General Issues with the financial model of tournament disc golf coverage

[araytx]

Whether live coverage or post-produced, the model that most of the companies have today is not very sustainable long-term. I wonder/question if and when the single individuals driving each one has a life situation which doesn't allow them logistically to continue at the same level, can/will the company continue doing it? Kinda like when Steve Dodge left Vibram and what happened? Or when John Deusler left Terra Firma Media? Or going back to the beginning, when Steady Ed left Wham-O and the big disc golf tournaments suddenly lost their biggest sponsor?

I just have an opinion, or should I say, position, regarding disc golf coverage. First, I am not pointing at or calling out anyone specifically. I am simply stating in general that it is very unrealistic to expect something for nothing. That is, not exactly the same, but very similar to the welfare mentality. I stated in other posts, that I was very willing as an organizational leader to listen to the suggestions of anyone in the business who had an idea of how to make our organization better; my only stipulation was that if they brought a problem to me, they should also bring with it a possible solution and that solution should include what they themselves would either contribute or sacrifice to make that solution happy.

And therein lies my struggle with people who complain, offer negative comments, or even offer comments which they see as constructive to our current offerings of disc golf coverage. These guys are busting their tails, struggling on shallow budgets, looking for volunteers to help with what is (I suspect) a losing-money-proposition, at least in its current form, while 95% of we consumers do not deliver on assisting with the cost. We'll pay for most of our other entertainment, especially that which is delivered online or on cable TV, yet, most of us won't for disc golf. That just doesn't sound right. It's not like silly videos to make us laugh, that the person hopes to someday be their own YOUTUBE sensation; these guys are catering to a specific niche audience -- discgolfers. And it only seems right to support them with either time or money, ESPECIALLY, if you'll be critical of them.

Perhaps jvphobic, Royalhghnss, TheDiscGolfGuy, Jomez, or others with more detailed/intimate knowledge of the financial model can come on this forum and add to the discussion. I am not changing my comments from previously ... HERE, HERE, and HERE are some links if you wish to go back and see what was previously stated. However, I will respond on this thread to previously pointed out comments directed specifically at me.

I welcome a discussion of what you guys currently think of the fiscal model. I struggle with people who think they are doing just fine: I don't. I think they are lowballing their own prices, simply because they love disc golf so much, and hopefully, just like Bobby CDSB back in the day, they are eyeing (more like hping for) a bigger prize on down the line. But here's a question, if some nationally known music artist or other celebrity called Jonathan Gomez and said, hey, we've seen your work in the disc golf arena and we want you to be our tour's videographer for about $20,000 a month for the next 18 months, does disc golf coverage change? Or can it be sustained?


NOW moving on...

I do love the hypocrisy inherent within your post, given that you are arguing for people to support coverage on Patreon rather than expecting it for the cost of the Innova, Black Ink Discs, Bearded Bros Bars, Cali Connections, PacWest Disc Golf, and a variety of other commercials and ads which were paid to help provide the coverage and only actually have value if people watch the videos (as I said in the Las Vegas thread, anyone viewing the videos increases the value of these spots, which increases the amount the channel can charge, which generates more revenue. Just look at the mess the NFL is in currently), or rather that they should be ignored or discounted since they are not contributing extra money, and yet you are on the forum for free, rather than having purchased any sort of tiered membership which helps keep this forum and course database running in addition to the one banner ad at the top of each page (not that I have a problem with the banner ad, just for consistency of the argument's sake).

DGCR Store

And I am a patreon of both CCDG and Jomez (since we're putting that out there), although I'm not a Patreon of Smashboxx. However, that might soon change, since I did actually enjoy watching the live stream today (splicing in FPO coverage fills the dead air so well), but we'll see man.

If you would like to support this forum as well, you can purchase a membership in the store, which is in the banner above or can be found at the link below:

DGCR Store

I will also say that the Jomez and CCDG boys make money off ads, which only have value if people watch the videos. Yeah, it doesn't fully help cover the bills, and kicking more money into the pot is great, BUT for them to even make some money or for it to be worth it to Innova or Dynamic or MVP or whoever to pay them to go film a tournament, people first and foremost have to watch for that money to have actually accomplished anything.

So what I'm trying to say is, your whole basic premise of people who don't pay into the Patreon not really being part of what helps financially support these guys simply is not actually true. Any John Q Smith or Jane Q Doe who watches the videos helps support these channels because those added views increase the value of the advertising spots they sell, which allows them to make more money (and actually will reduce and ultimately eliminate the need for Patreon if the ad slots become valuable enough).

