|
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.
I believe so, and I really don't think that having a great quality, on time, event with amazing players and commentators is too much to ask for. People wouldn't pay as much money to watch professional sports on television if there were huge difficulties (although different problems may arise through different media outlets). And if a particular tournament doesn't care enough about quality, then they'll go out of business because there are plenty of other companies ready to satiate this budding community's hunger.
|
On February 09 2012 22:15 ropumar wrote:
"10% of the people buy a T-Shirt"
10% buying T-shirts is an outrageous number.... more than likely no more than 0.5% of people buy T-shirts
Not 10% buying that day, but perhaps averaging out to 10% buying over the course of a year. In Brazil, how many people do you know who do not own a t-shirt with some futball team/league/event on it? I know where I'm at in the United States, almost everyone owns some Chicago Bears gear. I personally own at least two T-shirts, two sweatshirts, and even a pair of earmuffs with the Chicago Bears labeled on it. Maybe I'm completely off-base and way too high, but that 10% number could easily be low if I'm talking lifetime as opposed to yearly.
On February 09 2012 22:19 Jojo131 wrote:
The SC2 scene is probably already past it's peak growth judging by recent threads that have noticed a decline in people actually playing the game each season, I don't see how you're expecting it to grow any more. Sure you can argue that more people will play when HOTS comes out, but I'm pretty sure those are the same people who will leave again after 2-3 seasons anyway to play/watch some other game. Even then, fast-track to when LOTV comes out and the same situation occurs, what then? You'll still have the same relatively sized audience and we'll (probably) be back into this situation.
Starcraft 2 has a better position to become a legitimate sport than almost all other video games because it is one of the rare ones where a lot of people actually prefer watching to playing. The ladder numbers will undoubtedly decrease until HotS (or maybe a slight bump right beforehand), but that doesn't have to mean viewer numbers decrease. It may mean that the community will need to do a better job of bringing outsiders in, but that's a whole other topic.
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.
A typical televised sport:
- HD quality broadcast, YES.
- TV broadcast production levels, they are the standard so YES
- Constant flow of high quality content, YES
- Perfectly run event, generally YES
- The best casters, some subjectivity but overall YES
- The very best players, YES
The cost: $0.
Sounds like E-Sports is overcharging.
A little joking on that last line, but real sports are competition for E-Sports. And that competitor does all those things for your free viewing. (sarc)Somehow those real sports teams and leagues have managed to squeak by and stave off catastrophe. Some of their players can even manage to rent a one room apartment(/sarc).
As I was saying in my last post, the problem isn't the model, e-sports actually monetizes more than traditional sports, the problem is the viewer numbers.
|
On February 09 2012 22:50 RenSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 22:15 ropumar wrote:
"10% of the people buy a T-Shirt"
10% buying T-shirts is an outrageous number.... more than likely no more than 0.5% of people buy T-shirts Not 10% buying that day, but perhaps averaging out to 10% buying over the course of a year. In Brazil, how many people do you know who do not own a t-shirt with some futball team/league/event on it? I know where I'm at in the United States, almost everyone owns some Chicago Bears gear. I personally own at least two T-shirts, two sweatshirts, and even a pair of earmuffs with the Chicago Bears labeled on it. Maybe I'm completely off-base and way too high, but that 10% number could easily be low if I'm talking lifetime as opposed to yearly. Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 22:19 Jojo131 wrote:
The SC2 scene is probably already past it's peak growth judging by recent threads that have noticed a decline in people actually playing the game each season, I don't see how you're expecting it to grow any more. Sure you can argue that more people will play when HOTS comes out, but I'm pretty sure those are the same people who will leave again after 2-3 seasons anyway to play/watch some other game. Even then, fast-track to when LOTV comes out and the same situation occurs, what then? You'll still have the same relatively sized audience and we'll (probably) be back into this situation. Starcraft 2 has a better position to become a legitimate sport than almost all other video games because it is one of the rare ones where a lot of people actually prefer watching to playing. The ladder numbers will undoubtedly decrease until HotS (or maybe a slight bump right beforehand), but that doesn't have to mean viewer numbers decrease. It may mean that the community will need to do a better job of bringing outsiders in, but that's a whole other topic. 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. A typical televised sport: - HD quality broadcast, YES. - TV broadcast production levels, they are the standard so YES - Constant flow of high quality content, YES - Perfectly run event, generally YES - The best casters, some subjectivity but overall YES - The very best players, YES The cost: $0. Sounds like E-Sports is overcharging. A little joking on that last line, but real sports are competition for E-Sports. And that competitor does all those things for your free viewing. (sarc)Somehow those real sports teams and leagues have managed to squeak by and stave off catastrophe. Some of their players can even manage to rent a one room apartment(/sarc). As I was saying in my last post, the problem isn't the model, e-sports actually monetizes more than traditional sports, the problem is the viewer numbers.
And the viewer numbers are low because of the quality and formats of the shows. So tournaments need to think it through to make more people watch their adds. It's all about the rating.
|
Why hasn't any tournament tried doing a "pay what you want"-model yet? Or maybe someone has, but I can't recall it happened.
Speed Demos Archive, the home to video game speed runs, is proud to present a special speed running marathon: Awesome Games Done Quick, a 6-day online event played to raise money for cancer prevention and streamed live for you to watch!
The marathon has finished, and over $149,000 was successfully raised for the Prevent Cancer Foundation, our partner for this event. We deeply appreciate everyone who donated, watched, or helped out in any way!
Ok, so that was for a charity event which might have been an extra incentive for people to donate, but that was simply from donations watching gamers do speedruns of games, some of them very odd and unheard of.
