CUDAKITE Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 (edited) THIS HAS TO BE INTENTIONAL. Last year a corps' VOD performance was posted 5 minutes after the corps left the field. It has nothing to do with the economy resulting in staff cuts... There would be NO REASON to buy the fan network PLUS with the live feeds if you only had to wait five minutes to see every performance! The poor audio/video quality is also intentional. The bottom line is they don't want the fan network to cut into APD and DVD sales. Can you blame them? The only thing you can do is write them and let them know you are not happy with the service. maybe then they will do away with this two tier silliness and offer a higher quality product with faster posting turnaround. Edited July 10, 2009 by CUDAKITE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pags Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 I'm thinking you need to update some supporting software for your browser. Got the latest Java? Quicktime? all that good stuff?I can pull it up with Past performances in video .. paid the same as you .. and it works on Firefox and IExplorer Same here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexL Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 THIS HAS TO BE INTENTIONAL. Last year a corps' VOD performance was posted 5 minutes after the corps left the field. It has nothing to do with the economy resulting in staff cuts... There would be NO REASON to buy the fan network PLUS with the live feeds if you only had to wait five minutes to see every performance! The poor audio/video quality is also intentional. The bottom line is they don't want the fan network to cut into APD and DVD sales. Can you blame them? no. but they shouldve taken this to account when launching the service. I dont think this is actually the case, but if they were just doing it to support the (imho) rediculous prices on apds and dvds, it would deffinitely #### me off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pags Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 THIS HAS TO BE INTENTIONAL. Last year a corps' VOD performance was posted 5 minutes after the corps left the field. It has nothing to do with the economy resulting in staff cuts... There would be NO REASON to buy the fan network PLUS with the live feeds if you only had to wait five minutes to see every performance! The poor audio/video quality is also intentional. The bottom line is they don't want the fan network to cut into APD and DVD sales. Can you blame them? The only thing you can do is write them and let them know you are not happy with the service. maybe then they will do away with this two tier silliness and offer a higher quality product with faster posting turnaround. I'm sorry but I'm not buying that excuse. That would be the dumbest marketing ploy in the world, not to mention that if it was their strategy they wouldn't have offered Fan Network at the quality we had for the past couple years. Until you are certain that they have the exact same equipment as years past (i.e. cameras and microphones to record the performances as well as the servers to host and store them) and that said equipment is in exactly the same condition as years past (things generally tend to have issues the longer their used), and you can guarantee that DCI has the financial capability to afford to upgrade to the fastest and cleanest video/audio for ALL the shows heading into Finals, then your argument has little merit. Just as an example, my church (last year) had to upgrade its AV equipment after a decade of using the same equipment. Churches, like DCI, are non-profit and really have to plan out how often they can afford to updgrade equipment. They went through what amounts to a basic upgrade. Slightly newer and more accurate directional speakers and microphones as well as some better servers and audio control equipment. The bill? Close to $40,000. This is ONE facility that didn't get top-of-the-line equipment. What I imagine is really happening is that DCI had to make a hard choice of realizing their financial limitations. They have to look at the whole picture when making decisions like these, especially when the economy is what it is. Heck, we have FOR-profit companies that are not only cutting staff but also limiting operational capabilities in their efforts to remain viable. Why should DCI be any different? I work for a Fortune 100 company which had been planning last year to do significant upgrade concerning both office-wide and individual technological capabilities. We're 18 months down the road and nothing has happened yet. Sometimes plans just plain have to be put on hold while other matters take precedence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoveKathyG Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 DCI's office isn't very big. Be grateful of how hardworking these guys are. I do video and sound and yes they don't have to do much editing and the quality isn't perfect... BUT I also do web design, and it is NOT easy to keep such a large web organization up to date and perfectly on time! Especially when you have to work with so many demanding fans like yourself. Oh hell no... That's the lamest excuse. While I am personally sympathetic to the fact that DCI has a small staff, as a member of the consumer base I am offended that you would even suggest that I should be worried about DCI's problems. I am the CUSTOMER. I am BUYING something from them. I deserve the product I have purchased. That's all you or DCI needs to know. The fact that DCI is sparsely staffed should never be mentioned. It's an excuse, and any high quality organization would bristle at having someone inside or outside the operation make excuses for them. And it's really quite simple... OUTSOURCE THE #### THING! Maybe it already has been, and if so OUTSOURCE IT TO SOMEONE ELSE!!! Of course, a small organization can't do all this themselves. That's why you contract to another entity to do the work for you. Might it cost more (assuming they haven't outsourced it already)? OF COURSE! But you pass the cost on to the consumer who is clearly willing to pay for a high quality product. This isn't brain surgery... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex M. Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 "What we have here is a failure to communicate." DCI could really smooth things over with a simple email blast to all Fan Network users explaining what is happening. That's the least they could do for their paying customers. Instead, we have everyone speculating and riling each other up. I'd definitely be more sympathetic too. But, as it turns out I'm still waiting to see VOD from the Ogden show. I may get it......the day of (or after) DOTR. Don't get me wrong...I love the concept and think 39 clams is a great value to watch the season unfold. I'd pay the $39 again next year too to see early season stuff. However, my expectations would be WAY lower and my perceptions of DCI's effort would be tarnished. This is horrible PR that can be solved very easily ---COMMUNICATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm sorry but I'm not buying that excuse. That would be the dumbest marketing ploy in the world, not to mention that if it was their strategy they wouldn't have offered Fan Network at the quality we had for the past couple years. Until you are certain that they have the exact same equipment as years past (i.e. cameras and microphones to record the performances as well as the servers to host and store them) and that said equipment is in exactly the same condition as years past (things generally tend to have issues the longer their used), and you can guarantee that DCI has the financial capability to afford to upgrade to the fastest and cleanest video/audio for ALL the shows heading into Finals, then your argument has little merit. Just as an example, my church (last year) had to upgrade its AV equipment after a decade of using the same equipment. Churches, like DCI, are non-profit and really have to plan out how often they can afford to updgrade equipment. They went through what amounts to a basic upgrade. Slightly newer and more accurate directional speakers and microphones as well as some better servers and audio control equipment. The bill? Close to $40,000. This is ONE facility that didn't get top-of-the-line equipment. What I imagine is really happening is that DCI had to make a hard choice of realizing their financial limitations. They have to look at the whole picture when making decisions like these, especially when the economy is what it is. Heck, we have FOR-profit companies that are not only cutting staff but also limiting operational capabilities in their efforts to remain viable. Why should DCI be any different? I work for a Fortune 100 company which had been planning last year to do significant upgrade concerning both office-wide and individual technological capabilities. We're 18 months down the road and nothing has happened yet. Sometimes plans just plain have to be put on hold while other matters take precedence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 A bad economy could be blamed for fewer DCI staffers and a slower turn around in getting the VOD's posted, but it surely doesn't necessitate 16kbps audio... Maybe. i don't know much about hosting a website, and I don't know a ton about bandwidth. But I would guess it's a lot cheaper to host smaller video/audio files than larger ones, and I thought that higher quality audio/video = larger file. Maybe I'm mistaken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Smith Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Expectations: Some argue that we should be sympathetic to DCI and possible issues they may be having and just "be happy." Some argue that we should be demanding of DCI because they have charged a fee for a service. I happen to lean to the second point of view. Think of any of any other service you may employ, whether it's hiring a plumber or eating at a restaurant. You have expectations, and frankly you pay to have expectations. If there was a gentleman down the hall here at the home who happened to be a retired plumber and he volunteered his services to fix my bathroom sink, then my expectations are exceedingly lower than I have of a company I call who says they're going to charge me $75 an hour and will be at my home sometime before noon. I realize that DCI is a nonprofit organization; however, that does not equate them to the same status as a church for example. A church exists solely on the donations and gifts from people. Therefore, they have have a different type of accountability than an organization that exists based on the sales of products and services. If Burger King was a nonprofit organization, I would still complain and be upset if they left the cheese off of the cheeseburger that I ordered. Maybe I wouldn't flop on the ground and kick and scream realizing that mistakes do happen, but in an adult manner I would let the manager know that he needs to realize that I'm a displeased customer and if he doesn't resolve the problem, then I might not come back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CUDAKITE Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 I'm sorry but I'm not buying that excuse. That would be the dumbest marketing ploy in the world, not to mention that if it was their strategy they wouldn't have offered Fan Network at the quality we had for the past couple years. Until you are certain that they have the exact same equipment as years past (i.e. cameras and microphones to record the performances as well as the servers to host and store them) and that said equipment is in exactly the same condition as years past (things generally tend to have issues the longer their used), and you can guarantee that DCI has the financial capability to afford to upgrade to the fastest and cleanest video/audio for ALL the shows heading into Finals, then your argument has little merit. ... Equipment? First of all, recording equipment can not be the issue. I have seen a MUCH better quality video of crown on 'tube'. and that was recorded by a camcorder. The truth is any 14 year old could borrow dad's camcorder and get a better quality video posted and get it posted faster than what we have seen on the fan network. So it has nothing to do with recording equipment or staff shortages. The only point you might have is on the server delivery side of it. When a video is uploaded you choose the quality/bitrate at which to upload it as. As the original post shows, a VERY poor quality is being CHOSEN. Is that to save money on storage or bandwidth? I DOUBT IT. Considering the HUGE library they offer, storage isn't the likely problem. And considering they host and allow any corps to upload any video they want AND those videos have higher audio/video quality... It would appear bandwidth isn't the issue either. So what is the reason for the poor quality choice? Can't believe it's equipment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Is there anyone out there who got the Fan Network service for WGI or BOA this past season? Was the service similar, better or worse? Just wondering how DCI compares to it's counterparts 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.