|
Calgary25989 Posts
On February 09 2012 23:42 SACtheXchng wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 22:24 Klonere wrote:
So what people are asking for is:
- Have 1080+ free stream (a la IPL)
- Nearly TV broadcast production levels
- Constant flow of high quality content (many people commenting on MLG only being on a few times a year)
- Perfectly run event (no delays, tech problems etc)
- The best casters (despite that being an enormously subjective thing)
- The very best players
And then they would maybe consider dropping $5/10 on the event? Just trying to do some market research here. You sound like you think that's too much to ask. Chill wrote something about "Charity Model" earlier in this thread. Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 15:09 Chill wrote:
I think people have gotten used to this charity model where the majority is given away for free. I, as a consumer of free esports content, feel offended by that term. It has happened more than once that I turned off one of these "Charity Broadcasts" just because I simply couldn't bear anymore the sometimes cringe-worthy, amateurish casting/production. Right now events that charge for streams are asking the viewers for "Charity Money" despite their sub par production. Well I'm certainly not going to give "Charity Money" to companies that have: - Bad quality streams - Bad broadcast production levels - Outrageous waiting times - Casters who drop hundreds of "Uhs" per broadcast - Sub par players
That's fine, but there's a gap between what things cost and what people are willing to pay for them. If people will pay $100,000 for a production that costs $1,000,000, then we have a problem.
|
My personal opinion on monetizing SC is that maybe we should utilize what led to the revival of e-sports, online streaming. Without question it is a much cheaper option and I am sure you can make a just as good of production as a major LAN tournament. I do believe their is a need for LANs but maybe instead of for example IEM holding a 6 LAN season or MLG holding a 5 LAN season start with the cheap internet option bring the top X players to a LAN site and hold a BIG ASS LAN (sounds like EVO now that I reread). When there is a way to profit off of a cheaper system then feel free to continue to have a larger season.
TLDR: Decrease Expenses instead of Increase Revenues while keeping production high or improving. Once you can find a way to profit on a smaller scale expand instead of trying to maintain an unsupportable system
|
On February 09 2012 23:47 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:42 SACtheXchng wrote:On February 09 2012 22:24 Klonere wrote:
So what people are asking for is:
- Have 1080+ free stream (a la IPL)
- Nearly TV broadcast production levels
- Constant flow of high quality content (many people commenting on MLG only being on a few times a year)
- Perfectly run event (no delays, tech problems etc)
- The best casters (despite that being an enormously subjective thing)
- The very best players
And then they would maybe consider dropping $5/10 on the event? Just trying to do some market research here. You sound like you think that's too much to ask. Chill wrote something about "Charity Model" earlier in this thread. On February 09 2012 15:09 Chill wrote:
I think people have gotten used to this charity model where the majority is given away for free. I, as a consumer of free esports content, feel offended by that term. It has happened more than once that I turned off one of these "Charity Broadcasts" just because I simply couldn't bear anymore the sometimes cringe-worthy, amateurish casting/production. Right now events that charge for streams are asking the viewers for "Charity Money" despite their sub par production. Well I'm certainly not going to give "Charity Money" to companies that have: - Bad quality streams - Bad broadcast production levels - Outrageous waiting times - Casters who drop hundreds of "Uhs" per broadcast - Sub par players That's fine, but there's a gap between what things cost and what people are willing to pay for them. If people will pay $100,000 for a production that costs $1,000,000, then we have a problem.
And according to Mr.Bitter in this thread and others elsewhere, this is essentially what is happening.
|
On February 09 2012 23:46 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:42 TBone- wrote:
The only foreign tournament I would subscribe to would be IPL. Currently, no other league is putting out a quality product for me to want to pay for it. MLG, NASL, and IEM have a long ways to go before I would even consider buying a subscription based service from either of them. Quite frankly, your standards are too high. Even community theaters have to charge money for tickets. I have a feeling a large portion of the "produce better content and I'll pay" argument are people who simply won't pay if they can avoid it, much like piracy.
