SD86
Banned
Maybe someone can approach Jussi and work out a deal to have live coverage. I do understand that may be wishful thinking on my part.
Okay, on my way to the Conpiracies thread to ask what is really going on with this...
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
USDGC coverage
- Thread starter Anon
- Start date
Maybe someone can approach Jussi and work out a deal to have live coverage. I do understand that may be wishful thinking on my part.
Okay, on my way to the Conpiracies thread to ask what is really going on with this...
Askar
Bogey Member
https://discgolf.ultiworld.com/2016...duced-content-will-not-include-livestreaming/
This article pretty much explains it all.
This article pretty much explains it all.
onemilemore
* Ace Member *
I think the premise has been to build the media, not necessarily demonstrate it as a broadcast sport. It seems to me that Jussi wants it to be packaged and polished more professionally and higher paced - hence the recap/highlight show - rather than shown in one big chunk on the livestream.
Thanks, was coming to link this.
I can't and wont say much other than the numbers that Jussi guessed at for the DGPT and Worlds were slightly off. I don't think he took into account the fact that we were streaming it in 4 different locations. (2 Youtube sites & 2 FB sites). I am not saying that we were WAY above that. But we had about 6500 concurrent viewers for the Worlds finals, and the DGPT has easily gone about 1000 for every event, usually closer to 2000 for the final rounds.
And as far as post produced vs live. Yes, a condensed live coverage will almost always get more eyeballs. But just a quick comparison for Worlds Final round.
Jomez post produced: 30,892 views
SmashBoxx live round: 39,036 views (both of our YouTube streams combined)
This is NOT a dig on Jomez. They do a phenomenal job with the post produced work. Their quality of video and graphics are better than ours because they are not streaming. And in the long run their video views will out pace ours due to quality and time. And almost all of their other videos have double the views that ours have from Worlds.
opcorn:
And as far as post produced vs live. Yes, a condensed live coverage will almost always get more eyeballs. But just a quick comparison for Worlds Final round.
Jomez post produced: 30,892 views
SmashBoxx live round: 39,036 views (both of our YouTube streams combined)
This is NOT a dig on Jomez. They do a phenomenal job with the post produced work. Their quality of video and graphics are better than ours because they are not streaming. And in the long run their video views will out pace ours due to quality and time. And almost all of their other videos have double the views that ours have from Worlds.
opcorn:That's my point though. Other than Smashboxx, who is there to do live coverage? It's not the kind of thing that can be slapped together by just anyone, especially with 3 weeks to go.
I will say that I understand some of Jussi's reasoning from the Ultiworld article, but I find his throwing around the $25,000 figure a bit disingenuous. It wouldn't cost near that amount for Smashboxx to do it. It would still cost money, but probably a fraction of the number he's citing. He also says that live coverage can't be post-produced because of the quality, which is true. But live and post-produced CAN co-exist. They did it last year at the USDGC. There's usually post-produced coverage after every event Smashboxx covers live. It really isn't an either/or thing.
onemilemore
* Ace Member *
I'm interested to see where the livestream/post-produced dilemma goes in the coming years. I love the next day coverage, but I also think it is a contributing factor in the live numbers being low. If people know they can tune in later that night or early the next day to the condensed version, where is the incentive to watch live? I'll be curious to see if more events that broadcast live begin to push their post-production content out a few days, or even a week, after the fact in an effort to attract more live viewers.
Nice article.
"Those numbers are so low that as an investor, I would not put $25,000 into that, especially when livestreamed video cannot be post-produced with quality,"
A bit of a misleading statement here...
For $25k they can slap some damn memory cards into the cameras and record HQ footage WHILE live streaming.
As much as this is appealing to me for viewer count, I would hope that most tournaments DONT do this. I don't want to hold anyone's enjoyment of disc golf hostage. I am not saying that it may not happen in the future, but I hope not. All it would do is make people angry that they have to wait. Instead I would like to see the post-edited stuff be obligated to put in a certain amount of commercials (3 or 5?) of the event sponsors. The same ones that we play live. But that is more an agreement that the specific tours have to make. My goal is to show disc golf to people, and make advertisers happy. I think that is a good compromise.
