perc2100 Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 I have been posting/e-mail DCI similar sentiments for years. I think this COULD be feasible if DCI charged a reasonable (on their end) price for the stream. Some of my points in the past were: * DCI needs to charge a good premium. I am a very cheap drum corps fan now-a-days, and I can't afford (at this time, at least) to fly to Indy, get a hotel room, and pay for three tickets to finals. HOWEVER, I would be willing to pay a reasonable sum for a live stream of finals. The average ticket price is $72.50 (all four ticket prices divided by two). If DCI charged, say $70 for the live stream, I would happily pay it. I would bet that others would too. * DCI needs to make the stream HIGH ANGLE ONLY. With only a limited option for viewing finals, I think more fans would be more inclined to buy the DVD's that contain all of the bells and whistles. * DCI needs to make the stream a pay-per-view only. I.E. if you are a Fan Network member, you still need to pay the fee to watch finals. This way, DCI could 'double dip' their internet fans. However, this might take away revenue from their Fan Network customers (fans might forgo paying the season pass fee and only pay the Finals stream fee). This would need to take some market research by DCI, and perhaps they can offer a discount for the Fan Network customers. But I think for DCI to make money off of the Finals stream they would have to charge EVERYONE. The biggest question marks regarding making this a reality: * Does DCI have the funds to make this work? It would possibly cost a substantial amount of money for DCI to record/stream Finals. I don't know if they could use the same equipment that they use to record the material for DVD, and obviously it could be a big cost to rent the appropriate equipment. It's possible that the equipment is already being used for the DVD's and DCI couldn't spare what they are already using. I don't know if this is a factor. * Are their right issues? Do DCI or it's member corps have to pay additional fees for each live stream/broadcast, or do they pay just a flat fee for the season? This would potentially be a big gamble for DCI (if they do get the expected results, they would lose money by streaming Finals, lose potential DVD revenue and/or have issues recording Finals which would also effect DVD sales). DCI would have to do some serious market research to see if this is a feasible idea, but I would think it could potentially be a great fundraiser for DCI. Does BOA stream their finals? Does WGI? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HolyName06 Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 The biggest question marks regarding making this a reality:* Does DCI have the funds to make this work? They're already doing it with their regional competitions. They show Quarter Finals every year over a live broadcast....they have the technology.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peel Paint Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 (edited) I have been posting/e-mail DCI similar sentiments for years. I think this COULD be feasible if DCI charged a reasonable (on their end) price for the stream. Some of my points in the past were:* DCI needs to charge a good premium. I am a very cheap drum corps fan now-a-days, and I can't afford (at this time, at least) to fly to Indy, get a hotel room, and pay for three tickets to finals. HOWEVER, I would be willing to pay a reasonable sum for a live stream of finals. The average ticket price is $72.50 (all four ticket prices divided by two). If DCI charged, say $70 for the live stream, I would happily pay it. I would bet that others would too. * DCI needs to make the stream HIGH ANGLE ONLY. With only a limited option for viewing finals, I think more fans would be more inclined to buy the DVD's that contain all of the bells and whistles. * DCI needs to make the stream a pay-per-view only. I.E. if you are a Fan Network member, you still need to pay the fee to watch finals. This way, DCI could 'double dip' their internet fans. However, this might take away revenue from their Fan Network customers (fans might forgo paying the season pass fee and only pay the Finals stream fee). This would need to take some market research by DCI, and perhaps they can offer a discount for the Fan Network customers. But I think for DCI to make money off of the Finals stream they would have to charge EVERYONE. The biggest question marks regarding making this a reality: * Does DCI have the funds to make this work? It would possibly cost a substantial amount of money for DCI to record/stream Finals. I don't know if they could use the same equipment that they use to record the material for DVD, and obviously it could be a big cost to rent the appropriate equipment. It's possible that the equipment is already being used for the DVD's and DCI couldn't spare what they are already using. I don't know if this is a factor. * Are their right issues? Do DCI or it's member corps have to pay additional fees for each live stream/broadcast, or do they pay just a flat fee for the season? This would potentially be a big gamble for DCI (if they do get the expected results, they would lose money by streaming Finals, lose potential DVD revenue and/or have issues recording Finals which would also effect DVD sales). DCI would have to do some serious market research to see if this is a feasible idea, but I would think it could potentially be a great fundraiser for DCI. I agree that your plan would be the right way for DCI to approach streaming finals. Market-research it, run the numbers, and