Quote:
Originally Posted by Ark2
I don't know what the numbers are so I can't comment on whether or not they would be forfeiting a lot of revenue. However, I don't exactly understand how making the game more accessible could be detrimental to them, especially when you consider the fact that University students will stream live games with or without the consent of the NHL. Also, thinking that the University student demographic is not a viable market to target is, quite frankly, laughable. Even if your argument is that they don't currently have the income to be a lucrative target, the fact that they have parents who are (not to mention that they will soon graduate and get decent paying jobs) is something that you don't seem to consider.
Look, we aren't talking about marketing the game to homeless people or families living on the other side of the planet here. We are talking about people in their early 20's that will soon grow up to be the very people that the league depends on, and that's the whole point really. The NHL (along with just about everyone else in the entertainment industry) needs to understand their consumers are changing and business decisions need to be made to accommodate those changes. It's either that, or you insist that your product is a luxury that should only be available to those willing to pay a subscription and watch your television revenues dwindle.
|
First of all, referring to something that costs $200/year as a luxury is laughable. It's not a luxury, it's pretty damn affordable. As for the desirability of the market segment, you're the one who put them out there as a group that can't afford $200/year, but now they have parents that can buy them things and will all be wealthy next year? Which one is it? Either it's a group with disposable income that is desirable to advertisers or it's a group that can't afford to drop $200.
I don't disagree with the idea that marketing needs to adapt to the changes brought about by technology, but giving away your product isn't the answer, especially if the impetus is the fact they're going to steal it anyways. How does that help you? All you've done is legitamize the theft, make it free and they watch legitimately and you have no revenue stream outside of a possible marginal bump in ad sales. Keep the current model and you retain the pay-per-view revenue stream without losing any of the exposure you pointed out as being so important because those kids are still watching, just on a bootleg feed.