Closed Doors Live Streaming.

[peternapper]

16 minutes ago, Jamie_M said:

You aren't though are you? You are paying season ticket prices for not attending games. 

Bet you still buy into the 'my new iPhone was free because I was due a free upgrade on my £60 a month contract' scam.

I was buying a season ticket regardless simply to give the club something, have no idea what arrangements other clubs are giving season ticket holders regards streaming. Do not think streaming will be the thing to save a lot of clubs simply because take up will not cover playing costs.

[Jamie_M]

1 hour ago, peternapper said:

I was buying a season ticket regardless simply to give the club something, have no idea what arrangements other clubs are giving season ticket holders regards streaming. Do not think streaming will be the thing to save a lot of clubs simply because take up will not cover playing costs.

Fair play and reason for buying. Anyone who bought for any other reason is an idiot.

[punk_dfc]

Streaming definitely isn't a substitute for going to the game. Just for me personally, I'm never going to get to Dens more than 5 times a season nowadays. I'd probably stream most weeks if I could though.

Not having a go, but interested to see if this mindset holds up once you start experiencing the streams.
Every one I've watched, bar Rangers, has had at least 4/5 blackout moments. The Kilmarnock game i missed all 3 goals, 20 minutes of the first half and the final 10 minutes, due to the stream dropping/lagging, which the media team admitted was their error. Its not improving at all as time goes on, and thats with clubs who have run their own PPV type set ups flawlessly before.
This Pixellot thing is absolutely dreadful aswell, for anyone going with that.

[RiG]

Has there been any discussion about the number of "packages" sold or log ins by the Premiership clubs for their streaming services? I can't imagine they will be comparable to a normal match day crowd but it would be interesting to see figures if any exist.

[Hedgecutter]

Possibly mentioned already, but I would imagine that there would be a greater benefit for the smaller clubs (with regards to closing revenue differences between clubs) if the home club took the streaming profits.  For example, Jambos would probably watch Arbroath v Hearts in roughly the same numbers as if it was Hearts v Arbroath (there’ll always be the petty “I’m no giving them my money” brigade), hence the Smokies could potentially make a greater profit from a stream than if they had a normal open gate at Gayfield which many fans couldn’t be arsed with otherwise.

That said, a big downside is that they’d lose the family gate packages seeing as two adults and three kids can watch it under a single subscription costing less than a normal adult ticket.  However, it’s not unfeasible for Arbroath to sell 2000+ streams for the Hearts games if the maroon half of Edinburgh was to properly get into the habit.

Edited September 28, 2020 by Hedgecutter

[Homer Thompson]

48 minutes ago, Hedgecutter said:

Possibly mentioned already, but I would imagine that there would be a greater benefit for the smaller clubs (with regards to closing revenue differences between clubs) if the home club took the streaming profits.  For example, Jambos would probably watch Arbroath v Hearts in roughly the same numbers as if it was Hearts v Arbroath (there’ll always be the petty “I’m no giving them my money” brigade), hence the Smokies could potentially make a greater profit from a stream than if they had a normal open gate at Gayfield which many fans couldn’t be arsed with otherwise.

That said, a big downside is that they’d lose the family gate packages seeing as two adults and three kids can watch it under a single subscription costing less than a normal adult ticket.  However, it’s not unfeasible for Arbroath to sell 2000+ streams for the Hearts games if the maroon half of Edinburgh was to properly get into the habit.

While all thats true, its only one game, two if you're lucky.

The rest of the time, the smaller home fanbase means a smaller potential audience for streaming

[Hedgecutter]

26 minutes ago, Mr X said:

While all thats true, its only one game, two if you're lucky.

The rest of the time, the smaller home fanbase means a smaller potential audience for streaming

True, although all clubs will be running with a reduced income, just that the smaller clubs would be running at less of a loss as a proportion of their usual income due to such bumper days.  As such, the financial gap between top and bottom would probably narrow, although I appreciate you can have a greater end profit than other sides whilst having a lower percentage than them.

Edited September 28, 2020 by Hedgecutter

[foreverarover]

If clubs think that clamping down on already existing YouTube highlights of games will lead to fans clamouring to stump up £15 or more to live stream the full ninety minutes instead then they're even stupider than I previously thought. 
PPV isn't a financially viable option at this level regardless of what they do. The above would simply be pissing off their own customers even further, on top of the fact that clubs are offering them a dogshit alternative to the service that they actually want to buy which yeah, isn't really a sound corporate strategy.

