|
Can't wait till Esports makes it onto mainstream TV.
|
Why isn't this front page news?
|
On June 01 2012 07:31 BuddhaMonk wrote:
People talking about "lack of competition" have no idea what they're talking about.
One of the major failings of esports up to this point has been that they have an attractive demographic, but events are either too fragmented or too small or don't have the know-how to sell advertising to the degree that they could.
If you pool all of the ad inventory of esports suddenly the numbers are much bigger and therefore much more attractive to advertisers. Likewise, they have the know-how and relationships with advertisers to sell the inventory correctly and get the most out of it (no more MLG's with the same Dr. Pepper ad over and over). This was one of the reasons why IGN getting into esports was exciting because they have similar advertising experience.
With respect to the question of a "monopoly" there's no such thing because the reality is that esports advertising is competing directly side-by-side with other entertainment and media ad space. If I'm Proctor and Gamble, I might have to decide to buy an ad for some esports events or a basketball game. It's way better if CBSi can offer up combined numbers for the whole scene rather than just for an individual tournament. Keep in mind that every tournament will get their cut of the revenue, so in reality everyone wins. The only loser here are other companies who could have also brokered the ad sales, but I don't think there was a long list of companies looking to do this. Frankly, CBSi is ahead of the curve here.
^^^
What BuddhaMonk said.
There are a lot of business noobs here but that's expected because many TLers are studying for their next math exam rather than actively working/participating in the business world.
In a nutshell, this is good for the SC2 community because:
1) Esports events can be consolidated and sold to potential clients. Individual leagues will not attract the attention of Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc. But if all the e-sports events are combined together by CBSi and marketed to the big companies, Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc, will be more likely to advertise in e-sports.
2) If MLG makes enough $$$ off of advertising, they may cut or reduce their PPV model. MLG knows that PPV limits viewers, and the the higher the PPV fee, the less viewers there are. Less viewers means less advertisement money. But of course, MLG may simply use CBSi for their big live audience events and continue with the PPV model for Arena.
Having said this, if the other leagues make good $$$ from advertising, this will keep them from doing PPV. Advertising is a win-win for SC2 viewers as we don't want to pay for PPV.
3) Not only does this open the door to bigger advertisers (see point 1), but with bigger advertisers comes potential interest from bigger networks - including ESPN. If CBSi makes a killing off of this, you can expect ESPN to look into e-sports. Everybody's wet dreams about seeing SC2 on ESPN is one step closer.
4) Bigger advertisers and more money in esports means bigger cash prizes and higher salaries for pro players. This is only a good thing - especially for the pro players that don't even have a salary right now.
The most likely to get hurt are the smaller companies that work with MLG, etc. If the advertising rates go up because bigger companies are jumping into advertising with e-sports, these smaller companies may have to look elsewhere to advertise.
|
United States33592 Posts
dumb misleading marketing release
|
Ladies and Gentlemen, capitalism has arrived.
|
While there isn't a direct partnership, I think it's large companies like this which will start to bring SC2 to the mainstream, because they want MONEH for the things they invest in.
|
|
|
On June 01 2012 22:11 xelnaga_empire wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 07:31 BuddhaMonk wrote:
People talking about "lack of competition" have no idea what they're talking about.
One of the major failings of esports up to this point has been that they have an attractive demographic, but events are either too fragmented or too small or don't have the know-how to sell advertising to the degree that they could.
If you pool all of the ad inventory of esports suddenly the numbers are much bigger and therefore much more attractive to advertisers. Likewise, they have the know-how and relationships with advertisers to sell the inventory correctly and get the most out of it (no more MLG's with the same Dr. Pepper ad over and over). This was one of the reasons why IGN getting into esports was exciting because they have similar advertising experience.
