a chunk of the viewers who tuned in to their halftime presentation. Over 25 million viewers watched the TPUSA pro-American lineup.
But Samba TV reported startling numbers this morning.
According to Samba, NEARLY HALF of the Super Bowl audience tuned out at halftime rather than watch Hispanic act Bad Bunny whose entire act was in Spanish.
This was a shocking report.
The Super Bowl lost 22.1 million viewers during the halftime entertainment.
Actually more people watched bad bunny than the game.
“Bad Bunny‘s Super Bowl halftime show — or the “Benito Bowl,” as it was affectionally named by his fans — reached an average of 128.2 million viewers on Sunday
RE: NFL claims Bad Bunny will deliver 'united moment' at Super Bowl Halftime Show
(02-10-2026 09:07 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote: In addition to 128M watching live the Bad Bunny halftime show currently has 62M views on YouTube compared to 21M for the toilet paper USA show.
The original numbers released showed Bad Bunny with respectable viewership on for the Super Bowl halftime.
Meanwhile, TPUSA took a chunk of the viewers who tuned in to their halftime presentation. Over 25 million viewers watched the TPUSA pro-American lineup.
But Samba TV reported startling numbers this morning.
According to Samba, NEARLY HALF of the Super Bowl audience tuned out at halftime rather than watch Hispanic act Bad Bunny whose entire act was in Spanish.
This was a shocking report.
The Super Bowl lost 22.1 million viewers during the halftime entertainment.
Actually more people watched bad bunny than the game.
“Bad Bunny‘s Super Bowl halftime show — or the “Benito Bowl,” as it was affectionally named by his fans — reached an average of 128.2 million viewers on Sunday
RE: NFL claims Bad Bunny will deliver 'united moment' at Super Bowl Halftime Show
(02-11-2026 10:15 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:
This is where the right gets it all twisted. Clay points out 10 million drop!!! Okay, but a drop from 133 million to 123 million...
I think Bad Bunny sucks balls. I don't think he has any talent based on what I saw. If your argument is "well, it's hard to do a live show...". THAT'S THE POINT! If you sound great in the studio but then sound like dogshit live...then you are not talented.
Besides that, that's a lot of eyeballs watching Bad Bunny. TPUSA wasn't being patriotic to try to eclipse the the half time show out of a sense of patriotic duty. It was all about the money! Get that several million views, sell whatever adds, sponsorships, etc and go with it. You give the correct message, conservatives who are also a part of the religious right are the MOST LOYAL CUSTOMERS out there.
RE: NFL claims Bad Bunny will deliver 'united moment' at Super Bowl Halftime Show
Miko, do you think TPUSA did the alternate halftime show to make money? I don't.
I think they did it to give their typical audience an alternative to Bad Bunny. If it had been a SB country music halftime show, I doubt they would have even done a show.
But now, it was so successful, they seem to be planning to do it every year, going forward. But I don't think for a second that their prime motivation was money.
I also don't recall any ads when I watched it live on YT.
(This post was last modified: 02-11-2026 10:43 AM by TripleA.)
RE: NFL claims Bad Bunny will deliver 'united moment' at Super Bowl Halftime Show
(02-11-2026 10:42 AM)TripleA Wrote: Miko, do you think TPUSA did the alternate halftime show to make money? I don't.
I think they did it to give their typical audience an alternative to Bad Bunny. If it had been a SB country music halftime show, I doubt they would have even done a show.
But now, it was so successful, they seem to be planning to do it every year, going forward. But I don't think for a second that their prime motivation was money.
Fully agree that it wasn't about the money (edit: this year).
I do wonder, however, how many mainstream artists are willing to go on to their platform and potentially alienate a chunk of their fanbase. But, to be honest, I wonder about that with the NFL show as well. You may start seeing fewer established stars playing it because of the risks involved.
(This post was last modified: 02-11-2026 10:45 AM by mlb.)