I don't see how it's not viable. Raith for instance film the full game anyway to fans abroad. It would cost them zero extra to stream it to everyone at a cost.

[Skyline Drifter]

36 minutes ago, foreverarover said:

On 25/09/2020 at 15:56, virginton said:

If clubs think that clamping down on already existing YouTube highlights of games will lead to fans clamouring to stump up £15 or more to live stream the full ninety minutes instead then they're even stupider than I previously thought. 
PPV isn't a financially viable option at this level regardless of what they do. The above would simply be pissing off their own customers even further, on top of the fact that clubs are offering them a dogshit alternative to the service that they actually want to buy which yeah, isn't really a sound corporate strategy.

I don't see how it's not viable. Raith for instance film the full game anyway to fans abroad. It would cost them zero extra to stream it to everyone at a cost.

You've misunderstood his point. He's not saying clubs can't make money doing PPV (clearly they can and will). He's saying it isn't remotely going to come close to replacing gate money. And he's absolutely right. I'd be surprised if it ends up at 20% of gate money but we'll see.

[Jamie_M]

6 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

You've misunderstood his point. He's not saying clubs can't make money doing PPV (clearly they can and will). He's saying it isn't remotely going to come close to replacing gate money. And he's absolutely right. I'd be surprised if it ends up at 20% of gate money but we'll see.

Indeed.

The uptake is likely to be less than expected particularly if it's an inferior stream, inferior product (action is just not the same without fans), inferior atmosphere but premium price.

The first couple might be well subscribed but likely to drop sharply outwith season ticket holders as the novelty wears off.

Edited September 28, 2020 by Jamie_M

[madton]

17 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

You've misunderstood his point. He's not saying clubs can't make money doing PPV (clearly they can and will). He's saying it isn't remotely going to come close to replacing gate money. And he's absolutely right. I'd be surprised if it ends up at 20% of gate money but we'll see.

Would be amazed if its that's low.

If I can somehow watch every Morton game this season, I'd pay to do so.  I go to most home games and the odd away game purely because i can't justify all the time away from family, (canny be out all day every Sat basically) but if its only between 3 and 4.45, I would be able to get away with that and would happy pay the streaming cost to an away club as well as my own( through the season ticket). If say 25% of a standard home support signed up for an away streaming service and adds to the home support , say 50% of their normal home gate, i would imagine it would be a lot more than 20%.

If we take the up and coming Morton- QOTS game for example. Might attract 1200 normally, paying on average  £15 a ticket- 18k revenue.

Id like to think you would get at least 600 Morton fans and say 300 Queens fans signing up for a streaming service, £10 a head- 9k revenue., so 50%. The more i think about it,  the more i think the away number could be more. They will want to see their team play, just as much as Morton fans, the venue becomes irrelevant.

I might be way off, but i think fans at our level are itching to watch their teams again and many will happy sign up or a home/away match as long as the streaming service is acceptable.  Pure guess work, but 6 months is a long time and I think the majority will want to watch their team live on a streaming service rather than wait and watch a highlights package and check the score on Soccer Saturday.

Proof will be in the pudding i guess.

 

 

 

 

[DA Baracus]

You need to factor in families watching together, which could mean 2-4 watching a single screen on a single purchase rather than each paying individually.

Bear in mind all the lost revenue from hospitality as well.

[Skyline Drifter]

7 minutes ago, madton said:

Would be amazed if its that's low.

If I can somehow watch every Morton game this season, I'd pay to do so.  I go to most home games and the odd away game purely because i can't justify all the time away from family, (canny be out all day every Sat basically) but if its only between 3 and 4.45, I would be able to get away with that and would happy pay the streaming cost to an away club as well as my own( through the season ticket). If say 25% of a standard home support signed up for an away streaming service and adds to the home support , say 50% of their normal home gate, i would imagine it would be a lot more than 20%.

If we take the up and coming Morton- QOTS game for example. Might attract 1200 normally, paying on average  £15 a ticket- 18k revenue.

Id like to think you would get at least 600 Morton fans and say 300 Queens fans signing up for a streaming service, £10 a head- 9k revenue., so 50%. The more i think about it,  the more i think the away number could be more. They will want to see their team play, just as much as Morton fans, the venue becomes irrelevant.

I might be way off, but i think fans at our level are itching to watch their teams again and many will happy sign up or a home/away match as long as the streaming service is acceptable.  Pure guess work, but 6 months is a long time and I think the majority will want to watch their team live on a streaming service rather than wait and watch a highlights package and check the score on Soccer Saturday.