I pay 10$ per month for 100 cable channels. Why should I pay 25$ for a weekend of semi - professional streaming?
|
Simply due to the physical demands of the sport, MMA content (the matches) are much rarer and more unique than a Starcraft match. I might get to see a world class fighter like Anderson Silva every six months, and that's being optimistic. I love the UFC and I can't afford to miss a great fighter's sole appearance in 6 months, so I buy their PPVs religiously. If that was the case for players like MVP, MMA, DRG, Leenock, etc, I could understand a similar model. As it stands though, I don't think SC2 content is unique enough to look at a boxing or MMA model. It's more similar to professional football, where you can see amazing players like Leo Messi or Robin Van Persie compete on an almost weekly basis. I only know sports with such regular appearances as either free, or monthly subscription models.
If a PPV model did happen to be implemented in Starcraft II, fewer people would watch events, and undoubtedly the overall size of the scene would shrink. For sports in general, even in the case of MMA, I don't think PPV is a model you want to stay with forever. In fact, I think going from free to watch to PPV actually represents a step back. Looking at the UFC again, they were PPV during the years they were developing and growing, but now that the MMA is blowing up, they are trying to get on cable and network television where people can watch for free. Any sport that is able to be profitable without a PPV model prefers to be free.
It's understandable that organizations are looking to PPV as a revenue model, but I don't think it's one that works with Starcraft. Nonetheless it is important for organizations to explore all available options at some point.
|
My genuine opinion is the vast majority of people following starcraft are too spoiled and entitled. Follow that up with that they'll take that attitude and throw a shit-fit whenever they don't get EXACTLY what they want in terms of casters, players, any delays ever (none of which is even realistic), and we have a community that I think is just going to strangle itself if company's running events actually listen to all the entitled assholes.
I'm not sure what the solution is. They need to make a profit to keep going. I don't think trying to force PPV is a good idea at all. Even if it's a PPV with a free option that's bad. But there need to be alternative ways than just PPV. More sponsors, etc...Idk.
I used to be very afraid of what SC2 with Kespa coming in would look like; I'm starting to think it might be the only thing that saves it from a short life.
|
The main problem right now is the scene is heavily oversaturated. There are a huge number of players and a huge number of tournaments relative to the size and money-making potential of the viewership pool.
I believe the cold, hard, and ugly truth is that to reach a sustainable level, a large part of the current scene will have to die off. Even if E-sports as a whole grows, I don't really see SC2 as a growth industry (in terms of viewership) itself, just because the game is relatively complex and not very easy to digest if you are a first-time viewer with no background in SC, SC2 or RTSes. SC2 is too niche, too small to be supported by ad revenue.
In addition, there is a fundamental oversaturation of content. There are too many tournaments, too many streams and probably too many casters and players. There is more content out there than there are hours in the day for anyone to view. Segmenting an already small market as tournaments try to one-up each other in providing quality content at the lowest cost will eventually drive some of them out of the business, it is inevitable. The ones that survive, either because they have deeper pockets or found a way to make it work, will then be able to capture the remaining market share. No one is profitable because the pie is too small, and is broken up among too many different organizations.
Sure, the total pie will shrink if some of this content goes away, but the rest of the (small) scene will then standardize on what's left, and I think the scene overall will be much healthier when the oversaturation ends. Some organizations will have to stop and/or fail, the question is which ones will.
