|
On January 31 2011 06:30 StarBrift wrote:
It absolutely cuts exposure for the GSL. But it's the path they've chosen to go as worldwide streaming is not free and they have to finance it somehow. Hopefully they can get sponsors abroad and have a high quality free stream + vods in the future.
GomTV should just do a low speed korean stream, then allow restream. Fans will take care of the rest.
|
The answer here is obvious imo:
Pay per View = Lower viewer counts, but Gom makes more profit in the short term.
Free per View = Higher Viewer counts, less profit in the short term, (more profit in the long term from sponsors and advertisers though)
obviously GOM is worried about making money right now, and has lost sight of the bigger picture imo.
Also, to those who say, 10$/month is nothing, I beg to differ, 10$/mo is a LOT. Especially for a broke college student, not all of us have great jobs, or have parents with deep pockets who like to spoil their kids rotten with whatever they want. 10$/mo is almost as much as I pay for my cell phone bill, It's 1/4 of how much I pay for my Internet. 20$/year sounds like a fair price to me but 10$/mo is ludicrous.(and isn't it 15$/mo for gom anyways?) If I can get billions of hours of free content(youtube, hulu etc) and thousands of hours of free starcraft2 content by paying 40$/mo for internet, I shouldn't have to pay 10$/mo for a few GSL games. GOM would do better in the long term if they get more viewers, and make them watch a couple advertisements rather than trying to make all the viewers pay a fee, This business model has been reproduced all over the internet. Saying that the only way they can do it is by charging a fee is just simply not true.
|
The way I see it, if you're not working you can probably arrange your schedule to view the live stream.
If you are working you can probably afford the $10 for what amounts to 15-20+ hours of VODS.
I'll agree that the price cuts down on their audience, but it's ultimately GOM's decision to go with this business model. Someone in charge there ultimately believes that the money earned from subs is equal to or greater than the additional advertising revenue if the streams & VODS were free to watch, and I won't sit here pretending to know more about their business than they do.
|
On February 01 2011 02:19 Heimatloser wrote:
[...]
i dont get it way so many people are willing to pay for content these days.
[...]
Because contrary to what most of the internet generation believes, having access to the internet does not equal accessing everything for free. A decade of unregulated downloads, P2P and torrenting created that mindset. And I'm pretty sure you're wrong if you speak of "so many people"; most internet users, even those with a healthy wallet or paypal account are cheapskates with afore mentioned attitude.
If GomTV wouldn't charge, it wouldn't exist in the form we know it today. Maybe there'd be a league just financed by sponsoring, but the quality would be abysmal and the future outlook bleak at best.
-------
This is all off-topic, of course. Regarding the OP and the question asked there: I think we should be happy there's quality SC2 content at all. It's not as if GomTV had an unique position in a saturated market; they're basically holding the monopoly on high level SC2 league play with streams, VODs and commentary included.
Without GOM, we wouldn't be talking about the possibilty of introducing new people to the scene at all, because there would be no scene to begin with. Free, accessible content as a niche will follow once there's a whole market for this and some competition for GOM, but until then we should respect the pioneer work they're doing for the SC2 scene.
|
If gomtv was smart, they would use youtube.com/gomtv and upload the VODs there; they could eventually make a killing through youtube partnership, and the increased exposure they would get would be immense. But it would never happen because they aren't that tied to the foreigner market.
|
I watch sports for free on tv. I watch starcraft for free on the internet. Why would I pay. Yes it might be the ultimate starcraft... but if its so good then they should get sponsors and advertising when they get huge hits from how popular it is and make their money the traditional way. Streams can have adverts.... in between games can be adverts. Advertising is how sports run. Teams have sponsors and companies pay to advertise during breaks etc.
Esports shouldn't be any different if they let it grow. The cost to watch just chokes the enthusiasm of a non existent fan base. The whole facebook thing... its not cool if it costs.
|
On January 31 2011 06:30 mprs wrote:
I think people can still watch SQ live for free, which isn't too bad...
Except only a hardcore fan is going to stay up into the wee hours of the morning to watch it.
|
On February 01 2011 03:41 Iplaythings wrote:
You wont win any diehard broodwar fans over by declining their favorite sport and then wanting them to pay for your shit that took away my passion.
