Bad Blood 2 Archer Vs Appleton For Free????

[Bigtruck]

I am not understanding the math, whether its 100-300 at $25 a pop or 1000-2000 at $3 a pop, the numbers are the same in the end. I am glad live streaming is a hobby for me and not a means to an end because I would be streaming for food and some beer then, lmao!

I have been saying it for a long time that PPV just does not work for pool at this point and time, I hope it turns around for those who have a good deal of time and money invested into it. I think getting 5-10 stream sponsors at $200 a pop for a major challenge match which will attract tens of thousands of viewers would not be too hard and would cover the cost of a stream. I could go anywhere in the country and do a stream for under $1000 but that would be giving up my time for free which I know people making money on the event love but it does not help me to get better equipment or some new kicks.

I know that companies in the pool world pay more for the ads in papers and magazines which have a smaller number of people checking it out then the streams. I highly doubt TAR would get 1000-2000 viewers for a free stream of 2 top players matching up for the cash, more like 10,000-20,000 viewers.

I am doubtful any billiards publication has those kind of numbers so if you own a company then wake up and get on board with those people putting together big events and challenge matches that offer streaming for FREE. Sponsoring a PPV stream makes no sense for a sponsor because of the couple hundred who are watching it.

Sorry Lenny, but I have to dis-agree with you on these points.

The problem with FREE streaming is....most of the viewers dont have any money. They are only watching because they love pool and it's FREE. With a PPV you may only have 200-700 viewers but your viewers can afford to buy a ticket and therefore buy the sponsor products.

The numbers aren't high on FREE streams because the people that are watching are nits, they are high because money is tight and it's FREE. If the economy would get moving and there was a high quality production for PPV, I believe we would see 2000 viewers or more on one.

Additionally if the PPV was really cheap, connectivity problems would multiply to the point of absolute maddening proportion. A Full time tech man would be necessary for the same amount of return.

Ray

 

[Kickin' Chicken]

Just a suggestion, Beav. Not a poster child. It's only one of many ideas, but it is a thought that Justin Bieber might be able to attract the youth, especially the ladies!

Yeah, but Jam, who then would follow all of the young girls? :thumbup:

Beav, sometimes you just gotta look the other way when the nurse tells you, as she's about to inject you with the medicine that'll make it all better; "okay, you're gonna feel a little pinch".

If it would take Justin Bieber to save pool then let me comb my grey hair forward.

And BTW, the lightning in a bottle that is The Mosconi Cup, is a brilliant format for fan engagement and excitibility. In this format, people who know little or even nothing at all about pool, can easily find themselves on the edges of their seats cheering on the players.

However it is accomplished, the acknowledged, required, missing piece of the puzzle for any real success in pool is increasing the numbers of fans. Without a broader appeal there will be no meaningful money coming from sponsors.

Where's the heck is the next great pool movie?

Best,
Brian kc <----- still extremely impressed with Mark for his thinking big, setting his ideas into motion, and for having an open dialogue seeking ideas from others who also want to see pool brought back up to a higher level.

 

[beav99_4life]

A few things. The itunes database kind of system would be nice, but look whats going on with that, people are already complaining about $1 a song and there are sites out there that do memberships for $15 or something a month and download all you want. Now someone is going to say why can't some of these streaming companies do that? Well, they might be able to but in order to make it a product thats worthy of a customer base, you need to have a fairly decent library of matches and events on there to justify someone paying for a subscription. Plus trying to have a small one or two man streaming company do anything that a company like Apple does is kind of unreasonable. The tech problems alone could be a nightmare for a single individual.

Another thing that was brought up was the price being cheaper for the matches. The reason I don't think that should be done is because 98% of those who buy the PPV's would buy them if they were $25 or $75, its just the way that group is. If companies made it $3-5, there will be some increase in viewership, but I doubt it would be nearly enough to make up the difference in lost intake. The people that won't pay $25 typically (and yes, I did say typically, I know there are some out there that are the exception) are the same ones who wont pay $1.

 

[ccshrimper]

Here are my ideas on how to improve either the PPV or free streaming.