I'm guessing the GOM right now is probably the most successful of all of the SC2 tournament organizations. The pay-wall model for VODs and HQ stream works reasonably well, and they provide the highest level of content and the highest production values. It's very difficult for other productions to compete with GOM from a technical standpoint, and that is why they are searching for other business models. Other tournaments may boast viewership numbers, but without a way to turn that into money, they cannot continue to operate. I don't see how they can convert viewership numbers into cash. There simply aren't enough viewers for advertising to be meaningful, not to mention that the e-sport scene is more likely to be a tech-savvy scene, which means a larger number of people using ad-blocking technology and the like. As others mentioned, there are many poor people who either will view it for free (to them) or die. These people cannot be turned into money, cannot really help the scene grow (you can try to argue they will attract new viewers, but will they really in a scene as niche as this?), and are therefore more or less irrelevant to turning this into a sustainable business. If that is the majority of the people who watch, then the scene is in reality already on life-support.
MrBitter noted that GOM is likely walking on a very, very fine line also. If they can barely make it where they are, I think people have greatly overestimating the potential market. Consolidation will occur, tournaments will fail, teams will disband, players and support staff like casters will move on. The survivors may be able to make a razor thin ROI, but it will still be very, very tough, and in the long run, there will likely only be one or two tournaments with good content and good production values that will survive by doing three things simultaneously: generating ad revenue, earning subscription fees, selling merchandise.
Edit: In response to Nazgul, I believe that's correct. Everyone wants to go free-to-watch with primarily ad revenue driven support. The problem is, you need significant viewership (millions of people) to make that model work, and I don't see SC2 getting there, even with the explosive growth it's had recently, even if you provide production quality that is better than anything else available worldwide.
|
On February 09 2012 23:49 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:46 Jibba wrote:On February 09 2012 23:42 TBone- wrote:
The only foreign tournament I would subscribe to would be IPL. Currently, no other league is putting out a quality product for me to want to pay for it. MLG, NASL, and IEM have a long ways to go before I would even consider buying a subscription based service from either of them. Quite frankly, your standards are too high. Even community theaters have to charge money for tickets. I have a feeling a large portion of the "produce better content and I'll pay" argument are people who simply won't pay if they can avoid it, much like piracy. I pay 10$ per month for 100 cable channels. Why should I pay 25$ for a weekend of semi - professional streaming?
Because comparing cable TV to esports streaming is absurd.
|
United States22883 Posts
On February 09 2012 23:49 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:46 Jibba wrote:On February 09 2012 23:42 TBone- wrote:
The only foreign tournament I would subscribe to would be IPL. Currently, no other league is putting out a quality product for me to want to pay for it. MLG, NASL, and IEM have a long ways to go before I would even consider buying a subscription based service from either of them. Quite frankly, your standards are too high. Even community theaters have to charge money for tickets. I have a feeling a large portion of the "produce better content and I'll pay" argument are people who simply won't pay if they can avoid it, much like piracy. I pay 10$ per month for 100 cable channels. Why should I pay 25$ for a weekend of semi - professional streaming?
It depends what you're used to. What do pay per view events cost in Romania? In the US, major boxing matches and fights are usually like $40 just for that night. That's the PPV model they're talking about.
|
On February 09 2012 23:52 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:49 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 23:46 Jibba wrote:On February 09 2012 23:42 TBone- wrote:
The only foreign tournament I would subscribe to would be IPL. Currently, no other league is putting out a quality product for me to want to pay for it. MLG, NASL, and IEM have a long ways to go before I would even consider buying a subscription based service from either of them. Quite frankly, your standards are too high. Even community theaters have to charge money for tickets. I have a feeling a large portion of the "produce better content and I'll pay" argument are people who simply won't pay if they can avoid it, much like piracy. I pay 10$ per month for 100 cable channels. Why should I pay 25$ for a weekend of semi - professional streaming? It depends what you're used to. What do pay per view events cost in Romania? In the US, major boxing matches and fights are usually like $40 just for that night. That's the PPV model they're talking about.
