Pro Tour Live Coverage

[JC17393]

Their seems to be a vein of thought, among some of the Jomez fans, that because Dodge and Jomez built something together, more or less, that Dodge is obligated to use Jomez forever.

If the circumstances were reversed, would they feel the same? If Jomez wanted to pursue something else, would they say that he was obligated to cover DGPT forever, too?

When is it fair for someone to say, What we did last year, we're not doing this year?

I understand people saying, We miss Jomez, we wish we could watch his videos of these events. Or to play armchair quarterback and say, Dodge really blew this move, trying to make his own videos.

Exactly how I see this whole thing as well. And oft overlooked in the "DGPT done Jomez wrong" argument is that Jomez has done DGPT wrong in the past as well. A wrong that, while apparently settled and corrected during last season, was likely an impetus in the changes made for this season.

I think it's entirely fair to be disappointed in DGPT coverage quality thus far and to be critical of Steve's over-promise and under-delivery. It's also entirely fair to wish that Jomez and/or CCDG and/or Smashboxx were still involved (or more prominently involved) in covering the DGPT this year. It just strikes me as disingenuous and a bit entitled to frame everything that's happened as a Steve/DGPT done Jomez/CCDG wrong.

 

[JC17393]

I do disagree with Steve's decision to ice Jomez and CCDG out of events that are in the DGPT, but I also understand why he's doing it. He's trying to capture the full audience, and deliver undiluted eyes to his advertisers.

Thing is, even this is a mis-characterization of what is going on. He didn't "ice Jomez and CCDG out of events that are in the DGPT". The only thing he "iced them out of" was lead card coverage. They're still at liberty to come in and cover any DGPT event (as they did at WACO). That they aren't covering many of them is their choice, not his (and I can't say I blame them for electing to cover lead cards elsewhere vs 2nd/3rd card at DGPTs).

 

[biscoe]

Exactly how I see this whole thing as well. And oft overlooked in the "DGPT done Jomez wrong" argument is that Jomez has done DGPT wrong in the past as well. A wrong that, while apparently settled and corrected during last season, was likely an impetus in the changes made for this season.

I think it's entirely fair to be disappointed in DGPT coverage quality thus far and to be critical of Steve's over-promise and under-delivery. It's also entirely fair to wish that Jomez and/or CCDG and/or Smashboxx were still involved (or more prominently involved) in covering the DGPT this year. It just strikes me as disingenuous and a bit entitled to frame everything that's happened as a Steve/DGPT done Jomez/CCDG wrong.

Please clarify the bolded if you would.

IMO Steve's main problem is not his handling of relationships with coverage providers (which does leave something to be desired as best can be told) but his marriage to live coverage to begin with. Even at it's best it is mediocre in comparison to post-produced due to the limitations of cell coverage. This is going to continue regardless of who is doing it.

 

[slowplastic]

Thing is, even this is a mis-characterization of what is going on. He didn't "ice Jomez and CCDG out of events that are in the DGPT". The only thing he "iced them out of" was lead card coverage. They're still at liberty to come in and cover any DGPT event (as they did at WACO). That they aren't covering many of them is their choice, not his (and I can't say I blame them for electing to cover lead cards elsewhere vs 2nd/3rd card at DGPTs).

I was under the impression that they would be obligated to pay a substantial fee to the DGPT to film any event at all, and WACO was an exception due to their relationship with the TD?

I may be missing some details as well.

 

[JC17393]

Please clarify the bolded if you would.

Jomez went out and got a sponsor for its DGPT coverage independent of the DGPT itself, which meant that their coverage was saturated with ads and graphics for that sponsor...to the detriment of the event sponsors. Just look at Jomez's videos of any of the DGPT events early in the year last year and tell me how happy the title sponsors of the events (and the DGPT as their representative) should be with how those videos came out. Lead card Memorial presented by Discraft coverage...brought to you by Innova. Lead card WACO presented by Dynamic Discs coverage....brought to you by Innova. Lead card Jonesboro presented by Prodiscus coverage...brought to you by Innova. Lead card Discraft Great Lakes Open coverage....brought to you by Innova.

This eventually came to a head at Ledgestone (a headline Discraft event, obviously) where Jomez nearly wasn't allowed to cover it. The compromise was their coverage that weekend was entirely sponsored by Discraft instead of Innova. Pretty sure that Steve decided to bring the lead card post-produced stuff in house, at least in part, in order to protect from something like that happening again.

 

[slowplastic]

^Edit: That post just arrived as I submitted too

As far as the advertising issues that I've heard about, where tournament sponsors are apparently upset that other advertisers are shown on post-produced footage...doesn't this happen in big time sports all the time?

