Liquid`

EDT 03:14
CEST 09:14
KST 16:14

Forum Sidebar

Events/Features

Pros React To: ASL S21 Finals BW General Discussion Very long shot - StarCraft x A7X video Pros React to: TvT Masterclass in FlaSh vs Light vespene.gg — BW replays in browser

Tourneys

Escore Tournament StarCraft Season 2 [BSL22] WB Final & LB Semis - Saturday 21:00 CEST [ASL21] Grand Finals [Megathread] Daily Proleagues

Strategy

Any training maps people recommend? Muta micro map competition [G] Hydra ZvZ: An Introduction Fighting Spirit mining rates

Blogs

Customization Drives Loyalty…

TrAiDoS

Why RTS gamers make better f…

gosubay

ramps on octagon

StaticNine

ASL S21 English Commentary…

namkraft

Put down the pitchforks, or lower them, at least. - Page 10

Post a Reply

Prev 1 8 9 10 11 12 35 Next All

Pandemona

Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts

February 14 2012 08:50 GMT

#181

This is very interesting! Another reason why i love EG ♥ Such a boss is mr Alex :D

Thanks for the amazing post, always an excellent read, i agree with you 110% and everyone in the community is deffo realing from this pitch, a very bad pitch aswell. GOMTV do this alot, make random tournaments was sick players for people to buy HD pass for, but they never charge outstanding prices like this. Think someone at MLG was pitching a little to high with this.

Thanks again Alex :D EG FIGHTING

robih

Austria1086 Posts

February 14 2012 08:51 GMT

#182

there are so many tourmanets in the year yet there are always kinda the same players.
why would i pay 20$ for one of them when i can see the same players for free two weeks afterwards?
and its not like MLG is something special. its just one of many tournaments.
thats why i am not paying.

aebriol

Norway2066 Posts

February 14 2012 08:52 GMT

#183

I would have paid $20 to watch.

But I feel cheated because I bought the gold membership to get a years access to HD streams and HD vods. And I feel I should get what I paid for.

So I won't.

(I bought every GSL, GSTL, first seasons of NASL, IPL, and mlg gold ... so I am not opposed to paying in general).

VirgilSC2

United States6151 Posts

February 14 2012 08:56 GMT

#184

On February 14 2012 17:32 YMCApylons wrote:

Show nested quote +

Good catch. The MLG defense would be that MLG Arena never fell under content access rights given to MLG gold members, so notification would be unnecessary, as there was no modification of terms of service. Your claim would be that it did.

Yes, but MLG would lose there, plain and simple.

Gold Membership offered "Access to HQ Pro Circuit Broadcasts"

and MLG's Winter Arena was, and is currently, being marketed as the "Pro Circuit Winter Arena"

pulsade13

Australia50 Posts

February 14 2012 08:57 GMT

#185

Great post Alex, I love and appreciate the honesty. When am I going to be able to watch Justin, Floe and Ricky compete within the same two hours as incontrol, idra and huk??? I think that is what we need to really grow esports. The live on three guys really got me into the FGC and those guys should be as big at the starcraft guys because I think Justin is one of the most talented progamers in the world. Anyways great post

FrostedMiniWeet

United States636 Posts

February 14 2012 08:59 GMT

#186

PPV only is a terrible idea, even if they are able to make a bit more money, as they are not taking into account the value of a viewer. For example, if both PPV and Freemium netted the same revenue, Freemium would be a far superior choice as Freemium would naturally have far greater viewership, and viewers have value in and of themselves regardless of whether they pay or not right now, as they represent likely future revenue. PPV is short term gain, long term loss.

ceaRshaf

Romania4926 Posts

February 14 2012 08:59 GMT

#187

I think some tournament organizers think that the community is getting so much for so little but it's not true. Last year only I think I have spend 200$ (if not a lot more) on tournament tickets. It's not my fault that there are so many tournaments and the money spreads so thin.

Trying to take more money from the community is bad. Some tournaments need to die and others to bloom. Sorry to say this but we are oversaturated with good quality sc2 content. Rising the price is a really bad move.

And really MLG, pay per view? Good luck with your 200 viewers. You'd better run 10 ads between games.

Tobberoth

Sweden6375 Posts

February 14 2012 09:00 GMT

#188

20 is just a buttload of money, I would barely pay that to watch an event live, much less so a live stream.