Yeah but it's not like tournaments are something that happen once over 6 months. If it's not rare it can't worth that much.
|
On February 09 2012 23:47 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:42 SACtheXchng wrote:On February 09 2012 22:24 Klonere wrote:
So what people are asking for is:
- Have 1080+ free stream (a la IPL)
- Nearly TV broadcast production levels
- Constant flow of high quality content (many people commenting on MLG only being on a few times a year)
- Perfectly run event (no delays, tech problems etc)
- The best casters (despite that being an enormously subjective thing)
- The very best players
And then they would maybe consider dropping $5/10 on the event? Just trying to do some market research here. You sound like you think that's too much to ask. Chill wrote something about "Charity Model" earlier in this thread. On February 09 2012 15:09 Chill wrote:
I think people have gotten used to this charity model where the majority is given away for free. I, as a consumer of free esports content, feel offended by that term. It has happened more than once that I turned off one of these "Charity Broadcasts" just because I simply couldn't bear anymore the sometimes cringe-worthy, amateurish casting/production. Right now events that charge for streams are asking the viewers for "Charity Money" despite their sub par production. Well I'm certainly not going to give "Charity Money" to companies that have: - Bad quality streams - Bad broadcast production levels - Outrageous waiting times - Casters who drop hundreds of "Uhs" per broadcast - Sub par players That's fine, but there's a gap between what things cost and what people are willing to pay for them. If people will pay $100,000 for a production that costs $1,000,000, then we have a problem.
So in a way you are agreeing with me that the industry is essentially asking the community for charity money? Be it for the greater good of ESPORTS or whatever, but asking people to pay $20 for something that's worth $10 is just that; asking for charity.
|
On February 09 2012 23:54 SACtheXchng wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:47 Chill wrote:On February 09 2012 23:42 SACtheXchng wrote:On February 09 2012 22:24 Klonere wrote:
So what people are asking for is:
- Have 1080+ free stream (a la IPL)
- Nearly TV broadcast production levels
- Constant flow of high quality content (many people commenting on MLG only being on a few times a year)
- Perfectly run event (no delays, tech problems etc)
- The best casters (despite that being an enormously subjective thing)
- The very best players
And then they would maybe consider dropping $5/10 on the event? Just trying to do some market research here. You sound like you think that's too much to ask. Chill wrote something about "Charity Model" earlier in this thread. On February 09 2012 15:09 Chill wrote:
I think people have gotten used to this charity model where the majority is given away for free. I, as a consumer of free esports content, feel offended by that term. It has happened more than once that I turned off one of these "Charity Broadcasts" just because I simply couldn't bear anymore the sometimes cringe-worthy, amateurish casting/production. Right now events that charge for streams are asking the viewers for "Charity Money" despite their sub par production. Well I'm certainly not going to give "Charity Money" to companies that have: - Bad quality streams - Bad broadcast production levels - Outrageous waiting times - Casters who drop hundreds of "Uhs" per broadcast - Sub par players That's fine, but there's a gap between what things cost and what people are willing to pay for them. If people will pay $100,000 for a production that costs $1,000,000, then we have a problem. So in a way you are agreeing with me that the industry is essentially asking the community for charity money? Be it for the greater good of ESPORTS or whatever, but asking people to pay $20 for something that's worth $10 is just that; asking for charity.
I have bought 90% of the tickets for the tournaments since starcraft 2 appeared. My sole feeling when paying is that i give them money to make something happen later, rather than I pay to be entrained right now. So I feel more like I am donating. Someone who is not a fan might not like to give money out of love. They might actually want something back.
|
SC2 needs actual legitimate sponsors. I don't even know who sponsors most SC2 teams, but if that level was actually acceptable Jaedong wouldn't be looking so troubled these days.
