TboneBtonegirl Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 When was the last year that finals was shown on t.v.?? Was it stopped because there weren't enough views or was it because DCI wanted to get more money? Enlighten me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsubone Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 2007 was the last year. Contract renewal was too expensive for DCI to muster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 When was the last year that finals was shown on t.v.?? Was it stopped because there weren't enough views or was it because DCI wanted to get more money? Enlighten me. IIRC, it was because producing the show cost A LOT. DCI had the pay ESPN for broadcast time, and I think it was costing tens of thousands of dollars. DCI used to be on PBS, but PBS stopped carrying the programming for one reason or another. I think it's just too darned expensive to put on TV, and with Fan Network bringing revenue into DCI (as opposed to ESPN taking significant money away from DCI) it seems a lot more fiscally logical for DCI to make money with the subscription service. Add DCI 'broadcasting' Quarterfinals in movie theaters, and there really isn't a point for DCI to be on TV. People like to argue that TV broadcast somehow means millions of people will be flipping the TV, stumble upon DCI accidentally, stick with the broadcast, and then go out and spend money on DCI via attending shows, souvenirs, etc. While that might be the case for a likely very small group of people, I doubt enough people became DCI fans to justify the expenditure. With FN DCI can live stream several live shows a season, with Quarterfinals fans can pay a very nominal price to see corps in a movie theater, and DCI doesn't have to chop up & edit shows to fit broadcast criteria. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrettc101 Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 To add to everyone else's points, DCI on ESPN wasn't super good either. Sure you got your DCI fill for free from your couch, but they really only broadcasted about 5-6 minutes per show. On the Fan Network, movie theater, etc., you get to see all of everything without announcers talking through the little slice of show that ESPN would broadcast. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigW Posted February 24, 2014 Share Posted February 24, 2014 What also really damaged the ESPN2 experience was the fact you only saw portions of programs that are specifically designed to be viewed in their entirety to get the full experience of the show. Then replaced with nice stories about some of the corps members and interest stories, but really, I frankly would rather have watched the actual complete presentations. The QF simulcasts are pretty good- unless you get someone checking and texting and talking on their cellphone around you- or even more suprising, the busloads of band kids, not the oldsters laughing at some of the programs. To me, that's kind of telling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 (edited) When was the last year that finals was shown on t.v.?? Was it stopped because there weren't enough views or was it because DCI wanted to get more money? Enlighten me. All things being equal... DCI Finals being on TV ( live or tape delay ) is infinitely better for the exposure of the activity than not to be on TV. I think this point should be inarguable it seems to me. Take a poll of all the current marchers in DCI this year, ask them if they'd want DCI to be broadcast on TV or not. Can we agree that over 95% would prefer that DCI be televised on TV than not be televised on TV ?.... As for the costs, the costs can not be absorbed now because the activity does not have the numbers of followers willing to underwrite the costs, and potential corporate sponsors that could easily underwrite the expense, have decided its not a wise investment of their dollars vs. expected return on investment. So there you have it, and thats where we are right now regarding the loss of TV exposure for the DCI Championships that were once in existence for a few decades. Edited February 25, 2014 by BRASSO 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seen-it-all Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 All things being equal... DCI Finals being on TV ( live or tape delay ) is infinitely better for the exposure of the activity than not to be on TV. I think this point should be inarguable it seems to me. Take a poll of all the current marchers in DCI this year, ask them if they'd want DCI to be broadcast on TV or not. Can we agree that over 95% would prefer that DCI be televised on TV than not be televised on TV ?.... As for the costs, the costs can not be absorbed now because the activity does not have the numbers of followers willing to underwrite the costs, and potential corporate sponsors that could easily underwrite the expense, have decided its not a wise investment of their dollars vs. expected return on investment. So there you have it, and thats where we are right now regarding the loss of TV exposure for the DCI Championships that were once in existence for a few decades. So we should ask them if they'd want DCI to be broadcast on TV or not.......is this in addition to the current paradigm of webcasts and movie theater showings? Or instead of? Because I don't know about you, but I'd rather pay for the Fan Network and see *multiple* DCI events in a given season than to only see Finals on TV on some PBS station that might not be showing it live (or at all), or to see a heavily edited version on ESPN2. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 (edited) So we should ask them if they'd want DCI to be broadcast on TV or not.......is this in addition to the current paradigm of webcasts and movie theater showings? Or instead of? Because I don't know about you, but I'd rather pay for the Fan Network and see *multiple* DCI events in a given season than to only see Finals on TV on some PBS station that might not be showing it live (or at all), or to see a heavily edited version on ESPN2. I see no valid reason why there could not TV exposure as well as pay for view paid subscription for those that want a little more. The sports world realm has both pay for view and free exposure via TV for the others, and has so for years. The two are not mutually exclusive at all, imo. It can be done. It has been done. There are live prizefights on TV.. and then there are pay for view prizefights, as well as the live fights in both options. College football games are free on TV, but if you want more, there are league network games on cable and in more and more cases, the league's own networks. Games are live, then later rebroadcast. And of course, one can go live to the games as well.But all these options can not be done for DCI watching if the numbers of followers and/ or corporate sponsors are insufficient to make it happen. It that case, regrettably the only option becomes going to the die hards to underwrite the costs more than they ever had to before to keep it afloat. Edited February 25, 2014 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 (edited) So we should ask them if they'd want DCI to be broadcast on TV or not....... Sure, why not. Although they are already footing an increased cost to participate, so the burden of TV exposure should not be borne out by them. They are also not responsible for the loss of national exposure of the activity via TV in the first place. Thats something the adults in the activity have mishandled, in my view. These performers work their tails off. Like previous generations, they deserve the exposure that only national TV can provide. But it does not appear that this is on the horizon anytime soon, so it appears that ship has sailed as well. Things change.. of course. And this is one of those changes as we have evolved too. Edited February 25, 2014 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2muchcoffeeman Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 All things being equal... DCI Finals being on TV ( live or tape delay ) is infinitely better for the exposure of the activity than not to be on TV. I think this point should be inarguable it seems to me. In the digital age, there is no "mass audience," no "mass marketing." It's a niche world. A targeted world. It's cheaper for a content producer such as DCI to use the very low costs of digital marketing to isolate their most promising prospective customers, and connect to them directly. It's no longer about reach. It's about precision. Ask any newspaper. Ask any broadcaster. Ask any advertiser. Aside from the Super Bowl or a huge national disaster, people no longer gather around the same program on TV in large numbers. 1 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.