You really think a paying member of on online forum is comparable? I just think you were trying to make a point. And I get your point. But there's a big difference in costs between a one-time cost to set up an online forum followed my monthly monitoring and maintenance in a single location VS for each event traveling to a site, doing drone videos, prepping graphics, getting familiar with the course and lines enough to have cameras in the right place, physically following them around during the round, capturing video, editing it, providing voice-over commentary time and recording etc, and getting it turned over within 30 hours. Add in live coverage and then there are also even more costs in terms of manpower, equipment, and resources.

Before I go on, I will clearly state that I have not said anywhere that you nor anyone else specifically is a non-contributor to the Patreon accounts. My comments are general in nature and are geared toward the "I-want-something-for-nothing" crowd. I do not know if you or anyone else is in that group, and I don't need to know. [Given some of the comments/responses I've gotten, the famous line, "Methinks thou doth protest too much" comes to mind.] I, myself don't contribute to all of their Patreons; I think that would be spreading the resources too thin and I, like everyone, can only contribute so much money. However, comparing supporting the stand-alone vendors of a specific event to the people producing coverage is also a comparison that is not close to the same – particularly in terms of cost. Plus people don't get on these forums and criticize or complained about the Innovs vendor, the Black Ink Discs vendor, the Bearded Bros Bars vendor, etc. like they find criticism of disc golf coverage.


I doubt that the ads cover the cost of coverage. I know that for the event I helped work on we had a sponsor (one year it was two) pay for the post production coverage. The ads within were nice and they help a little, but even those I am not sure are sustainable. We cater to a specific crowd and a DD ad isn't likely to get me or most discgolfers to change by Innova discs, nor is a Discraft ad gonna convince me to change my Prodigy discs and vice versa. Those guys are just being nice to pay for a small ad, (you know the grow-the-sport, be supportive mentality) but long-term, that model is not sustainable. You took on my premise (which you missed it btw), but I am not sure what your premise is. If it relates to as space pays for coverage, then I will apologize if I'm wrong, I just don't think that the ads come close. It sounds like you believe the ads model IS sustainable long term and you think that eventually the "value of the ad space will catch up" to the point where coverage is profitable solely with ads and Pateron accounts will no longer be needed. Again, I mat be wrong, but I just think that thought is so off-base logistically. Maybe we can get a comment from Jomez, jvphobic, TheDiscGolfGuy, Royalhghnss, and others

 

[davetherocketguy]

Lawdy is there a Cliff notes version of this???

 

[araytx]

Lawdy is there a Cliff notes version of this???

I was hoping you guys would shorten it for me.

 

[Turnipseed]

I stated in other posts, that I was very willing as an organizational leader to listen to the suggestions of anyone in the business who had an idea of how to make our organization better; my only stipulation was that if they brought a problem to me, they should also bring with it a possible solution and that solution should include what they themselves would either contribute or sacrifice to make that solution happy.

What is your possible solution (to this nonexistent problem)? And why should anyone be interested in your organizational leadership?

I have never seen any disc golf related media that was worth a nickel of my money. That doesn't keep me from recognizing that Jeremy Koling is a diaper-baby.

 

[ru4por]

Interesting topic, araytx. I don't think there is really enough interest on our game or coverage to warrant such musing. If disc golf coverage simply went away, I am not really impact much. I certainly spent most of my playing years without any coverage. I am not interested in "growing the sport" on some large scale. Not to say I don't bring out noobs, put together office outings or drop some free plastic on a noob on a course. But, I think that is more about sharing my love of the game, than making it a huge and popular game. I think hardcore golfers watch videos. I think the occasional surfer stumbles across some videos. I think some curious party might seek out a video. I don't think there is an industry now or really ever will be.
Perhaps I am not your target in this thread, so respectfully leave my take and will hopefully enjoy reading some novel or good ideas.

 

[araytx]

Interesting topic, araytx. I don't think there is really enough interest on our game or coverage to warrant such musing. If disc golf coverage simply went away, I am not really impact much. I certainly spent most of my playing years without any coverage. I am not interested in "growing the sport" on some large scale. Not to say I don't bring out noobs, put together office outings or drop some free plastic on a noob on a course. But, I think that is more about sharing my love of the game, than making it a huge and popular game. I think hardcore golfers watch videos. I think the occasional surfer stumbles across some videos. I think some curious party might seek out a video. I don't think there is an industry now or really ever will be.
Perhaps I am not your target in this thread, so respectfully leave my take and will hopefully enjoy reading some novel or good ideas.