|
United States22883 Posts
On February 09 2012 23:53 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:52 Jibba wrote:On February 09 2012 23:49 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 23:46 Jibba wrote:On February 09 2012 23:42 TBone- wrote:
The only foreign tournament I would subscribe to would be IPL. Currently, no other league is putting out a quality product for me to want to pay for it. MLG, NASL, and IEM have a long ways to go before I would even consider buying a subscription based service from either of them. Quite frankly, your standards are too high. Even community theaters have to charge money for tickets. I have a feeling a large portion of the "produce better content and I'll pay" argument are people who simply won't pay if they can avoid it, much like piracy. I pay 10$ per month for 100 cable channels. Why should I pay 25$ for a weekend of semi - professional streaming? It depends what you're used to. What do pay per view events cost in Romania? In the US, major boxing matches and fights are usually like $40 just for that night. That's the PPV model they're talking about. Yeah but it's not like tournaments are something that happen once over 6 months. If it's not rare it can't worth that much. I agree, there's an oversaturation of events that undercut each other. I'm just saying that it's not sustainable to put on a show for free, even if the production standards aren't with WCG. If MLG and others aren't high enough for you, then there's probably nothing you'll pay for. MLG's ticket system is probably the cheapest per event, with relatively high quality, and it doesn't seem like they're doing too well.
|
On February 09 2012 23:56 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:54 SACtheXchng wrote:On February 09 2012 23:47 Chill wrote:On February 09 2012 23:42 SACtheXchng wrote:On February 09 2012 22:24 Klonere wrote:
So what people are asking for is:
- Have 1080+ free stream (a la IPL)
- Nearly TV broadcast production levels
- Constant flow of high quality content (many people commenting on MLG only being on a few times a year)
- Perfectly run event (no delays, tech problems etc)
- The best casters (despite that being an enormously subjective thing)
- The very best players
And then they would maybe consider dropping $5/10 on the event? Just trying to do some market research here. You sound like you think that's too much to ask. Chill wrote something about "Charity Model" earlier in this thread. On February 09 2012 15:09 Chill wrote:
I think people have gotten used to this charity model where the majority is given away for free. I, as a consumer of free esports content, feel offended by that term. It has happened more than once that I turned off one of these "Charity Broadcasts" just because I simply couldn't bear anymore the sometimes cringe-worthy, amateurish casting/production. Right now events that charge for streams are asking the viewers for "Charity Money" despite their sub par production. Well I'm certainly not going to give "Charity Money" to companies that have: - Bad quality streams - Bad broadcast production levels - Outrageous waiting times - Casters who drop hundreds of "Uhs" per broadcast - Sub par players That's fine, but there's a gap between what things cost and what people are willing to pay for them. If people will pay $100,000 for a production that costs $1,000,000, then we have a problem. So in a way you are agreeing with me that the industry is essentially asking the community for charity money? Be it for the greater good of ESPORTS or whatever, but asking people to pay $20 for something that's worth $10 is just that; asking for charity. I have bought 90% of the tickets for the tournaments since starcraft 2 appeared. My sole feeling when paying is that i give them money to make something happen later, rather than I pay to be entrained right now. So I feel more like I am donating. Someone who is not a fan might not like to give money out of love. They might actually want something back.
I don't know man. I'm a fan and I still want something back. I'm German and I pay for the German Bundesliga pay-TV channel. I'm a MASSIVE fan but if they would produce shitty content I would cancel my subscription.
|
On February 09 2012 23:54 SACtheXchng wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:47 Chill wrote:On February 09 2012 23:42 SACtheXchng wrote:On February 09 2012 22:24 Klonere wrote:
So what people are asking for is:
- Have 1080+ free stream (a la IPL)
- Nearly TV broadcast production levels
- Constant flow of high quality content (many people commenting on MLG only being on a few times a year)
- Perfectly run event (no delays, tech problems etc)
- The best casters (despite that being an enormously subjective thing)
- The very best players
And then they would maybe consider dropping $5/10 on the event? Just trying to do some market research here. You sound like you think that's too much to ask. Chill wrote something about "Charity Model" earlier in this thread. On February 09 2012 15:09 Chill wrote:
I think people have gotten used to this charity model where the majority is given away for free. I, as a consumer of free esports content, feel offended by that term. It has happened more than once that I turned off one of these "Charity Broadcasts" just because I simply couldn't bear anymore the sometimes cringe-worthy, amateurish casting/production. Right now events that charge for streams are asking the viewers for "Charity Money" despite their sub par production. Well I'm certainly not going to give "Charity Money" to companies that have: - Bad quality streams - Bad broadcast production levels - Outrageous waiting times - Casters who drop hundreds of "Uhs" per broadcast - Sub par players That's fine, but there's a gap between what things cost and what people are willing to pay for them. If people will pay $100,000 for a production that costs $1,000,000, then we have a problem. So in a way you are agreeing with me that the industry is essentially asking the community for charity money? Be it for the greater good of ESPORTS or whatever, but asking people to pay $20 for something that's worth $10 is just that; asking for charity.
