Fan Network and the choice to leave a cable broadcast

[CrownLeadSop]

Hi all,

I wrote a post for my company's blog that I thought might interest you, so I decided to share it here. Check it out: http://brandwarepr.com/2013/the-drums-of-change-roll-in-media-distribution/

I'm interested to hear your thoughts, I know it's a very polarizing issue. Keep it civil, please. :)

[Jeff Ream]

good stuff!

[garfield]

You obviously wrote this prior to the Buffalo Buffoonery, eh?

:ph34r:/>

Nice writing, though.

:thumbup:/>

[barigirl78]

Thanks for sharing your interesting piece.

I do have some thoughts on your three key points:

The Fan Network suits all of DCI’s media distribution needs:

1. It is run in-house and does not require an expensive contract with a network.

This is something that has perplexed me about DCI's ESPN2 deal. Why was it expensive for DCI? The networks bid for the rights to air various sports. They pay the sport for the rights to air it and it is their expense to produce the telecast. The sport doesn't pay the network. Is drum corps so obscure that DCI can't get any network to pay for the rights to air them? (I think I can guess the answer to that question).

2. Fans get to watch all of the content from the cable broadcast and now have access to the entire DCI library without ever having to purchase a DVD.

That's a good feature for the fan. But, there isn't any reason that this feature couldn't exist AND have a broad airing over a cable network of the finals. A lot of TV content is now available on an archived basis whether its through Netflix or Hulu or other sources. But, it also exists as a broadcast on a broad-based way.

DCI is able to tease their content for free on a public YouTube Channel that promotes their content to a broader audience.

YouTube is huge, but you generally search for what you are looking for unless you hear about it virally like that Psy video. So, I don't know how much broader the exposure of the You Tube Channel beyond current fans. It may reach fans who aren't Fan Network subscribers, but that's really it.

When DCI aired on ESPN2 September 5, 2007, Nielsen reported 518,000 viewers.

Does Fan Network have that many subscribers? Only one DCI YouTube video has more views than that (the Harlem Shake one). But, "views" include duplication because one person can watch the same video several times. Nielsen counts people only once.

There a tad over 19,000 people who have clicked that YouTube page "subscribe" button.

Some other stats from Nielsen on the telecast:

• Median Age: 43.8
  
• The WNBA playoffs, which aired earlier that night had fewer viewers than DCI (419,000)
  
• Only 47,000 of the viewers were aged 12-17 and 90,000 were aged 18-34.
  
• 39% of the viewers were aged 50+ and 54% were age 35-64
  
• Even though it was on an ESPN network, the audience was about 50/50 male vs. female
  

I've never understood why the Fan Network and a telecast like that can't co-exist. One to fulfill the needs of current fans. Another to reel in others.

Those viewing figures were pretty good for ESPN2. We should have a network paying DCI to air our activity. Not the other way around.

[skywhopper]

When DCI aired on ESPN2 September 5, 2007, Nielsen reported 518,000 viewers.

Does Fan Network have that many subscribers? Only one DCI YouTube video has more views than that (the Harlem Shake one). But, "views" include duplication because one person can watch the same video several times. Nielsen counts people only once.

Perhaps ESPN is the wrong cable network to be looking at. How about a series of one-hour episodes that feature one-on-one "competitions" between two corps performances, most likely current-year, but could be historical. Spend half an hour on each, show some of the designers thoughts, show the kids working on the show, show the most charismatic judges talking about what's important, show certain relevant techniques and what's good and bad, etc, then show the performance. Then cover the other corps similarly (or do them both in parallel). Then have judges recap and talk over the show, with cuts back ot highlights complete with analysis of forms, intonation, effect, etc, then do a reveal of the decision and scores.

You could get six to ten one-hour episodes easily out of that structure, though if you're doing it as the season is happening (which would be the most effective, IMO), you would probably only really have time to do five or six at most. But anyway, if you are doing it during the season, you could even advertise current shows and add a tour update/scores/news section and promote the heck out of finals, the theater broadcast, Fan Network, everything.

I see no reason why that show would be *all* that expensive to produce. Recording the shows would be the costliest part, but they're already doing that for Fan Network--bumping up the audio quality and adding an extra camera or two would be added costs, but less than bootstrapping an entire recording infrastructure. Add in bodycams for corps members and judges. Interviewing the designers and judges should be easy and cheap, I'm sure they love talking about what they do and their opinions and they also are going to be good at it, because they do it all the time. Members I'm sure would be happy to talk about their experiences as well. You could also do "followups" on shows that had been profiled in previous episodes, etc.

So... could such a show get enough viewership to win over a cable network like A&E or Science or some upstart smaller network looking to take risks on odd shows? If it were well produced and non-cheesy, I think it could actually be interesting to more people that would give just a live showing of Finals a shot. And as a series, it could have a chance to build some word of mouth. You only really need a couple hundred thousand viewers for these shows to be considered "successful" on the right network. I suppose music licenses might be the biggest obstacle to such a venture, that and corps management being willing to have their groups critiqued on TV.

If DCI couldn't get any takers, it seems like something that would be worth DCI itself investing in as a web series, which could lead to a TV pickup, or if not still might just be worth doing.

[Jeff Ream]

why did the sport pay ESPN?

No one else wanted to.

[Stu]

This is something that has perplexed me about DCI's ESPN2 deal. Why was it expensive for DCI? The networks bid for the rights to air various sports. They pay the sport for the rights to air it and it is their expense to produce the telecast. The sport doesn't pay the network. Is drum corps so obscure that DCI can't get any network to pay for the rights to air them? (I think I can guess the answer to that question).

For a select few major sports (ie NFL, MLB) major networks will bid to broadcast; however for most all sports, or other non-network created programing for that matter, it is customer-pay system for broadcast time. Indycar races are a prime example; with the exception of the Indianapolis 500 the Indycar organization actually purchases time on a broadcast station for all their races then 'hopefully' secures enough sponsors to advertise during the broadcasts; and it is up to Indycar to front that money for air-time, not the network, and it is up to Indycar, not the network, to secure sponsors to cover that investment.