|
|
Post by seastape on Mar 21, 2023 9:30:33 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by obf on Mar 21, 2023 9:58:25 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by beavheart on Mar 21, 2023 10:00:00 GMT -8
Indeed an interesting read. It more or less consolidates a lot of the things we are hearing in one article.
It was hard to ignore the number of times that they misspelled linear as "liner", but that is the part that concerns me the most.
I'm just not sure streaming services are going to help the conference in the long run. Sure, they may fork out the money for the Pac12 deal, but what is the hidden cost of being invisible to a large swath of your target audience? If the Pac12 network was a disaster because they couldn't come to terms with one TV service provider (DirectTV), then how is being tucked away on some streaming service going to be any better, if not much worse?
|
|
|
|
Post by obf on Mar 21, 2023 10:04:25 GMT -8
Honestly at this point, even though I was anti apple TV to begin with (Not because of streaming, just because I dislike apple, I am happy to go full streaming). I just want a deal done and just want it to be a single dollar more than the Big12 deal  The article writer makes a nice connection as well between the Pac-12 schools and the tech giants such as apple and amazon, since many of their employees come from the academic prowess of the Pac-12. OK, so I am sold, all in... screw ESPN, lets go 100% streaming on apple TV, amazon prime and the Pac-12 networks (which should go full streaming)! I'll even go on record and say I will finally bow my knee to the Darth Jobs and get an Apple TV membership... Then I will finally get to watch Ted Lasso as well! See what all the hubbub is about |
|
|
|
Post by obf on Mar 21, 2023 10:14:17 GMT -8
Indeed an interesting read. It more or less consolidates a lot of the things we are hearing in one article. It was hard to ignore the number of times that they misspelled linear as "liner", but that is the part that concerns me the most. I'm just not sure streaming services are going to help the conference in the long run. Sure, they may fork out the money for the Pac12 deal, but what is the hidden cost of being invisible to a large swath of your target audience? If the Pac12 network was a disaster because they couldn't come to terms with one TV service provider (DirectTV), then how is being tucked away on some streaming service going to be any better, if not much worse? Ahhh, auto correct and spell checker the greatest double edged sword of all time  Too bad we don't have editors and proof readers anymore I think the second bolded quote is a bit of a misnomer... The BEAUTY of streaming is that access is MORE abundant, not less. The only thing keeping me from an Apple TV subscription is a click of a button. The thing keeping me from a comcast subscription could literally be it is impossible for me to get it at my house (and thus use direct TV) and/or the cost and hassle of changing cable service providers or changing your cable package can be huge and expensive. IMHO, streaming services are the way of the future, and the traditional cable companies will simply be ISPs in the future, no TV at all. Think about it this way. How many people have see Ted Lasso, or Game of thrones, or any other streamed content vs how many people have the Pac-12 Network, or even ESPN the cable channel (not streamed). Now you can watch Ted Lasso AND get Beaver games and you can cancel easily online anytime (say you only want it for football season) then reup in the fall again. In Fact I am guessing things will get even more striated. Instead of a full subscription to Apple TV, you will just "rent" a season of Ted Lasso, or just buy access to stream a single Beaver game. Truly ala carte programming for each individual. I for one would welcome this (assuming the rental / purchase prices are reasonable). |
|
|
|
Post by obf on Mar 21, 2023 10:17:13 GMT -8
One interesting thought experiment... I wonder how much HBO's viewer ship would go down if it eliminated it's channel on traditional satellite and cable packages and just went full streaming? I for one have never in my life had a TV package that included HBO, however I have used HBO Max off and on for the last couple years. I would still have never seen an HBO show without streaming.
|
|
|
|
Post by beaver55to7 on Mar 21, 2023 10:21:16 GMT -8
Indeed an interesting read. It more or less consolidates a lot of the things we are hearing in one article. It was hard to ignore the number of times that they misspelled linear as "liner", but that is the part that concerns me the most. I'm just not sure streaming services are going to help the conference in the long run. Sure, they may fork out the money for the Pac12 deal, but what is the hidden cost of being invisible to a large swath of your target audience? If the Pac12 network was a disaster because they couldn't come to terms with one TV service provider (DirectTV), then how is being tucked away on some streaming service going to be any better, if not much worse? Is it really that different from how things are now for the SEC network, or big10 network? I have never paid for those channels so I don't get them. Sure they are on my channel list (xfinity) but since I don't pay for them I don't get them. So if not all your games are on linear tv, does it really make any difference to what we had before or what the other conferences have now? |
|
|
|
Post by bennyskid on Mar 21, 2023 10:37:30 GMT -8
I've thought all along that the best scenario would be for every week, one game being ESPNs "Pac-12 After Dark", one game on "liner" TV (e.g. Fox), and the rest on a streaming platform like Apple+. We need some old-school TV to keep up the awareness with the casual national fans, but streaming is the future.