With respect to the question of a "monopoly" there's no such thing because the reality is that esports advertising is competing directly side-by-side with other entertainment and media ad space. If I'm Proctor and Gamble, I might have to decide to buy an ad for some esports events or a basketball game. It's way better if CBSi can offer up combined numbers for the whole scene rather than just for an individual tournament. Keep in mind that every tournament will get their cut of the revenue, so in reality everyone wins. The only loser here are other companies who could have also brokered the ad sales, but I don't think there was a long list of companies looking to do this. Frankly, CBSi is ahead of the curve here. ^^^ What BuddhaMonk said. There are a lot of business noobs here but that's expected because many TLers are studying for their next math exam rather than actively working/participating in the business world. In a nutshell, this is good for the SC2 community because: 1) Esports events can be consolidated and sold to potential clients. Individual leagues will not attract the attention of Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc. But if all the e-sports events are combined together by CBSi and marketed to the big companies, Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc, will be more likely to advertise in e-sports. 2) If MLG makes enough $$$ off of advertising, they may cut or reduce their PPV model. MLG knows that PPV limits viewers, and the the higher the PPV fee, the less viewers there are. Less viewers means less advertisement money. But of course, MLG may simply use CBSi for their big live audience events and continue with the PPV model for Arena. Having said this, if the other leagues make good $$$ from advertising, this will keep them from doing PPV. Advertising is a win-win for SC2 viewers as we don't want to pay for PPV. 3) Not only does this open the door to bigger advertisers (see point 1), but with bigger advertisers comes potential interest from bigger networks - including ESPN. If CBSi makes a killing off of this, you can expect ESPN to look into e-sports. Everybody's wet dreams about seeing SC2 on ESPN is one step closer.4) Bigger advertisers and more money in esports means bigger cash prizes and higher salaries for pro players. This is only a good thing - especially for the pro players that don't even have a salary right now. The most likely to get hurt are the smaller companies that work with MLG, etc. If the advertising rates go up because bigger companies are jumping into advertising with e-sports, these smaller companies may have to look elsewhere to advertise.
I would say the barriers to number 3 are far more than just potential revenue. The biggest barrier that it uniquely has (as opposed to say LoL or even back when Halo was on USA) is a time estimate. When you watch a football game or a baseball game those typically end within 15 minutes of the scheduled end time but in SC2 if I gave you 1.5 hours for a Bo5 that may be 1 hour too much or barely enough time to cover first 2 games+adds.
|
On June 04 2012 12:37 Adreme wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 22:11 xelnaga_empire wrote:On June 01 2012 07:31 BuddhaMonk wrote:
People talking about "lack of competition" have no idea what they're talking about.
One of the major failings of esports up to this point has been that they have an attractive demographic, but events are either too fragmented or too small or don't have the know-how to sell advertising to the degree that they could.
If you pool all of the ad inventory of esports suddenly the numbers are much bigger and therefore much more attractive to advertisers. Likewise, they have the know-how and relationships with advertisers to sell the inventory correctly and get the most out of it (no more MLG's with the same Dr. Pepper ad over and over). This was one of the reasons why IGN getting into esports was exciting because they have similar advertising experience.
With respect to the question of a "monopoly" there's no such thing because the reality is that esports advertising is competing directly side-by-side with other entertainment and media ad space. If I'm Proctor and Gamble, I might have to decide to buy an ad for some esports events or a basketball game. It's way better if CBSi can offer up combined numbers for the whole scene rather than just for an individual tournament. Keep in mind that every tournament will get their cut of the revenue, so in reality everyone wins. The only loser here are other companies who could have also brokered the ad sales, but I don't think there was a long list of companies looking to do this. Frankly, CBSi is ahead of the curve here. ^^^ What BuddhaMonk said. There are a lot of business noobs here but that's expected because many TLers are studying for their next math exam rather than actively working/participating in the business world. In a nutshell, this is good for the SC2 community because: 1) Esports events can be consolidated and sold to potential clients. Individual leagues will not attract the attention of Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc. But if all the e-sports events are combined together by CBSi and marketed to the big companies, Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc, will be more likely to advertise in e-sports. 2) If MLG makes enough $$$ off of advertising, they may cut or reduce their PPV model. MLG knows that PPV limits viewers, and the the higher the PPV fee, the less viewers there are. Less viewers means less advertisement money. But of course, MLG may simply use CBSi for their big live audience events and continue with the PPV model for Arena. Having said this, if the other leagues make good $$$ from advertising, this will keep them from doing PPV. Advertising is a win-win for SC2 viewers as we don't want to pay for PPV. 3) Not only does this open the door to bigger advertisers (see point 1), but with bigger advertisers comes potential interest from bigger networks - including ESPN. If CBSi makes a killing off of this, you can expect ESPN to look into e-sports. Everybody's wet dreams about seeing SC2 on ESPN is one step closer.4) Bigger advertisers and more money in esports means bigger cash prizes and higher salaries for pro players. This is only a good thing - especially for the pro players that don't even have a salary right now. The most likely to get hurt are the smaller companies that work with MLG, etc. If the advertising rates go up because bigger companies are jumping into advertising with e-sports, these smaller companies may have to look elsewhere to advertise. I would say the barriers to number 3 are far more than just potential revenue. The biggest barrier that it uniquely has (as opposed to say LoL or even back when Halo was on USA) is a time estimate. When you watch a football game or a baseball game those typically end within 15 minutes of the scheduled end time but in SC2 if I gave you 1.5 hours for a Bo5 that may be 1 hour too much or barely enough time to cover first 2 games+adds.
