Steinway Classic - Who Set Stream Prices?

P

playpool2

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
What were they thinking? Must be a government employee. Complain about prices and they raise them.

For $18 i will go watch a movie that cost millions to produce not a pool tournament.

I would willingly pay to watch if it was similar to the Accu-Stats production where you could choose a day or evening session where the charge was in line with its value.

Not a good decision.
 
I always enjoy sitting back when the time allows and watch a little live pool online, but I agree with you. This is a bit steep and I would never be able to take advantage of an entire day at the same time. Also, that stream has historically been iffy ... and it isn't quite Accu-stats either as you mentioned so, I'll second your thought.

Splitting it into sessions is good, but I too was surprised to see 18 bucks a day. I would have imagined it to be more like 10 or 12, but hey .... it's their deal I guess. I'm out.

Not to mention that for me ... it's rotation. Not my cup of tea. Too redundant for me. I might take a single 18 dollar stab at a good one hole match though. :smile:
 
anything more than $10 a day is too much, imo. I MIGHT pay that much for something like the mosconi cup, but wouldn't buy it everyday...too expensive.
 
playpool2 said:
What were they thinking? Must be a government employee. Complain about prices and they raise them.

For $18 i will go watch a movie that cost millions to produce not a pool tournament.

I would willingly pay to watch if it was similar to the Accu-Stats production where you could choose a day or evening session where the charge was in line with its value.

Not a good decision.
Click to expand...

i COMPLETELY Agree...i would have paid $5.95-$7.95 per day, but No Way Jose for $18...Give me a break....
 
It's cheaper then going to the movies for us. Forty dollars is giving us a longer time to watch some all star pool. We've been watching the usopen all week. Why would I want to start cleaning or cooking yet,,,, lol.

It's a little high for what it is, without the A-one commentators that we had with Danny D and Mark Wilson this should be a bit cheaper.
:wink:
We bought n late would have been much cheaper I think at the early bird price.
All the best
Mrs.g
 
Gunn_Slinger said:
It's cheaper then going to the movies for us. Forty dollars is giving us a longer time to watch some all star pool. We've been watching the usopen all week. Why would I want to start cleaning or cooking yet,,,, lol.

It's a little high for what it is, without the A-one commentators that we had with Danny D and Mark Wilson this should be a bit cheaper.
:wink:
We bought n late would have been much cheaper I think at the early bird price.
All the best
Mrs.g
Click to expand...
That Accu-Stats stream had "A-one commentators"? People living in the past :o
 
Danny D is top of the line imo.

I love hearing his commentating. I always will as long as he is available.
 
I agree its way overpriced. I was looking forward to watching football then watching pool and would watch it each night but its a little to steep for my blood.
 
If it was for Fri., Sat., and Sun., I would of....But I work Mon. and Tues. and have league both those nights also..Wouldn't get to see much pool for that price...So I had to pass...Wouldn't be worth it for the time I had to watch...
If the price was lower I probably would of even though I wouldn't get to see much...
 
Stream prices

I bought the early bird special which I think was $30 for all 3 days. I didn't think it was bad but there is a gamble considering the problems we've had with streams out of Steinway earlier.

I always look at the stream purchases as supporting the people trying to build pool. I buy most all of the major streams and some I never even watch. I'm also setup on auto pay with some streamers and never tune into their stream. If I happen to catch POV, I try and send Daniel 20. BTW, his stream is always top quality IMHO. It may be crazy but I'm a working professional with some disposable income and I want to try and help the people supporting pool. I have friends who go to Nascar, football, baseball, etc and it cost them thousands every year. I just choose to support pool as much as possible. It may not be everyone's cup of tea but we all sit around and b*tch about how crappy pool has become but we never spend any money on it. Try and support a few whether they are good or not and buy a few products from the sponsors. I think that would go a long way to building the game back.

Just my 2 cents....
 
Let us call a spade a spade, the stream prices are overpriced & I bet some of it is to cover the cost of the added money. The same thing we had with the Gotham stream.

Someone would have to hate their money to pay for a AZBTV stream especially out of Steinway. If it is not the wifi issues that consistently mess with the stream, it is the super amateurish commentary that frequents the streams. No one cares about what you or anyone else is eating at the venue or finds good at the place.
 
BeiberLvr said:
Danny D is top of line.

Archer should be on the Mosconi Cup team.

Be serious, you're trolling here, right?
Click to expand...

What's Archers statistics in mosconi cup?? Is he any good over there?

Actually, now that I think of it,,,,, Archer does have the worst record over there right?

Doesn't Shane have the best? Isn't he like 98%winner?

Just thinking out loud, just thinking out loud;)
 
LIAKOS27 said:
What's Archers statistics in mosconi cup?? Is he any good over there?