Like a stadium sponsor is independent of the gear sponsor for players. And there are banners all over boards for sponsors on hockey games. Then other companies pay for advertisements during commercials. And some players use one brand's equipment, some use another's. It's not like one company owns 100% of the advertisements from the logos around the stadium to the "this replay brought to you by xxx" to the commercials that are run by the cable broadcaster.

 

[JC17393]

I was under the impression that they would be obligated to pay a substantial fee to the DGPT to film any event at all, and WACO was an exception due to their relationship with the TD?

I may be missing some details as well.

If that's the case, that's a fee that any media would be paying, not just Jomez. So I hardly see that as being something that DGPT "did" to Jomez (or CCDG).

 

[JC17393]

^Edit: That post just arrived as I submitted too

As far as the advertising issues that I've heard about, where tournament sponsors are apparently upset that other advertisers are shown on post-produced footage...doesn't this happen in big time sports all the time?

Like a stadium sponsor is independent of the gear sponsor for players. And there are banners all over boards for sponsors on hockey games. Then other companies pay for advertisements during commercials. And some players use one brand's equipment, some use another's. It's not like one company owns 100% of the advertisements from the logos around the stadium to the "this replay brought to you by xxx" to the commercials that are run by the cable broadcaster.

It may happen, but the question is, what are those advertisers promised when they buy those spaces on the boards at hockey games? Are they promised exclusivity? Or are they paying for the opportunity to advertise to the people in the arena and whatever exposure they get appearing on the screen is a bonus?

We also don't know what's in the contracts between the event and the broadcasters. Most broadcast companies are paying the event substantial sums to cover it. So the event gets their "cut" of the broadcast up front and the ads are not really their concern. I don't believe Jomez is paying DGPT to cover those events. In fact, I think for most tournaments, Jomez and company are being paid by the tournament (or its sponsors) to cover it.

If DGPT is contracting with Jomez to cover the lead card, isn't Jomez obligated to produce content that doesn't conflict with DGPT sponsors?

 

[slowplastic]

If that's the case, that's a fee that any media would be paying, not just Jomez. So I hardly see that as being something that DGPT "did" to Jomez (or CCDG).

And also if that's the case...then instead of not getting whatever youtube income Jomez would have received, they had to pay for equipment and people, deal with backlash, and get very few views in return due to releasing video a week late. Wonder if they broke even.

 

[JC17393]

And also if that's the case...then instead of not getting whatever youtube income Jomez would have received, they had to pay for equipment and people, deal with backlash, and get very few views in return due to releasing video a week late. Wonder if they broke even.

DGPT wouldn't be getting that youtube money if Jomez produced the coverage and put it out on their channel. That's the whole point of charging a fee for them to cover...to get their cut of those viewcount revenues.

 

[Meillo]

I want the best video coverage possible. I want the same chances for all video teams and then be able to watch what I like best.

 

[ru4por]

I want the best video coverage possible. I want the same chances for all video teams and then be able to watch what I like best.

All on someone else's dime.

 

[DiscFifty]

They (Jomez) honed the product, at their expense and time, developing the skills and the format that created a demand. (BTW - I include Smashboxx in this, in terms of live).

While I'm very grateful for what Jomez does, I certainly would watch Paul shoot -18 down or my other favorite players regardless who is covering them. The "content" is PDGA Pro Disc Golf, the "demand" is due to the sport itself growing and the fact that social media explodes the ability to spread information around at light speed. If Jomez stopped covering disc golf today, post production of the elite tour events wouldn't skip a beat. Not talking about quality, just stating the fact the event would still be covered.

however...I still think the "Jomez Pro Disc Golf Tour" could be a reality at some point. They have pretty much everything in place now to make this happen. All they need to do is hire a front man to be the spokesmen/TD director and they are good to go.

 

[ZMan44]

Given that Jomez produced the McBeth to Discraft reveal, the "Making of the Bag" and the final "In the Bag" videos ... well, I'm sure Discraft isn't still holding a grudge against Jomez...because those dudes helped them move a TON of product.

As for Jomez and Innova last year, I'm sure Innova gave them a pretty nice sponsorship deal to follow the tour and make videos. If the tournament sponsors got upset, then they could have sponsored Jomez for the season and reaped the exposure benefit.

At the end of the day, the DGPT success is not going to be settled by the sponsors, it will be settled by the players...and from what I can tell, all the players prefer the guys at Jomez and CCDG to Steve Dodge. Anyone who follows the pros on social media knows the feelings of most. McBeth sells a lot of Discraft. He moves the needle. And he loves Jomez. Eventually, that will be tough for Dodge to overcome.