Actually, I do think you're in the target audience. I often wonder why the video producers keep trying. Given that it is primarily their love of the sport, I suspect when things in the leaders lives change dramatically, we will see some type of change, maybe even the end of coverage by a certain company. And if/when that happens, I wonder how many of the critics will then long for videos with Jerm's antics again.

 

[DanJon]

If the current content creators dip out because of life changes, then someone else will probably take their place.

I'm guessing the majority of them started doing it for the love of the sport and getting support from manufacturers now is great.

What happens if Innova and DD decide they no longer want to subsidize disc golf media?

That's a private business decision, will you write a novel calling them out too?

Maybe we would see more regionally based media groups covering the local tournaments rather than a few groups traveling the world.

Right now, even with manufacturer support and Patreon, the current media model isn't sustainable.

I realize some of them are looking/hoping for corporate sponsorship or dollars someday, but that may never happen.

If not, then I'm sure the majority of them will focus on other areas of media or go back to their day jobs.

Like a lot of things in life you have to appreciate things while you have them.

I'm sure they do and many of us do as well, that doesn't mean we can't offer constructive criticism.

 

[ThrowBot]

I don't get the impression that the video coverage production companies are focused on immediate quid-pro-quo compensation from every single viewer. If they were, then they would be monetizing their product directly in that way, maybe through a pay per view or subscription model. However, since you don't see that happening, it's pretty clear that they are prioritizing maximum viewership over direct financial support from viewers. At least in the short term.

In that sense, any viewer has value to the production company, and any potential viewer has potential value. So constructive criticism aimed at pleasing viewers and growing the base of viewership is helpful. It's not exactly the same as contributing money, but it is another way of helping them achieve their current goal: producing the best content that will draw as many eyes as possible. For that reason I don't see constructive criticism without financial compensation as a bad thing (or vice versa). They're different pathways to the same end goal.

I understand that talk is cheap, and that production companies would rather have more money than criticism at this point. Also, it's too easy to be mean and unhelpful online. Still I don't think that honest opinions on how coverage might be improved are altogether bad.

And FWIW, my opinion counts because I chipped in some money to CCDG during Worlds last year

 

[JTacoma03]

My issue with criticism of my video content is that most of it is actually very counter-productive and not helpful. When you get comments that say "OMG YOU IDIOT WHY DIDN'T YOU DO THIS INSTEAD OF THAT???" - the subtext within that assumes that there were multiple options on the table in the first place.

That's a vague example obviously, but I think we can extrapolate from there. It's very easy to criticize or tell someone how they're doing something wrong when 1) you have the benefit of hindsight, and 2) you don't have a complete set of information which contextualizes the process of making those decisions.

In that sense, it's a very fine line between criticism and complaining...and I'll be totally honest, the complaining hurts. We do it for the love of the game, and for the people who are as passionate about this sport as we are. To just have people take potshots at you without understanding 1/10th of the situation you may have been in sucks.

Now, before I sound like I'm complaining - we all know that it's a minority of people. We tell ourselves and each other that occasionally when someone really goes off the rails. We're our own little support group sometimes, lol.



As far as the bigger financial picture...that would be a loooong post. Maybe I'll lurk and discuss specific topics/ideas as they're brought up instead of unloading my thoughts all at once. We all have slightly different ideas on how to go about doing that anyway.

 

[sidewinder22]

The current model must be working better than the previous when we had to wait and buy DVDs.

 

[sjberry2017]

(note: I used italics to point out the key points in my argument below)

Whether live coverage or post-produced, the model that most of the companies have today is not very sustainable long-term. I wonder/question if and when the single individuals driving each one has a life situation which doesn't allow them logistically to continue at the same level, can/will the company continue doing it? Kinda like when Steve Dodge left Vibram and what happened? Or when John Deusler left Terra Firma Media? Or going back to the beginning, when Steady Ed left Wham-O and the big disc golf tournaments suddenly lost their biggest sponsor?

Good and fair point, I agree with this

And therein lies my struggle with people who complain, offer negative comments, or even offer comments which they see as constructive to our current offerings of disc golf coverage. These guys are busting their tails, struggling on shallow budgets, looking for volunteers to help with what is (I suspect) a losing-money-proposition, at least in its current form, while 95% of we consumers do not deliver on assisting with the cost.

