2019 United States Disc Golf Championship Oct 2-5

[davetherocketguy]

USDGC with a release about media coverage.

Live will be PPV.

Post-production will be SpinTV (lead) and Jomez (chase). So much for Jomez not being invited and a need to boycott. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Why PPV I wonder? Do they really think there is enough demand to justify this? Really?

I know I won't be paying that. I rarely have time to watch free live coverage as it is and pay $10? Y'all should should see the ridiculousness going on over this topic on the Book of Faces. Pretty silly IMHO. Bunch of people seem to think all of us DG'ers ought to just dump the $10 no questions asked because if you can't afford that you should get out of the hobby and the $10 just automatically supports everything good in disc golf. Whatever.

Anyways, it'll be interesting to see how all of this pans out and if it'll be a giant flop like I think it will.

 

[DanJon]

Maybe they saw all of the "grow the sport" bs and thought people might be ready to spend $10 on three days of live coverage?

I mean, how dare they?

 

[elmexdela]

lolololol i dont even pay for any other films i watch why would i pay for dg

 

[Streets]

I know I won't be paying that. I rarely have time to watch free live coverage as it is and pay $10? Y'all should should see the ridiculousness going on over this topic on the Book of Faces. Pretty silly IMHO. Bunch of people seem to think all of us DG'ers ought to just dump the $10 no questions asked because if you can't afford that you should get out of the hobby and the $10 just automatically supports everything good in disc golf. Whatever.

I think I'll take my $10 and go buy a disc and go out and enjoy the hobby. Why waste it on subpar coverage when next day vids are free. Heck, i'd rather just donate my $10 to CCDG/Jomez/Gatekeeper.

 

[DavidSauls]

I rarely watch either, but it strikes me that live vs. post-produced is an odd comparison; a bit of apples vs. oranges. You can watch post-produced and see better quality, in much less time. On the other hand, you can't watch the drama of live competition, which is generally why people watch sports. There's a difference between wondering what will happen, and wondering what has happened.

Not better or worse; just different.

I do wonder what other sports do people prefer to avoid live action, so they can watch a produced summary later?

Admittedly, other sports have better production values for the live action than disc golf can afford, and perhaps that's part of the reason. Regardless, whatever the virtues of post-produced, it's not live, which makes it something quite different.

 

[DavidSauls]

Why PPV I wonder? Do they really think there is enough demand to justify this? Really?

I know I won't be paying that. I rarely have time to watch free live coverage as it is and pay $10? Y'all should should see the ridiculousness going on over this topic on the Book of Faces. Pretty silly IMHO. Bunch of people seem to think all of us DG'ers ought to just dump the $10 no questions asked because if you can't afford that you should get out of the hobby and the $10 just automatically supports everything good in disc golf. Whatever.

Anyways, it'll be interesting to see how all of this pans out and if it'll be a giant flop like I think it will.

I have no idea.

But I wonder---how much revenue is generated, per viewer, on free coverage? The calculation is that it's probably pennies, and you need a lot less demand at $10 a person to make it a success.

 

[Streets]

Admittedly, other sports have better production values for the live action than disc golf can afford, and perhaps that's part of the reason. Regardless, whatever the virtues of post-produced, it's not live, which makes it something quite different.

The bolded part is where I fall...I've yet to experience any live DG that is worth paying for and really don't mind just following the scores on Udisc and then catching the action later...with good quality video.

 

[davetherocketguy]

This PPV thing is a bit of putting the cart before the horse here. The quality of coverage is nowhere near the $10 price point for most. They need to work on quality of coverage first prior to charging for it IMHO. I mean, if people aren't even willing to watch it when its free how in the world can you justify charging for it?

 

[jdm0514]

If previous live dg has taught me anything is that paying for it won't be worth it. To get my money's worth I would have to set a side what 3 hours a day at almost price of Netflix? No think you especially with all the possible problems that could arise. If live dg coverage was to the point with a lot of action and little down time I'll be willing to pay 9.99. I rather wait for the post production on YouTube and save 10 bucks.

 

[Martin Dewgarita]

Curious.. Free youtube coverage gets quite a bit of freewill donations. I don't have any idea how much, but I see the little thing pop up fairly regular in the live chat, $5 here, $50 there, just in donations is probably several hundred over the course of multiple days. So, on one hand there are people willing to shell out a little $$ in support of coverage. On the other hand, how many people will do so when it's a requirement...

 

[madmax88]

Maybe I am an anomaly but I am fine with spending $10 on three days worth of LIVE coverage. Sure it might not be the highest quality but I can still see what is going on and get to follow the live action as it unfolds for barely over $3 a day. Even if only 300 people buy in, that is $3,000. A lot of money going in to help support the tournament and any extra goes to a good cause. Can't really complain either because they are still providing next day coverage absolutely free.