 

[slowplastic]

DGPT wouldn't be getting that youtube money if Jomez produced the coverage and put it out on their channel. That's the whole point of charging a fee for them to cover...to get their cut of those viewcount revenues.

Exactly, although I worded it poorly...

And also if that's the case...then instead of not getting whatever youtube income Jomez would have received

Meaning that instead of getting $0 of whatever $xx Jomez makes, or maybe they could have worked out a % or something

they had to pay for equipment and people, deal with backlash, and get very few views in return due to releasing video a week late. Wonder if they broke even.

So now they spent some money and have to rely on THEIR numbers just to get back to $0.

 

[cheesethin]

Jomez went out and got a sponsor for its DGPT coverage independent of the DGPT itself, which meant that their coverage was saturated with ads and graphics for that sponsor...to the detriment of the event sponsors. Just look at Jomez's videos of any of the DGPT events early in the year last year and tell me how happy the title sponsors of the events (and the DGPT as their representative) should be with how those videos came out. Lead card Memorial presented by Discraft coverage...brought to you by Innova. Lead card WACO presented by Dynamic Discs coverage....brought to you by Innova. Lead card Jonesboro presented by Prodiscus coverage...brought to you by Innova. Lead card Discraft Great Lakes Open coverage....brought to you by Innova.

This eventually came to a head at Ledgestone (a headline Discraft event, obviously) where Jomez nearly wasn't allowed to cover it. The compromise was their coverage that weekend was entirely sponsored by Discraft instead of Innova. Pretty sure that Steve decided to bring the lead card post-produced stuff in house, at least in part, in order to protect from something like that happening again.

This I feel must have been the major catalyst for the change.

But, some questions I have (possibly only answerable by DGPT, Jomez etc themselves) are:

Why weren't the sponsorship rights tied into the media rights/permissions from the start? Was this inexperience on behalf of both the DGPT and the media teams, as they are all relatively young enterprises, and the value of the media rights has only just grown to be significant? My understanding is that the media teams have always had to seek and receive permission to film at DGPT events. So if that permission did not come tied in with stipulations as to media sponsors etc then some of the culpability lies with the DGPT for not protecting their event sponsors. It doesn't necessarily absolve Jomez or CCDG from a moral obligation, but it is reasonable for the media teams to try and seek extra income sources, and see my point below about potential sponsors.

My guess is that it has only been the past couple/few years that the online viewership for disc golf has grown big enough to be of interest/value to the major sponsors like discraft and innova. And they have only just realised they could demand that advertising in the media be part of their overall sponsorship deal.

And I'd love to know at what point did the DGPT start to engage Jomez over this issue. Had the DGPT already given permission to film at future events? Had Jomez already contracted with their sponsors? There are a lot of potential other factors in determining who if anybody should carry responsibility.

Another issue is that the disc golf world currently has a very small and not diverse pool of potential sponsors/advertisers. It's pretty much; disc manufacturers and large disc golf retailers, and a few accessory manufacturers. Most of these companies are in competition with each other. A sport with a large viewership like american football will have a huge pool of potential sponsors/advertisers. So if lets say SuperBowl 2019 has Ford motor company as its main event sponsor, I would imagine they could still easily sell the media rights with a prohibition against any other car manufacturer being allowed to advertise on air, as there are still many many more willing advertisers. Not so in disc golf (yet).

Oh, and one more thought that just popped into my head: does Innova carry any responsibility for 'hijacking' the coverage of a discraft event by sponsoring Jomez? Am I right in thinking the disc manufacturers are the source of most of the money in disc golf?

Anyway, if anyone has further detail/insight/insider info I'd love to hear it.

 

[Finny]

The above is why I think the PDGA should take over the DGPT. And why I wrote the article.

 

[SD86]

This (the bolded) is something that I still haven't seen or heard an explanation of. What exactly did Dodge do to Jomez and CCDG? Because my understanding of what Dodge has done with DGPT media coverage has little to do with Jomez or CCDG directly unless somehow they're entitled to lead card coverage at DGPT events.

Thing is, even this is a mis-characterization of what is going on. He didn't "ice Jomez and CCDG out of events that are in the DGPT". The only thing he "iced them out of" was lead card coverage. They're still at liberty to come in and cover any DGPT event (as they did at WACO). That they aren't covering many of them is their choice, not his (and I can't say I blame them for electing to cover lead cards elsewhere vs 2nd/3rd card at DGPTs).

Okay, some inconsistencies are cropping up in your statements, so let's review: Originally we were told that Steve Dodge offered Jomez/CCDG coverage of lower cards. Well, if they can cover those anyway, then how could Dodge be in a position to offer them that?!?! And then there's going onto the Smashboxx podcast and telling Terry he was being cut out of it, too. The impression at the time, and I believe a valid one, was that Steve Dodge was exercising iron control over all DGPT media access. And now you're saying he doesn't have that and that Jomez can cover lower cards at will?!?!? (And WACO was an exception at the demand of the Tournament Director there.)

