Closed Doors Live Streaming.

[vikingTON]

2 hours ago, BIGdavieT said:

 

You’ve definitely got a point and there will be others that agree.

But I think there are plenty of fans like me who will enjoy the streams this season. If I was only interested in quality of football I wouldn’t support a team and just go watch Liverpool instead. Queens mean something to me so the match also means more as a result. I sometimes pay to watch Brentford on ifollow because I used to support them at uni. I always pay to watch Queens on the various online platforms that have been around for years, (Dunfermline/Raith etc.)

Plenty of people talk about the negatives and there will be many. But there are some positives to watching your local team from your armchair as well. Grab a beer, avoid the horrendous weather, see the game from a better or at least different perspective, international/England based fans can watch every game for the first time ever.

This won’t be a revolution, going to the match will always be better at this level, but it might not be that bad!

 

I think expats develop an entirely different mentality to this while out the country and for them having a streaming option would be a great service to have going forward. There's a big difference though when you normally have the opportunity to go to a live match and have this piss-poor alternative offered instead; particularly when you can just sit it out until fans - home and away games - are back in the summer of 2021 or later.

[johnnydun]

20 minutes ago, virginton said:

There's nothing to get out of it. I don't want to watch a 90 minute stream of a match: I want to be there or I'll just watch the highlights instead. Those were the choices available before March and I see no reason to pay any amount of money - never mind what Championship clubs will try and get away with - to access some pointless shite halfway house that they want to push now.

If fans can't get to games then the season at this and all levels below should be scrapped. 

To scrap a season would be worse for fans, players and clubs. 

They are pushing this "pointless shite halfway house" because they have no other option. Highlights and being there were the options before March but you can't be there now. So what else are clubs meant to do?

It's not pointless at all, it's the only chance they have of making any kind of proper fan based income and the only chance of fans watching games.

[punk_dfc]

I don't live in Dundee so the prospect of being able to watch the game at home without incurring the expense and time of travel actually suits me. There will be occasions where I'd pay £20 for a stream for a game where I wouldn't necessarily want to spend £20 on train plus money on pints and food

[vikingTON]

4 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

To scrap a season would be worse for fans, players and clubs. 

They are pushing this "pointless shite halfway house" because they have no other option. Highlights and being there were the options before March but you can't be there now. So what else are clubs meant to do?

It's not pointless at all, it's the only chance they have of making any kind of proper fan based income and the only chance of fans watching games.

It might be worse for clubs and players but you're speaking for yourself with the worse for fans claim. I'd much rather the league was put into deep freeze until it can run properly instead of starting this 27 game farce, with pretty much zero chance of having anything that makes the habit of following football at this level worthwhile.

[johnnydun]

7 minutes ago, virginton said:

It might be worse for clubs and players but you're speaking for yourself with the worse for fans claim. I'd much rather the league was put into deep freeze until it can run properly instead of starting this 27 game farce, with pretty much zero chance of having anything that makes the habit of following football at this level worthwhile.

Maybe I am speaking for myself with my worse for fans claim, but if the 2 options for a fan is not seeing my club do anything at all for about 18 months or watching them on a stream every week then I know what one I would choose.

[vikingTON]

Except those aren't the only choices as there would still be highlights available at no cost, which are frankly long enough for the dung games at this level as it is.

[johnnydun]

9 minutes ago, virginton said:

Except those aren't the only choices as there would still be highlights available at no cost, which are frankly long enough for the dung games at this level as it is.

So how do you suppose a club makes any regular money from fans? Giving away free highlights is not going to be commercially viable is it?

[vikingTON]

13 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

So how do you suppose a club makes any regular money from fans? Giving away free highlights is not going to be commercially viable is it?

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.

Edited September 25, 2020 by vikingTON

[RandomGuy.]

1 hour ago, punk_dfc said:

I don't live in Dundee so the prospect of being able to watch the game at home without incurring the expense and time of travel actually suits me. There will be occasions where I'd pay £20 for a stream for a game where I wouldn't necessarily want to spend £20 on train plus money on pints and food

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.

[johnnydun]

10 minutes ago, 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 will ask again. What alternative is there for clubs to make a regular income from fans this season?

[vikingTON]

59 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

I will ask again. What alternative is there for clubs to make a regular income from fans this season?

Morton have a fan ownership group that is contributing regular money in exchange for taking over the club from the gormless dauphin figure in the near future. I couldn't really care less how other clubs choose to secure fans' investment without a credible product to offer; it won't get me to pretend that paying £15 to stream a second tier Scottish football match is anything other than an abysmal idea that I won't be taking up.

The obvious course is in fact for clubs to realise now that this season isn't feasible without crowds, postpone/scrap it and beg for government aid - instead of harbouring the delusion that they'll still be getting thousands of paying customers for some garbage stream content by the end of November to keep the bills paid. That's where the real threat to the existence of clubs lies here.

Edited September 25, 2020 by vikingTON

[TxRover]

50 minutes ago, virginton said:

“...paying £15 to stream

Just wondering where “£15” is coming from? Raith, in League One, charged £5 per game video for external to UK streams last year. I can’t see them tripling the price and expecting any serious takeup.

