|
On February 14 2012 21:56 BadBinky wrote:
I think it's a clever way to get more people to pay 10 bucks they wouldn't pay if they announced their real price right away.
I doubt that this is the overall plan, and I also doubt people are really that transparent with their spending. As a matter of fact, this thread proves you wrong. People weigh the options and the amounts very carefully and deliberately.
I also don't believe Sundance/MLG will change this model for the Winter tournament. It is very clear to me that this is a trial run, and I would like to applaud them for actually doing it. I applaud them because they are putting a sizable chunk of money behind it, and not to make a huge profit, but to see if they can't kick the revenue models to the next level and accelerate the growth and financial backing of the scene. I disagree with them on the timing, but I hope I'm wrong and they're right and it ends up working out for them.
But back to your point; I would have right away and would still put up $10 because I have a Gold membership already. I would like to see a ~$30 extra on an annual ticket, assuming 4 of those events a year, and calling it Platinum or whatever. I don't see how the $20 announcement makes a lick of a difference, I think it makes for a good and healthy discussion though.
|
Great post but I have one problem with it. You state that we might be looking at a 80% decrease in viewership because of this PPV business, yet you want the industry to grow and your team to make more money by selling direct-to-source merchandise. How does a 80% decline in viewership help that happen at all if 80% less than before will be interested and see your team play? Sure there's more money in play with this business model in the short term but the money is not spread anywhere near as evenly as it would if there were free LQ streams available or if the passes where set at a more fair price.
This move, to me, feels like MLG has sat down and said to themselves that the peak interest has been reached and it is now time to cash in rather than getting more people interested in SC2 as an e-sport which is really not the case and will stump the growth of it in the long run.
Big up for not standing by something that you do not believe in though!
|
I would assume that MLG are hoping they can still get up to around the 10,000 viewer mark. The silly thing is I don't think they will get close to that (I would guess around 5,000), but I'm certain a $10 ticket would get them 25,000 viewers. Now I'm not that good at maths, but it seems like 5,000 x $20 might - in some circumstances - be somewhat less than 25,000 x $10. Is that right?
|
Thanks for your point of view Alex. I don't think $20 is absurd but I do agree that it's a bit much to go from Freemium to $20. I will pay for Winter Arena. But I'd rather pay $10 since this is a new model. I'd love for MLG to take this chance but I hope in the future they lower the pricing and do more for the gold members. I hope that MLG is still a success. I'll be attending Columbus and I can't wait.
|
The problem is we don't get much for the $20 we're supposed to be spending, especially when you consider the competition (GSL, IEM, etc.)
E-sports doesn't grow by throwing money at a tournament organizer. They have to give value to the paying customer. Now we don't know their exact budget (and quite frankly we shouldn't), but if they can't afford to put on a free stream for an entire weekend (not just Friday and Saturday) and/or a $10 premium HQ stream, then I can't help but wonder what they're doing behind closed doors to justify the $20. For me personally, I think I'll pass on watching MLG for now and spend my money elsewhere.
|
On February 14 2012 22:07 WigglingSquid wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2012 22:04 DrN0 wrote:
I have to say that no matter the community outcry I think this will earn MLG a lot of money. Before they had to survive on advertisements now I think the ads are still there but an extra 20$ for anybody IMO silly enough to buy, but think about it this way, if only 500 people buy the pass that's still 10 000$. So if just 2000 people buy the pass that's 40 000$ which is absolutely tons, more than enough you would think. I am fairly sure 40k$ is not even enough to cover the players' expenses.
no i would take 2k$ per player as an average value, so this would come to 64k$.
I don't know how MLG computed their budgets, but anyway 20$ for a 32player tournament is just way too much. Will every match be broadcasted? Then i would at least think about it. Will there be some group stages? (which would mean more matches)? I wouldn't pay 20$ for a 32 player double or single elimination tournament, cause that's way to less content for that prize. It's really a shame, that they ruined their great event with the prize.