Doesn't Boxing have the same problem with time estimate. I used to watch Mike Tyson knocked some dude out in less than 1 min and I though wtf that's it?
|
On June 04 2012 12:50 Wildmoon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 12:37 Adreme wrote:On June 01 2012 22:11 xelnaga_empire wrote:On June 01 2012 07:31 BuddhaMonk wrote:
People talking about "lack of competition" have no idea what they're talking about.
One of the major failings of esports up to this point has been that they have an attractive demographic, but events are either too fragmented or too small or don't have the know-how to sell advertising to the degree that they could.
If you pool all of the ad inventory of esports suddenly the numbers are much bigger and therefore much more attractive to advertisers. Likewise, they have the know-how and relationships with advertisers to sell the inventory correctly and get the most out of it (no more MLG's with the same Dr. Pepper ad over and over). This was one of the reasons why IGN getting into esports was exciting because they have similar advertising experience.
With respect to the question of a "monopoly" there's no such thing because the reality is that esports advertising is competing directly side-by-side with other entertainment and media ad space. If I'm Proctor and Gamble, I might have to decide to buy an ad for some esports events or a basketball game. It's way better if CBSi can offer up combined numbers for the whole scene rather than just for an individual tournament. Keep in mind that every tournament will get their cut of the revenue, so in reality everyone wins. The only loser here are other companies who could have also brokered the ad sales, but I don't think there was a long list of companies looking to do this. Frankly, CBSi is ahead of the curve here. ^^^ What BuddhaMonk said. There are a lot of business noobs here but that's expected because many TLers are studying for their next math exam rather than actively working/participating in the business world. In a nutshell, this is good for the SC2 community because: 1) Esports events can be consolidated and sold to potential clients. Individual leagues will not attract the attention of Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc. But if all the e-sports events are combined together by CBSi and marketed to the big companies, Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc, will be more likely to advertise in e-sports. 2) If MLG makes enough $$$ off of advertising, they may cut or reduce their PPV model. MLG knows that PPV limits viewers, and the the higher the PPV fee, the less viewers there are. Less viewers means less advertisement money. But of course, MLG may simply use CBSi for their big live audience events and continue with the PPV model for Arena. Having said this, if the other leagues make good $$$ from advertising, this will keep them from doing PPV. Advertising is a win-win for SC2 viewers as we don't want to pay for PPV. 3) Not only does this open the door to bigger advertisers (see point 1), but with bigger advertisers comes potential interest from bigger networks - including ESPN. If CBSi makes a killing off of this, you can expect ESPN to look into e-sports. Everybody's wet dreams about seeing SC2 on ESPN is one step closer.4) Bigger advertisers and more money in esports means bigger cash prizes and higher salaries for pro players. This is only a good thing - especially for the pro players that don't even have a salary right now. The most likely to get hurt are the smaller companies that work with MLG, etc. If the advertising rates go up because bigger companies are jumping into advertising with e-sports, these smaller companies may have to look elsewhere to advertise. I would say the barriers to number 3 are far more than just potential revenue. The biggest barrier that it uniquely has (as opposed to say LoL or even back when Halo was on USA) is a time estimate. When you watch a football game or a baseball game those typically end within 15 minutes of the scheduled end time but in SC2 if I gave you 1.5 hours for a Bo5 that may be 1 hour too much or barely enough time to cover first 2 games+adds. Doesn't Boxing have the same problem with time estimate. I used to watch Mike Tyson knocked some dude out in less than 1 min and I though wtf that's it?