But there are other methods to be explored for making money than jumping straight to "ok, now you gotta pay to watch our tournament". This being the internet and all (where so much content is free and has been for a long time) a PPV model or any forced payment for streams should be a last resort imo.
|
On February 09 2012 22:48 DarkPlasmaBall 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. I believe so, and I really don't think that having a great quality, on time, event with amazing players and commentators is too much to ask for. People wouldn't pay as much money to watch professional sports on television if there were huge difficulties (although different problems may arise through different media outlets). And if a particular tournament doesn't care enough about quality, then they'll go out of business because there are plenty of other companies ready to satiate this budding community's hunger.
While I agree on the point that we should expect these things as fans as we have been able to get nearly all of them before, I just don't see where the money is in it. All of those things require a different set of staff with certain expertise (casters and production staff), expensive equipment (like the infamous MLG satellite trucks) and the very best care for players (dedicated player staff and paid expenses).
For example I really don't understand IPL's business model at all, offering so much stuff that should be premium while putting really gimmicky stuff (player cams and roving interviewers) behind a pay-wall. Obviously they do have a fairly impressive list of sponsors but whether they are going to stick around for the upcoming IPL's when the first one just about hit 50k with some ridiculous production values and ggs.....I just don't get how its profitable or even sustainable.
|
On February 09 2012 22:53 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 22:50 RenSC2 wrote:On February 09 2012 22:15 ropumar wrote:
"10% of the people buy a T-Shirt"
10% buying T-shirts is an outrageous number.... more than likely no more than 0.5% of people buy T-shirts Not 10% buying that day, but perhaps averaging out to 10% buying over the course of a year. In Brazil, how many people do you know who do not own a t-shirt with some futball team/league/event on it? I know where I'm at in the United States, almost everyone owns some Chicago Bears gear. I personally own at least two T-shirts, two sweatshirts, and even a pair of earmuffs with the Chicago Bears labeled on it. Maybe I'm completely off-base and way too high, but that 10% number could easily be low if I'm talking lifetime as opposed to yearly. On February 09 2012 22:19 Jojo131 wrote:
The SC2 scene is probably already past it's peak growth judging by recent threads that have noticed a decline in people actually playing the game each season, I don't see how you're expecting it to grow any more. Sure you can argue that more people will play when HOTS comes out, but I'm pretty sure those are the same people who will leave again after 2-3 seasons anyway to play/watch some other game. Even then, fast-track to when LOTV comes out and the same situation occurs, what then? You'll still have the same relatively sized audience and we'll (probably) be back into this situation. Starcraft 2 has a better position to become a legitimate sport than almost all other video games because it is one of the rare ones where a lot of people actually prefer watching to playing. The ladder numbers will undoubtedly decrease until HotS (or maybe a slight bump right beforehand), but that doesn't have to mean viewer numbers decrease. It may mean that the community will need to do a better job of bringing outsiders in, but that's a whole other topic. 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. A typical televised sport: - HD quality broadcast, YES. - TV broadcast production levels, they are the standard so YES - Constant flow of high quality content, YES - Perfectly run event, generally YES - The best casters, some subjectivity but overall YES - The very best players, YES The cost: $0. Sounds like E-Sports is overcharging. A little joking on that last line, but real sports are competition for E-Sports. And that competitor does all those things for your free viewing. (sarc)Somehow those real sports teams and leagues have managed to squeak by and stave off catastrophe. Some of their players can even manage to rent a one room apartment(/sarc). As I was saying in my last post, the problem isn't the model, e-sports actually monetizes more than traditional sports, the problem is the viewer numbers. And the viewer numbers are low because of the quality and formats of the shows. So tournaments need to think it through to make more people watch their adds. It's all about the rating.
Where did you get this from?
If the viewers numbers are low that means the market isn't ready for it from the demanding side. If there are no strong demands you either need to generate them or pull out of this "market" which then isn't really one
Edit: or ofc its your product placement thats lacks something.
|
On February 09 2012 22:57 bluQ wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 22:53 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 22:50 RenSC2 wrote:On February 09 2012 22:15 ropumar wrote:
"10% of the people buy a T-Shirt"
10% buying T-shirts is an outrageous number.... more than likely no more than 0.5% of people buy T-shirts Not 10% buying that day, but perhaps averaging out to 10% buying over the course of a year. In Brazil, how many people do you know who do not own a t-shirt with some futball team/league/event on it? I know where I'm at in the United States, almost everyone owns some Chicago Bears gear. I personally own at least two T-shirts, two sweatshirts, and even a pair of earmuffs with the Chicago Bears labeled on it. Maybe I'm completely off-base and way too high, but that 10% number could easily be low if I'm talking lifetime as opposed to yearly. On February 09 2012 22:19 Jojo131 wrote:
The SC2 scene is probably already past it's peak growth judging by recent threads that have noticed a decline in people actually playing the game each season, I don't see how you're expecting it to grow any more. Sure you can argue that more people will play when HOTS comes out, but I'm pretty sure those are the same people who will leave again after 2-3 seasons anyway to play/watch some other game. Even then, fast-track to when LOTV comes out and the same situation occurs, what then? You'll still have the same relatively sized audience and we'll (probably) be back into this situation. Starcraft 2 has a better position to become a legitimate sport than almost all other video games because it is one of the rare ones where a lot of people actually prefer watching to playing. The ladder numbers will undoubtedly decrease until HotS (or maybe a slight bump right beforehand), but that doesn't have to mean viewer numbers decrease. It may mean that the community will need to do a better job of bringing outsiders in, but that's a whole other topic. 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. A typical televised sport: - HD quality broadcast, YES. - TV broadcast production levels, they are the standard so YES - Constant flow of high quality content, YES - Perfectly run event, generally YES - The best casters, some subjectivity but overall YES - The very best players, YES The cost: $0. Sounds like E-Sports is overcharging. A little joking on that last line, but real sports are competition for E-Sports. And that competitor does all those things for your free viewing. (sarc)Somehow those real sports teams and leagues have managed to squeak by and stave off catastrophe. Some of their players can even manage to rent a one room apartment(/sarc). As I was saying in my last post, the problem isn't the model, e-sports actually monetizes more than traditional sports, the problem is the viewer numbers. And the viewer numbers are low because of the quality and formats of the shows. So tournaments need to think it through to make more people watch their adds. It's all about the rating. Where did you get this from? If the viewers numbers are low that means the market isn't ready for it from the demanding side. If there are no strong demands you either need to generate them or pull out of this "market" which then isn't really one.