If they don't make it cheaper down to 10$, I will completely skip this tournament and just check the results  . And that's really sad, since i was really looking forward to it.
|
On February 14 2012 22:20 TeeTS wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2012 22:07 WigglingSquid wrote:On February 14 2012 22:04 DrN0 wrote:
I have to say that no matter the community outcry I think this will earn MLG a lot of money. Before they had to survive on advertisements now I think the ads are still there but an extra 20$ for anybody IMO silly enough to buy, but think about it this way, if only 500 people buy the pass that's still 10 000$. So if just 2000 people buy the pass that's 40 000$ which is absolutely tons, more than enough you would think. I am fairly sure 40k$ is not even enough to cover the players' expenses. no i would take 2k$ per player as an average value, so this would come to 64k$. I don't know how MLG computed their budgets, but anyway 20$ for a 32player tournament is just way too much. Will every match be broadcasted? Then i would at least think about it. Will there be some group stages? (which would mean more matches)? I wouldn't pay 20$ for a 32 player double or single elimination tournament, cause that's way to less content for that prize. It's really a shame, that they ruined their great event with the prize. If they don't make it cheaper down to 10$, I will completely skip this tournament and just check the results . And that's really sad, since i was really looking forward to it.
every match is broadcast through five streams, + behind the scenes, interviews etc etc etc(check their page)
idk about format, I think it's D.E
that said, I'm one of these "please tone down to 10". I bought gold membership already, and I'd surely love to buy this one as well; however 20 dollars is simply too much for a weekend.
|
Here is an issue that I haven't seen addressed:
The real cost is $20 PPV plus the time spent watching.
I cannot devote an entire weekend (20+ hours) to the MLG Arena, I'd love to, but cannot. I probably can watch an hour here or there, and really try to watch the final few rounds or catch my favorite players.
I do buy the GSL ticket because I can time-shift by a day or two, the important matches that I want to watch. This happens once or twice a week, so over the course of a GSL season I think I get my money's worth. In contrast, the MLG Arena will generate too much content for me to consume without being too spoiled or old, and thus not really worth my money.
That being said, I will pay my $20 this time, but make it clear that $20 is too much for one weekend, and it should be lowered to $10.
New Idea: Hourly charge (e.g. $1/hour for live stream). Let's say an Arena cost $10 and there are 20 hours of content for the weekend. If I only can watch on Sunday for 4 hours, then I will pay you $4 instead of zero.
|
On February 14 2012 22:24 SolonTLG wrote:
Here is an issue that I haven't seen addressed:
The real cost is $20 PPV plus the time spent watching.
I cannot devote an entire weekend (20+ hours) to the MLG Arena, I'd love to, but cannot. I probably can watch an hour here or there, and really try to watch the final few rounds or catch my favorite players.
I do buy the GSL ticket because I can time-shift by a day or two, the important matches that I want to watch. This happens once or twice a week, so over the course of a GSL season I think I get my money's worth. In contrast, the MLG Arena will generate too much content for me to consume without being too spoiled or old, and thus not really worth my money.
That being said, I will pay my $20 this time, but make it clear that $20 is too much for one weekend, and it should be lowered to $10.
New Idea: Hourly charge (e.g. $1/hour for live stream). Let's say an Arena cost $10 and there are 20 hours of content for the weekend. If I only can watch on Sunday for 4 hours, then I will pay you $4 instead of zero.
It was kinda adressed because the whole problem is inflexibel pricing model. I hope they change it to different types.
Like you suggested and like said over and over again: cheaper prices for worse quality, high prices for high quality.
|
Every major event deserves the poor man audience. Whether the standard price is $10 or $20, please provide a 480p stream at $5. All I want is the very minimum, just to follow along with the action.
|
On February 14 2012 22:25 bluQ wrote:Show nested quote +On February 14 2012 22:24 SolonTLG wrote:
Here is an issue that I haven't seen addressed:
The real cost is $20 PPV plus the time spent watching.
I cannot devote an entire weekend (20+ hours) to the MLG Arena, I'd love to, but cannot. I probably can watch an hour here or there, and really try to watch the final few rounds or catch my favorite players.
