How can this be?

SLIM

SLIM

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
i would estimate that there were less than 250 people each night at icebreakers to watch the match between earl & shane.

From what i have been told, only about 250 people paid to watch the tar stream.

Two of the best pool players in the world match up & less than 500 people are willing to pay to see it.

What is the reason for this?

SLIM
 
I know some people who tried to get in..all seats were taken.
Pool can't handle a big audience generally.

So,I see streaming as being the vehicle to pool growth.
But there are lots of people like me...computer illiterates.
Yeah..one finger search and peck...no paypal.
I still send cash to causes I want to support, using friends.
Some day I'll set up a paypal account..a lot of us will.

In the meantime I'll buy streamer's products on site.

When the Earl/Shane match went free, 2000 watchers showed up.
Eventually we will become paying customers
 
I think its because pretty much only people here and those who hangout at icebreakers knew about it. We need posters all around the cities and tv ads....in an ideal world that is.
 
Slim,

Last time the Mosconi Cup was held at the MGM Grand in Vegas, several people went to the front desk to ask where the event was. Even the hotel personnel did not know a major televised worldwide event was being held on the premises. Guess a local pool room is no different! How sad is that.

Lyn
 
jimbojim said:
i think its because pretty much only people here and those who hangout at icebreakers knew about it. We need posters all around the cities and tv ads....in an ideal world that is.
Click to expand...

when tar let the stream go out for free over 2000 people watched it.
That is over 750 people who were not willing to pay for it but were obviously interested in it.
That is a shame.

I agree with you about the advertizement not being widespread enough.

SLIM
 
A lot of the pool players and fans that won't pay $25 for THREE DAYS for an action match with two of the big names in pool will pay $75 or more for three hours of boxing, the cage bs, and other sports and not complain.

I think a lot of it is they are use to free stream in pool, most people can see and play the best players at their local poolroom, and the #1 bigest reason is pool streamers don't make the money to promote a stream to the mainstream that don't go on AZ Billiards. I don't know much about the social networks, but that seems the only way to promote pool ppv right now with the small amount of money thats in it. Johnnyt
 
Of course, tv ads would cost an arm + a leg with the hair that comes with it.

Posters on billboards like they do with upcoming music/comedy shows and movies would be a great addition for having a spread out announcement. Its probably cheaper and would attract people. Get a few and then word of mouth will ensue.
 
I personally think the three day event killed some of the people; it did me. I could only watch one night...why on earth do I want to tune in for three consecutive nights to watch some race to 100. Do what you can in one day..three days take me away from what I really like; shooting pool !
 
johnnyt said:
a lot of the pool players and fans that won't pay $25 for three days for an action match with two of the big names in pool will pay $75 or more for three hours of boxing, the cage bs, and other sports and not complain.

I think a lot of it is they are use to free stream in pool, most people can see and play the best players at their local poolroom, and the #1 bigest reason is pool streamers don't make the money to promote a stream to the mainstream that don't go on az billiards. I don't know much about the social networks, but that seems the only way to promote pool ppv right now with the small amount of money thats in it. Johnnyt
Click to expand...

i think you point out a very important problem.
Some people are under the delusion that they see pro caliber pool in their local poolroom.
Granted, there are some very good pool players in just about every pool hall in america.
However, very few of these players are on the same level as the top pros.
The top pros just make it look so easy that it looks like anyone should be able to do what they are doing.

SLIM
 
After only getting 200+ paying customers, and then seeing almost 2,000 joining the stream once it went free, JCIN said something to the effect of: Man if I could get 2,000 people to actually PAY for the stream, I'd fly to LA, pick-up Charlie Sheen, and show that pu$$y how to really party! :thumbup:

Mr Hoppe is a long time supporter of TAR.
 
Sorry to hear that.

houstoer said:
i personally think the three day event killed some of the people; it did me. I could only watch one night...why on earth do i want to tune in for three consecutive nights to watch some race to 100. Do what you can in one day..three days take me away from what i really like; shooting pool !
Click to expand...

myself & three others drove an hour to get to ice breakers to watch the match & then drove an hour back home each day of the match.
It was more than worth it.

SLIM
 
SLIM said:
myself & three others drove an hour to get to ice breakers to watch the match & then drove an hour back home each day of the match.
It was more than worth it
SLIM
Click to expand...

