ATDHE.net domain seized by Homeland Security

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by FlamesPuck12

This goes back to the discussion of how the corporations should adapt to technology. Would NHL make more money trying to gouge every cent from their limited fans (which by the way does nothing to fight piracy) or would they make more profit adapting to the current technology (support free online streaming) by expanding their market for viewership (more profit through advertisements) and merchandise purchases from new fans they gain.

Exactly! Think of all the university students that love hockey but can't afford to pay for NHL Center Ice. Forget going to a bar and asking them to switch to the Calgary-Minnesota game if you live anywhere other than Alberta. This could be a fantastic way to not only have the game reach all of its fans, but also expand it to other people that aren't currently fans yet as well.

[GreenTeaFrapp]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Exactly! Think of all the university students that love hockey but can't afford to pay for NHL Center Ice. Forget going to a bar and asking them to switch to the Calgary-Minnesota game if you live anywhere other than Alberta. This could be a fantastic way to not only have the game reach all of its fans, but also expand it to other people that aren't currently fans yet as well.

Why do you think people should be given luxuries for free just because they can't afford them?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Exactly! Think of all the university students that love hockey but can't afford to pay for NHL Center Ice. Forget going to a bar and asking them to switch to the Calgary-Minnesota game if you live anywhere other than Alberta. This could be a fantastic way to not only have the game reach all of its fans, but also expand it to other people that aren't currently fans yet as well.

So your plan is to give it to them for free? How does that benefit the NHL? Targeting a market with insufficient resources to drop $200 on the pay per view package probably isn't going to bring in multi-million dollar advertising revenue. You would be removing an income stream and replacing it with a smaller one, how is that a smart move?

[FlamesPuck12]

Originally Posted by GreenTeaFrapp

Why do you think people should be given luxuries for free just because they can't afford them?

NHL isn't a business based on luxury where only the select rich individuals can afford. It's a business based on wide range of audience viewership. NHL makes more money based on the number of audience watching the game regardless of their financial situation.

That being said, no one here is suggesting that NHL can't charge $200 for center ice. We're just suggesting that it is not the best way for NHL to maximize their profit.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by FlamesPuck12

NHL isn't a business based on luxury where only the select rich individuals can afford. It's a business based on wide range of audience viewership. NHL makes more money based on the number of audience watching the game regardless of their financial situation.

That being said, no one here is suggesting that NHL can't charge $200 for center ice. We're just suggesting that it is not the best way for NHL to maximize their profit.

How does giving it away maximize their profit exactly?

[FlamesPuck12]

Originally Posted by valo403

So your plan is to give it to them for free? How does that benefit the NHL? Targeting a market with insufficient resources to drop $200 on the pay per view package probably isn't going to bring in multi-million dollar advertising revenue. You would be removing an income stream and replacing it with a smaller one, how is that a smart move?

Yes, give the televised game for free to the fans. They might not be able to gouge as much as they can from an existing fan watching a televised game but this will guarantee many more fans watching the game and lure potential fans.

Casual fans aren't the ones buying tickets or merchandises. Let the game become more available to the casual fans and let them become more emotionally invested into the game. They're more likely to buy tickets to the game, buy jerseys, and other merchandises. Casual fans aren't going to dropping $200 on Center Ice.

Not only that, NHL can charge more for advertisements if more people are watching the game. They can convert casual fans into hardcore fans, and gain new fans as well.

Look at Chicago couple years ago. The owner thought he could get more people to the games by not allowing televised hockey games and this only made the ticket sale worse.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by FlamesPuck12

We're just suggesting that it is not the best way for NHL to maximize their profit.

I can't think of too many business that maximize their profits by giving away their product for free. Maybe the NHL should get rid of ticket prices too and just make it free but first come, first serve type business and their profits will sky rocket! Also free NHL jerseys for all students who can't afford one.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by valo403

So your plan is to give it to them for free? How does that benefit the NHL? Targeting a market with insufficient resources to drop $200 on the pay per view package probably isn't going to bring in multi-million dollar advertising revenue. You would be removing an income stream and replacing it with a smaller one, how is that a smart move?

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.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by FlamesPuck12

Yes, give the televised game for free to the fans. They might not be able to gouge as much as they can from an existing fan watching a televised game but this will guarantee many more fans watching the game and lure potential fans.

Casual fans aren't the ones buying tickets or merchandises. Let the game become more available to the casual fans and let them become more emotionally invested into the game. They're more likely to buy tickets to the game, buy jerseys, and other merchandises. Casual fans aren't going to dropping $200 on Center Ice.

Not only that, NHL can charge more for advertisements if more people are watching the game. They can convert casual fans into hardcore fans, and gain new fans as well.