Boxing events function either thru a full card which evens it out a bit or a single massive fight on PPV which means you take that risk when you order something on PPV. However on free TV they cant afford to risk either going too far over or to far under.
|
So does that include their deal with own3d? Will they have the rights if own3d streams for those events, since they are partnered as well?
|
On June 04 2012 12:53 Adreme wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 12:50 Wildmoon wrote:On June 04 2012 12:37 Adreme wrote:On June 01 2012 22:11 xelnaga_empire wrote:On June 01 2012 07:31 BuddhaMonk wrote:
People talking about "lack of competition" have no idea what they're talking about.
One of the major failings of esports up to this point has been that they have an attractive demographic, but events are either too fragmented or too small or don't have the know-how to sell advertising to the degree that they could.
If you pool all of the ad inventory of esports suddenly the numbers are much bigger and therefore much more attractive to advertisers. Likewise, they have the know-how and relationships with advertisers to sell the inventory correctly and get the most out of it (no more MLG's with the same Dr. Pepper ad over and over). This was one of the reasons why IGN getting into esports was exciting because they have similar advertising experience.
With respect to the question of a "monopoly" there's no such thing because the reality is that esports advertising is competing directly side-by-side with other entertainment and media ad space. If I'm Proctor and Gamble, I might have to decide to buy an ad for some esports events or a basketball game. It's way better if CBSi can offer up combined numbers for the whole scene rather than just for an individual tournament. Keep in mind that every tournament will get their cut of the revenue, so in reality everyone wins. The only loser here are other companies who could have also brokered the ad sales, but I don't think there was a long list of companies looking to do this. Frankly, CBSi is ahead of the curve here. ^^^ What BuddhaMonk said. There are a lot of business noobs here but that's expected because many TLers are studying for their next math exam rather than actively working/participating in the business world. In a nutshell, this is good for the SC2 community because: 1) Esports events can be consolidated and sold to potential clients. Individual leagues will not attract the attention of Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc. But if all the e-sports events are combined together by CBSi and marketed to the big companies, Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc, will be more likely to advertise in e-sports. 2) If MLG makes enough $$$ off of advertising, they may cut or reduce their PPV model. MLG knows that PPV limits viewers, and the the higher the PPV fee, the less viewers there are. Less viewers means less advertisement money. But of course, MLG may simply use CBSi for their big live audience events and continue with the PPV model for Arena. Having said this, if the other leagues make good $$$ from advertising, this will keep them from doing PPV. Advertising is a win-win for SC2 viewers as we don't want to pay for PPV. 3) Not only does this open the door to bigger advertisers (see point 1), but with bigger advertisers comes potential interest from bigger networks - including ESPN. If CBSi makes a killing off of this, you can expect ESPN to look into e-sports. Everybody's wet dreams about seeing SC2 on ESPN is one step closer.4) Bigger advertisers and more money in esports means bigger cash prizes and higher salaries for pro players. This is only a good thing - especially for the pro players that don't even have a salary right now. The most likely to get hurt are the smaller companies that work with MLG, etc. If the advertising rates go up because bigger companies are jumping into advertising with e-sports, these smaller companies may have to look elsewhere to advertise. I would say the barriers to number 3 are far more than just potential revenue. The biggest barrier that it uniquely has (as opposed to say LoL or even back when Halo was on USA) is a time estimate. When you watch a football game or a baseball game those typically end within 15 minutes of the scheduled end time but in SC2 if I gave you 1.5 hours for a Bo5 that may be 1 hour too much or barely enough time to cover first 2 games+adds. Doesn't Boxing have the same problem with time estimate. I used to watch Mike Tyson knocked some dude out in less than 1 min and I though wtf that's it? Boxing events function either thru a full card which evens it out a bit or a single massive fight on PPV which means you take that risk when you order something on PPV. However on free TV they cant afford to risk either going too far over or to far under.