 

[elmexdela]

Maybe I am an anomaly but I am fine with spending $10 on three days worth of LIVE coverage. Sure it might not be the highest quality but I can still see what is going on and get to follow the live action as it unfolds for barely over $3 a day. Even if only 300 people buy in, that is $3,000. A lot of money going in to help support the tournament and any extra goes to a good cause. Can't really complain either because they are still providing next day coverage absolutely free.

its just another tourney its not like its worlds lolol

 

[madmax88]

$10 just doesn't seem like that much to me. Especially for the USDGC. I would pay that for Worlds as well.

Just for reference, I am a teacher. Not really rolling in the dough.

 

[DanJon]

What they should have done is asked Jomez to start a GoFundMe page/donate to Patreon deal right after Worlds, to raise funds for live coverage, plus next day edited.

Jomez could keep something like 10-15% off the top, plus expenses and regular pay.

They probably would have raised six figures or more.

 

[onemilemore]

Curious.. Free youtube coverage gets quite a bit of freewill donations. I don't have any idea how much, but I see the little thing pop up fairly regular in the live chat, $5 here, $50 there, just in donations is probably several hundred over the course of multiple days. So, on one hand there are people willing to shell out a little $$ in support of coverage. On the other hand, how many people will do so when it's a requirement...

I think you hit the nail on the head here: It's have to versus want to. The freedom to choose drives a lot of viewers it seems. At the same time, the freedom to choose between paid live and free post is there.

 

[teemkey]

Disc Golf Planet swings back into view.

 

[bmcgov1209]

I rarely watch either, but it strikes me that live vs. post-produced is an odd comparison; a bit of apples vs. oranges. You can watch post-produced and see better quality, in much less time. On the other hand, you can't watch the drama of live competition, which is generally why people watch sports. There's a difference between wondering what will happen, and wondering what has happened.

Not better or worse; just different.

I do wonder what other sports do people prefer to avoid live action, so they can watch a produced summary later?

Admittedly, other sports have better production values for the live action than disc golf can afford, and perhaps that's part of the reason. Regardless, whatever the virtues of post-produced, it's not live, which makes it something quite different.

I often watch condensed baseball games next day through mlb.tv. It cuts a game down to about 20 minutes. I don't watch that live for the same reason I don't watch live disc golf. I have better things to do than watch TV for 3+ hours at a time.

I also couldn't care less about being spoiled on the outcome before I watch the post produced version of either sport.

I'm sure that I'm in the minority, but I wish the post produced rounds were shorter. I'd ideally like to be able to watch a full round in about the time a 9 hole video currently takes.

 

[DiscFifty]

For those that enjoy live entertainment be it a concert, sporting event, etc, 9.95 for 9 hours+ entertainment is actually dirt cheap. I have to admit the fact that there is going to be post round coverage the next day makes it easy to blackout the media and just watch post. I would have preferred my 9.95 gives me 24/7 access to the coverage for at least a week before the public gets to watch it for free. That would have given me additional "perceived" value.

 

[ryanrockmoran]

$10 just doesn't seem like that much to me. Especially for the USDGC. I would pay that for Worlds as well.

Just for reference, I am a teacher. Not really rolling in the dough.

Agreed. I would not pay 10 bucks for a tournament every weekend, but I think it's worth it for a major. The hours of entertainment per dollar spent is far better than most things (movies, going out to dinner etc...). Watching something live will always be better than post-produced.

 

[JC17393]

This PPV thing is a bit of putting the cart before the horse here. The quality of coverage is nowhere near the $10 price point for most. They need to work on quality of coverage first prior to charging for it IMHO. I mean, if people aren't even willing to watch it when its free how in the world can you justify charging for it?

The bolded is where you lose me, logic-wise. What is the quality threshold they need to reach before it's okay to charge for it? And can they get there without more funding than they're able to get presently? What if the quality has hit its ceiling with the current financial model? Should they just sit there in perpetuity without at least exploring the idea of PPV?

People are clearly willing to watch for free, just look at the numbers that Smashboxx was getting at Worlds for example (10-12K, at times). My assumption is they got good enough numbers on last year's free broadcast for them to think that if X% of those viewers kicked in $10 to watch this year, they'd have enough to be able to improve on what they are doing. And word will spread so they can do it again next year bigger and better with hopefully an even bigger budget. And if PPV fails, they'll scale back next year's broadcast and put it out for free, or worse, eschew live coverage all together. It's for that reason that I've already paid my $9.99 despite the fact that I'll likely be unable to watch the final two days.