FXOpen Invitational Final Analysis - Page 2

On February 20 2012 13:26 ninjamyst wrote:
Any chance we can see the breakdown of the cost to run the event? Just want to see where that $8k is coming from.

On February 20 2012 13:23 Gheed wrote:
You rebroadcasted it, but you ran it right after the first airing ended. Would you not have gotten more ad revenue running it again during a better time for NA/EU viewers? Not that it would have probably made you break even, but still

On February 20 2012 13:33 MrCash wrote:
Did this in a couple of minutes, but someone weigh in if I'm not doing this right.
2412.88/956 = $2.52 (Earned per ad)
2.52/7615 = $0.00033 (average earned per ad through the duration of the showing)

If I got my definition of CPM properly, the $0.00033 would be the CPM in this specific scenario and it's not what has been touted by any streaming companies.

On February 20 2012 13:36 FXOpen wrote:


It's an easily confused term. What CPM means is how much you get for every 1000 shown ad's. So your calculations don't factor in fill rate.

On February 20 2012 13:27 ReachTheSky wrote:
Sounds like your in the wrong business if your trying to make money. Maybe you should try a different market?

On February 20 2012 13:33 MrCash wrote:
Did this in a couple of minutes, but someone weigh in if I'm not doing this right.
2412.88/956 = $2.52 (Earned per ad)
2.52/7615 = $0.00033 (average earned per ad through the duration of the showing)

If I got my definition of CPM properly, the $0.00033 would be the CPM in this specific scenario and it's not what has been touted by any streaming companies.
Or if CPM is per 1000, then it would be $0.33, which makes a lot more sense.
Still is pretty low, as normally we hear numbers ranging from $2-$4 thrown around.

On February 20 2012 13:42 udgnim wrote:


I think they're looking more for financial sustainability than financial profitability.

On February 20 2012 13:31 FXOpen wrote:


We ran rebroadcasts for over 12 hours after each event, Unfortunately we were not approved to have rebroadcast events in the Calander.

On February 20 2012 13:42 Primadog wrote:


This is an incorrect way to calculate CPM or eCPM.

The error of this come from double-counting ads from rebroadcasts. While 956 ads may been played, most of it was played during rebroadcast time, which have much lower concurrent average than the live broadcast. Therefore you're artificially deflating eCPM.

Much more accurate measure would be viewer-hour per ad dollar, which is roughly inline with the first-week analysis FXOBoss produced.

On February 20 2012 13:47 MrCash wrote:


How is that not eCPM?
Do TV ads pay less when they run the show 3 days in a row when the same people are watching?
If the ad service providers gives less revenue for running more ads to same viewers, they are either not providing enough diverse ads or are insufficiently filling the ad demand.
Those numbers are based completely of total revenue and average concurrent viewers.
Viewer-hour per ad dollar ad would serve no purpose and would by definition NOT be eCPM or CPM.
Number of ads run per hour and number of viewers hour to hour would vary as well.

On February 20 2012 13:31 FXOpen wrote:


We ran rebroadcasts for over 12 hours after each event, Unfortunately we were not approved to have rebroadcast events in the Calander.

On February 20 2012 13:48 Primadog wrote:


The trick here is that there aren't 7615 people on average watching both the live and rebroadcasts.

On February 20 2012 13:50 MrCash wrote:


How do you know that?
They said average concurrent viewers and total ads run.
If the rebroadcast numbers don't include average viewers, than maybe the rebroadcast ads are not listed either?
That seems like a strange assumption to make.

On February 20 2012 13:55 Primadog wrote:


I enjoy tracking data, so I have an idea of the general range of where FIS#5 runs on average. It's unlikely that 7615 number represent an average that includes rebroadcast when this is their best day:


Note that the http://pe.nitrated.net/ tracker refreshes at 3minute intervals. Hence the instanenous concurrent peak would be higher than the tracked concurrent peak.

Consider, for example, if you have 8k people watching live, 4k watching the first rebroadcast, and 2k thereafter watching the 2nd rebroadcast on the average. the 956 ads break down evenly to each of these three time slots. Therefore:

2412.88 / ( 8k * 956 / 3 + 4k * 956 /3 + 2k * 956 / 3) = 0.00054

or a eCPM of $0.5 per thousand. Not great, but at least closer to the quoted CPM and known fill rates.

On February 20 2012 14:06 Befree wrote:
I feel like I watched the rebroadcasts much less than I would have otherwise because of it not being on the TL calendar. Is there anyway you guys could get approved for that this next time?

I can't remember how exactly it was setup but there were many times I'd go on the rebroadcast after finding it and be like "Wow, I can't believe there are these great games on here right now and it's not under "On Air:" I have to imagine there were many people who would have otherwise been watching that rebroadcast if it were listed more prominently.

I'm also curious on the sponsorship issue. Maybe I misunderstand what "434,895 Unique Visitors" means, but isn't that a huge amount of awareness for your sponsor? I guess I just don't see why this isn't "reliant" enough. Isn't this appealing to sponsors, why would they all leave?

I look forward to the next tournament. Should be fun .

On February 20 2012 14:02 MrCash wrote:


While a very pretty chart, it's still a lot of assumptions.
Assuming that average numbers for rebroadcasts from one day of views.
Assuming the total ads run is actually total for everything, while other numbers are exclusive to certain times.
Either we can draw conclusions assuming the numbers given to us are accurate or we can't draw any conclusions at all.
The more assumptions you ad to the equation, the less valuable the conclusion.
From what you are showing there, that seems to be rather accurate for that one day, but that's as far as I can reasonably agree.