I guess you are right but I swear that match was on free TV on my country lol.
|
On June 04 2012 12:57 Wildmoon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 12:53 Adreme wrote:On June 04 2012 12:50 Wildmoon wrote:On June 04 2012 12:37 Adreme wrote:On June 01 2012 22:11 xelnaga_empire wrote:On June 01 2012 07:31 BuddhaMonk wrote:
People talking about "lack of competition" have no idea what they're talking about.
One of the major failings of esports up to this point has been that they have an attractive demographic, but events are either too fragmented or too small or don't have the know-how to sell advertising to the degree that they could.
If you pool all of the ad inventory of esports suddenly the numbers are much bigger and therefore much more attractive to advertisers. Likewise, they have the know-how and relationships with advertisers to sell the inventory correctly and get the most out of it (no more MLG's with the same Dr. Pepper ad over and over). This was one of the reasons why IGN getting into esports was exciting because they have similar advertising experience.
With respect to the question of a "monopoly" there's no such thing because the reality is that esports advertising is competing directly side-by-side with other entertainment and media ad space. If I'm Proctor and Gamble, I might have to decide to buy an ad for some esports events or a basketball game. It's way better if CBSi can offer up combined numbers for the whole scene rather than just for an individual tournament. Keep in mind that every tournament will get their cut of the revenue, so in reality everyone wins. The only loser here are other companies who could have also brokered the ad sales, but I don't think there was a long list of companies looking to do this. Frankly, CBSi is ahead of the curve here. ^^^ What BuddhaMonk said. There are a lot of business noobs here but that's expected because many TLers are studying for their next math exam rather than actively working/participating in the business world. In a nutshell, this is good for the SC2 community because: 1) Esports events can be consolidated and sold to potential clients. Individual leagues will not attract the attention of Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc. But if all the e-sports events are combined together by CBSi and marketed to the big companies, Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc, will be more likely to advertise in e-sports. 2) If MLG makes enough $$$ off of advertising, they may cut or reduce their PPV model. MLG knows that PPV limits viewers, and the the higher the PPV fee, the less viewers there are. Less viewers means less advertisement money. But of course, MLG may simply use CBSi for their big live audience events and continue with the PPV model for Arena. Having said this, if the other leagues make good $$$ from advertising, this will keep them from doing PPV. Advertising is a win-win for SC2 viewers as we don't want to pay for PPV. 3) Not only does this open the door to bigger advertisers (see point 1), but with bigger advertisers comes potential interest from bigger networks - including ESPN. If CBSi makes a killing off of this, you can expect ESPN to look into e-sports. Everybody's wet dreams about seeing SC2 on ESPN is one step closer.4) Bigger advertisers and more money in esports means bigger cash prizes and higher salaries for pro players. This is only a good thing - especially for the pro players that don't even have a salary right now. The most likely to get hurt are the smaller companies that work with MLG, etc. If the advertising rates go up because bigger companies are jumping into advertising with e-sports, these smaller companies may have to look elsewhere to advertise. I would say the barriers to number 3 are far more than just potential revenue. The biggest barrier that it uniquely has (as opposed to say LoL or even back when Halo was on USA) is a time estimate. When you watch a football game or a baseball game those typically end within 15 minutes of the scheduled end time but in SC2 if I gave you 1.5 hours for a Bo5 that may be 1 hour too much or barely enough time to cover first 2 games+adds. Doesn't Boxing have the same problem with time estimate. I used to watch Mike Tyson knocked some dude out in less than 1 min and I though wtf that's it? Boxing events function either thru a full card which evens it out a bit or a single massive fight on PPV which means you take that risk when you order something on PPV. However on free TV they cant afford to risk either going too far over or to far under. I guess you are right but I swear that match was on free TV on my country lol.