Well worth it & I'd do it again.
If theirs gonna be a rematch I hope it's at Ice Breakers.
Also about them turning people away at the door I would half to say is false. I had the best seat in the bleachers & I could've layed down & watched the match. Their was seats open.
 
SLIM said:
i would estimate that there were less than 250 people each night at icebreakers to watch the match between earl & shane.

From what i have been told, only about 250 people paid to watch the tar stream.

Two of the best pool players in the world match up & less than 500 people are willing to pay to see it.

What is the reason for this?

SLIM
Click to expand...

Pool needs what are referred to as "Patrons or angels". My wife gives a lot of money to a local repertory theater as well as a children theater. We give money each year to public television as well as political campaigns for people we believe in. If there was a non profit organization that promoted pool I would be happy to write a $1000.00 check each year. If we can't find at least a 1000 people (and I am aiming low), nation wide who would pony up a $1000 each to run tournaments I would be surprised. That is 1 million right from the start to underwrite say 6 large tournaments a year. These tournaments could give away hundreds of thousands in prize money with no problem.

This was basically what the IPT was to be till it could be self sustaining but they screw it up. All the money does not come from the "patrons", these tournaments will make money but with no worry of short falls. It is almost a given, at least in the beginning, they will lose money but it doesn't matter, that is why they are underwritten. This is done by all kinds of organizations from public television to the humane society. Heck, you can do fundraisers to support it. I.E. again, public television. The problem is, we keep come back the ineptitude of the powers that be in pool.
 
Houston (TX) is rife with poolplayers/poolhalls, but at the Galveston World Classic a couple years ago, the stands were rarely filled with more than 50 or 60 paying spectators each day although MANY of the best players in the world were there (excluding the Europeans that had a scheduling conflict with the EuroTour that weekend). I've come to the conclusion that people just don't want to watch pool live or televised, for free or not!!!

Maniac
 
SLIM said:
myself & three others drove an hour to get to ice breakers to watch the match & then drove an hour back home each day of the match.
It was more than worth it.

SLIM
Click to expand...

An hour, that's all? I thought you liked pool? :) I can't understand where the problem is. Anyone that is on this forum is obviously interested in pool. $25 is so cheap for what you get that it's almost laughable. You're basically getting it for free.

I had four people texting me during the match asking for updates, all of which had the ability to purchase the stream. Yet none of them did. I drove forever and spent my entire weekend around the match, but they couldn't even spend the $25 to watch. I just don't know what holds people back from buying the ppv. I know it's not the money for most (even if they say it is), because those same people probably spent more than that eating out on one of those days and then talked about how they couldn't afford it.

It cost me $300 to watch that match, and it was well worth every penny.
 
I think you guys keyed in on the 4 main reasons for the lack of numbers.

1) It was set up for 200 or so spectators, even the WPBA events (at least the one I went to in Mt Pleasant) only had seating for 200 or so, so while it would be nice to set up a venue where 1000 people could go and watch, it would be a logistical nightmare AND a huge monetary gamble.

2) The length of the game. While it might take ALL the 'lucky rolls' out of the game by running to 100, it also takes out all but the most dedicated pool fans/gamblers/people with NOTHING going on for an entire weekend. Maybe shortening the race to 15, and running first to 4 sets would be more attention grabbing, or having a king of the hill type tournament where 4 or 8 players post 2.5k each would be more appealing, racing to 21 or 25.

3) Advertising... I'd have NEVER known about this match if it wasn't for AZB, and I have many friends who are much more serious about pool than me, who had no clue it was going on. the Johnny/Earl match has been advertised a little more, but still only within the pool community. Being from england originally, I know that the OTB companies are the ones who profit the most from sponsoring snooker tours and tournaments, why not get a casino involved, really ramp up the ads and create an environment where average joes will put down $40 on one of them to win.

4) Production quality.. As much as I thank JCIN, runout media and the like for doing what they do, and it's got a charming, grassroots feel to it that you can't fake, it's also a huge negative. I doubt they'll be hearing from ESPN2 to show a selection of the top 10 racks from the match (which is almost criminal.. the drama, the phenomenal shooting of earl, the epic table would make for great TV). Obviously someone at ESPN thinks that the WPBA is more Television friendly, whatever the actual case may be, the pool players/pool organizations can't be stubborn, there has to be a middle ground between the network sports companies, and the big names in pool to find a TV friendly, authentic product that can be produced.