Actually, now that I think of it,,,,, Archer does have the worst record over there right?

Doesn't Shane have the best? Isn't he like 98%winner?

Just thinking out loud, just thinking out loud;)
Click to expand...

You're probably being sarcastic. But for anyone wondering about their actual records:

Method 1. -- Counting a full win or loss for each player in a doubles' or trebles' match (i.e., not splitting the point into halves or thirds), and a win and a loss for everyone in a team match (i.e., not splitting the point into fifths or sixths).

• Shane Van Boening (8 years -- 2007-2014) ..... 9-12 singles, 9-10 doubles, 3-5 teams, 21-27 total (winning percentage of 44%)

• Johnny Archer (17 years) ..... 18-13 singles, 26-23 doubles, 0-2 trebles, 5-4 teams, 49-42 total (winning percentage of 54%)


Method 2. -- Counting a full point for each player in a singles win or loss, a half a point for each player in a doubles win or loss, a third of a point for each player in a trebles (played only in 2006) win or loss, and one-fifth of a point (one-sixth in 2006 when the teams had 6 players) for each player in a team win or loss.

• Van Boening ..... 14.1 - 18.0 (winning percentage 44%)

• Archer ..... 31.9 - 26.0 (winning percentage 55%)


[Both players had poor showings in their latest Cups -- 1-4 (Method 1) for SVB in 2014, 0-4 for Archer in 2013.]
 
Last edited:
Question for AT Large

AtLarge said:
You're probably being sarcastic. But for anyone wondering about their actual records:

Method 1. -- Counting a full win or loss for each player in a doubles' or trebles' match (i.e., not splitting the point into halves or thirds), and a win and a loss for everyone in a team match (i.e., not splitting the point into fifths or sixths).

• Shane Van Boening (8 years -- 2007-2014) ..... 9-12 singles, 9-10 doubles, 3-5 teams, 21-27 total (winning percentage of 44%)

• Johnny Archer (17 years) ..... 18-13 singles, 26-23 doubles, 0-2 trebles, 5-4 teams, 49-42 total (winning percentage of 54%)


Method 2. -- Counting a full point for each player in a singles win or loss, a half a point for each player in a doubles win or loss, a third of a point for each player in a trebles (played only in 2006) win or loss, and one-fifth of a point (one-sixth in 2006 when the teams had 6 players) for each player in a team win or loss.

• Van Boening ..... 14.1 - 18.0 (winning percentage 44%)

• Archer ..... 31.9 - 25.9 (winning percentage 55%)


[Both players had poor showings in their latest Cups -- 1-4 (Method 1) for SVB in 2014, 0-4 for Archer in 2013.]
Click to expand...

What were Bergman and Halls records from last year using the above method?

Thanks

Wedge
 
playpool2 said:
What were they thinking? Must be a government employee. Complain about prices and they raise them.

For $18 i will go watch a movie that cost millions to produce not a pool tournament.

I would willingly pay to watch if it was similar to the Accu-Stats production where you could choose a day or evening session where the charge was in line with its value.

Not a good decision.
Click to expand...

I do agree $18 for a pool stream that has connection issues and poor commentary is excessive.

By charging $18 you have eliminated a lot of folks who would have paid $9.95 to watch.

If you are trying to market the few who are going to watch and then you charge nearly $20 I think your're shooting yourself in the foot.

But the market will determine if it is to high.

Don
 
Wedge said:
What were Bergman and Halls records from last year using the above method?

Thanks

Wedge
Click to expand...

Method 1:
• Justin Bergman ..... 0-2 singles, 1-1 doubles, 0-1 teams, 1-4 total (20%)
• Justin Hall ..... 1-0 singles, 2-1 doubles, 0-1 teams, 3-2 total (60%)

Method 2:
• Bergman ..... 0.5 - 2.7 (16%)
• Hall ..... 2.0 - 0.7 (74%)
 
Thanks

AtLarge said:
Method 1:
• Justin Bergman ..... 0-2 singles, 1-1 doubles, 0-1 teams, 1-4 total (20%)
• Justin Hall ..... 1-0 singles, 2-1 doubles, 0-1 teams, 3-2 total (60%)

Method 2:
• Bergman ..... 0.5 - 2.7 (16%)
• Hall ..... 2.0 - 0.7 (74%)
Click to expand...

Good stuff!

Wedge
 
Don't know why others are cluttering this up with Masconi Cup Talk.
Just wanted to say I'm glad I didn't buy the Steinway stream.
Too expensive. Some are asking for money back on their facebook page because of streaming problems. Good luck there. The live scoring from what I saw yesterday is a joke and the brackets are a joke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top