the pricing you're talking about and high-cam and live only probably would make sense if the research bore that out. The other reason to do it as a separately-priced event is that a lot of Fan Network subscribers do go to finals, and they're not going to want to have a high-priced event built into their subscription that they can't see. One complication is that DCI would have to pay to have a number of tech support people on phone lines during finals ready to take and try to resolve any complaints about not getting the feed, because if DCI is charging $70 and the feed gets lost just as the viewer's "favorite" corps comes on, and that viewer can't watch it later on Fan Network to make up for the missed live feed, there would be some loud howling. With the price of finals what it is, whether you watch it in person live, on media (DVD), or potentially streamed, DCI has to be sure that they're building new revenue opportunities, and not hurting their net revenue by cannibilizing sales of existing products (finals tickets, DVD sales, Fan Network subscriptions) if they're going to offer finals streamed. A $10 live stream of finals will cannibilize sales and hurt DCI's net revenue. Edited July 9, 2009 by Peel Paint Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob-UK Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 Everyone is talking about the negatives of showing finals but what about the hoardes of people (like me, based in the UK), that can't/wont go to finals but would be willing to pay $50+ to watch finals? WGI has been showing finals for some years, I wonder if they feel they lost out (no they don't because they always sell out at Dayton) v how much ADDTIONAL revenue they make on showing finals? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAFL Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 Um, out of curiousity have you been paying attention to the current economic state of the professional sports? The NBA has had to LOWER its salary cap for the first time due to economic struggles. Hockey is still struggling to re-establish its fan-base. Baseball has had to go to what essentially amounts to a socialist standard to keep its lower market teams viable. As popular as football is, some of its teams have not escaped financial struggle (Detroit Lions, St. Louis Rams, Kansas City Chiefs anyone?) and the league is talking about extending the season by 2 games to gain more revenue. The problem? Getting butts in the seats. People are more willing to forego paying $50-100 per ticket to see ONE game and instead will pay $40-50 a MONTH and see 4 (or more) games from the comfort of their living room, and that doesn't even include the issue of concessions. Am I saying that the expansion of TV coverage is the only economic driver for these developments? No, but it has been a major player. Why do you think each sport is going about trying to get its own channel and charging up the wazzoo? If you're not going to grace them with your presence IN the stadium/arena, then they will get it from you another way. But they are struggling as well. The point of TV for the major sports was to motivate people to ultimately want to go to games where they were happening. Instead, the level of access TV has is creating the reverse effect. Actually, the access on TV is what built those leagues to what they are today. Without that visibility and access to fans who would never grace a stadium, the leagues wouldn't have the fan bases they enjoy currently. For most of the fans throughout the country, the only way to have any serious exposure to a professional sports team is via television. Without that exposure, the fan base is limited to those who can make it to the stadium--meaning they live locally and have the time and money available to do so. Indeed, even most of the local fans can only watch games on TV because they can't afford tickets to see the games live. Television coverage has fueled the growth of the leagues. The troubles the leagues are having currently has nothing to do with TV access. The Lions have trouble putting butts in seats because the Lions suck--perennially bad teams will always hurt for fans. Other teams struggle financially because they're in small markets, which means a smaller local fan base, yet they have to pay to acquire and keep top players the same as the large market teams. The leagues are wanting to build their own networks because they want a larger share of the revenues surrounding the coverage--NOT because of any financial hardship brought on by coverage. One can expect the number of fans regularly watching games to drop when accessibility lessens, which means ad revenues will drop and merchandising revenues will drop. That's already beginning. As more games have been shunted off national broadcast TV and onto premium channels, fans like me can't see the games we'd like to see. We don't get as excited and involved in the season as we did prior and we don't buy merchandise like we did prior. The only thing that ties us to the league is accessible coverage, and when that goes, our ties to the league follow. The lesson for DCI/DCA in all that? Tie as many fans as possible to your activity with as much coverage as you can get. Live performance will always draw and broadcast coverage can't match the live experience. Broadcast coverage will include people who can't be at the event and help keep them involved. The more involved they are, the more they'll spend on merchandise and the more likely they'll be to show up to local shows when they can. A $10 stream for finals is a bit much to expect, I think. A $30 stream for finals, however, would