This past 2 weekends I saw a few people pop into our chat board saying, "Hey what is this? It popped up on my YouTube Live recommended feed." & "OH COOL. I didn't know disc golf was broadcast live!" Maybe they enjoyed golf, maybe they were disc golfers, I wasn't able to get a lot of info. Some new people were found on Facebook by others sharing. We are slowly getting new viewers. Not an avalanche, but a slow trickle.
I can almost guaranty that the post edited stuff isn't bringing in many new viewers, but they are catering to our faithful watchers and people who just eat up disc golf.
I want both to succeed.
We do locally record, never know when SportsCenter is gonna want a high quality clip. And the only thing that makes it tough for us to produce an edited version is that we have a commentator talking over the video. We would probably have to edit out the video and do some sort of post-round commentary.
Askar
Bogey Member
What I think he is going at is that to not get the bag spottage of grainy or other unseeable live he would need to hire a truck to send the live streaming through which would add to the cost. What I don't understand last year they did live streaming through one of those trucks in Sweden that were in the middle of nowhere and they did it through a truck. To grow the sport why can't the td's maybe talk to the local tv station which probably got some kind of satelite truck to maybe suggest and have the live coverage on both local tv and youtube. Sure it would be a extra cost for the live coverage and you would need to talk the tv station into loaning/renting the truck and all that but it would be a start.
I know during some of the DGPT there were some courses where cellphone signals were horrible. Would this help? Yes, but it takes time and some extra money but would it maybe be worth it in the end?
I know during some of the DGPT there were some courses where cellphone signals were horrible. Would this help? Yes, but it takes time and some extra money but would it maybe be worth it in the end?
Askar
Bogey Member
It were Scandinavian Open 2015 they did coverage from middle of nowhere in northern Sweden.
Ya... there would definitely need to be another round of commentary done in post.
If you hard pan the commentary to one side of the audio spectrum and the 'nat audio' to the other side you can easily cut out the livestream commentary in post and still retain the natural sounds. Basically leveraging a stereo track as 2 separate mono sources.
During the live broadcast you'd just need to 're-center' the audio with a mixer or just do the final output as a mono mix.
hellbound
Eagle Member
Im disappointed that it will not be live. I personally would love to see it drop the Metrics and go with the Udisc setup. Better information. Post rounds are great but its hard not to have someone tell you on DGCR or facebook how people finished. I do get the whole we want great coverage but many people want to watch it live. Delay it say 2 hours and do the commentary away from the round. Hopefully that would finishes it at the end of the round live without the extra walking down the fairway till last few holes. Wonder if the Smashboxx guys have thought of something similar? Best round I though was the one they recorded and did a voice over post round.
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
It sounds like Avery or someone else may still be going Live on FB sometimes during the event. So that's a bit better than dots.
SD86
Banned
Totally agree with this.
Not gonna get in the weeds on this, but my sense is that they're giving up on live feeds too easily, especially as it's the USDGC.
Seems like this is a Jussi-centric attitude to move away from the live stuff as-it-stands and focus on the post-produced product.
Business wise... I get it. It makes sense because doing live coverage right is EXPENSIVE. But it conveniently ignores that fact that pandoras box has already been opened. The viewer/consumer is expecting a live product because of other tournaments and years prior.
So to somehow explain that "sure sure, I know we did it in the past but it just doesn't make sense to us right now" to a conditioned consumer feels like its probably a losing battle.
Hell... we are all spoiled. Each week we watch HIGHLY produced sports events (and eSports events) for free on TV (and streaming). So we are completely desensitized to how amazing that level of production is and just how much money and manpower it costs.
I get that Jussi wants to see live disc golf at that level but I'd argue that cutting out the current live product in the hopes that '5 years down the road' we can do it 'right' is basically shooting yourself (and your existing hardcore fanbase) in the foot.
Of course, the counter argument is that not nearly enough are expecting live coverage. We haven't been watching (in sufficient numbers).
Using that argument you could pretty much determine that NONE of the current disc golf coverage is really 'worth it.'
Our numbers (fancy 'bells and whistles' post-produced coverage included) pale in comparison to even the most niche of eSports.
Last edited:
Maybe I'm alone; but I much prefer the live streamed stuff over the post-produced stuff -- even when not actually watching it live. I'll choose to watch/listen to the live stream a week later over a post-produced version. The post-produced stuff is too fast of a pace, the nonstop action is actually boring to me and can't hold my attention. Let's compare it to baseball, do people watch post produced baseball games with all the deadtime edited out? maybe they actually do? I don't know.