I can see where you're coming from on this and why you're upset, and I completely agree. HOWEVER

We'll pay for most of our other entertainment, especially that which is delivered online or on cable TV, yet, most of us won't for disc golf. That just doesn't sound right.

We don't pay for this entertainment, at least not in the traditional medium (Netflix and Hulu allow us to pay for it without the funding mechanism I will point out below, moreso Netflix although Hulu does have an option to get rid of commercials). We pay for the ability to access the entertainment. I'm not really paying for the channels or for them to make money. I'm paying for a package that includes channels, which the cable or satellite service uses to pay to subscribe to those channels. Those channels do use that money, but they make the bulk of their money, and really the only money that matters for keeping the channel going, through advertisements, with companies that want to get their products into the faces of as many consumers as possible. If you're going to build a monetary base, that's how you're going to be able to do it.

It's not like silly videos to make us laugh, that the person hopes to someday be their own YOUTUBE sensation; these guys are catering to a specific niche audience -- discgolfers. And it only seems right to support them with either time or money, ESPECIALLY, if you'll be critical of them.

I see where you're coming from, but this is America, not Russia or China or any authoritarian government. This is also not a Corporation with a Board of Directors or shareholders, but an entertainment enterprise. Yes, I know it's a niche and all of that, but at the end of the day, the ads they're selling are worth nothing without views. As much as I don't like the way he went about it, Jussi Meressma did understand this and tried to build the views of the DGWT videos into something he could take to sponsors to show that there was a base of people watching that they could advertise to.

Now, your basic argument is that people who are not on Patreon or otherwise contribute towards the broadcast should be ignored (I'll pass by how communistic in logic this is when you're calling out the welfare basis of the current system). My basic argument is this:

People watching or not watching are contributing financially to the broadcast because they make the ads worthwhile. Because they watch, an Innova or Dynamic Discs sees value in paying for CCDG or Jomez to fly out to the NT and DGPT tournaments, and MVP wants to pay for CCDG to go to the Rocky Mountain Championships, The Bloom, and all the California tournaments they film.

Now allow me to bring this paragraph here, as I feel that we're having two conversations and this more fits my next point.

I doubt that the ads cover the cost of coverage. I know that for the event I helped work on we had a sponsor (one year it was two) pay for the post production coverage. The ads within were nice and they help a little, but even those I am not sure are sustainable.

The ads are at least paying air fair and travel costs, which are going to be most of your hard costs to get out there and film. You can talk about the value of labor, time, opportunity costs, spending their vacation time on this, etc, but in terms of hard core, bottom line them being able to make the amount of videos they do, it is this financial help which makes the whole bit work.

We cater to a specific crowd and a DD ad isn't likely to get me or most discgolfers to change by Innova discs, nor is a Discraft ad gonna convince me to change my Prodigy discs and vice versa. Those guys are just being nice to pay for a small ad, (you know the grow-the-sport, be supportive mentality) but long-term, that model is not sustainable.

Maybe not you or I, but if we share that video with friends and they get into the sport, or someone stumbles on them on Youtube (as I did back in 2014 with SpinTV and the Japan Open and Masters Cup etc), it could help sway a new player to go out and buy that cool looking MVP discs, or that Innova disc that is beadless and is still a super overstable putter.

You took on my premise (which you missed it btw), but I am not sure what your premise is. If it relates to as space pays for coverage, then I will apologize if I'm wrong, I just don't think that the ads come close. It sounds like you believe the ads model IS sustainable long term and you think that eventually the "value of the ad space will catch up" to the point where coverage is profitable solely with ads and Pateron accounts will no longer be needed. Again, I mat be wrong, but I just think that thought is so off-base logistically. Maybe we can get a comment from Jomez, jvphobic, TheDiscGolfGuy, Royalhghnss, and others

No, I did not take on your premise. My premise is that the very act of watching a Jomez or CCDG video is contributing financially to their broadcast because it creates value in the ad space which they are trying to sell, not that those who do not contribute financially should be ignored even if they have a valid opinion. Because these ad spots are paying the hard costs for them to get out and film, these people are contributing to the ability for these guys to get out and film. If they have a complaint or criticism, which if addressed, means the difference between them watching only the final round videos or all 3 or 4 rounds of video, or between only tuning into their favorite tournaments and tuning in to a lot more because they're more enjoyable to watch, then that is creating more value for CCDG or Jomez.