I just feel like the streaming video pool isn't going to be the breakthrough in pool that some people are hoping for. It's a treat for us that love pool enough to hunch over a laptop for hours watching a match, but we're in the minority. I personally think bringing the men and women together, along with top amateurs from qualifying tournaments around the world (Just like the WSOP does) and running a week long tournament, then televising it in weekly installments, with back stories and great production would be phenomenal, just remember, Texas hold'em didn't have the growth it did, until Chris moneymaker shocked the world. Imagine if Jason Kirkwood or Adam Smith or Hennessee hit that gear they have and ran through appleton, corr, immonen and hatch before losing to ouchan in the semi-finals, and getting to watch alex/jasmin in the finals...

PS. I know this was tried before, with the Tavern pool championships (or whatever it was called) and the huge tournaments from a few years back (forgot the names of them), but getting television coverage and a channel like ESPN and a casino involved would make running it so much easier.
 
lastminutepanic said:
I think you guys keyed in on the 4 main reasons for the lack of numbers.

1) It was set up for 200 or so spectators, even the WPBA events (at least the one I went to in Mt Pleasant) only had seating for 200 or so, so while it would be nice to set up a venue where 1000 people could go and watch, it would be a logistical nightmare AND a huge monetary gamble.

2) The length of the game. While it might take ALL the 'lucky rolls' out of the game by running to 100, it also takes out all but the most dedicated pool fans/gamblers/people with NOTHING going on for an entire weekend. Maybe shortening the race to 15, and running first to 4 sets would be more attention grabbing, or having a king of the hill type tournament where 4 or 8 players post 2.5k each would be more appealing, racing to 21 or 25.

3) Advertising... I'd have NEVER known about this match if it wasn't for AZB, and I have many friends who are much more serious about pool than me, who had no clue it was going on. the Johnny/Earl match has been advertised a little more, but still only within the pool community. Being from england originally, I know that the OTB companies are the ones who profit the most from sponsoring snooker tours and tournaments, why not get a casino involved, really ramp up the ads and create an environment where average joes will put down $40 on one of them to win.

4) Production quality.. As much as I thank JCIN, runout media and the like for doing what they do, and it's got a charming, grassroots feel to it that you can't fake, it's also a huge negative. I doubt they'll be hearing from ESPN2 to show a selection of the top 10 racks from the match (which is almost criminal.. the drama, the phenomenal shooting of earl, the epic table would make for great TV). Obviously someone at ESPN thinks that the WPBA is more Television friendly, whatever the actual case may be, the pool players/pool organizations can't be stubborn, there has to be a middle ground between the network sports companies, and the big names in pool to find a TV friendly, authentic product that can be produced.

I just feel like the streaming video pool isn't going to be the breakthrough in pool that some people are hoping for. It's a treat for us that love pool enough to hunch over a laptop for hours watching a match, but we're in the minority. I personally think bringing the men and women together, along with top amateurs from qualifying tournaments around the world (Just like the WSOP does) and running a week long tournament, then televising it in weekly installments, with back stories and great production would be phenomenal, just remember, Texas hold'em didn't have the growth it did, until Chris moneymaker shocked the world. Imagine if Jason Kirkwood or Adam Smith or Hennessee hit that gear they have and ran through appleton, corr, immonen and hatch before losing to ouchan in the semi-finals, and getting to watch alex/jasmin in the finals...

PS. I know this was tried before, with the Tavern pool championships (or whatever it was called) and the huge tournaments from a few years back (forgot the names of them), but getting television coverage and a channel like ESPN and a casino involved would make running it so much easier.
Click to expand...

Casino's won't touch it. If they can't run a line on it for betting purposes, it's not worth it for them. And they won't put a line on it because of the fear of someone dumping.

WPBA is on ESPN because they pay to be there.

I like your ideas, but sadly it's not gonna happen that way, at least right now. Streaming is the best bet we have currently. Thankfully TAR and BigTruck and TVMike and everyone else who streams provide us with something to get excited about.
 
Houstoer said:
I personally think the three day event killed some of the people; it did me. I could only watch one night...why on earth do I want to tune in for three consecutive nights to watch some race to 100. Do what you can in one day..three days take me away from what I really like; shooting pool !
Click to expand...

This and the fact that they go until 2 or 3 in the morning make it pretty much out of the question for me to watch, though I did for this one. Watched until the end on Saturday night and fell asleep before the finish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top