enable lots of fans to stay tied in to the event while being unable to make it live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 Actually, the access on TV is what built those leagues to what they are today. Without that visibility and access to fans who would never grace a stadium, the leagues wouldn't have the fan bases they enjoy currently. For most of the fans throughout the country, the only way to have any serious exposure to a professional sports team is via television. Without that exposure, the fan base is limited to those who can make it to the stadium--meaning they live locally and have the time and money available to do so. Indeed, even most of the local fans can only watch games on TV because they can't afford tickets to see the games live. Television coverage has fueled the growth of the leagues. Used to be a big hockey fan and was thinking of how the NHL got into broadcasting local games on the radio. At first only the third period was broadcast so people wouldn't skip going to the games. Turned out the broadcasts introduced more people to the excitment of the game and attendance went up. Of course this was when going to a game was more affordable. Now in my area local minor league baseball is easier to find on the media than some of our MLB. (That's without buying extra channels or packages.) How can DCI use any of this to gain more fans? Good question... anyone know if use of Fan Network is growing? Only thing I see that relates to this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
contrajedi8 Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 Because they want you to buy the insanely overpriced tickets to finals and then the even more insanely overpriced DVDs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
year1buick Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 I agree that your plan would be the right way for DCI to approach streaming finals. Market-research it, run the numbers, and the pricing you're talking about and high-cam and live only probably would make sense if the research bore that out. The other reason to do it as a separately-priced event is that a lot of Fan Network subscribers do go to finals, and they're not going to want to have a high-priced event built into their subscription that they can't see. One complication is that DCI would have to pay to have a number of tech support people on phone lines during finals ready to take and try to resolve any complaints about not getting the feed, because if DCI is charging $70 and the feed gets lost just as the viewer's "favorite" corps comes on, and that viewer can't watch it later on Fan Network to make up for the missed live feed, there would be some loud howling.With the price of finals what it is, whether you watch it in person live, on media (DVD), or potentially streamed, DCI has to be sure that they're building new revenue opportunities, and not hurting their net revenue by cannibilizing sales of existing products (finals tickets, DVD sales, Fan Network subscriptions) if they're going to offer finals streamed. A $10 live stream of finals will cannibilize sales and hurt DCI's net revenue. I completely disagree with this. If a free broadcast didn't hurt attendance in the past, why are you so convinced something like a $10 one would now? I think you're talking about two different customer bases here--I think it's ridiculous to assume that a sizeable number of people who would otherwise be willing to travel to Indy, pay for a hotel, then pay for a more expensive ticket would then blow all of that off to settle for a cheaper, online experience. They are two completely different mind-sets/customer bases and I guarantee you that offering the lower priced online alternative won't significantly affect ticket sales. (Like I've already said, attendance numbers were fine even with the live--free--TV broadcast.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 [/b]I completely disagree with this. If a free broadcast didn't hurt attendance in the past, why are you so convinced something like a $10 one would now? I think you're talking about two different customer bases here--I think it's ridiculous to assume that a sizeable number of people who would otherwise be willing to travel to Indy, pay for a hotel, then pay for a more expensive ticket would then blow all of that off to settle for a cheaper, online experience. They are two completely different mind-sets/customer bases and I guarantee you that offering the lower priced online alternative won't significantly affect ticket sales. (Like I've already said, attendance numbers were fine even with the live--free--TV broadcast.) I think that at this point is in an unknown factor: it might not hurt revenue, but it might. Web technology is not some highly advanced thing that few people understand: it is VERY easy to record live streams. Who knows if people would be 'satisfied' with just a mediocre (at best) copy of a live finals stream vs. paying $100+ for the DVD's. Besides, if DCI prices their semi's stream at $30, why in the world would they charge anything less for Finals?! That alone would be killing revenue (not pricing their product appropriately)! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highpitch_83 Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 A one-time Fan Network quality stream vs. re-playability whenever you want...with great picture quality and all the sound options/video angles... Except they cut out all the worthwhile extras <cough> perc cam/judging tape overdubs </cough> and we're paying the same price! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.