As to saying that the ad space catching up is so off-base logically, allow me to explain my logic. First, as I stated above, entertainment channels make their money of off advertisements, not off of subscriber fees for service providers (losing subscriber fees is not what hurts financially, but the loss of that viewer base reduces their viewer pool for ads). Just look at this past NFL season and the Papa Johns scandal with how their ad value was hurt by the drop in viewership. If the channels want to make the sort of money that would allow this to be sustainable, they will need to generate ad revenue as that is the only viable path. I get the whole "community, everyone pitch in, rah rah" attitude of disc golf, and it works well for building courses, but in this instance, I do not see it being possible for that to reach a sustainable level, or if it did, it would take much longer than if the ad revenue grew to be sustainable. Because of this, viewers who don't contribute through Patreon but do watch are still part of what is generating the ability of these guys to travel and film, and so they still have the right to complain and be taken seriously and considered because they are part of this (again, Innova/Dynamic ads do have the ability to reach people and change their minds on discs. Maybe not you or me, but the new players or those who are looking for a new disc to fill a slot in their bag). This is my main problem with your position, because they are still generating value.

You really think a paying member of on online forum is comparable? I just think you were trying to make a point. And I get your point. But there's a big difference in costs between a one-time cost to set up an online forum followed my monthly monitoring and maintenance in a single location VS for each event traveling to a site, doing drone videos, prepping graphics, getting familiar with the course and lines enough to have cameras in the right place, physically following them around during the round, capturing video, editing it, providing voice-over commentary time and recording etc, and getting it turned over within 30 hours. Add in live coverage and then there are also even more costs in terms of manpower, equipment, and resources.

Yes, yes I do think these are at least somewhat comparable, because this site is so much larger than a simple forum. It is a database of thousands of courses around the country and world, with the ability for players to connect, get an SSE for their rounds, plan road trips for disc golf, connect with other players, find tournaments, and so much more. It can be used as a tool to argue for the need for a new course within a town, or for the argument that a new kind of course or another course can be supported as well. It is even referenced by local media when describing local courses in their stories. Tim is constantly creating new features, coming out with and updating both iOS and Android apps, and so much more. He is pouring his own money into keeping all of this running and updated, much like those who create tournament coverage. I see what you're saying with the amount of effort that must be put in by video crews, but the amount of effort put in by Tim to keep this site up in his free time is at least comparable enough to argue that your position is somewhat compromised by not being willing to support a tool for the community such as this website.

Post 1/2

 

[sjberry2017]

post 2/2

Before I go on, I will clearly state that I have not said anywhere that you nor anyone else specifically is a non-contributor to the Patreon accounts. My comments are general in nature and are geared toward the "I-want-something-for-nothing" crowd. I do not know if you or anyone else is in that group, and I don't need to know. [Given some of the comments/responses I've gotten, the famous line, "Methinks thou doth protest too much" comes to mind.] I, myself don't contribute to all of their Patreons; I think that would be spreading the resources too thin and I, like everyone, can only contribute so much money. However, comparing supporting the stand-alone vendors of a specific event to the people producing coverage is also a comparison that is not close to the same – particularly in terms of cost. Plus people don't get on these forums and criticize or complained about the Innovs vendor, the Black Ink Discs vendor, the Bearded Bros Bars vendor, etc. like they find criticism of disc golf coverage.

I see where your frustrations arise from, and that crowd is annoying. However, to say that constructive criticism which could improve the coverage unless they are paying to help support the organization frustrates me for a couple reasons.

1) Just see my above argument. Those people are helping to support by watching the videos, and anything which would lead them to watch more videos would lead to more value for the ads (again, my opinion is this is the best way to make it sustainable, your opinion may [and obviously does] vary).

2) It is absolutely ridiculous for people to ignore constructive criticism and good advice, especially for the reason "oh, you don't actually support us financially, why do you matter?" It frustrates me so much when people say there is a pay to play sort of club going on. Now, should those who pay have a louder voice? Yeah, I can agree on that. But to say you're just ignored unless you give money, well, that just sticks in my craw so to speak.

Third, why would it not matter to you whether or not people are contributing to Patreons when your ENTIRE ARGUMENT is that those who don't contribute to anyone should be ignored? Don't you need to know if that person is supporting a channel or not to know whether or not their criticism and comments hold any value in your eyes? Additionally, by supporting those who support the channels, you show the value of the ads and why they are worth more. Just look at Adidas and McBeth a couple years ago; he gets sponsored and Adidas Outdoors sells so many Terrex pairs that Germany called them up and asked "hey, did your system glitch? There's no way you sold almost 900 pairs that quickly...oh, you sponsored a golf player...wait, DISC golf?...we gotta look into this." That's how you build value, that's how you get sponsors to take notice, and that's how you get more investment in the sport and media.

