Galveston World Classic – Live feed – How much $$ would you pay?

I would pay $10 - $20.00 per day depending on who was playing and commentating. If it were advertised that the commentating included "secret" tips from pro commentators ala JoeyA's recent worrk I might even pay more.

Might buy a week long admission with a discount to support the sport.

I would probably pay even more if along with the price of a week's admission I got a reasonable discount from one or more of the sponsors. A one time 20% discount on 2X the price of admission would be quite appealing. I could get something I wanted, support the sport, the sponsers and the players in one shot.

Lets say I paid $100.00 for a week's admission. First I probably would not be able to watch everything but that is OK. With a 20% discount up to a $200.00 purchase at Mueller's I could recover $40.00 and buy from Mueller's. Good deal for everyone. Might even buy a Predator break cue at a discount !
 
Last edited:
I am not sure if everyone knows this, but the ppv events are not done on Ustream. Ustream sells commercial ads that run during all the free streams, so ustream does make money on the free streams.

Also, the ppv is not free to the promoters. TAR has to pay based on the bandwidth, I think. If they don't charge enough and everyone gets on all at once they could actually lose money! (I am no expert on this, but this is how I understand that it works)

TAR also has a great deal of expenses in setting up an event. They place ads like the banner ads here on AZ, and they spend countless hours working out the logistics with the players and their backers to make sure it all goes off as planned. Imagine spending thousands to get to an event, bring the people you have to have to make it all work, and then one of the players backs out! What TAR does is not anything like a weekend streamer that goes to an already existing tournament and sets up a camera. I think there is a place for both, and I support the weekend streamers too. I support both of these streamers because they are different.

What it all boils down to is this. If we want quality streaming coverage of the best players in the best events, then it is not free. We have to pay for it through a ppv, or by patronizing the advertisers, or both. You can't expect the streamer to put in the effort and investment to put together a quality stream, travel to the events, take all the risks etc., and not make a profit from it. No one would continue to do all that for nothing.

Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
 
Another option might be for these guys looking to throw away loads of money to offer free streams and try to build a viewer base that sponsors can't ignore.

If they could get 100,000 viewers, they would make money.
 
Return on Investment

As always there are lots of good thoughts and ideas to be shared by AZBers and this thread is no different.

My perspective is that Live Streaming should be free for viewers. The problem with PPV streaming is that you limit the number of people who will tune in.

If Live Streaming is ever going to be Main Streaming, it needs to be accepted and appreciated by large numbers of people.

When large numbers of people tune in, the potential to sell them some products and services are increased. MOST sponsors want NUMBERS, large numbers of people, who have money to spend on THEIR products.

In the end the sponsors want ROI. Without a consistent ROI, even the most stalwart of advertisers will soon fade away.

Just my $.02

JoeyA
 
Wow!

If I could get 100,000 viewers, I would do it my self!

That would be fantastic! The bandwidth might be expensive, but it would be worth it if I could get that many viewers!


Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
 
One more thing!

You have to be careful who the viewers are.

I was told that pool on TV averages about 400,000 viewers. But I was also told that 99% of those are just channel surfers who wouldn't buy pool products at all. So most of the pool companies that have advertised on TV have regretted it.

Now, if we could get just 100,000 viewers who do buy pool products, we could get good money for the advertising spots! Of course, we would have to get them first, and then sell the advertising for the next venue. You couldn't just bet on the come.


Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
 
Jason Robichaud said:
Sick as a dog with the flu, I have nothing better to do than think of crap to post...

How about free stream and a small fee for chat capabilities? Free is limited use only. I know the option to ask questions etc is nice and with 1400 viewers the chat is way to heavy.
Click to expand...

I like that idea. Then the chat wouldn't be cluttered with all of the spammers, idiots, etc...
 
RBC said:
Wow!

If I could get 100,000 viewers, I would do it my self!

That would be fantastic! The bandwidth might be expensive, but it would be worth it if I could get that many viewers!


Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
Click to expand...

That is why you would need someone with deep pockets. If this group holding the Galveston event decided to dump the $250,000 in streaming, they probably could have come close.