Exatcly, thats how ESPORTS operate right now. Its not the matter of production, its the matter of game, its niche product, if you throw world event money for niche product you will end up in deficit. What you need is increasing popularity of sport/game, not better production. I mean the better production will only appeal to few spectators while better game (spectator wise) will appear to whole.
Thats why sooner or later LoL and other mobas will overrun the market, not because of tournament production values.
Blizzard doesnt seem to be pressured, its sad. Their 5 cents are worth more than tournaments 500dollars.
|
On February 09 2012 23:23 bmml wrote:
I think the only tourney I'd give money for currently is HSC, everything else pales in comparison to the entertainment value on offer from TakeTV. I would probably pay some for dreamhack as well personally. Or any event as well produced and entertaining as the dreamhack invitational(and hsc of course). But if I had to guess dreamhack isn't losing money on their events anyway.
People talk a lot about HD this and that but almost no one seem to talk about the entertainment value. Take last NASL or some of the MLG's with tons of downtime with absolutely nothing going on. I know people that watch sc2 basically every single day that usually quit watching those events after just a couple of games. Think they will get a thousands and thousands of ppv viewers when big parts of the events can be so boring that people that watch more sc2 than tv don't watch when it's free?
|
On February 09 2012 23:56 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:53 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 23:52 Jibba wrote:On February 09 2012 23:49 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 23:46 Jibba wrote:On February 09 2012 23:42 TBone- wrote:
The only foreign tournament I would subscribe to would be IPL. Currently, no other league is putting out a quality product for me to want to pay for it. MLG, NASL, and IEM have a long ways to go before I would even consider buying a subscription based service from either of them. Quite frankly, your standards are too high. Even community theaters have to charge money for tickets. I have a feeling a large portion of the "produce better content and I'll pay" argument are people who simply won't pay if they can avoid it, much like piracy. I pay 10$ per month for 100 cable channels. Why should I pay 25$ for a weekend of semi - professional streaming? It depends what you're used to. What do pay per view events cost in Romania? In the US, major boxing matches and fights are usually like $40 just for that night. That's the PPV model they're talking about. Yeah but it's not like tournaments are something that happen once over 6 months. If it's not rare it can't worth that much. I agree, there's an oversaturation of events that undercut each other. I'm just saying that it's not sustainable to put on a show for free, even if the production standards aren't with WCG. If MLG and others aren't high enough for you, then there's probably nothing you'll pay for. MLG's ticket system is probably the cheapest per event, with relatively high quality, and it doesn't seem like they're doing too well.
Many people can't watch 3 days of starcraft and consider it's not worth it to pay it all if they can watch it in between activities. Maybe if schedules were respected more often people would know when to tune in for their favorite player in a 3 day tournament and would be willing to pay for a HD ticket.
Also when you see down time and unplanned situations that are poorly handled it's kinda of a turn off. Remember NASL first season. 100k prize pool are you kidding me? In situations like that it's the companies fault for bad management.