 

[araytx]

Sorry, but I had to ... some of the quote, because the forum said I had too many characters.

I don't get the impression that the video coverage production companies are focused on immediate quid-pro-quo compensation from every single viewer. If they were, then they would be monetizing their product directly in that way, maybe through a pay per view or subscription model. However, since you don't see that happening, it's pretty clear that they are prioritizing maximum viewership over direct financial support from viewers. At least in the short term.

In that sense, any viewer has value to the production company, and any potential viewer has potential value. So constructive criticism aimed at pleasing viewers and growing the base of viewership is helpful. It's not exactly the same as contributing money, but it is another way of helping them achieve their current goal: producing the best content that will draw as many eyes as possible. For that reason I don't see constructive criticism without financial compensation as a bad thing (or vice versa). They're different pathways to the same end goal.

I understand that talk is cheap, and that production companies would rather have more money than criticism at this point. Also, it's too easy to be mean and unhelpful online. Still I don't think that honest opinions on how coverage might be improved are altogether bad.

And FWIW, my opinion counts because I chipped in some money to CCDG during Worlds last year

Well, the PPV model has already been tried with the disc golf community... and it failed (DiscGolfPlanet). Accordingly these current content producers have had to come up with new and creative ways to fund their work. And accordingly, I actually agree that they aren't focused on immediate quid-pro-quo compensation from viewers. Again, I have not indicted anyone specifically on this forum or anywhere; my comments were the general "I just don't understand nor agree with the 'I-want-something-for nothing' mentality." And not just regarding disc golf coverage and content production -- in life. And I contend that the "potential value of every viewer" is a supposition or assertion without data to back it up. If the content producers will tell me that, then I'll get on board.

(


I can see where you're coming from on this and why you're upset, and I completely agree. HOWEVER

We don't pay for this entertainment, at least not in the traditional medium (Netflix and Hulu allow us to pay for it without the funding mechanism I will point out below, moreso Netflix although Hulu does have an option to get rid of commercials). We pay for the ability to access the entertainment. I'm not really paying for the channels or for them to make money. I'm paying for a package that includes channels, which the cable or satellite service uses to pay to subscribe to those channels. Those channels do use that money, but they make the bulk of their money, and really the only money that matters for keeping the channel going, through advertisements, with companies that want to get their products into the faces of as many consumers as possible. If you're going to build a monetary base, that's how you're going to be able to do it.

I see where you're coming from, but this is America, not Russia or China or any authoritarian government. This is also not a Corporation with a Board of Directors or shareholders, but an entertainment enterprise. Yes, I know it's a niche and all of that, but at the end of the day, the ads they're selling are worth nothing without views. As much as I don't like the way he went about it, Jussi Meressma did understand this and tried to build the views of the DGWT videos into something he could take to sponsors to show that there was a base of people watching that they could advertise to.

...My basic argument is this:

People watching or not watching are contributing financially to the broadcast because they make the ads worthwhile. Because they watch, an Innova or Dynamic Discs sees value in paying for CCDG or Jomez to fly out to the NT and DGPT tournaments, and MVP wants to pay for CCDG to go to the Rocky Mountain Championships, The Bloom, and all the California tournaments they film.

Now allow me to bring this paragraph here, as I feel that we're having two conversations and this more fits my next point.

The ads are at least paying air fair and travel costs, which are going to be most of your hard costs to get out there and film. You can talk about the value of labor, time, opportunity costs, spending their vacation time on this, etc, but in terms of hard core, bottom line them being able to make the amount of videos they do, it is this financial help which makes the whole bit work.

Maybe not you or I, but if we share that video with friends and they get into the sport, or someone stumbles on them on Youtube (as I did back in 2014 with SpinTV and the Japan Open and Masters Cup etc), it could help sway a new player to go out and buy that cool looking MVP discs, or that Innova disc that is beadless and is still a super overstable putter.



No, I did not take on your premise. My premise is that the very act of watching a Jomez or CCDG video is contributing financially to their broadcast because it creates value in the ad space which they are trying to sell, not that those who do not contribute financially should be ignored even if they have a valid opinion.....[/I].