People are ready for starcraft, just that the format may be wrong. If a TV show doesn't get high ratings it's its fault and no others. Starcraft has great appeal.
|
On February 09 2012 22:53 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 22:50 RenSC2 wrote:On February 09 2012 22:15 ropumar wrote:
"10% of the people buy a T-Shirt"
10% buying T-shirts is an outrageous number.... more than likely no more than 0.5% of people buy T-shirts Not 10% buying that day, but perhaps averaging out to 10% buying over the course of a year. In Brazil, how many people do you know who do not own a t-shirt with some futball team/league/event on it? I know where I'm at in the United States, almost everyone owns some Chicago Bears gear. I personally own at least two T-shirts, two sweatshirts, and even a pair of earmuffs with the Chicago Bears labeled on it. Maybe I'm completely off-base and way too high, but that 10% number could easily be low if I'm talking lifetime as opposed to yearly. On February 09 2012 22:19 Jojo131 wrote:
The SC2 scene is probably already past it's peak growth judging by recent threads that have noticed a decline in people actually playing the game each season, I don't see how you're expecting it to grow any more. Sure you can argue that more people will play when HOTS comes out, but I'm pretty sure those are the same people who will leave again after 2-3 seasons anyway to play/watch some other game. Even then, fast-track to when LOTV comes out and the same situation occurs, what then? You'll still have the same relatively sized audience and we'll (probably) be back into this situation. Starcraft 2 has a better position to become a legitimate sport than almost all other video games because it is one of the rare ones where a lot of people actually prefer watching to playing. The ladder numbers will undoubtedly decrease until HotS (or maybe a slight bump right beforehand), but that doesn't have to mean viewer numbers decrease. It may mean that the community will need to do a better job of bringing outsiders in, but that's a whole other topic. 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. A typical televised sport:
- HD quality broadcast, YES.
- TV broadcast production levels, they are the standard so YES
- Constant flow of high quality content, YES
- Perfectly run event, generally YES
- The best casters, some subjectivity but overall YES
- The very best players, YESThe cost: $0. Sounds like E-Sports is overcharging. A little joking on that last line, but real sports are competition for E-Sports. And that competitor does all those things for your free viewing. (sarc)Somehow those real sports teams and leagues have managed to squeak by and stave off catastrophe. Some of their players can even manage to rent a one room apartment(/sarc). As I was saying in my last post, the problem isn't the model, e-sports actually monetizes more than traditional sports, the problem is the viewer numbers. And the viewer numbers are low because of the quality and formats of the shows. So tournaments need to think it through to make more people watch their adds. It's all about the rating.
With the exception of certain things like Champions League and sometimes the World Cup, I would have to pay a high premium here in Ireland to get any of those things, paying for Sky Sports or ESPN or whatever. The only reason that the CL and WC appear on non-subscription TV is because they pull in incredible numbers and are the most lucrative adverising slots possible for many TV stations. I don't really think that any ESPORT event can compare to those.
|
On February 09 2012 19:30 MrBitter wrote:
From my slightly-insiders point of view:
Right now people aren't making money. Hosting tournaments is expensive, and ad revs from the streaming platforms seldom cover just the prize pools. The only way these organizers stay in business right now is with investor/sponsor money.
I've spoken with many of these sponsors, and I've asked them the very straight question: "How the hell do you make any money in this business?", and the answer is always the same: "We don't."
The big, powerhouse sponsors - the multi-billion dollar corporations that have infinite money to throw around, continue to invest in e-sports, not for profit, but to modernize their image, and to appear "cool" in today's market. True story.
The smaller/mid-range sponsors - industry specific tech companies, peripheral manufacturers, basically companies that cater to a niche market already, are definitely trying to carve out a piece of what they perceive as a growing market, but think about how many mouse pads have to be sold to run a tournament? How many graphics cards, or notebooks have to be bought to cover JUST the prize pools?
There is definitely a day of reckoning on the horizon. A lot of people jumped into the game in hopes of cashing in on e-sports, but it's excruciatingly difficult to make money in this business.
People keep citing the GSL as the premiere league, and the only one worth paying for, but the cold truth is that they too are walking a very thin line in terms of their sustainability.
Some of these tournament organizers are eventually going to have to tap out, or drastically scale back what they've been doing. For events to continue to grow, event organizers will have to figure out a way to make money. Even if it is purely for love of the game, you can't keep playing if you can't stop bleeding cash.
PPV models are something industry people are looking at because it HAS worked in the past. It's what got UFC from grassroots to the big stage. But there were more factors in UFC rising to the level it has than just a functional PPV platform.