I think even 10 dollars is a stretch unless it's a really good tournament with the best players/casters, more or less optimal time (I'm European, don't want to sit up to 3AM to watch the games), and vods available afterwards.

5 dollars is something I could see myself pay for what MLG events have been up to now.

stfouri

Finland272 Posts

February 14 2012 09:02 GMT

#189

They should just slap the shitty 360p for free stream and drop the price to $10.

yawnoC

United States3704 Posts

February 14 2012 09:02 GMT

#190

ChibSquad ... Well written as always.

Personally I am Option C ... but also agree with Option B ^_^

checkplus

United States10 Posts

February 14 2012 09:05 GMT

#191

pretty eloquent and well reasoned post.

Auren

United States82 Posts

February 14 2012 09:09 GMT

#192

Personally, I find the price way to high and will not be paying simply because I'm so used to stuff being free/cheap for a subscription/hd pass when it comes to sc2. Now, I'm not saying I'm a cheapass and that's why, I'm saying I feel that way because that's what feels "normal" for me to be paying. For example, I will gladly drop $60 for a ps3 game without batting an eye, I will gladly drop $14.95 a month for an mmo.. but I say what the fuck at an iphone game that wants more than $5. Why? Because I think iphone game suck or the game isn't good enough? No, I have that reaction because I'm so used to paying $2 or less for games. At least for me, MLG can compare it to other shit like movies all you want but what I pay for one thing has nothing to do with what I will pay for something completely different.

I agree that $10 would have been more appropriate as a price because that feels more in-line with what I'm used to paying for things.

phos4

Germany226 Posts

February 14 2012 09:11 GMT

#193

if this is really a bait-and-switch, and to me it seem like that, i dont understand how anybody can advice goldmembers not to get their money back. i want a flourishing sc2 scene just as much as anybody on this site, but i fell the way mlg is doing it is just wrong.

AmericanUmlaut

Germany2594 Posts

February 14 2012 09:12 GMT

#194

A very well reasoned post. I don't actually have a problem with an organization creating a PPV event. If MLG said "Hey, we're going to do this event in 2013 that will be strictly PPV...", I'd have no problem with it. I wouldn't pay $20, but I'd probably pay $10 if it was a really sick lineup. My issue is that I bought a gold pass for $30 based on the promise of a year of access to MLG content, and then, months later MLG announces that one of the events in that year is actually going to cost me an additional $20. That's incredibly disrespectful, and I have e-mailed them to let them know that I'll be cancelling my membership on day 1 of the Winter Arena if the policy isn't changed to allow gold members to see the content they paid for.

architecture

United States643 Posts

February 14 2012 09:15 GMT

#195

This is an absurd point.

No other industry primarily relies on ticket sales to drive revenue. Advertising deals is where it's at, and will always be where it's at.

Now, I can understand if you are unable to land million dollar contracts, because there aren't a million people that watch SC. But what does that say about the spectator sport? Doomed to merely subsist?

Volrath

Sweden45 Posts

February 14 2012 09:16 GMT

#196

Yea the $20 price is a pretty high price tag for a tournament like this. $10 sounds fair. And it has nothing to do with "being" cheap or something like that. I won´t pay more for a service than I actually think it is worth.

RJau

Australia141 Posts

February 14 2012 09:17 GMT

#197

I'm not angry about the price. But as a gold pass subscriber I feel MLG dishonestly advertised the "Gold Pass". Selling a 12 month pass that includes access to all MLG footage and then determining some events are excluded is very poor form.

I'm fine with MLG changing their model, but they should honour their existing customers and their existing commitments. You sold Gold Passes that were made out to be an all inclusive content pass. The LEAST you could do is honour that commitment by giving all current Gold Pass subscribers access to this content.

Good luck going back to any kind of subscription model after this. PPV better work out.

Talin

Montenegro10532 Posts

February 14 2012 09:17 GMT

#198

Good move by EG.

Hartley

United Kingdom5 Posts

February 14 2012 09:21 GMT

#199

I have to commend you on this post Alex, it's a brilliant insight to the reasons why and possible compromises. I agree with your sentiments and I am glad EG took this stance on the issue. I have trust in Sundance that they will revise the system to fit values people expect better but it is nice to know the reasoning behind trying to shift more money away from outside funds. Thank you for this post.

bubblegumbo

Taiwan1296 Posts

February 14 2012 09:23 GMT

#200

I don't know what is going on with the replay packs, but I would only pay $10 for them at most and VODs per MLG weekend.