Proof will be in the pudding i guess.

I'd love it if you are right but as you already concede, there's no way streaming charges will be the same as an attendance charge and you've taken no account of shared usage of streams. I know we're currently unable to visit each other's homes to any extent but there are likely at least to be multiple family users of the same stream who would have paid separate entrances in a ground plus there's a fair chance some clubs / pubs will stream while that's allowed (Annan streamed their friendly on Saturday to their own Social Club at the ground and let circa 40 or 50 drinkers watch it).

I do accept there's a chance you'll hold up away revenue as more will pay than will have travelled. I'm far from convinced the home revenue will hold up in the medium term. A lot of it is tribal, a lot of it is meeting your mates, going to the pub, getting the atmosphere, vocalising, etc. Not convinced the novelty of shouting at a tv screen in your house won't wear off for some.

I really do hope you're more right than me though.

EDITED to add: As DA says also lost hospitality, food kiosk, even programme sales, etc. Half time draws (though it may be possible to organise those online).

Edited September 28, 2020 by Skyline Drifter

[Rob1885]

Theres no point talking about loss of revenue through hospitality etc. Theres absolute zero alternative at the minute so just have to make do.

[Homer Thompson]

6 minutes ago, Rob1885 said:

Theres no point talking about loss of revenue through hospitality etc. Theres absolute zero alternative at the minute so just have to make do.

You're right but its lost revenue against previous seasons, obviously. Its become relevant because the season is starting again and clubs still need to pay players

[Skyline Drifter]

4 minutes ago, Rob1885 said:

Theres no point talking about loss of revenue through hospitality etc. Theres absolute zero alternative at the minute so just have to make do.

Well yes, we know this. The discussion is about what percentage of "normal" revenues clubs can make from live streaming. Hospitality is a factor in that whether you like it or not.

It might be added that whilst it's unclear if there's a market for it, clubs might potentially still be able to do hospitality. As ridiculous as it seems, running a restaurant is not illegal as long as no joint dining protocols are breached. Likewise running a pub. You could conceivably offer distanced seating and a basic meal / drinks with a live stream of the game in the dining room, even though at home games that game is happening 10 yards away!

[Rob1885]

Well yes, we know this. The discussion is about what percentage of "normal" revenues clubs can make from live streaming. Hospitality is a factor in that whether you like it or not.
It might be added that whilst it's unclear if there's a market for it, clubs might potentially still be able to do hospitality. As ridiculous as it seems, running a restaurant is not illegal as long as no joint dining protocols are breached. Likewise running a pub. You could conceivably offer distanced seating and a basic meal / drinks with a live stream of the game in the dining room, even though at home games that game is happening 10 yards away!

Uptake in the premiership has been above projections so hopefully that pattern follows through.

[Skyline Drifter]

1 minute ago, Rob1885 said:

3 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Well yes, we know this. The discussion is about what percentage of "normal" revenues clubs can make from live streaming. Hospitality is a factor in that whether you like it or not.
It might be added that whilst it's unclear if there's a market for it, clubs might potentially still be able to do hospitality. As ridiculous as it seems, running a restaurant is not illegal as long as no joint dining protocols are breached. Likewise running a pub. You could conceivably offer distanced seating and a basic meal / drinks with a live stream of the game in the dining room, even though at home games that game is happening 10 yards away!

Uptake in the premiership has been above projections so hopefully that pattern follows through.

So has been rumoured in several places but I've seen no actual numbers anywhere and "above projections" is meaningless if projections weren't publicly stated in the first place. If projections were 10% of gate income and they've actually been 15% then that's not going to solve the problem. If on the other hand they've 50% that would be very good news.

[Rob1885]

So has been rumoured in several places but I've seen no actual numbers anywhere and "above projections" is meaningless if projections weren't publicly stated in the first place. If projections were 10% of gate income and they've actually been 15% then that's not going to solve the problem. If on the other hand they've 50% that would be very good news.

What's the alternative?

[Skyline Drifter]

43 minutes ago, Rob1885 said:

1 hour ago, Skyline Drifter said:

So has been rumoured in several places but I've seen no actual numbers anywhere and "above projections" is meaningless if projections weren't publicly stated in the first place. If projections were 10% of gate income and they've actually been 15% then that's not going to solve the problem. If on the other hand they've 50% that would be very good news.

What's the alternative?

Going out of business or mothballing for a year, although as I've posted several times already, I think we're beyond that point now.