So which is it?

It just strikes me as disingenuous and a bit entitled to frame everything that's happened as a Steve/DGPT done Jomez/CCDG wrong.

And I think it's disingenuous to try to deflect from what I was saying earlier by calling it 'entitled', when I said no such thing nor implied any such thing. I never said nor implied that Jomez had any specific 'rights' based upon past precedents.

What I *DID* say was that Dodge wants iron control over all DGPT Media in pursuit of his ultimate goal. And I said that people are reacting strongly in a negative way because it's Dodge and because of what is perceived that he did to Jomez/CCDG in cutting them out. You can parse it any which way you want, but the perception is that he did badly and dishonorably by them, then failed to keep the promises he made, and he's not getting cut any slack nor given any 'grace period' because of it.

Something good may come of all of this, but I suspect we're going to have to endure the collapse of the star and the supernova before we get the rebirth and new life. In other words, in the end we may get better tournaments and better coverage (live and post-produced), but a lot of ugliness will have to happen to get there, and I don't think Dodge will be part of that better ending...

 

[JC17393]

Okay, some inconsistencies are cropping up in your statements, so let's review: Originally we were told that Steve Dodge offered Jomez/CCDG coverage of lower cards. Well, if they can cover those anyway, then how could Dodge be in a position to offer them that?!?! And then there's going onto the Smashboxx podcast and telling Terry he was being cut out of it, too. The impression at the time, and I believe a valid one, was that Steve Dodge was exercising iron control over all DGPT media access. And now you're saying he doesn't have that and that Jomez can cover lower cards at will?!?!? (And WACO was an exception at the demand of the Tournament Director there.)

So which is it?

Are you being intentionally obtuse on this point? There's no inconsistency in what I'm saying. Jomez/CCDG/ANYBODY ELSE can cover the lower cards because Steve has made them available to be covered by anybody. It's a published DGPT policy (pages 2 and 3). As long as they follow the requirements set out in that document, Jomez, CCDG, or whoever can cover any non-MPO1/MPO2/FPO1 card they want at a DGPT. The exception at WACO was allowing Jomez on MPO2, not allowing them to cover at all.

And I think it's disingenuous to try to deflect from what I was saying earlier by calling it 'entitled', when I said no such thing nor implied any such thing. I never said nor implied that Jomez had any specific 'rights' based upon past precedents.

What I *DID* say was that Dodge wants iron control over all DGPT Media in pursuit of his ultimate goal. And I said that people are reacting strongly in a negative way because it's Dodge and because of what is perceived that he did to Jomez/CCDG in cutting them out. You can parse it any which way you want, but the perception is that he did badly and dishonorably by them, then failed to keep the promises he made, and he's not getting cut any slack nor given any 'grace period' because of it.

I know it's a perception. It's also entirely a false perception. But you (and others) keep referencing it as if it isn't perception. That's all I was asking for...proof that the perception is fact. And it doesn't exist. I think it's disingenuous to keep bringing it up as if it is fact when you admit that it is a incorrect perception.

If you don't want to cut Dodge slack, that's fine. I can understand disappointment and upset over how the coverage has gone thus far this year. But don't frame it as if he did Jomez/CCDG dirty when he didn't.

 

[biscoe]

Jomez went out and got a sponsor for its DGPT coverage independent of the DGPT itself, which meant that their coverage was saturated with ads and graphics for that sponsor...to the detriment of the event sponsors. Just look at Jomez's videos of any of the DGPT events early in the year last year and tell me how happy the title sponsors of the events (and the DGPT as their representative) should be with how those videos came out. Lead card Memorial presented by Discraft coverage...brought to you by Innova. Lead card WACO presented by Dynamic Discs coverage....brought to you by Innova. Lead card Jonesboro presented by Prodiscus coverage...brought to you by Innova. Lead card Discraft Great Lakes Open coverage....brought to you by Innova.

This eventually came to a head at Ledgestone (a headline Discraft event, obviously) where Jomez nearly wasn't allowed to cover it. The compromise was their coverage that weekend was entirely sponsored by Discraft instead of Innova. Pretty sure that Steve decided to bring the lead card post-produced stuff in house, at least in part, in order to protect from something like that happening again.

I don't see anything wrong with that. The way it was presented to me regarding our event later this year is it costs "x" to have Jomez cover the event. The event has the option of paying "x" or of paying a lesser amount and having Jomez find sponsors to cover the rest. This appears to be what occurred. It is not Jomez' fault DGPT opted not to pay the full nut.