I'll do my best., I thought my English was good in the opening post..
You're technically not giving up anything. We're creating an avenue in which you can consistently broadcast in HD, and buy down the costs based on your performance. Essentially in theory, if the cost to use our services is $647.00 for a 6 hour stream @ 1500k, and your impression and click performance was $1,647.00. We'll credit you $1,000.00. Complete analytic reports will be provided to you and sponsors to ensure no confusion.
Obviously we have to have all the sponsorship leverage for this to happen. That is the largest hurdle we will face in this venture.
In theory, over the long haul, Sponsors will pay less, and streamers will consistently make cash when they broadcast. The key factor is creating a consistent field of measure for both sides. Putting the money in the correct places maximizing benefit.
The only reason, my friend, why those sites are unbeatable, is because we foolishly keep embellishing our content to them. It’s a vicious monopoly.
You're Rbglislpou
We will actually encourage OnSitePool.com streamers to pick their poison site. Except.. The content that is packaged for those will be of significant less quality, branded to entice the eyeballs to come watch it in high definition, or come back and watch an edited version with better stuff. This feature will be on the fly. So no need to repackage. OnSitePool.com will have this neat feature for you at your disposal. YouTube, Facebook, etc. etc. How? Because with ABS, Flash Media Server stores as many variations you tell it in the manifest. You will essentially be able to tell our repackager (but there already packaged) which bitrate you want to send out as bait.
OnSItePool.com will blow anything and everything AudioVideoWeb provides. I promise.
I think you essentially hit the nail on the head. I think “Yes” would be an appropriate answer to your whole paragraph. You would not however, have to give us full rights to your content.
We are not in business to steal content. But in all reality, what's the difference? You are already handing over the content to YouTube & Ustream for that purpose. But we'll keep that a secret..
The only benchmark that is of a streamers concern is the cost of the service. You beat that you're in the black. I guess the sophistication could be limitless based on agreed terms among all streamers who use the service on how to deal with copyrights and material infringement.
We couldn't use sponsorship money to compensate for re-broadcasts. Re-broadcasts have to be more lucrative in the manner that the eyeballs would pay a subscription. Then in theory, burning DVD's and creating box sets would be in the past. The key here is limiting the “event” to a 1 time HD broadcast only and sticking to that principal. With our services this will become a complete reality, but we do not want to tell streamers how to conduct their business.
My opening post was professional. We are serious about this venture. Maybe I should redirect your tense. “I gotta say it looks like a pool guy met an internet guy and ^have a good idea.”
Thank you for your response. A few parts made me chuckle. Hopefully your dark side will leave you, and come stream with us.
Zach.