RE: NFL claims Bad Bunny will deliver 'united moment' at Super Bowl Halftime Show
(02-11-2026 10:42 AM)TripleA Wrote: Miko, do you think TPUSA did the alternate halftime show to make money? I don't.
I think they did it to give their typical audience an alternative to Bad Bunny. If it had been a SB country music halftime show, I doubt they would have even done a show.
But now, it was so successful, they seem to be planning to do it every year, going forward. But I don't think for a second that their prime motivation was money.
I also don't recall any ads when I watched it live on YT.
Yes, absolutely. Based on the article below Charlie Kirk was worth $12 million. In no way am I begrudging anyone from making money if they are putting in the work and offering something that people want. He wasn't rich either. However, you almost never (probably never) see a leader of even the most noble cause/movement out there live like a middle class person or lower. These guys aren't taking vows of poverty to push EVERYTHING into the cause. Par for the course for these guys - they live very comfortable lives.
TPUSA didn't do this as a give back to the fans. This was a prospecting venture. If they did it - how many would want to see it? How successful could it be? How much can they make? That's why next year will be so much better. Because they didn't put a lot of resources into it. It was all about exploring the market.
RE: NFL claims Bad Bunny will deliver 'united moment' at Super Bowl Halftime Show
(02-11-2026 10:45 AM)mlb Wrote:
(02-11-2026 10:42 AM)TripleA Wrote: Miko, do you think TPUSA did the alternate halftime show to make money? I don't.
I think they did it to give their typical audience an alternative to Bad Bunny. If it had been a SB country music halftime show, I doubt they would have even done a show.
But now, it was so successful, they seem to be planning to do it every year, going forward. But I don't think for a second that their prime motivation was money.
Fully agree that it wasn't about the money (edit: this year).
I do wonder, however, how many mainstream artists are willing to go on to their platform and potentially alienate a chunk of their fanbase. But, to be honest, I wonder about that with the NFL show as well. You may start seeing fewer established stars playing it because of the risks involved.
Very few chicks with green hair and nose rings, or dudes who like dudes are listening to Cody Johnson or Morgan Wallen. There is whole genre of music out there that is getting excluded from "The Mainstream" now. Some could say two genres. The other being Rock Genre. The top five music styles currently are Rap/HipHop, which should be classified as two, Rock, Pop, Country and EDM. If the Super Bowl is going to continue to just have one there is a lot of opportunity to run alternative programming to gain eyes.
RE: NFL claims Bad Bunny will deliver 'united moment' at Super Bowl Halftime Show
(02-11-2026 11:00 AM)miko33 Wrote:
(02-11-2026 10:42 AM)TripleA Wrote: Miko, do you think TPUSA did the alternate halftime show to make money? I don't.
I think they did it to give their typical audience an alternative to Bad Bunny. If it had been a SB country music halftime show, I doubt they would have even done a show.
But now, it was so successful, they seem to be planning to do it every year, going forward. But I don't think for a second that their prime motivation was money.
I also don't recall any ads when I watched it live on YT.
Yes, absolutely. Based on the article below Charlie Kirk was worth $12 million. In no way am I begrudging anyone from making money if they are putting in the work and offering something that people want. He wasn't rich either. However, you almost never (probably never) see a leader of even the most noble cause/movement out there live like a middle class person or lower. These guys aren't taking vows of poverty to push EVERYTHING into the cause. Par for the course for these guys - they live very comfortable lives.
TPUSA didn't do this as a give back to the fans. This was a prospecting venture. If they did it - how many would want to see it? How successful could it be? How much can they make? That's why next year will be so much better. Because they didn't put a lot of resources into it. It was all about exploring the market.
I don't believe for a second that it was a prospecting venture. I bet if it had been a SB performer acceptable to their followers, they wouldn't have done it.
I also disagree that their mission is to make money. It's simply a byproduct of the effort.
IMO, you don't understand Kirk or the mission. And I'm not into it at all, but I've seen enough interviews with Kirk before he died to think that he was on a mission, and it wasn't to become rich. JMO, but I don't care enough to take it further.