I've bought a bunch of the streams but only if they interested me. The price didn't matter but I do think it would be cool if people could buy blocks of time instead of just the whole production. For people with limited time, let them buy a couple of hours for $5. That's cheaper than a movie. By the time the stream is over, they might spend more than the $25 for the whole stream. You could potentially get the normal 300+ paying $25 and another 500+ spending an average of $10. If it's a close match going down to the wire several people might hear about it and pay $5 to finish watching it.

If streaming big matches was free I don't see why you couldn't get a bunch of the pool halls streaming them. It's in the pool halls interest for people to like pool. Go to the chains websites and email instructions to each of the managers first.

After that, look up the pool halls with big tournaments and let them know about the free streaming and give them any help or instructions they need.

Next, get in touch with the league operators in major cities. Email them flyers and see if they would be willing to give them out to their local pool halls. You can go as deep as you want with this even down to looking up pool halls all over the US or the world. Again, it's in the league operators interests to get people interested in pool so sell it to them like that.

It would be more like others sports at bars. You could look for sponsors by telling them it doesn't matter how many viewers are logged in because each could have dozens of people at their businesses watching. Ask the businesses streaming to log in with their business name so the sponsors could see.

I might be clueless thinking people would help but I hope they would.

 

[mikeyfrost]

A few things. The itunes database kind of system would be nice, but look whats going on with that, people are already complaining about $1 a song and there are sites out there that do memberships for $15 or something a month and download all you want. Now someone is going to say why can't some of these streaming companies do that? Well, they might be able to but in order to make it a product thats worthy of a customer base, you need to have a fairly decent library of matches and events on there to justify someone paying for a subscription. Plus trying to have a small one or two man streaming company do anything that a company like Apple does is kind of unreasonable. The tech problems alone could be a nightmare for a single individual.

Another thing that was brought up was the price being cheaper for the matches. The reason I don't think that should be done is because 98% of those who buy the PPV's would buy them if they were $25 or $75, its just the way that group is. If companies made it $3-5, there will be some increase in viewership, but I doubt it would be nearly enough to make up the difference in lost intake. The people that won't pay $25 typically (and yes, I did say typically, I know there are some out there that are the exception) are the same ones who wont pay $1.

Beav you are right again. I was ready to buy that Earl Vs. SVB for damn near any amount I needed to see it. You get these guys on green monsters and real pool heads will ship the hell out of it. I also think the quality of the matches help out. You get Alex or Earl involved and you can bet people are tuning in. We see so much of SVB I think people take it for granted on how good the pool is and just write the matches he plays in as foregone conclusions.

For $5 who knows. I wonder what would happen if y'all raffled off spots for PPV also.

 

[OsideRida06]

A few things. The itunes database kind of system would be nice, but look whats going on with that, people are already complaining about $1 a song and there are sites out there that do memberships for $15 or something a month and download all you want. Now someone is going to say why can't some of these streaming companies do that? Well, they might be able to but in order to make it a product thats worthy of a customer base, you need to have a fairly decent library of matches and events on there to justify someone paying for a subscription. Plus trying to have a small one or two man streaming company do anything that a company like Apple does is kind of unreasonable. The tech problems alone could be a nightmare for a single individual.

Another thing that was brought up was the price being cheaper for the matches. The reason I don't think that should be done is because 98% of those who buy the PPV's would buy them if they were $25 or $75, its just the way that group is. If companies made it $3-5, there will be some increase in viewership, but I doubt it would be nearly enough to make up the difference in lost intake. The people that won't pay $25 typically (and yes, I did say typically, I know there are some out there that are the exception) are the same ones who wont pay $1.

I find this very hard to believe. If there a game on the iphone and it was $25 I would have to really think about it before I bought it. And I mean really think about it too. On the other hand I spend way more than that on games without even realizing it. When things are only a buck or two it becomes an impulse buy. The same thing will be true here. The only difference is with buying that $25 game, atleast I get to keep the game. When I pay $25 to watch a live stream I get nothing to physically keep. Which is fine. I enjoy watching them personally, but many others who do not have as much money to spare in this time in the US may not be able to justify $25 for something like this that they really do not need and really cannot afford. However, if it becomes a few bucks that totally changes the game completely. Not only can they justify it, but they will be hooked, and waiting to be able to watch the next big stream of the pros.