Personally, I'm of the opinion that you can't charge people to watch Starcraft. There's just too much free Starcraft available. What you can do is charge people to participate in chat, to access VODs, and to avoid seeing ads.
But that change alone would not make running major tournaments profitable. For that to happen, the people at the top of the industry, Sundance, David Ting, Carmac, Robert Ohlen, Russ, have got to figure out ways to sell their product to a small, niche market, without that market turning on them.
It's a very difficult problem to solve, and the answer may very well be to scale back and hold smaller events, but really, nobody wants that.
We all want bigger, better, faster, and stronger, and in the world of business, the first guy to figure out how to deliver that, while still making money, is going to be the one that survives.
It seems to me that a lot of esports brands are pursuing the tech startup model of first getting the users and the scale, and then figuring out how to monetize. That works fine for tech, but only because there are enormous returns to scale and they have huge piles of VC cash to burn. For esports, I think it's a terrible model:
1. The network effects are limited. No one wants GSL because all their friends are on GSL. They want GSL because they love SC2 and the games are amazing. But that means that the pool of potential customers is fixed, and actually probably shrinking. You aren't going to build a business in this environment by pursuing a grow-now, monetize-later strategy.
2. Giving away a free product is treated as a license to produce a bad product. I agree with everyone else who's said it that Code S is the only SC2 product that fully meets what I think are the minimum criteria for a commercial product. Other tournaments seem to be poorly produced and carried by great players and (sometimes) great casters. Some esports orgs (thinking MLG and, apparently, vvv gaming here) seem to hold their users in open contempt, which certainly doesn't help either.
3. The free model is just convincing people they shouldn't have to pay for esports. I get the impression that you buy into this view, but I don't really agree. The amount of content that a major tournament produces is just staggering. A GSL season is around a hundred hours of content probably. That's a lot of stuff! GSL does a better job of managing the amount of content they have by spreading it out over a season, which is a nice feature. But people will pay $10 to go see a movie. They'll certainly pay $10 to watch 50x as much content, if they are excited about esports.
I get your concern about competition from free content, but if your product can't compete with some random streamer, then it's because you're producing a bad product.
Charging people for random incidental bullshit is a bad model, imo, because you are never going to raise enough revenue to support a great product. You're essentially saying to treat the tournaments and the production as a loss leader and nickle and dime people on conveniences. It might work for Zynga, but it's no way to cater to a niche market.
So, I definitely believe that the way forward is to produce a truly professional-level product and charge for it accordingly. esports has the advantage that you can attract world-class talent to an event with truly paltry sums of money. Add in the professional production, casting, and delivery, and you have a product that fans are going to love and care about. And then just don't give it away for free.
|
On February 09 2012 22:58 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 22:57 bluQ wrote:On February 09 2012 22:53 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 22:50 RenSC2 wrote:On February 09 2012 22:15 ropumar wrote:
"10% of the people buy a T-Shirt"
10% buying T-shirts is an outrageous number.... more than likely no more than 0.5% of people buy T-shirts Not 10% buying that day, but perhaps averaging out to 10% buying over the course of a year. In Brazil, how many people do you know who do not own a t-shirt with some futball team/league/event on it? I know where I'm at in the United States, almost everyone owns some Chicago Bears gear. I personally own at least two T-shirts, two sweatshirts, and even a pair of earmuffs with the Chicago Bears labeled on it. Maybe I'm completely off-base and way too high, but that 10% number could easily be low if I'm talking lifetime as opposed to yearly. On February 09 2012 22:19 Jojo131 wrote:
The SC2 scene is probably already past it's peak growth judging by recent threads that have noticed a decline in people actually playing the game each season, I don't see how you're expecting it to grow any more. Sure you can argue that more people will play when HOTS comes out, but I'm pretty sure those are the same people who will leave again after 2-3 seasons anyway to play/watch some other game. Even then, fast-track to when LOTV comes out and the same situation occurs, what then? You'll still have the same relatively sized audience and we'll (probably) be back into this situation. Starcraft 2 has a better position to become a legitimate sport than almost all other video games because it is one of the rare ones where a lot of people actually prefer watching to playing. The ladder numbers will undoubtedly decrease until HotS (or maybe a slight bump right beforehand), but that doesn't have to mean viewer numbers decrease. It may mean that the community will need to do a better job of bringing outsiders in, but that's a whole other topic. 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. A typical televised sport: - HD quality broadcast, YES. - TV broadcast production levels, they are the standard so YES - Constant flow of high quality content, YES - Perfectly run event, generally YES - The best casters, some subjectivity but overall YES - The very best players, YES The cost: $0. Sounds like E-Sports is overcharging. A little joking on that last line, but real sports are competition for E-Sports. And that competitor does all those things for your free viewing. (sarc)Somehow those real sports teams and leagues have managed to squeak by and stave off catastrophe. Some of their players can even manage to rent a one room apartment(/sarc). As I was saying in my last post, the problem isn't the model, e-sports actually monetizes more than traditional sports, the problem is the viewer numbers. And the viewer numbers are low because of the quality and formats of the shows. So tournaments need to think it through to make more people watch their adds. It's all about the rating. Where did you get this from? If the viewers numbers are low that means the market isn't ready for it from the demanding side. If there are no strong demands you either need to generate them or pull out of this "market" which then isn't really one. People are ready for starcraft, just that the format may be wrong. If a TV show doesn't get high ratings it's its fault and no others. Starcraft has great appeal.
? So the format in terms of stream? tournaments? And why are people ready for "starcraft"(i would rather stick to esports) when they don't watch it that much as u assumed.