Look at Chicago couple years ago. The owner thought he could get more people to the games by not allowing televised hockey games and this only made the ticket sale worse.

Umm games are already free or in basic cable tiers for the vast majority of people. How does your idea change anything? You want to make every game free? So I can watch any out of market game for free? Why would local broadcasters pony up for the rights to their region when they'll be competing with gmaes across the country. You've just undermined every local TV deal, how are you going to recoup that lost revenue?

Just so I'm clear, is your argument that increased jersey sales will replace the loss of TV revenue? Seriously?

[FlamesPuck12]

Originally Posted by HOOT

I can't think of too many business that maximize their profits by giving away their product for free. Maybe the NHL should get rid of ticket prices too and just make it free but first come, first serve type business and their profits will sky rocket! Also free NHL jerseys for all students who can't afford one.

You think majority of the profit NHL makes comes from charging $200 for Center Ice subscription?

[PIMking]

Originally Posted by GreenTeaFrapp

Why do you think people should be given luxuries for free just because they can't afford them?

The NHL should stop showing the Sunday games on NBC then... That's a free channel.

[FlamesPuck12]

Originally Posted by valo403

Umm games are already free or in basic cable tiers for the vast majority of people. How does your idea change anything? You want to make every game free? So I can watch any out of market game for free? Why would local broadcasters pony up for the rights to their region when they'll be competing with gmaes across the country. You've just undermined every local TV deal, how are you going to recoup that lost revenue?

Just so I'm clear, is your argument that increased jersey sales will replace the loss of TV revenue? Seriously?

TV revenues aren't from the $200 Center Ice subscription fee. It's mostly based on advertisement revenue. And guess what the cost of advertisement is based on.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by FlamesPuck12

Not only that, NHL can charge more for advertisements if more people are watching the game. They can convert casual fans into hardcore fans, and gain new fans as well.

Who is going to pay for that advertising? The NHL as is already has a hard enough time finding people to advertise in most markets let alone charging even more. If you assume that there are 2m subscribers to NHLCI/NHLGC that is $400m in lost revenue, now you are asking your already small advertising group to put in more dollars?

I'd also venture to guess that the NHLCI/NHLGC subscriber list is also a lot more than 2m people in Canada, let alone the world, so as those numbers rise so does the cost to the advertisers.

Look at Chicago couple years ago. The owner thought he could get more people to the games by not allowing televised hockey games and this only made the ticket sale worse.

I think you are missing the point on why the Chicago market actually struggled. Television was about 1% of the problem in that market.

[Yeah_Baby]

I'm a poor student. Guess I shouldn't have to pay for gas, or food, or bourbon.

[octothorp]

The live sports distribution models that are out there need to change, and a site like atdhe, even if it's illegal, can help to drive that change in the same way that napster drove change in the music industry or that torrent sites continue to drive change in the movie industry. The distribution models that came out of these movements were driven by user choices: I can now go on iTunes, and for $.99, download any track I want in seconds, at high quality. They've essentially made a model that is more convenient than attempting to download the track illegally, without being prohibitively expensive.

Right now, the NHL's distribution model is expensive and inconvenient. Make it inexpensive and convenient, and people will pay.

[valo403]

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.

[FlamesPuck12]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Who is going to pay for that advertising? The NHL as is already has a hard enough time finding people to advertise in most markets let alone charging even more. If you assume that there are 2m subscribers to NHLCI/NHLGC that is $400m in lost revenue, now you are asking your already small advertising group to put in more dollars?

I'd also venture to guess that the NHLCI/NHLGC subscriber list is also a lot more than 2m people in Canada, let alone the world, so as those numbers rise so does the cost to the advertisers.



I think you are missing the point on why the Chicago market actually struggled. Television was about 1% of the problem in that market.

The reason why NHL is having problem with advertising is because the hockey market is very small compared to other major sports league.

That's like saying the NFL should charge people to watch the superbowl. Surely they'll make more money that way. Who cares about the loss in advertising revenue. They can recoup their loss by charging $20 superbowl pay per view. I mean think of all the revenue, surely no one will pirate that game.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by FlamesPuck12

TV revenues aren't from the $200 Center Ice subscription fee. It's mostly based on advertisement revenue. And guess what the cost of advertisement is based on.

And guess what happens to the prices that broadcasters are willing to pay when you tell them they'll be competing with every market in the country as opposed to having exclusive regional rights.

[photon]

Please do not discuss specific links or request links.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by FlamesPuck12

The reason why NHL is having problem with advertising is because the hockey market is very small compared to other major sports league.

Right, so in order to grow the game you adopt a model that will almost surely bankrupt the league. Seems like an intelligent decision.