 

[Perk]

Here are my ideas on how to improve either the PPV or free streaming.

I've bought a bunch of the streams but only if they interested me. The price didn't matter but I do think it would be cool if people could buy blocks of time instead of just the whole production. For people with limited time, let them buy a couple of hours for $5. That's cheaper than a movie. By the time the stream is over, they might spend more than the $25 for the whole stream. You could potentially get the normal 300+ paying $25 and another 500+ spending an average of $10. If it's a close match going down to the wire several people might hear about it and pay $5 to finish watching it.

.

FYI, Accustats already does something like this. For the recent 10ball tourney a month or so ago I paid for the evening sessions only as I had that time available. I did that for almost every day they streamed. I didn't buy the whole package as there was zero chance I could watch any of the day sessions. I felt like the $6 or so per session was pretty good value--and they showed great matches.

 

[beav99_4life]

Here are my ideas on how to improve either the PPV or free streaming.

I've bought a bunch of the streams but only if they interested me. The price didn't matter but I do think it would be cool if people could buy blocks of time instead of just the whole production. For people with limited time, let them buy a couple of hours for $5. That's cheaper than a movie. By the time the stream is over, they might spend more than the $25 for the whole stream. You could potentially get the normal 300+ paying $25 and another 500+ spending an average of $10. If it's a close match going down to the wire several people might hear about it and pay $5 to finish watching it.

If streaming big matches was free I don't see why you couldn't get a bunch of the pool halls streaming them. It's in the pool halls interest for people to like pool. Go to the chains websites and email instructions to each of the managers first.

After that, look up the pool halls with big tournaments and let them know about the free streaming and give them any help or instructions they need.

Now don't take my word for it since i'm an technological idiot, but I don't think this is even possible at this current time. Even if it is, it would be the biggest pain in the azz in the world. I don't see Dana White saying go ahead and buy which UFC fights you want each night, you either buy the card or you don't. We have to be realistic here guys, we're talking about one or two man operations trying to provide a service here and you're trying to demand services that Microsoft needs to create. Trust me, i'm as broke, if not more so, than anyone, but lets be realistic about what comes along with $25 (or $1-3 if its up to some of you out there) for 3 days of pool.

Edit. I just saw the post above about Accu-stats doing that for the tournaments they stream. I was talking about just jumping on and someone saying "I want to buy the next 2 hours of the stream". And yes, that is nice, but not sure how realistic it is for gambling matches between two players who decide themselves when they want to take breaks.

 

[ccshrimper]

FYI, Accustats already does something like this. For the recent 10ball tourney a month or so ago I paid for the evening sessions only as I had that time available. I did that for almost every day they streamed. I didn't buy the whole package as there was zero chance I could watch any of the day sessions. I felt like the $6 or so per session was pretty good value--and they showed great matches.

Yeah, I bought some of them too but with accustats you got about 6 hours of play for that price but some of the matches weren't very good. With a TAR production or Bad Blood, the match will be great so I can see paying more.

 

[beav99_4life]

I find this very hard to believe. If there a game on the iphone and it was $25 I would have to really think about it before I bought it. And I mean really think about it too. On the other hand I spend way more than that on games without even realizing it. When things are only a buck or two it becomes an impulse buy. The same thing will be true here. The only difference is with buying that $25 game, atleast I get to keep the game. When I pay $25 to watch a live stream I get nothing to physically keep. Which is fine. I enjoy watching them personally, but many others who do not have as much money to spare in this time in the US may not be able to justify $25 for something like this that they really do not need and really cannot afford. However, if it becomes a few bucks that totally changes the game completely. Not only can they justify it, but they will be hooked, and waiting to be able to watch the next big stream of the pros.

You find it hard to believe huh? Well, lets say that nearly 2000 people were watching a stream and its announced that Shane VanBoening and Efren Reyes are about to do a big gambling set for the first time ever, a race to 23 ten-ball for a lot of money and its going to be $15 to watch. How many of those 2000 do you think will pay to watch this epic match-up that EVERYONE had been waiting on?