TV here is not even in FullHD, just blockbusters and stuff or you need to pay for it. So ... yea, same business modell and quality isn't it? People still watch TV.
|
On February 09 2012 22:50 RenSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 22:15 ropumar wrote:
"10% of the people buy a T-Shirt"
10% buying T-shirts is an outrageous number.... more than likely no more than 0.5% of people buy T-shirts Not 10% buying that day, but perhaps averaging out to 10% buying over the course of a year. In Brazil, how many people do you know who do not own a t-shirt with some futball team/league/event on it? I know where I'm at in the United States, almost everyone owns some Chicago Bears gear. I personally own at least two T-shirts, two sweatshirts, and even a pair of earmuffs with the Chicago Bears labeled on it. Maybe I'm completely off-base and way too high, but that 10% number could easily be low if I'm talking lifetime as opposed to yearly. Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 22:19 Jojo131 wrote:
The SC2 scene is probably already past it's peak growth judging by recent threads that have noticed a decline in people actually playing the game each season, I don't see how you're expecting it to grow any more. Sure you can argue that more people will play when HOTS comes out, but I'm pretty sure those are the same people who will leave again after 2-3 seasons anyway to play/watch some other game. Even then, fast-track to when LOTV comes out and the same situation occurs, what then? You'll still have the same relatively sized audience and we'll (probably) be back into this situation. Starcraft 2 has a better position to become a legitimate sport than almost all other video games because it is one of the rare ones where a lot of people actually prefer watching to playing. The ladder numbers will undoubtedly decrease until HotS (or maybe a slight bump right beforehand), but that doesn't have to mean viewer numbers decrease. It may mean that the community will need to do a better job of bringing outsiders in, but that's a whole other topic. 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. A typical televised sport: - HD quality broadcast, YES. - TV broadcast production levels, they are the standard so YES - Constant flow of high quality content, YES - Perfectly run event, generally YES - The best casters, some subjectivity but overall YES - The very best players, YES The cost: $0. Sounds like E-Sports is overcharging. A little joking on that last line, but real sports are competition for E-Sports. And that competitor does all those things for your free viewing. (sarc)Somehow those real sports teams and leagues have managed to squeak by and stave off catastrophe. Some of their players can even manage to rent a one room apartment(/sarc). As I was saying in my last post, the problem isn't the model, e-sports actually monetizes more than traditional sports, the problem is the viewer numbers.
Its not free.. unless tv is free in the US normally you need to pay atleast 20-30$(standart tv). obviously its cheap but they have ads between most of the game and what not.
Nothing in this world is FREE and it wont change
|
On February 09 2012 22:56 Klonere wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 22:48 DarkPlasmaBall 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. I believe so, and I really don't think that having a great quality, on time, event with amazing players and commentators is too much to ask for. People wouldn't pay as much money to watch professional sports on television if there were huge difficulties (although different problems may arise through different media outlets). And if a particular tournament doesn't care enough about quality, then they'll go out of business because there are plenty of other companies ready to satiate this budding community's hunger. While I agree on the point that we should expect these things as fans as we have been able to get nearly all of them before, I just don't see where the money is in it. All of those things require a different set of staff with certain expertise (casters and production staff), expensive equipment (like the infamous MLG satellite trucks) and the very best care for players (dedicated player staff and paid expenses). For example I really don't understand IPL's business model at all, offering so much stuff that should be premium while putting really gimmicky stuff (player cams and roving interviewers) behind a pay-wall. Obviously they do have a fairly impressive list of sponsors but whether they are going to stick around for the upcoming IPL's when the first one just about hit 50k with some ridiculous production values and ggs.....I just don't get how its profitable or even sustainable.
I suppose you have to spend money to make money, especially when trying to make yourself stand out as a great-looking business compared to others who are competing in a new market.
That being said, I don't really care for too much gimmicky stuff, although it's important to find ways to pass the time between games. And I don't mind watching advertisements (it's the least I can do if I'm going to watch a free stream) but I care more about watching a good quality stream, on time, with casters and players who know what they're doing. I don't need to see too many bells and whistles (if you're wasting money on it, don't bother), and I'm not sure how much profit they're turning over at the moment either.