You need a schedule, promotion, main events, instruction, Q&A etc. Start a pool channel, give it 5 years and see what happens. I think 100,000 would be possible. We are talking world wide viewers....
 
I have another question that someone here might know... Are cig companies able to advertise online? This might be some big money available. The government doesn't have the hold over the internet like regular broadcasting.
 
My wife jokes about how much televised sports I watch. With that said I do not watch that much of the live streams, some of this is due to the late nights of them. I have and will continue to purchase streams that interest me. Most of the time I really just listen to the commentary of whats going on at an event and not really get into the actual match. I like to see the live results and hear about any action thats happening that week/day. So the action reporting is key for my interest over the actual play. A live podcast or something would be sweet too.

When I purchase streams I watch it in short spurts. I cant think of the last time I watched more than an hour in a row. When streaming or television gets to a point of multiple tables views, quick replays of key shots in the tournament (from different players not in primary match), live reporting of each match (similar to espn headline banners that float on bottom of screen), or other additions to the big tourneys then I would consider paying larger amounts. Until then I will just support the occasional TAR match that interests me based on the player, or an event that has alot of action discussed through the commentating.
 
As Joey said, I personally think the stream should (and probably will) remain free. One thing to mention is that in this case, the stream and the tournament were not separate things, they were both funded from the same place. So even though one company is providing the stream and being paid by the promoters for their time/service, it's still all coming from the same place. The sponsors that were listed were not exclusive to the stream but were sponsors of the entire event. And the event as a whole lost money.

Many times players add up the reg fees, gate ticket sales and sponsorship money and assume that the promoters are skimming off the top but most people don't understand the costs that go into putting on an event like that. You have to factor in the paid staff members (which don't make nearly as much as you might think, esp for the amount of hours they put in, just ask Ken), advertising costs, hotel services fees/space rental, and especially the arena set-up. I can guarentee you that just hanging the lights for the tables and setting up the pipe and draping for the booths, tournament table areas and the pit cost well over what they could have brought in with sponsorship on this event this year.

I believe they plan to use the numbers that they pulled in on the stream to increase the sponsorship support next year.
 
JD_Hogg said:
With the great variety of events being held at the Galveston Classic, and the duration of it, I think they could really benefit $$ wise from the live feed.

Mind you the quality of the feed would have to greatly improve, and maybe a second camera. But there is such a great variety of pool matches to watch over the course of the event.

And if you could bet on some of the matches even better.

I’d be willing to dish out $50 for the whole feed, maybe a little more. Or something like $10 dollars per day. Since they had 1000 viewers at times they might be able to generate some good cash.

Hopefully this is already a part of their plan.

How much would you pay???
Click to expand...

I think your prices are in line and I wouldn't think anyone in the pool world would shy away from those prices.

That said, and with your mention of much better quality being needed before those kind of charges were in place, I would like to specify that the quality not only should include all that you mentioned, but also better lighting, and a MUCH faster connection.

I think that hamster on the wheel was way overworked trying to highspeed that stream.

In fact, I'd much rather pay than deal with free low quality.
 
Jason Robichaud said:
That is why you would need someone with deep pockets. If this group holding the Galveston event decided to dump the $250,000 in streaming, they probably could have come close.

You need a schedule, promotion, main events, instruction, Q&A etc. Start a pool channel, give it 5 years and see what happens. I think 100,000 would be possible. We are talking world wide viewers....
Click to expand...

Jason,

That would be great, but I don't see anyone with enough money to throw it away for 5 years just to see if it can be done.

There has to be a plan for income that would outrun the expenses. No one has come up with any kind of plan to be profitable, they just say "get a big sponsor and it will all work out". Well, without a plan, it won't work. Just look at Galveston. It appears that they thought that if they just bring in the best players on the planet that they would bring in huge crowds. Now that would be a revenue stream, but no one showed up to watch. They had seating for over 2000 but I doubt there was ever more than 75 people in the bleachers when I was there. So, you have to plan a revenue stream before any investors will come in.

Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
 
3andstop said:
I think your prices are in line and I wouldn't think anyone in the pool world would shy away from those prices.