 

[ccshrimper]

Now don't take my word for it since i'm an technological idiot, but I don't think this is even possible at this current time. Even if it is, it would be the biggest pain in the azz in the world. I don't see Dana White saying go ahead and buy which UFC fights you want each night, you either buy the card or you don't. We have to be realistic here guys, we're talking about one or two man operations trying to provide a service here and you're trying to demand services that Microsoft needs to create. Trust me, i'm as broke, if not more so, than anyone, but lets be realistic about what comes along with $25 (or $1-3 if its up to some of you out there) for 3 days of pool.

Edit. I just saw the post above about Accu-stats doing that for the tournaments they stream. I was talking about just jumping on and someone saying "I want to buy the next 2 hours of the stream". And yes, that is nice, but not sure how realistic it is for gambling matches between two players who decide themselves when they want to take breaks.

Any break longer than a bathroom break would have to be predetermined for it to work Beav. I don't know much about streaming so I don't know if the streams could hold up if a bunch of people logged in for the last two hours and clogged it. Maybe make the last session of the match a little higher and on a close match you might really get paid.

 

[justadub]

A few things. The itunes database kind of system would be nice, but look whats going on with that, people are already complaining about $1 a song and there are sites out there that do memberships for $15 or something a month and download all you want. Now someone is going to say why can't some of these streaming companies do that? Well, they might be able to but in order to make it a product thats worthy of a customer base, you need to have a fairly decent library of matches and events on there to justify someone paying for a subscription. Plus trying to have a small one or two man streaming company do anything that a company like Apple does is kind of unreasonable. The tech problems alone could be a nightmare for a single individual.

I said that I didn't think the math would work. I just can't make the math work on my end either.

At least I can come here and read about it.

 

[richiebalto]

I personally can't work with Strickland anymore due to his management agreement that makes it impossible to justify the work, effort and up front money needed to do any event like this with Earl. Sorry to say it as I have worked with Earl for a number of years now. So there are other great players out there.

That is terrible news,because we all know earl is going to sell the most tickets,well i hope some way team earl can please us hungry pool fans,i hope you the best mark,but i just dont see archer and appleton attracking very many viewers.

 

[JDB]

Maybe make the last session of the match a little higher and on a close match you might really get paid.

LOL... The nature of pool players; and streamers are pool players. I could see every stream going down to the wire...lol.

Seriously, no disrespect to any streamers out there; I just found this funny.

 

[ccshrimper]

LOL... The nature of pool players; and streamers are pool players. I could see every stream going down to the wire...lol.

Seriously, no disrespect to any streamers out there; I just found this funny.

Lol, true John. Didn't think about that.

 

[PoolSharkAllen]

We have to be realistic here guys, we're talking about one or two man operations trying to provide a service here and you're trying to demand services that Microsoft needs to create. Trust me, i'm as broke, if not more so, than anyone, but lets be realistic about what comes along with $25 (or $1-3 if its up to some of you out there) for 3 days of pool.

Sponsors who are willing to support streaming are looking for eye balls of people who can afford to buy their products. So if you are broke, I doubt that you're the market that sponsors are targeting. Incidentally, if you can afford to spend money at the local pool hall, then you're not really broke.

The iTunes business model of charging $1 per download is actually very lucrative for Apple and is something that might be applied to a pool PPV business model. By reducing the price of a PPV, more people will watch it. Charging $1-3 PPV is a way of generating additional revenue and profit, whereas giving the product away for free makes it that much harder for a struggling enterprise to stay afloat.

 

[gettnthere]

Based on Bad Blood 1 how about Strickland vs. Putnam? The "bad blood" there sounds pretty well intact at least from Shawn's side.

Ray

i like this idea and earl could give shawn a spot and shawn would still have no chance

 

[beav99_4life]

Sponsors who are willing to support streaming are looking for eye balls of people who can afford to buy their products. So if you are broke, I doubt that you're the market that sponsors are targeting. Incidentally, if you can afford to spend money at the local pool hall, then you're not really broke.

The iTunes business model of charging $1 per download is actually very lucrative for Apple and is something that might be applied to a pool PPV business model. By reducing the price of a PPV, more people will watch it. Charging $1-3 PPV is a way of generating additional revenue and profit, whereas giving the product away for free makes it that much harder for a struggling enterprise to stay afloat.