Thats my look on it, I can enjoy sc2 matches but if they want me to pay for something like that.
They do it the wrong way around. I'd pay if I had to, to watch BW. I wouldn't if I wasnt allready inside the community.
The SQ live is unstable as hell and has a viewer limmit to prevent an allready existing lag, but if they decrease viewers to STILL decreasing the lag.
I never understood why GSL didn't restream itself into multiple SQ's, that would fix so much of the lag...
That's not true since like...season 2 ? for viewer limit (perhaps season 3)
And the stream being unstable is very excessive.
For GSL january, we had 2 laggy days, and the lag is like 15-20 minutes before being fixed. I understand this is computer and some people will always have problems no matter what. But the problems you mention makes it look like you quickly read 2 or 3 pages of season 1 live report thread, saw some posts, and 4 months later that you use those posts to say it sucks ><
tldr : there is no viewer limit for free stream for at least 2 seasons, same for stream problem.
I agree on the first part of your post anyway, but I guess GOM wants to deliver the best players and the best games. I imagine they see people coming into sc with free content, and the people who get into the game and want to see the best it has to offer will pay for it.
|
On February 01 2011 04:02 Bobgrimly wrote:
I watch sports for free on tv. I watch starcraft for free on the internet.
Actually for most sporting events you DO pay through your cable subscription. Your provider pays for the rights to air the channels, and those channels pay for the rights to air the sporting event.
Paying for the internet is not analogous in the slightest.
|
While I do agree that free sq vods and premium hd vods are a better buisness model, with the sq vods having adverts so it's a win win situation.
But the same people who say "well they should have ads in the vods" are the same people who run adblock. Ofc they could put the ads right into the video feed, but that would be awfull and limited.
|
I don't believe there is a mandate that GOMTV is responsible for growing eSport,
Precisely. I think this is the point that needs to be hammered into people heads.
People who know nothing about professional StarCraft are more likely to start watching it through local tournaments. That's what they'll hear about. That's what their friends will link them to.
The GSL is a different beast. It's Korean, which for most people who know nothing about professional StarCraft means that it's foreign to them. Yes, there's English commentary, but that doesn't change the fact that it's clearly foreign. That presents a barrier to entry, one that is best bypassed by interest. That is, not being someone who knows nothing about professional StarCraft.
The GSL is not, and will not be, a gateway into watching StarCraft. Even if it's free.
|
Calgary25981 Posts
On February 01 2011 03:49 TheGiftedApe wrote:
The answer here is obvious imo:
Pay per View = Lower viewer counts, but Gom makes more profit in the short term.
Free per View = Higher Viewer counts, less profit in the short term, (more profit in the long term from sponsors and advertisers though)
I think there's a lot of assumptions in that post that you're just glossing over. What are GOM's total viewership on their VODs? I'm at work but I'd assume a Ro16 game gets somewhere between 30,000 - 70,000 views. How many views do you think it would get if it was free?
Now, do you think the costs associated with streaming content for free to those users could be supported by completely untargeted, global ads? And do you think they would end up further ahead this year if they went that route, or stuck with the $10 / season model? At what point does the profit / season cross over that threshold? I don't think it's as cut and dry as "more profit in the long term".
The foreign market isn't even on a sponsor's radar, so we can ignore that. Advertising is of course something GOM is looking at. But I don't think you can just say "GOM, if you took a loss to provide free content now, you'd make a 50% return by 2012." It's not that simple. It's a pretty huge risk. I think GOM is playing it right.
|
i just now got off the site prepaying for the gsl-tl and omg 4.99! i swear the gsl is going to have my money every month, so much content its just so worth it. to the point about it not helping the popularity and not spreading the word because it is pay to view is a good argument but world wide streaming like this cant be cheap. maybe one day with more sponsors i hope but until then ill gladly give them my money.
|
On February 01 2011 03:49 TheGiftedApe wrote:
obviously GOM is worried about making money right now, and has lost sight of the bigger picture imo.
If making money right now is the difference between being able to continue as an enterprise and not, it would seem to me that is the bigger picture.