It sounds like K is putting together something close to that ideal. Let's just see what that final number looks like.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Mar 21, 2023 11:42:21 GMT -8
I personally welcome the streamers into the mix and am OK if they get it all if a deal isn't worked out with traditional carriers. Apparently Comcast, the biggest cable company, has 21 something million subscribers (and falling) while Disney+ picked up 54 million subscribers in its first 6 months. I suspect if people want to see the Pac play, most will probably make the jump. Very few Beaver games were over-the-air and to see them all somebody is getting paid. Our overall cable and TV services bill dropped by over 100 bucks a month when we dropped to internet cable and started streaming everything (including the streaming services' fees). The added benefit to streaming is you can turn it off and on whenever you want. I think the "exposure" worries are overblown to a degree. Maybe in the near term that's somewhat the case, but over time it just might reverse. Apple is kind of light on content, so some might balk at paying a few bucks a month to get it, but what's on there is pretty good. The wife and I have binged all currently available of Lasso, Shrinking, The Morning Show, Severance (this one's kinda bizarro) and are working on a couple of others and they're all pretty good. I actually kind of liked Schmigadoon, the wife not so much. I'd like to think it all works out well in the long run. techjury.net/blog/cord-cutting-statistics/#gref |
|
|
|
Post by beavheart on Mar 21, 2023 14:23:12 GMT -8
Indeed an interesting read. It more or less consolidates a lot of the things we are hearing in one article. It was hard to ignore the number of times that they misspelled linear as "liner", but that is the part that concerns me the most. I'm just not sure streaming services are going to help the conference in the long run. Sure, they may fork out the money for the Pac12 deal, but what is the hidden cost of being invisible to a large swath of your target audience? If the Pac12 network was a disaster because they couldn't come to terms with one TV service provider (DirectTV), then how is being tucked away on some streaming service going to be any better, if not much worse? Ahhh, auto correct and spell checker the greatest double edged sword of all time Too bad we don't have editors and proof readers anymore I think the second bolded quote is a bit of a misnomer... The BEAUTY of streaming is that access is MORE abundant, not less. The only thing keeping me from an Apple TV subscription is a click of a button. The thing keeping me from a comcast subscription could literally be it is impossible for me to get it at my house (and thus use direct TV) and/or the cost and hassle of changing cable service providers or changing your cable package can be huge and expensive. IMHO, streaming services are the way of the future, and the traditional cable companies will simply be ISPs in the future, no TV at all. Think about it this way. How many people have see Ted Lasso, or Game of thrones, or any other streamed content vs how many people have the Pac-12 Network, or even ESPN the cable channel (not streamed). Now you can watch Ted Lasso AND get Beaver games and you can cancel easily online anytime (say you only want it for football season) then reup in the fall again. In Fact I am guessing things will get even more striated. Instead of a full subscription to Apple TV, you will just "rent" a season of Ted Lasso, or just buy access to stream a single Beaver game. Truly ala carte programming for each individual. I for one would welcome this (assuming the rental / purchase prices are reasonable). I guess I'm just getting old or stuck in the past, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around it being an advantage to be on Apple TV or Amazon where you have to seek out the games and pay to watch vs being on linear TV like the big dogs. Just for starters, I have never seen a sports bar anywhere showing a streaming game or match that they weren't specifically showing on purpose. Basically, if it's not on one of the main cable channels, it's not on in a bar or really any public place. That could change, but it will take time. In the meantime, good luck getting Bill's Watering Hole to turn on the OSU game that is on Amazon TV. Bartender would probably just laugh in your face. I will say that I just made the switch myself to streaming, and I loathe Comcrap so I hope you are right. Especially if the media deal does include streaming, which it sounds like it will. I understand it's the way of the future, but is it too soon perhaps to gamble the conference's exposure on it? Most of the rest of the country is already rooting for the Pac12 to fail. If we are hidden out of sight, they win. This is all starting to feel like the wrong end of a body-bag game. We're taking a payday, but are going to get left in the dust in every other way. |
|
|
|
Post by obf on Mar 21, 2023 14:33:13 GMT -8
Ahhh, auto correct and spell checker the greatest double edged sword of all time Too bad we don't have editors and proof readers anymore I think the second bolded quote is a bit of a misnomer... The BEAUTY of streaming is that access is MORE abundant, not less. The only thing keeping me from an Apple TV subscription is a click of a button. The thing keeping me from a comcast subscription could literally be it is impossible for me to get it at my house (and thus use direct TV) and/or the cost and hassle of changing cable service providers or changing your cable package can be huge and expensive. IMHO, streaming services are the way of the future, and the traditional cable companies will simply be ISPs in the future, no TV at all. Think about it this way. How many people have see Ted Lasso, or Game of thrones, or any other streamed content vs how many people have the Pac-12 Network, or even ESPN the cable channel (not streamed). Now you can watch Ted Lasso AND get Beaver games and you can cancel easily online anytime (say you only want it for football season) then reup in the fall again. In Fact I am guessing things will get even more striated. Instead of a full subscription to Apple TV, you will just "rent" a season of Ted Lasso, or just buy access to stream a single Beaver game. Truly ala carte programming for each individual. I for one would welcome this (assuming the rental / purchase prices are reasonable). I guess I'm just getting old or stuck in the past, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around it being an advantage to be on Apple TV or Amazon where you have to seek out the games and pay to watch vs being on linear TV like the big dogs. Just for starters, I have never seen a sports bar anywhere showing a streaming game or match that they weren't specifically showing on purpose. Basically, if it's not on one of the main cable channels, it's not on in a bar or really any public place. That could change, but it will take time. In the meantime, good luck getting Bill's Watering Hole to turn on the OSU game that is on Amazon TV. Bartender would probably just laugh in your face. I will say that I just made the switch myself to streaming, and I loathe Comcrap so I hope you are right. Especially if the media deal does include streaming, which it sounds like it will. I understand it's the way of the future, but is it too soon perhaps to gamble the conference's exposure on it? Most of the rest of the country is already rooting for the Pac12 to fail. If we are hidden out of sight, they win. This is all starting to feel like the wrong end of a body-bag game. We're taking a payday, but are going to get left in the dust in every other way. I am sure you are right about a small or independent bar like "Bills watering hole", but many of the chains are already doing only streaming, because it is too hard to claim to have any game, but have to manage cable vs satellite vs streaming, etc. It is a lot easier for them to just have something like Fubo TV which is 100% streaming and has pretty much every channel imaginable. For instance I am pretty sure Buffalo Wild Wings (which claims it can show almost any sport/game you want) is mostly streaming. Especially for premier league and non traditional over the air American sports. I definitely think it is the way of the future and don't think we are too soon. Of course now that I am excited about streaming I am sure the Pac-12 will choose a crappier linear channel to go with... Get excited for most Beaver games to be on TCM and HGTV  |
|
|
|
Post by beavheart on Mar 21, 2023 14:46:33 GMT -8
Indeed an interesting read. It more or less consolidates a lot of the things we are hearing in one article. It was hard to ignore the number of times that they misspelled linear as "liner", but that is the part that concerns me the most. I'm just not sure streaming services are going to help the conference in the long run. Sure, they may fork out the money for the Pac12 deal, but what is the hidden cost of being invisible to a large swath of your target audience? If the Pac12 network was a disaster because they couldn't come to terms with one TV service provider (DirectTV), then how is being tucked away on some streaming service going to be any better, if not much worse? Is it really that different from how things are now for the SEC network, or big10 network? I have never paid for those channels so I don't get them. Sure they are on my channel list (xfinity) but since I don't pay for them I don't get them. So if not all your games are on linear tv, does it really make any difference to what we had before or what the other conferences have now? I had Comcast for years. Paid the extra $10/month for the sports package so I could get all the Pac-12 channels. I was able to watch all of the other conference channels as well. Along with NBA, NFL, RedZone, and MLB channels. I suppose one way or another you pay for it, but it is sooo much easier and smoother to access all of those channels once you do get them, because they are on the same platform as all the other cable channels. A guy can just about watch 2 games at once on the same TV by instantly bouncing back and forth between channels on Comcast. With streaming it just is a non starter. Switching between channels on one provider in one thing (like Sling), but switching between Apps takes way too long work. If you are watching a game on Apple or Amazon, you are pretty much locked into that game. In the meantime, SEC and Big10 will be playing games on broadcast TV, which still works (better than ever/Digital quality), and is still free so long as you have an antennae. And the rest of their games will be shown on the main cable channels. Maybe I'm just feeling pessimistic today, but it seems like this is the next step in the Pac12 disappearing altogether. If I am dead wrong, and this is the start of a new era of prosperity for the conference then I will be the first champion George K's forward thinking and leadership! |
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Mar 21, 2023 14:48:24 GMT -8
I've ordered FUBU for 3 or 4 years now just to watch Pac 12 football, and watched most Beaver games via streaming anyway. Hopefully Apple gives me one month free.
Let's get 'er done and move on to winning the Pac 12 next year.
|
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Mar 21, 2023 15:32:46 GMT -8
I'd be interested to know how old each author of these posts is. I'm 59, and I use sling and in the past have used hulu. As a guess, this is only a problem if you were born sometime earlier than about 1970. Of course maybe I'm missing the boat on exactly what is apple TV.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Mar 21, 2023 15:37:13 GMT -8
One thing about streaming, there's a possibility that the Pac could literally just play EVERY GAME at noon (pick a time, noon was an example) on Saturday and fans could go play with the kids or whatever they want Saturday morning, then any time past noon hit the couch and watch whatever game they want, at any time they want, uninterrupted by commercials, while being able to rewind or fast forward any time they want, then go straight to, or mix with, any other league game they want. No recording, chasing down replays or waiting for game replays in the middle of the night.
It's just a different way of doing things that might take a bit of getting used to.
|
|
Too bad we don't have editors and proof readers anymore 