You must be confused about who I am. I don't own or operate any streaming company, so I'm not sure what my financial status had to do with sponsors. And just how do you know I spend money at a pool hall at this point in time?

As for the Itunes model, I said that it might work if the company had a large library to offer and if it was financially reasonable for the streamer. And obviously you missed where I said it doesn't matter if you drop the price, you won't pick up enough viewers to cover the costs. People who tend to buy streams will buy them no mayer what the cost is as long as its reasonable. The rest wouldn't pay for a stream no mayer whay it cost. People want a Mercedes for the price of a Kia and it won't work out for anyone.

 

[nathandumoulin]

Charging $1-3 PPV is a way of generating additional revenue and profit, whereas giving the product away for free makes it that much harder for a struggling enterprise to stay afloat.

As I mentioned earlier, the math is not even close to accurate.

It takes $5k+ to put together one of these streams. That's to break even. Now 2000 people MAX watch a free stream of a major event. Even the streamer somehow could get 100% of these people to pay $1-$3 (which isn't even close to possible), they'd still end up losing money.

Again....the *math does not work*. It's not as easy as people think. If it were, we wouldn't all be dead broke and pool wouldn't be in the dumps.

As for the other post about "not marketing properly"....where do you propose the streamer gets the necessary funds to advertise? Advertising isn't cheap, and when the streams are already losing money, a few extra thousand dollars doesn't just fall from the sky.

 

[JCIN]

The biggest hole in the market and most often heard complaint I see and hear comes down to time shifting. Most people who are going to pay $25 to watch a match for three days want to see it live. There is however a substantial number as well that want to be able to watch it on demand and that is the hole that needs filled first IMO.

With TAR matches there are several challenges we face.

1. Technical ability. I don't have it. I simply don't know how to create or purchase the capability we want with the resources we have at present. That is being worked on by someone smarter than me as we speak. It will be done at some point.

2. Length of match. Most tournament matches are 2 hours or less. One of our matches is 16-20 hours. This in itself presents some not inconsequential challenges when it comes to handling VOD.

3. Limited resources. TAR up until just recently has had exactly one person doing all the tech work. That person is me and four years ago I didn't know a XLR cable from a garden hose. To do this stuff well is difficult. To do it well without experience and a lot of money is HARD. I learned in photography that somethings you just can't do cheap. Video is ten times worse. Add in the pressure of live production and it gets worse. There is no second take. When you screw up, a piece of gear fails or one setting in one system is wrong its on display for everyone to witness.

I say all that to illustrate that saying "Well XYZ does ABC" is easy to say but hard to put into practice when you don't have a clue how to do it and paying someone isn't an option. I have been extremely lucky to have gotten some guidance from people with much more expertise than I have like Nathan and Cleary both of whom are real pro's at what they do. The live camera work and graphics before and during TAR 20 are a glimpse of whats to come in future productions thanks to their contributions.

I could go on forever talking about why we do things the way we do. Believe me I would be very surprised if anyone has thought more about the PPV/streaming thing than I have over the last four years. One thing I know is I have seen steady improvement and growth all across the industry. This in a terrible down time in the economy. You can chalk that up to one thing. There is a very small but very dedicated group of people who love pool and want to watch the best in the world play it despite the technical glitches and hassles associated with it being produced by small half broke companies with more passion than sense and sometimes ability. Its because of that group that TAR is still around and been able to learn and grow. Its the same for Accu-Stats, Lenny, Mark and everyone else out there trying to do things.

At some point someone is going to get it figured out and perfected. At that point, I believe, it will then be able to move outside the realm of what it is now. My friend used to have a saying about business "The pioneer always takes the arrow. Never be the pioneer." But those of us who do this thing have no choice. So we and everyone who buys in are going to take some arrows. I think it will be worth it when its all said and done.

Sorry for the book but as I said I could talk about this stuff forever.

Edit to add:

The answer to almost every "Why don't they" question and "They should" statement comes down to one or more of the following three things in order of importance:

1. Money
2. Knowledge
3. Time