As to saying that the ad space catching up is so off-base logically, allow me to explain my logic. First, as I stated above, entertainment channels make their money of off advertisements, not off of subscriber fees for service providers (losing subscriber fees is not what hurts financially, but the loss of that viewer base reduces their viewer pool for ads). Just look at this past NFL season and the Papa Johns scandal with how their ad value was hurt by the drop in viewership. If the channels want to make the sort of money that would allow this to be sustainable, they will need to generate ad revenue as that is the only viable path. I get the whole "community, everyone pitch in, rah rah" attitude of disc golf, and it works well for building courses, but in this instance, I do not see it being possible for that to reach a sustainable level, or if it did, it would take much longer than if the ad revenue grew to be sustainable. Because of this, viewers who don't contribute through Patreon but do watch are still part of what is generating the ability of these guys to travel and film, and so they still have the right to complain and be taken seriously and considered because they are part of this (again, Innova/Dynamic ads do have the ability to reach people and change their minds on discs. Maybe not you or me, but the new players or those who are looking for a new disc to fill a slot in their bag). This is my main problem with your position, because they are still generating value.

Well thank you for seeing some of the points. I respect that you have looked at these objectively. Frankly I agree and see some of your points that merit further investigation or present issues that should be addressed also -- Assuming "we" the consumer will continue to demand this service. Perhaps that is where some of my frustration comes from; several people on these forums seem to be demanding this service, and it seems the vast majority don't have a solution other than "Jerm needs to do this," "Nate needs to do that," "Jonathan should chose this", or "Ian needs to choose that." Notice the word that starts the vast majority of complaints that I have seen. Perhaps my using the wording "they should be ignored" was too harsh. "Taken with a grain of salt" might have expressed my position better.

Until I see data to support the assertion that the ads add significant value, I can only take that as an assumption on your part. I know that for the events I've been a part of that had coverage, ads alone could not get us post-produced content; we had to find a sponsor to pony up.

And I take a lot of the "NFL ratings are down" talk with a grain of salt. ALL over-the-air networks ratings were down across the board; one cannot attribute the NFL's losses in ratings primarily to Papa Johns scandal, or national anthem kneeling, or concussion protocols, or other related speculations. We've entered into a time when a huge number of people, while not yet a majority, are choosing their viewing entertainment pleasures differently with on-demand services, streaming services, and the like.

Yes, yes I do think these are at least somewhat comparable, because this site is so much larger than a simple forum. It is a database of thousands of courses around the country and world, with the ability for players to connect, get an SSE for their rounds, plan road trips for disc golf, connect with other players, find tournaments, and so much more. It can be used as a tool to argue for the need for a new course within a town, or for the argument that a new kind of course or another course can be supported as well. It is even referenced by local media when describing local courses in their stories. Tim is constantly creating new features, coming out with and updating both iOS and Android apps, and so much more. He is pouring his own money into keeping all of this running and updated, much like those who create tournament coverage. I see what you're saying with the amount of effort that must be put in by video crews, but the amount of effort put in by Tim to keep this site up in his free time is at least comparable enough to argue that your position is somewhat compromised by not being willing to support a tool for the community such as this website.

Post 1/2

I don't demean Tim's work on this forum at all. But for the most part, I am assuming that much of the costs were upfront. Maintenance, even while extending new products and features is still a stationary (from a single location) prop. NO travel, no labor intensive work, fewer compensated employees, etc. If we can't agree that the background ancillary costs are much larger for a video production company trying to make new content -- live and post-produced -- for every event, then we really can't start a discussion with a similar base point. A database is exactly that -- something that is easily replicable by users/consumers. In fact the users/consumers on these forums DO contribute to its usefulness by creating content, and by providing information directly related to its mission for future and current users. To me that's way different. The same consumers are not contributing much time, effort, or content to video and live coverage producers. After all, see the comments ot content producer, JTac, on post #9.

 

[sjberry2017]

(no worries on the ..., I had two posts due to that)

Well thank you for seeing some of the points. I respect that you have looked at these objectively. Frankly I agree and see some of your points that merit further investigation or present issues that should be addressed also -- Assuming "we" the consumer will continue to demand this service. Perhaps that is where some of my frustration comes from; several people on these forums seem to be demanding this service, and it seems the vast majority don't have a solution other than "Jerm needs to do this," "Nate needs to do that," "Jonathan should chose this", or "Ian needs to choose that." Notice the word that starts the vast majority of complaints that I have seen. Perhaps my using the wording "they should be ignored" was too harsh. "Taken with a grain of salt" might have expressed my position better.