|
On February 09 2012 23:02 bluQ wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 22:58 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 22:57 bluQ wrote:On February 09 2012 22:53 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 22:50 RenSC2 wrote:On February 09 2012 22:15 ropumar wrote:
"10% of the people buy a T-Shirt"
10% buying T-shirts is an outrageous number.... more than likely no more than 0.5% of people buy T-shirts Not 10% buying that day, but perhaps averaging out to 10% buying over the course of a year. In Brazil, how many people do you know who do not own a t-shirt with some futball team/league/event on it? I know where I'm at in the United States, almost everyone owns some Chicago Bears gear. I personally own at least two T-shirts, two sweatshirts, and even a pair of earmuffs with the Chicago Bears labeled on it. Maybe I'm completely off-base and way too high, but that 10% number could easily be low if I'm talking lifetime as opposed to yearly. On February 09 2012 22:19 Jojo131 wrote:
The SC2 scene is probably already past it's peak growth judging by recent threads that have noticed a decline in people actually playing the game each season, I don't see how you're expecting it to grow any more. Sure you can argue that more people will play when HOTS comes out, but I'm pretty sure those are the same people who will leave again after 2-3 seasons anyway to play/watch some other game. Even then, fast-track to when LOTV comes out and the same situation occurs, what then? You'll still have the same relatively sized audience and we'll (probably) be back into this situation. Starcraft 2 has a better position to become a legitimate sport than almost all other video games because it is one of the rare ones where a lot of people actually prefer watching to playing. The ladder numbers will undoubtedly decrease until HotS (or maybe a slight bump right beforehand), but that doesn't have to mean viewer numbers decrease. It may mean that the community will need to do a better job of bringing outsiders in, but that's a whole other topic. 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. A typical televised sport: - HD quality broadcast, YES. - TV broadcast production levels, they are the standard so YES - Constant flow of high quality content, YES - Perfectly run event, generally YES - The best casters, some subjectivity but overall YES - The very best players, YES The cost: $0. Sounds like E-Sports is overcharging. A little joking on that last line, but real sports are competition for E-Sports. And that competitor does all those things for your free viewing. (sarc)Somehow those real sports teams and leagues have managed to squeak by and stave off catastrophe. Some of their players can even manage to rent a one room apartment(/sarc). As I was saying in my last post, the problem isn't the model, e-sports actually monetizes more than traditional sports, the problem is the viewer numbers. And the viewer numbers are low because of the quality and formats of the shows. So tournaments need to think it through to make more people watch their adds. It's all about the rating. Where did you get this from? If the viewers numbers are low that means the market isn't ready for it from the demanding side. If there are no strong demands you either need to generate them or pull out of this "market" which then isn't really one. People are ready for starcraft, just that the format may be wrong. If a TV show doesn't get high ratings it's its fault and no others. Starcraft has great appeal. ? So the format in terms of stream? tournaments? And why are people ready for "starcraft"(i would rather stick to esports) when they don't watch it that much as u assumed. TV here is not even in FullHD, just blockbusters and stuff or you need to pay for it. So ... yea, same business modell and quality isn't it? People still watch TV.
I am saying that there is a market for esports that can get 100k views (for start) per tournament only if an event would be created in the right format.
The formats right now are too hardcore and not enough appeal for casuals. Also not enough females on camera (not jocking, remember IPL in the downtime?).
|
On February 09 2012 23:05 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:02 bluQ wrote:On February 09 2012 22:58 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 22:57 bluQ wrote:On February 09 2012 22:53 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 22:50 RenSC2 wrote:On February 09 2012 22:15 ropumar wrote:
"10% of the people buy a T-Shirt"
10% buying T-shirts is an outrageous number.... more than likely no more than 0.5% of people buy T-shirts Not 10% buying that day, but perhaps averaging out to 10% buying over the course of a year. In Brazil, how many people do you know who do not own a t-shirt with some futball team/league/event on it? I know where I'm at in the United States, almost everyone owns some Chicago Bears gear. I personally own at least two T-shirts, two sweatshirts, and even a pair of earmuffs with the Chicago Bears labeled on it. Maybe I'm completely off-base and way too high, but that 10% number could easily be low if I'm talking lifetime as opposed to yearly. On February 09 2012 22:19 Jojo131 wrote:
The SC2 scene is probably already past it's peak growth judging by recent threads that have noticed a decline in people actually playing the game each season, I don't see how you're expecting it to grow any more. Sure you can argue that more people will play when HOTS comes out, but I'm pretty sure those are the same people who will leave again after 2-3 seasons anyway to play/watch some other game. Even then, fast-track to when LOTV comes out and the same situation occurs, what then? You'll still have the same relatively sized audience and we'll (probably) be back into this situation. Starcraft 2 has a better position to become a legitimate sport than almost all other video games because it is one of the rare ones where a lot of people actually prefer watching to playing. The ladder numbers will undoubtedly decrease until HotS (or maybe a slight bump right beforehand), but that doesn't have to mean viewer numbers decrease. It may mean that the community will need to do a better job of bringing outsiders in, but that's a whole other topic. 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. A typical televised sport: - HD quality broadcast, YES. - TV broadcast production levels, they are the standard so YES - Constant flow of high quality content, YES - Perfectly run event, generally YES - The best casters, some subjectivity but overall YES - The very best players, YES The cost: $0. Sounds like E-Sports is overcharging. A little joking on that last line, but real sports are competition for E-Sports. And that competitor does all those things for your free viewing. (sarc)Somehow those real sports teams and leagues have managed to squeak by and stave off catastrophe. Some of their players can even manage to rent a one room apartment(/sarc). As I was saying in my last post, the problem isn't the model, e-sports actually monetizes more than traditional sports, the problem is the viewer numbers. And the viewer numbers are low because of the quality and formats of the shows. So tournaments need to think it through to make more people watch their adds. It's all about the rating. Where did you get this from? If the viewers numbers are low that means the market isn't ready for it from the demanding side. If there are no strong demands you either need to generate them or pull out of this "market" which then isn't really one. People are ready for starcraft, just that the format may be wrong. If a TV show doesn't get high ratings it's its fault and no others. Starcraft has great appeal. ? So the format in terms of stream? tournaments? And why are people ready for "starcraft"(i would rather stick to esports) when they don't watch it that much as u assumed. TV here is not even in FullHD, just blockbusters and stuff or you need to pay for it. So ... yea, same business modell and quality isn't it? People still watch TV. I am saying that there is a market for esports that can get 100k views (for start) per tournament only if an event would be created in the right format. The formats right now are too hardcore and not enough appeal for casuals. Also not enough females on camera (not jocking, remember IPL in the downtime?).
How do these supposedly free sports events on TV appeal to casuals hm? They don't. The whole women on camera thing is a marketing gimmick. No-one is going to watch MMA vs Nestea because some hot woman might be interviewing them. I would guarantee it. They are watching because MMA and Nestea are really fucking good or because its likely its in a final of a big event, like GSL or because their is a lot of money on the line.