Yeah in Thailand we have boxing, mostly Thai boxing, every weekend on free Tv like 3 channels. They put a lot of ads on during the breaks.
|
On June 04 2012 12:37 Adreme wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2012 22:11 xelnaga_empire wrote:On June 01 2012 07:31 BuddhaMonk wrote:
People talking about "lack of competition" have no idea what they're talking about.
One of the major failings of esports up to this point has been that they have an attractive demographic, but events are either too fragmented or too small or don't have the know-how to sell advertising to the degree that they could.
If you pool all of the ad inventory of esports suddenly the numbers are much bigger and therefore much more attractive to advertisers. Likewise, they have the know-how and relationships with advertisers to sell the inventory correctly and get the most out of it (no more MLG's with the same Dr. Pepper ad over and over). This was one of the reasons why IGN getting into esports was exciting because they have similar advertising experience.
With respect to the question of a "monopoly" there's no such thing because the reality is that esports advertising is competing directly side-by-side with other entertainment and media ad space. If I'm Proctor and Gamble, I might have to decide to buy an ad for some esports events or a basketball game. It's way better if CBSi can offer up combined numbers for the whole scene rather than just for an individual tournament. Keep in mind that every tournament will get their cut of the revenue, so in reality everyone wins. The only loser here are other companies who could have also brokered the ad sales, but I don't think there was a long list of companies looking to do this. Frankly, CBSi is ahead of the curve here. ^^^ What BuddhaMonk said. There are a lot of business noobs here but that's expected because many TLers are studying for their next math exam rather than actively working/participating in the business world. In a nutshell, this is good for the SC2 community because: 1) Esports events can be consolidated and sold to potential clients. Individual leagues will not attract the attention of Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc. But if all the e-sports events are combined together by CBSi and marketed to the big companies, Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc, will be more likely to advertise in e-sports. 2) If MLG makes enough $$$ off of advertising, they may cut or reduce their PPV model. MLG knows that PPV limits viewers, and the the higher the PPV fee, the less viewers there are. Less viewers means less advertisement money. But of course, MLG may simply use CBSi for their big live audience events and continue with the PPV model for Arena. Having said this, if the other leagues make good $$$ from advertising, this will keep them from doing PPV. Advertising is a win-win for SC2 viewers as we don't want to pay for PPV. 3) Not only does this open the door to bigger advertisers (see point 1), but with bigger advertisers comes potential interest from bigger networks - including ESPN. If CBSi makes a killing off of this, you can expect ESPN to look into e-sports. Everybody's wet dreams about seeing SC2 on ESPN is one step closer.4) Bigger advertisers and more money in esports means bigger cash prizes and higher salaries for pro players. This is only a good thing - especially for the pro players that don't even have a salary right now. The most likely to get hurt are the smaller companies that work with MLG, etc. If the advertising rates go up because bigger companies are jumping into advertising with e-sports, these smaller companies may have to look elsewhere to advertise. I would say the barriers to number 3 are far more than just potential revenue. The biggest barrier that it uniquely has (as opposed to say LoL or even back when Halo was on USA) is a time estimate. When you watch a football game or a baseball game those typically end within 15 minutes of the scheduled end time but in SC2 if I gave you 1.5 hours for a Bo5 that may be 1 hour too much or barely enough time to cover first 2 games+adds.
It is another barrier, but not an unbeatable one. Tennis suffers from many of the same issues because there isn't a guaranteed number of sets and thus some wildly fluctuating times. Yet, they still put it on ESPN and sometimes network television for big matches. Likewise (but less common) baseball can go to an infinite number of innings, and basketball has an unlimited number of overtimes.
For SC2, they'd likely overbook the timeslot by a little bit. If the first game goes really short, expect more "analysis", stock footage clips, and commercials before the second game. If the whole series is looking like a X-0 stomp, expect them to really pack in the extras and do a lot of post-match interviews. Conversely, if the first game goes long, expect them to move right into the second game after a short commercial break.
It's a hurdle, but it's one that ESPN has jumped many times in the past.
|
On June 04 2012 13:20 RenSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 12:37 Adreme wrote:On June 01 2012 22:11 xelnaga_empire wrote:On June 01 2012 07:31 BuddhaMonk wrote:
People talking about "lack of competition" have no idea what they're talking about.