MLG is getting up there with the production quality but GOM has the lead by far.
|
On February 10 2012 00:06 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:56 Jibba wrote:On February 09 2012 23:53 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 23:52 Jibba wrote:On February 09 2012 23:49 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 23:46 Jibba wrote:On February 09 2012 23:42 TBone- wrote:
The only foreign tournament I would subscribe to would be IPL. Currently, no other league is putting out a quality product for me to want to pay for it. MLG, NASL, and IEM have a long ways to go before I would even consider buying a subscription based service from either of them. Quite frankly, your standards are too high. Even community theaters have to charge money for tickets. I have a feeling a large portion of the "produce better content and I'll pay" argument are people who simply won't pay if they can avoid it, much like piracy. I pay 10$ per month for 100 cable channels. Why should I pay 25$ for a weekend of semi - professional streaming? It depends what you're used to. What do pay per view events cost in Romania? In the US, major boxing matches and fights are usually like $40 just for that night. That's the PPV model they're talking about. Yeah but it's not like tournaments are something that happen once over 6 months. If it's not rare it can't worth that much. I agree, there's an oversaturation of events that undercut each other. I'm just saying that it's not sustainable to put on a show for free, even if the production standards aren't with WCG. If MLG and others aren't high enough for you, then there's probably nothing you'll pay for. MLG's ticket system is probably the cheapest per event, with relatively high quality, and it doesn't seem like they're doing too well. Many people can't watch 3 days of starcraft and consider it's not worth it to pay it all if they can watch it in between activities. Maybe if schedules were respected more often people would know when to tune in for their favorite player in a 3 day tournament and would be willing to pay for a HD ticket. Also when you see down time and unplanned situations that are poorly handled it's kinda of a turn off. Remember NASL first season. 100k prize pool are you kidding me? In situations like that it's the companies fault for bad management. MLG is getting up there with the production quality but GOM has the lead by far.
NASL was out of their mind as an unproven tournament to try something so big without any proven value.As I said before instead of trying to start BIG and then make adjustments to increase $. Why don't people just start with a respectable AFFORDABLE prize pool and other costs then expand as they find they can support bigger and better things. And yes oversaturation is obviously a problem but eventually the cream will rise to the top because they hold up longer and then the crap will get flushed and it will self correct. How long will that take? Maybe years
|
On February 09 2012 23:56 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:53 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 23:52 Jibba wrote:On February 09 2012 23:49 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 23:46 Jibba wrote:On February 09 2012 23:42 TBone- wrote:
The only foreign tournament I would subscribe to would be IPL. Currently, no other league is putting out a quality product for me to want to pay for it. MLG, NASL, and IEM have a long ways to go before I would even consider buying a subscription based service from either of them. Quite frankly, your standards are too high. Even community theaters have to charge money for tickets. I have a feeling a large portion of the "produce better content and I'll pay" argument are people who simply won't pay if they can avoid it, much like piracy. I pay 10$ per month for 100 cable channels. Why should I pay 25$ for a weekend of semi - professional streaming? It depends what you're used to. What do pay per view events cost in Romania? In the US, major boxing matches and fights are usually like $40 just for that night. That's the PPV model they're talking about. Yeah but it's not like tournaments are something that happen once over 6 months. If it's not rare it can't worth that much. I agree, there's an oversaturation of events that undercut each other. I'm just saying that it's not sustainable to put on a show for free, even if the production standards aren't with WCG. If MLG and others aren't high enough for you, then there's probably nothing you'll pay for. MLG's ticket system is probably the cheapest per event, with relatively high quality, and it doesn't seem like they're doing too well.
This is one thing that bothers me about this whole thread: if production costs are so high and return on those costs is so low - why is so much content being provided? Why are there so many leagues?
Player streaming is certainly one thing that isn't helping. I think a lot fewer people would pay to watch an official league baseball game if they could watch their team play for free in a non-official scrimmage instead.
Edit: it may come down to a lot of leagues dying off before people come around to the idea of paying for broadcasts - and by then it won't be because they like this league or that league the most - it'll be because they don't want all the events to die.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