Appealing to casuals is all well and good but at its heart SC2 is an RTS video game that requires certain basic knowledge and information to understand what is happening. While we have seen some anecdotal evidence that people who don't play at all watch, it isn't very many at all. The majority of ESPORTS viewers will more than likely always be people who playing the games in question. How did BW appeal to casuals?
|
If SC2 became much more expensive (like $20 for a weekend of MLG or GSL) I don't think I would pay. The problem with comparing to UFC is, there's not much competing with UFC. If you want to watch the best fighters, you'll pay the PPV costs or find a bar/friend who will (or pirate it, but we're not going to discuss that here).
However, in the case of SC2, there are so many more free or nearly-free options. Those same GSL players are also streaming their games all day for free, they're playing in showmatches, they're playing in smaller tournaments. You could also just, y'know, play the game yourself and get entertainment that way. Not really the case with UFC. The only way to monetize SC2 profitably is to scale it up slowly and gradually, until other organizations also catch on and escalate their prices as well. You can't slap a $20 price tag on something that people are used to paying $5 for and can get for free elsewhere.
|
Some of the opinions in this thread are incredible to read.
Like some people stated before me:
- No major tournaments make money at this time.
- Everyone wants high quality HD production for free, but doesn't wanna pay for it.
We are already monetizing esports but if we want to grow esports even more we need to start to monetize viewership better.
Pay-per-view and subscription models for tournaments and leagues will probably increase a lot this year and through 2013, it wouldn't surprise me if a majority of MLG events this year is pay per view.
If you want esports to grow you need to cash out. Simple as that.
|
On February 09 2012 18:32 bluQ wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 18:23 Akta wrote:On February 09 2012 18:15 bluQ wrote:On February 09 2012 18:09 Akta wrote:On February 09 2012 17:56 bluQ wrote:On February 09 2012 17:53 bubblegumbo wrote:
Monetizing the numerous big Western Tournaments would be a a mistake unless it is at a very reasonable cost. There are about 4-5 big tournaments such as the NASL, MLG, IPL, IEM already and if all of them were to charge $50 for every season, what is going to happen? Multiply that by 6 if we count the GSL and we don't even need to argue anymore.
I dont know what kind of rich family the target audience live in that would gladly pay more than $100 a year for watching SC2 and that's only assuming 1 season per year. We are talking about the budgets of normal fans of a niche industry aging from 14 to early 30s here. Finding more sponsors and buying more adverts while continuing the present model is the most reasonable way to maintain the popularity of this scene. Going PPV in the manner of other hardcore sports only makes sense when there is only one big tournament and league, and even then that would only work in NA, not in other countries that don't have that. Are u kidding me? Did you listen his rant? How often do you go to cinema, drinking senseless, eating at MC if u ahve a full fridge? Dude those perspectives like yours are from guys who got illusioned by the "internet". The life is not for free. You normally CAN'T listen to music everywhere everyday everytime for free. You CAN'T watch movies and series for free everytime everywhere everyday. Did you even know you pay for TV? And I for me allready pay for MLG, HSC and GSL. The Tournies I watch regularly. I listened to it and while I agree that it would be good if people spent more money to support the events they like, I either think he's joking or don't know what he's talking about with all the yelling about that organizations should charge away. Or maybe he's right and everyone should start charging for stuff. Hell I should start charging for my 3k members forum, imagine all amazing things I could do if those damn blood sucking users just quit being cheap and paid me! Yea because hosting forums is a new economy ... oh wait. And I'm totally talking about charging everyone for everything ... just shows you didn't get the topic dude. Thats not how discussions work to interpret random things into it. I don't think you understand. Why couldn't my forums be a new economy? According to his arguments I should be able to make a lot of money on it. Hosting forums is allready a part of a big economy. Where the forum itself doesnt monteize. It is a feature often used for monetized services. And btw did you script your forum yourself or using unsave bboard? Because good forums cost money  And you still miss the whole point: i was never talking about when I make a website I should get money for views. We are talking about an economy which pays their players (inc. pricemoney) over 1kk$, who flew several humans several times trough the whole world, who have production equipment equivelant to "porfessional" TV prodcutions. Maybe listen to Jerith again and in particular to what he says about console gamers and supporting/buying sc2 stuff, then you maybe see that you missinterpreted alot. The point is that the fact that they need/want to make more money does not make for example PPV more financially viable. Which isn't even necessarily related to what is good for the sc2 scene either.
Also, his attitude about how people spend money is a huge pet peeve of mine. He's making it sound like people don't spend money on anything now a days like if people aren't spending their money. Breaking news: people are spending their money. It doesn't matter how angry you try to sound when you talk about how everyone should quit being cheap and magically spend more money on everything so we can reach fairy tale utopia, it's still retarded.