One of the major failings of esports up to this point has been that they have an attractive demographic, but events are either too fragmented or too small or don't have the know-how to sell advertising to the degree that they could.
If you pool all of the ad inventory of esports suddenly the numbers are much bigger and therefore much more attractive to advertisers. Likewise, they have the know-how and relationships with advertisers to sell the inventory correctly and get the most out of it (no more MLG's with the same Dr. Pepper ad over and over). This was one of the reasons why IGN getting into esports was exciting because they have similar advertising experience.
With respect to the question of a "monopoly" there's no such thing because the reality is that esports advertising is competing directly side-by-side with other entertainment and media ad space. If I'm Proctor and Gamble, I might have to decide to buy an ad for some esports events or a basketball game. It's way better if CBSi can offer up combined numbers for the whole scene rather than just for an individual tournament. Keep in mind that every tournament will get their cut of the revenue, so in reality everyone wins. The only loser here are other companies who could have also brokered the ad sales, but I don't think there was a long list of companies looking to do this. Frankly, CBSi is ahead of the curve here. ^^^ What BuddhaMonk said. There are a lot of business noobs here but that's expected because many TLers are studying for their next math exam rather than actively working/participating in the business world. In a nutshell, this is good for the SC2 community because: 1) Esports events can be consolidated and sold to potential clients. Individual leagues will not attract the attention of Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc. But if all the e-sports events are combined together by CBSi and marketed to the big companies, Coke, Pepsi, Nike, etc, will be more likely to advertise in e-sports. 2) If MLG makes enough $$$ off of advertising, they may cut or reduce their PPV model. MLG knows that PPV limits viewers, and the the higher the PPV fee, the less viewers there are. Less viewers means less advertisement money. But of course, MLG may simply use CBSi for their big live audience events and continue with the PPV model for Arena. Having said this, if the other leagues make good $$$ from advertising, this will keep them from doing PPV. Advertising is a win-win for SC2 viewers as we don't want to pay for PPV. 3) Not only does this open the door to bigger advertisers (see point 1), but with bigger advertisers comes potential interest from bigger networks - including ESPN. If CBSi makes a killing off of this, you can expect ESPN to look into e-sports. Everybody's wet dreams about seeing SC2 on ESPN is one step closer.4) Bigger advertisers and more money in esports means bigger cash prizes and higher salaries for pro players. This is only a good thing - especially for the pro players that don't even have a salary right now. The most likely to get hurt are the smaller companies that work with MLG, etc. If the advertising rates go up because bigger companies are jumping into advertising with e-sports, these smaller companies may have to look elsewhere to advertise. I would say the barriers to number 3 are far more than just potential revenue. The biggest barrier that it uniquely has (as opposed to say LoL or even back when Halo was on USA) is a time estimate. When you watch a football game or a baseball game those typically end within 15 minutes of the scheduled end time but in SC2 if I gave you 1.5 hours for a Bo5 that may be 1 hour too much or barely enough time to cover first 2 games+adds. It is another barrier, but not an unbeatable one. Tennis suffers from many of the same issues because there isn't a guaranteed number of sets and thus some wildly fluctuating times. Yet, they still put it on ESPN and sometimes network television for big matches. Likewise (but less common) baseball can go to an infinite number of innings, and basketball has an unlimited number of overtimes. For SC2, they'd likely overbook the timeslot by a little bit. If the first game goes really short, expect more "analysis", stock footage clips, and commercials before the second game. If the whole series is looking like a X-0 stomp, expect them to really pack in the extras and do a lot of post-match interviews. Conversely, if the first game goes long, expect them to move right into the second game after a short commercial break. It's a hurdle, but it's one that ESPN has jumped many times in the past.
In NL we have a tv channel that broadcasts F1 and what it does is make the screen where the action is going a lot smaller and without sound and then next to it the commercial with sound so that you can still follow the most important moments without it getting completely interrupted. Also there's a lot of other ways for commercials like the map name and just the names in the maps as well. You just gotta be a bit clever about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