I do buy the GSL ticket because I can time-shift by a day or two, the important matches that I want to watch. This happens once or twice a week, so over the course of a GSL season I think I get my money's worth. In contrast, the MLG Arena will generate too much content for me to consume without being too spoiled or old, and thus not really worth my money.
That being said, I will pay my $20 this time, but make it clear that $20 is too much for one weekend, and it should be lowered to $10.
New Idea: Hourly charge (e.g. $1/hour for live stream). Let's say an Arena cost $10 and there are 20 hours of content for the weekend. If I only can watch on Sunday for 4 hours, then I will pay you $4 instead of zero. It was kinda adressed because the whole problem is inflexibel pricing model. I hope they change it to different types. Like you suggested and like said over and over again: cheaper prices for worse quality, high prices for high quality.
I totally agree that the current MLG PPV model is inflexible. But I just wanted to highlight an additional cost of time that I didn't see discussed too much.
|
You need an option for, I'd buy it if it was less than $10. I'm sorry, but for my money, $10 is stretching it, especially for something I most likely won't get to watch all of. VODs you say!?! I generally find I don't get time to watch VODs after events unless it's an especially awesome game. There are just so many other tournaments to watch.
- Signed, poor college student.
|
I think it's lame that the polls don't have an option for "I think $20 for a weekend of hundreds of high-production games is reasonable."
|
[eh, made the point better a post above]
|
20$ isn't a reasonable price for a consumer base that ( whether you'd like to admit it or not ) spends all day at home not working or goes to school full time ( giving the benefit of the doubt here). The price tag just makes them look REALLY clueless.
I spent money on my GSL membership and buy team liquid gear when I don't even really have time to view it ( considering the GSL is literally the opposite of my sleep schedule ) just to support the community but 20$ for one event is pushing your consumer base far beyond their means.
Hopefully Alex will distribute a sort of real world insight ( which in this case was just plain common sense, do you really think your fan base is just untapped like, say, the Knicks fan base? Even Jeremy Lin beating MVP in a GSL final wouldn't make most people pay 20$ for an event. ) to the MLG.
|
Even though I chosen the B option I don't think I'll buy a ticket even if it will go down to a 10$ price for making an example of the MLG to be a warning to the other tournaments not try the same.
|
On February 14 2012 22:31 sensenmann wrote:
You need an option for, I'd buy it if it was less than $10. I'm sorry, but for my money, $10 is stretching it, especially for something I most likely won't get to watch all of. VODs you say!?! I generally find I don't get time to watch VODs after events unless it's an especially awesome game. There are just so many other tournaments to watch.
- Signed, poor college student.
I'm honestly with you on this. Call me cheap, but I would even go so far as to say $5 sounds like a much more reasonable price than $10. It's one weekend, and it doesn't even carry the hype of a main event. Plus, just as Alex said he thinks more than twice as many people would pay $10 than $20, I believe more than twice as many people would pay $5 than $10. It's such a small amount that I don't see many esports fans passing it up.
Great OP btw. Very well put.
|
I just feel so confused by the community's response to all of this. It just seems like a petulant child screaming about something they don't want or don't like. The amount of entitlement is disgusting.
I don't see how people can blindly and ignorantly claim they wouldn't even pay $10 for something because CLEARLY ad revenue MORE than makes up for it. Thank god we all have such insider information.
|
Technically they should be pricing to market if they're forcing a PPV.
Something like $5 for the main stream in normal quality, and an extra $15 for 4 more streams, with all streams in HQ. They've just alienated so many to start the base price so high.
|
I have not purchased a GSL ticket yet, that certainly comes before an MLG ticket. Also $20 is just too much right now, unless MLG has some really, really special shit planned... I would probably feel ripped off if I spent $20 on watching a few hours of SC.
$10 seems much more appropriate. Again... unless you have something really special that that $20 is going to. Like if you send MarineKing skydiving... well yeah then my $20 is worth it probably.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