Ahh, yeah I can see how you get frustrated with that, but to me that's a separate issue from supporting financially, and your assertion that people who don't make contributions should be ignored is what bugged me, not that.
Until I see data to support the assertion that the ads add significant value, I can only take that as an assumption on your part. I know that for the events I've been a part of that had coverage, ads alone could not get us post-produced content; we had to find a sponsor to pony up.

And I take a lot of the "NFL ratings are down" talk with a grain of salt. ALL over-the-air networks ratings were down across the board; one cannot attribute the NFL's losses in ratings primarily to Papa Johns scandal, or national anthem kneeling, or concussion protocols, or other related speculations. We've entered into a time when a huge number of people, while not yet a majority, are choosing their viewing entertainment pleasures differently with on-demand services, streaming services, and the like.

OK, so you missed my point here. The Papa Johns scandal started because John Schattner said that the downturn in NFL viewership, and specifically the national anthem protests driving it (which I think is where most of the actual controversy started), meant his company's commercials were not being seen by as many consumers, and thus hurt Papa John's sales (specifically, I think it's the fact their pizza isn't really all that great but anyways). Again, putting this to all the channels, they're having the same issues. The downturn in viewership is making ads worth less. If you watched some of the news headlines, specifically brought up on Sportscenter, there were several instances for high profile games where networks owed advertisers who aired commercials during those games money back because they did not get the viewership numbers they needed. Therefore, I posit to you that this is the primary way that, at least currently, entertainment is funded, and it goes all the way back to the radio days (Little Orphan Annie's Ovaltine from A Christmas Story anyone?). Now maybe Patreon is a way to break from that, but anyways, to me it seems ad revenue and value is the best way to make it a sustainable business. We might just have to agree to disagree on that, but that's my position on the matter.

I don't demean Tim's work on this forum at all. But for the most part, I am assuming that much of the costs were upfront. Maintenance, even while extending new products and features is still a stationary (from a single location) prop. NO travel, no labor intensive work, fewer compensated employees, etc. If we can't agree that the background ancillary costs are much larger for a video production company trying to make new content -- live and post-produced -- for every event, then we really can't start a discussion with a similar base point. A database is exactly that -- something that is easily replicable by users/consumers. In fact the users/consumers on these forums DO contribute to its usefulness by creating content, and by providing information directly related to its mission for future and current users. To me that's way different. The same consumers are not contributing much time, effort, or content to video and live coverage producers. After all, see the comments ot content producer, JTac, on post #9.

Well, I'm saying you're missing how much actually goes into a website (also hosting fees, which video producers don't have to pay Youtube to maintain their channels, but they do have their own websites for their merchandise). I can agree that video producing costs more, but I can't agree that the costs for this website are minuscule and not comparable. Additionally, this site is just a one man show, with one person responsible for it. CCDG is probably at least a half dozen guys who all share the load with going to tournaments and filming and editing. Jomez is a bit different but still, four guys sharing the work. But again, I can agree video producing is more work, but I can't agree that this website isn't comparable. But since that isn't really part of the core discussion, we can just agree to disagree on this and drop it if there isn't much of a counterpoint (although I still maintain my position that it compromises your argument somewhat regardless of if we agree to disagree).

 

[Aim For The Chains]

Lol..

What is really expected? Rofl.

WE ALL FINNA MAKE MILLONS IF WE TRY REAL HARD!

 

[Aim For The Chains]

And holy **** do people need to learn how to post on forums again or just want their own blog? I mean stfu already....

No one cares to read text walls and just make a ****ing point. Ive done it 10k times without that effort and more impact.. Wtf? :gross:

My posts take like maybe 30sec... That **** is a novel not worth reading on all ends.

 

[elmexdela]

you know how people youtube "billards tournament" or "ping pong championship" or "bowling 300 game" to find the "hardcore" players and laugh at them like its a big joke? thats what people do about disc golf videos (especially tournaments) unless its an "ace" video

 

[scarpfish]

It does bear mentioning, even for those of you who do watch tournament videos all the way through (I rarely do), how many of you watch at least part of them again? And are you less likely to watch a tourney video if certain people aren't featured?

I would venture the views on tourney coverage drop off considerably compared to say, a highlight compilation, an ace video, trick shot video or an ITB.

 

[brutalbrutus]

I watch pretty much all of CCDG, jomez...etc vids but the only ones I usually rewatch are the CCDG fun round vids...

 

[DiscFifty]

Jomez has distanced themselves from the other producers and quite frankly they make the other ones look dated. The best way to support Jomez imop is to simply keep watching their videos. The more plays, the higher the perceived audience, the more they can charge for commercials, etc.