1 hour ago, 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.

 Raith TV post highlights after the game anyway, in accordance with SPFL rules.

1 hour ago, RandomGuy. said:

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.

Raith TV was, for me, flawless for all but one game last season. The one game was a feed failure that was quickly identified and rectified. It’s a volunteer operation that shows that as long as the club is willing to invest in a good wired connection from camera to controller, you can produce a solid product.  The flaky streams are often down to either poor quality connection from the controller to the web or an RF issue on wireless transmissions. The key here is NOT using the Pixellot system, but using an established and tested setup.

2 hours ago, punk_dfc said:

I don't live in Dundee so the prospect of being able to watch the game at home without incurring the expense and time of travel actually suits me. There will be occasions where I'd pay £20 for a stream for a game where I wouldn't necessarily want to spend £20 on train plus money on pints and food

With the current issues, this isn’t as far fetched as some think, but there is the question of how long will that last. But, again, I don’t see £20 as a viable price. I suspect something in the £10 range is more likely, and yes that is cheaper than the ST holders are paying...but ST holders are also fans who stump up money each year to support THEIR club. Smart teams will find ways to “payback” ST holders in non-financial ways or financial ways in future seasons, and, for those demanding a refund, should happily provide one.

[RandomGuy.]

6 minutes ago, TxRover said:

 

Raith TV was, for me, flawless for all but one game last season. 

As was St Johnstones.

Yet this season, using the SPFL supplied provider, its been a complete shitshow all round.

Maybe lower league clubs will be lucky enough to run their own set ups, but if not then theres zero point using last season as a comparison.

[Homer Thompson]

5 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

As was St Johnstones.

Yet this season, using the SPFL supplied provider, its been a complete shitshow all round.

Maybe lower league clubs will be lucky enough to run their own set ups, but if not then theres zero point using last season as a comparison.

I dont think the Premiership clubs are using an SPFL provider, are they? They've all, but one, ended up with the same supplier but I dont believe the league had anything to do with it. 

[TxRover]

9 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

As was St Johnstones.

Yet this season, using the SPFL supplied provider, its been a complete shitshow all round.

Maybe lower league clubs will be lucky enough to run their own set ups, but if not then theres zero point using last season as a comparison.

My point exactly, Raith TV have already announced they will use their equipment and website for this year.

Looking around, I see £12-20 as the range of streaming prices for the Premiership, with most clustered at £12. Have any Championship teams announced a price for a PPV stream?

On that note, a cheerful thumbs up to Ross County, who while getting pounded by Celtic also managed to get £15 a stream from Celtic fans who couldn’t watch the game on Sky!

[grumswall]

My point exactly, Raith TV have already announced they will use their equipment and website for this year.
Looking around, I see £12-20 as the range of streaming prices for the Premiership, with most clustered at £12. Have any Championship teams announced a price for a PPV stream?
On that note, a cheerful thumbs up to Ross County, who while getting pounded by Celtic also managed to get £15 a stream from Celtic fans who couldn’t watch the game on Sky!

I'd be surprised if our prices aren't up this season. We won't have supporters in the stadium so it would be silly to not charge a bit extra for streams. £15 isn't that bad either in fairness. Clubs will lose alot through fans choosing to use iptv etc as well.

[RandomGuy.]

49 minutes ago, Mr X said:

I dont think the Premiership clubs are using an SPFL provider, are they? They've all, but one, ended up with the same supplier but I dont believe the league had anything to do with it. 

I assumed it was driven by the SPFL as theres literally no other reason for them to change provider.

[Rovers_Lad]

1 hour ago, grumswall said:

2 hours ago, TxRover said:

My point exactly, Raith TV have already announced they will use their equipment and website for this year.
Looking around, I see £12-20 as the range of streaming prices for the Premiership, with most clustered at £12. Have any Championship teams announced a price for a PPV stream?
On that note, a cheerful thumbs up to Ross County, who while getting pounded by Celtic also managed to get £15 a stream from Celtic fans who couldn’t watch the game on Sky!

I'd be surprised if our prices aren't up this season. We won't have supporters in the stadium so it would be silly to not charge a bit extra for streams. £15 isn't that bad either in fairness. Clubs will lose alot through fans choosing to use iptv etc as well.

This

Dont think anyone whos purchased a season ticket would be happy if prices were pitched at anything less than £15 which I think is the cost from them per game when broken down

[grumswall]

This
Dont think anyone whos purchased a season ticket would be happy if prices were pitched at anything less than £15 which I think is the cost from them per game when broken down

As much as you are right, I don't think anyone buying a season ticket for this season expects to get full value from them. Its pretty much impossible.

[DA Baracus]

Aye streaming will need to be priced pretty high, meaning at least £15, for two main reasons, the first being the aforementioned issue that pricing it lower than a season ticket (when taking the cost per game) makes said season tickets a less sensible purchase, and the second being that clubs have to try and mitigate losses as much as possible.