United States disc golf championships

[Central Scrutinizer]

I just looked it up. ESPN3 mainly. So yes, it is.

I'm not doing a very good job here...

 

[Dcinmd]

Every try to watch a major college football game in a PUBLICLY owned stadium, without tickets?

Or, for that matter, a Winthrop basketball game in the arena they play the USDGC around?

First thing that popped into my head was the old warning label.

 

[DavidSauls]

College football has reached a point that broadcasts can be largely supported by advertising dollars (along with ESPN subscriptions).

It hasn't always been that way. I remember when few games were televised, and paying to watch a few games on PPV in an arena. I also remember listening to a lot of games on the radio, when they weren't televised.

It's easy to gamble on the future if you're not the one gambling. The USDGC has presumably decided that rather than hope advertising dollars eventually come if they offer it for free now, they can gather and invest more resources with PPV. I have no idea if they're right, but they're the ones with skin in the game.

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

You're right, David. It's their baby, and power to them. The more I sit here the more I realize I'm wasting my energy griping about this. It's up to me to either care and pay their ransom, or not and go about my day.

It's just a tournament.

 

[DavidSauls]

I've thought they were out of their mind from the time I saw the promotion for the debut USDGC, and many times since. But despite my doubts, they've managed to create something people care about, the something bigger than anything I've done myself. So I'm inclined to cut them a lot of slack.

I'm admittedly privileged to (1) live close enough to day-trip, though the ticket prices have also soared and (2) not particularly care about watching it, live on post-production.

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

I only have a small amount of second-hand thingies with the USDGC. I have a friend who played in the FA-1 division of the first one in 2000 or whenever it was. 1999? Also, the first two season's runner up to Ken Climo is the guy who beat me by 11 from the same tees at my highest-ever rated round in 2005 in a C-tier, Al Schack. I saw him for the first time in years this summer at the Michigan HOF tourney at Meyer Broadway and told him, "All is right in the world again when you're beating the daylights out of me in pro from the same tees I'm playing in Am," and got a good smile out of him. Man, was he good back in the day.

 

[DiscJunkie]

Seems like a few on here feel the same way that I do…
That the commercialization has taken a bit of shine off the event.

I started going to the USDGC in 2008 when I started playing at 50 and it felt like a big "geeky" celebration of DG.
You were able to follow the Lead Card and see everything easily.
Day tickets were $5 and the VIP was $20, IIRC, and you got a free disc.
Went every year after that (except the weather cancellation year and last year), so I have some perspective.
The last few years have not been as much fun.
The crowds are bigger, the view is tougher and generally harder to move about.

For those of you that have wanted DG to grow, you have your wish.
You must now live with the consequences (commercialization, crowds, higher costs and collector prices).

For those of us that miss the old days, we all recognize that this is the future…but we don't have to like it.

 

[Central Scrutinizer]

If that's the negative to growth, but there are courses popping up all over the place, I'll take it.

 

[Dave242]

I watch my college's hockey teams (both men & women) on ESPN+ for $6/mo. 8 or so games a month for $6. It is pretty good coverage. Of course, there is tons and tons of other content that ESPN+ makes available to me (that I could watch for the same fee if I wanted to).

$25 for one event does not seem to match industry price points for a niche interest (like college hockey).

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Considering DGN subscriptions run:
$10/month
$75 for an entire year

I agree the $25 for a single event seems a bit out of line.

Not that $25 is gonna make a real difference in my life, but that's not the point.

Bottom line: as long as the people collecting the $25 for this are happy with the amount they're making, there's no reason for it to change.

 

[Jimb]

This is what I need someone to do for me. There's $5.00 in it for you.

 

[glassila]

Considering DGN subscriptions run:
$10/month
$75 for an entire year

I agree the $25 for a single event seems a bit out of line.

I just have a hard time believing they felt that $25 was the price point that would generate the most income. (am I wrong to assume that their goal is to make as much money as they could?)

It seems that they would get 3 or 4 times the viewers at $10. More viewers = more people talking about the tournament, buying products, seeing ads, etc.

I might get in at $10, but at $25..."Fuhgeddaboudit!"

 

[BogeyNoMore]

I just have a hard time believing they felt that $25 was the price point that would generate the most income. (am I wrong to assume that their goal is to make as much money as they could?)

It seems that they would get 3 or 4 times the viewers at $10. More viewers = more people talking about the tournament, buying products, seeing ads, etc.

I might get in at $10, but at $25..."Fuhgeddaboudit!"

I thought about a lower price point might increase viewership to the point of increased profits. But given the streaming problems they had, wouldn't more subscribers only make that situation worse?

 

[glassila]

I thought about a lower price point might increase viewership to the point of increased profits. But given the streaming problems they had, wouldn't more subscribers only make that situation worse?

Probably a lot worse. I'm assuming they would have done things differently if they knew there would be 3 times the amount of viewers.

 

[paulw]

? post production , , ,?

Is there post-production videos anywhere?

 

[biscoe]

I just have a hard time believing they felt that $25 was the price point that would generate the most income. (am I wrong to assume that their goal is to make as much money as they could?)

It seems that they would get 3 or 4 times the viewers at $10. More viewers = more people talking about the tournament, buying products, seeing ads, etc.

I might get in at $10, but at $25..."Fuhgeddaboudit!"

IMO Innova is probably not just straight up trying to maximize income from the one event but trying to feel out where the market is today without losing money on it. USDGC has historically had a large component of experimentation attached to it and this seems like more of it to me.

 

[biscoe]

Is there post-production videos anywhere?

only on DGN currently

 

[Three Putt]

IMO Innova is probably not just straight up trying to maximize income from the one event but trying to feel out where the market is today without losing money on it. USDGC has historically had a large component of experimentation attached to it and this seems like more of it to me.

Yeah, I would never, ever try to guess what Innova was actually trying to do with this event. They have lost oodles and gobs of money on it over the years trying to prop up the illusion that disc golf could be big time. They have had the long game view of this from the start. Pay per view is probably a big part of that long game view and this was probably more of a test than a money grab.

Say what you want about Innova, but I think they are a little above money-grab suspicion with USDGC after all these years.

 

[brutalbrutus]

I thought about a lower price point might increase viewership to the point of increased profits. But given the streaming problems they had, wouldn't more subscribers only make that situation worse?

They were talking about this on the foundation podcast the other day. The problems early in the round were caused by local internet/power interuption around JV's area in Wisconsin. Also, it's not the total number of viewers that caused the problem at the end, it was a sudden spike in views that triggered Vimeo to do an automattic shutdown/viewer restriction...




Starts at the 38:30 mark...

 

[DanJon]

I watch my college's hockey teams (both men & women) on ESPN+ for $6/mo. 8 or so games a month for $6. It is pretty good coverage. Of course, there is tons and tons of other content that ESPN+ makes available to me (that I could watch for the same fee if I wanted to).

$25 for one event does not seem to match industry price points for a niche interest (like college hockey).

I wonder why hockey costs less?

Could it be that it's played by a lot more people and has major third party sponsorship dollars invested?