If they had unlimited capital and could defer making money on what they're doing for an indefinite time, I'm sure they could do a lot of things differently that might greatly enhance the popularity of their tournament.
|
Honestly; I have never been eager to spend money to watch the GSL. It's not because I hate paying for it, or I don't like GOMtv, or anything like that. It's the fact that I get the same entertainment from watching HuK and Kiwikaki videos being casted and put on youtube. GSL can't really offer viewers much since there isn't a huge skill gap between GSL and other top tournaments.
I'd like to watch Starcraft for the same reason I watch football. I'd like to watch insane micro as two players go into 300 APM-mode and duke it out like absolute ballers. Crazy strategies that work because they timed it within a split-second of perfection. If a pro could make me get on starcraft and try what he's done, I'd pay to see that. I want inspired by the "professionals", and frankly; I don't see much of it in the GSL.
|
I don't see a problem. You pay like 20$ for a premium service and those who don't get the free service. Oh jesus, heaven forbid trying to give E sports an economy.
|
Seems theres a lot people with business degrees in this thread.
|
On February 01 2011 04:19 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 03:49 TheGiftedApe wrote:
The answer here is obvious imo:
Pay per View = Lower viewer counts, but Gom makes more profit in the short term.
Free per View = Higher Viewer counts, less profit in the short term, (more profit in the long term from sponsors and advertisers though) I think there's a lot of assumptions in that post that you're just glossing over. What are GOM's total viewership on their VODs? I'm at work but I'd assume a Ro16 game gets somewhere between 30,000 - 70,000 views. How many views do you think it would get if it was free? Now, do you think the costs associated with streaming content for free to those users could be supported by completely untargeted, global ads? And do you think they would end up further ahead this year if they went that route, or stuck with the $10 / season model? At what point does the profit / season cross over that threshold? I don't think it's as cut and dry as "more profit in the long term". The foreign market isn't even on a sponsor's radar, so we can ignore that. Advertising is of course something GOM is looking at. But I don't think you can just say "GOM, if you took a loss to provide free content now, you'd make a 50% return by 2012." It's not that simple. It's a pretty huge risk. I think GOM is playing it right.
Why don't Blizzard just pay for the streaming cost? It's probably less than 1% of their WoW income.
User was warned for this post
|
On February 01 2011 05:28 mmdmmd wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 04:19 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 03:49 TheGiftedApe wrote:
The answer here is obvious imo:
Pay per View = Lower viewer counts, but Gom makes more profit in the short term.
Free per View = Higher Viewer counts, less profit in the short term, (more profit in the long term from sponsors and advertisers though) I think there's a lot of assumptions in that post that you're just glossing over. What are GOM's total viewership on their VODs? I'm at work but I'd assume a Ro16 game gets somewhere between 30,000 - 70,000 views. How many views do you think it would get if it was free? Now, do you think the costs associated with streaming content for free to those users could be supported by completely untargeted, global ads? And do you think they would end up further ahead this year if they went that route, or stuck with the $10 / season model? At what point does the profit / season cross over that threshold? I don't think it's as cut and dry as "more profit in the long term". The foreign market isn't even on a sponsor's radar, so we can ignore that. Advertising is of course something GOM is looking at. But I don't think you can just say "GOM, if you took a loss to provide free content now, you'd make a 50% return by 2012." It's not that simple. It's a pretty huge risk. I think GOM is playing it right. Why don't Blizzard just pay for the streaming cost? It's probably less than 1% of their WoW income.
Why doesent Blizzard pay for my heating and electric bill too so i can watch GSL? Blizzard is a company separate from GomTV. I cant believe you actually posted that.
|
A lot of you are assuming that if they don't charge then they will "make more money in the long run". This is based on.... a complete guess? Pretty sure nobody on earth has a clue how much Gom would make on advertising in the future and even if you did you still don't have a clue how much they are making now so it sounds like you just don't want to pay a few bucks to watch. Not that there's anything wrong with that, just sayin'.
And Blizz probably makes more off of WoW every five minutes than the streaming costs are for the GSL... but obviously they'll never pay for that (and they shouldn't).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