That said, and with your mention of much better quality being needed before those kind of charges were in place, I would like to specify that the quality not only should include all that you mentioned, but also better lighting, and a MUCH faster connection.

I think that hamster on the wheel was way overworked trying to highspeed that stream.

In fact, I'd much rather pay than deal with free low quality.
Click to expand...

3 and stop,

I was at the event, and the broadband speed the hotel provided was huge! If you had issues, it most likely was on your end. It could have been Ustream, but I know they had enough bandwidth to upload 1o cameras at least.


Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
 
RBC said:
3 and stop,

I was at the event, and the broadband speed the hotel provided was huge! If you had issues, it most likely was on your end. It could have been Ustream, but I know they had enough bandwidth to upload 1o cameras at least.

Royce Bunnell
www.obcues.com
Click to expand...

I'm sure Justin was thinking "doesn't that just beat all!". After all the problems they've encountered with weak hotel connections, it figures the one place that had a solid connection was one that they weren't streaming from.

A general rule of thumb for those that watch the streams are - if you're the only one having the problem or only one or two more are having the problem, its on your end. If everyone is having the problem, its on the streaming end. TAR has had a glitch or two with their equipment over the years but if memory serves me correctly, the problems they encounter have more to do with the weak connection they have to work with, or the website (ustream) that they're having to rely on.

When you're at the mercy of an unknown connection, its hard to promise the best quality possible. I think most streamers want to give the best quality possible. I know TAR has spent a "small" fortune on top quality equipment but at certain venues, you wouldn't be able to tell it. Its not their fault, its the connection, but people blame TAR. Part of the problems with streaming is that people are not educated about how it works. Even after you explain it in the streaming chat until you can't type anymore, some people simply don't understand and sometimes, I think they don't want to understand. Its easier to point the finger at the person doing the streaming than it is to try to understand that it was something they had no control over.
 
I enjoy the free streams as much as anyone, but at the sametime I typically don't think twice about paying for a stream if its something I know I want to watch. There is an admission price for all of the big events; DCC, the Open, Galveston, Valley Forge. So why is it so inconceivable to pay to watch these matches from the comfort of your home, especially if its across the country and you can't make it. I've just never understood this feeling of entitlement to watch what others who are there are paying for. Since when is anything that's good supposed to be free. I feel the attitude should be to watch and enjoy the free streams while supporting the PPV's, I'm sure you'd be coming out ahead in the long run.

And Trigger, just for you:

Corvette, I'm calling you out to play for a bottle of your liqour of choice on a live PPV stream!!! (Atleast one that cost $100 or less) LOL
 
beav99_4life said:
I enjoy the free streams as much as anyone, but at the sametime I typically don't think twice about paying for a stream if its something I know I want to watch. There is an admission price for all of the big events; DCC, the Open, Galveston, Valley Forge. So why is it so inconceivable to pay to watch these matches from the comfort of your home, especially if its across the country and you can't make it. I've just never understood this feeling of entitlement to watch what others who are there are paying for. Since when is anything that's good supposed to be free. I feel the attitude should be to watch and enjoy the free streams while supporting the PPV's, I'm sure you'd be coming out ahead in the long run.




I agree with you.

I also don't see how 1000 viewers could be all that attractive to sponsors.

So far I think TAR is doing an awsome job balancing out the free stuff with the ppv. It's a great mix. Hopefully Galveston can incorporate some of your ideas.

The more money coming in the better, for the players and the game imo.
Click to expand...
 
They would have to improve the quality before ocnsidering asking for ppv. It was a nice start and hope they can improve everything going forward.
 
Aside from most being too cheap to pay for a stream, I think the hardest part (for me) is actually the process of paying for it. Going through paypal isn't hard, but for some reason, I always dread it.(I always forget my password) If the pool community could come up with a system similar to itunes, I think more would buy. For anyone who hasn't paid for music through itunes, you simple fill out your information the first time you buy, then for future purchases, you simple just click "buy" and type in your password. Its simple and painless for impulse buyers like myself. Just my thoughts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top