Btw I said I agreed with what he said about supporting events you like in the post you first quoted.
|
On February 09 2012 23:13 Klonere wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 23:05 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 23:02 bluQ wrote:On February 09 2012 22:58 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 22:57 bluQ wrote:On February 09 2012 22:53 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 09 2012 22:50 RenSC2 wrote:On February 09 2012 22:15 ropumar wrote:
"10% of the people buy a T-Shirt"
10% buying T-shirts is an outrageous number.... more than likely no more than 0.5% of people buy T-shirts Not 10% buying that day, but perhaps averaging out to 10% buying over the course of a year. In Brazil, how many people do you know who do not own a t-shirt with some futball team/league/event on it? I know where I'm at in the United States, almost everyone owns some Chicago Bears gear. I personally own at least two T-shirts, two sweatshirts, and even a pair of earmuffs with the Chicago Bears labeled on it. Maybe I'm completely off-base and way too high, but that 10% number could easily be low if I'm talking lifetime as opposed to yearly. On February 09 2012 22:19 Jojo131 wrote:
The SC2 scene is probably already past it's peak growth judging by recent threads that have noticed a decline in people actually playing the game each season, I don't see how you're expecting it to grow any more. Sure you can argue that more people will play when HOTS comes out, but I'm pretty sure those are the same people who will leave again after 2-3 seasons anyway to play/watch some other game. Even then, fast-track to when LOTV comes out and the same situation occurs, what then? You'll still have the same relatively sized audience and we'll (probably) be back into this situation. Starcraft 2 has a better position to become a legitimate sport than almost all other video games because it is one of the rare ones where a lot of people actually prefer watching to playing. The ladder numbers will undoubtedly decrease until HotS (or maybe a slight bump right beforehand), but that doesn't have to mean viewer numbers decrease. It may mean that the community will need to do a better job of bringing outsiders in, but that's a whole other topic. 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. A typical televised sport: - HD quality broadcast, YES. - TV broadcast production levels, they are the standard so YES - Constant flow of high quality content, YES - Perfectly run event, generally YES - The best casters, some subjectivity but overall YES - The very best players, YES The cost: $0. Sounds like E-Sports is overcharging. A little joking on that last line, but real sports are competition for E-Sports. And that competitor does all those things for your free viewing. (sarc)Somehow those real sports teams and leagues have managed to squeak by and stave off catastrophe. Some of their players can even manage to rent a one room apartment(/sarc). As I was saying in my last post, the problem isn't the model, e-sports actually monetizes more than traditional sports, the problem is the viewer numbers. And the viewer numbers are low because of the quality and formats of the shows. So tournaments need to think it through to make more people watch their adds. It's all about the rating. Where did you get this from? If the viewers numbers are low that means the market isn't ready for it from the demanding side. If there are no strong demands you either need to generate them or pull out of this "market" which then isn't really one. People are ready for starcraft, just that the format may be wrong. If a TV show doesn't get high ratings it's its fault and no others. Starcraft has great appeal. ? So the format in terms of stream? tournaments? And why are people ready for "starcraft"(i would rather stick to esports) when they don't watch it that much as u assumed. TV here is not even in FullHD, just blockbusters and stuff or you need to pay for it. So ... yea, same business modell and quality isn't it? People still watch TV. I am saying that there is a market for esports that can get 100k views (for start) per tournament only if an event would be created in the right format. The formats right now are too hardcore and not enough appeal for casuals. Also not enough females on camera (not jocking, remember IPL in the downtime?). How do these supposedly free sports events on TV appeal to casuals hm? They don't. The whole women on camera thing is a marketing gimmick. No-one is going to watch MMA vs Nestea because some hot woman might be interviewing them. I would guarantee it. They are watching because MMA and Nestea are really fucking good or because its likely its in a final of a big event, like GSL or because their is a lot of money on the line. Appealing to casuals is all well and good but at its heart SC2 is an RTS video game that requires certain basic knowledge and information to understand what is happening. While we have seen some anecdotal evidence that people who don't play at all watch, it isn't very many at all. The majority of ESPORTS viewers will more than likely always be people who playing the games in question. How did BW appeal to casuals?
Of course the women on camera are a marketing thing DUH. BW appealed to all sorts of people of all ages and sex. Look at a MLG crowd and it's a 15-30 sausage fest.
|
On February 09 2012 15:54 1sz2sz3sz wrote:
I dont like how people think we`ll pay for everything
I dont pay for any tournaments because I dont care THAT much about a game to spend money to watch people play it. I also run adblocker.
Ill stick with my LQ streams and HQ restreams when available.
I also find it ridiculous GOM already charges out the ass for their subscription (20$ a month if you want to watch the dual stream when it used to be free for all LOL) while Koreans get to watch it for free (just adverts)
1/ Korea is a big lan, streaming there cost nothing for GOM
2/ GOM can actually put ads in their Korean stream, for major companies, or movies, or anything. And they do (during each break in our stream...they had stuff likes ads for the last Harry Poter movie, or for some new car, phone or computer)
That's why we get to pay and not them basically.
--
I forgot to add to my previous post that IPL is also making a damn good job, they improved so much between seasons that I consider buying their premium product.
|
I just dont feel esports will succeed in the west.
In Korea, you have the GSL
Lasts 2 months.
Everyday exposure for your advertisements
X amount of prize money
Costs teams absolutely nothing to participate because they live in Korea
Up and coming talent every day, like Jjakji, goes from no-name to sudden GSL champion
Tournaments in the west
Lasts 3-4 days max
Limited advertisement exposure (I personally never visit IEMs or Dreamhacks website so whatevers on there I dont see since I watch off TL)
Same prize money as GSL
Costs teams THOUSANDS to fly their players around the world every other week to compete in tournaments
Dead talent base, no up and comers. (I dont consider a mediocre MLG run ONCE an accomplishment), masters players losing to DRG even though hes playing with chopsticks, rubbergloves, a cast
Relies on big names like Huk Idra etc to do well (what happens when they become a complete joke vs a korean, I guess theyd still have that 'star' level in the west)
Maybe tournaments should stop having 100k prizepool events every month if theyre not making enough money, there is so much going on in the starcraft community it isnt necessary, its kind of embarassing too when you see a tournament going on and then you see a streamer with the same amount or more viewer numbers.
I know Im not watching IEM until the finals because I dont know who 75% and personally only care about the matches with koreans in them
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
