DC United moves all tv games behind flosports paywall - And the fans are irate

cwarcarblue11 wrote:

This.

Cutting the cord allows you to pick and choose which services you have rather than individual packages. For me, the only sport I care about is running and I don't watch TV. So I only pay the following:

- Flotrack $150

- NBC gold $75

- USATF $30

This covers 99% of the sporting events I watch for $255 per year. Cable would cost me a minimum of $1200 per year, maybe more.

Plus, the cost of your internet package, which is probably $70/month, so now you are up to almost $1095 for the year.

MeHereYouWhere?! wrote:

cwarcarblue11 wrote:

This.

Cutting the cord allows you to pick and choose which services you have rather than individual packages. For me, the only sport I care about is running and I don't watch TV. So I only pay the following:

- Flotrack $150

- NBC gold $75

- USATF $30

This covers 99% of the sporting events I watch for $255 per year. Cable would cost me a minimum of $1200 per year, maybe more.

Plus, the cost of your internet package, which is probably $70/month, so now you are up to almost $1095 for the year.

That doesn't work for mainstream sports which are on CABLE. So you still need a cable subscription.

So soccer you still need cable to watch most of the games.

MeHereYouWhere?! wrote:

cwarcarblue11 wrote:

This.

Cutting the cord allows you to pick and choose which services you have rather than individual packages. For me, the only sport I care about is running and I don't watch TV. So I only pay the following:

- Flotrack $150

- NBC gold $75

- USATF $30

This covers 99% of the sporting events I watch for $255 per year. Cable would cost me a minimum of $1200 per year, maybe more.

Plus, the cost of your internet package, which is probably $70/month, so now you are up to almost $1095 for the year.

No one gets internet because they cut the cord, they had it before, and they'll continue having it if they decide to go back to cable. Internet is not an extra cost associated with cord cutting. It's just something you pay for.

Sling sucks, I had it and got rid of it, it's like basic cable without local channels.

I cut the cord, I have Netflix, Amazon, Hulu and the WWE Network. I had Amazon and Netflix before I cut the cord, those are not extra costs. The only things I added were Sling and Commercial Free Hulu (and I dropped sling). So I dropped an $80 a month cable bill for whatever Hulu costs.

I watch free stuff on YouTube as much as any of the stuff I pay for.

How many times did Rojo just type "chord" when he meant "cord?"

This is ridiculous. Now fans have to sign up for this streaming service, which is what, 150 a year? They also have to have cable for the other 13 games. Running fans are already accustomed to this/still complaining about it. A running fan needs cable for espn and nbc, flotrack, runnerspace, nbcsportsgold, and probably another service that I can't remember.

This only works (well) with a pay per view model!!! No one would raise a stink if for these flosports dc united games, one could pay $1-3 to watch each one individually.

DCU fans should be more irate they signed their manager, Ben Olsen, to a 3 year contract extension.

He's been in charge since 2010 and his record kind of sucks (Granted for many of these years, DCU was a complete bottom feeder as far as talent/payroll. The front-office just didn't have the money to spend), but his "Benny-ball" style of play is not exactly known for it's flair.

Maybe the DCU FO (front office) is hoping that what they say the 2nd half of the year after acquiring Rooney will be the new standard going forward. I think the combo of acquiring Rooney, getting players healthy AND the fact they had like 14 of their last 16 games at their new home field made Olsen look like a better coach because of the results they got. An entire season of results with Rooney and a more balanced home/away schedule will be the true test to see if Olsen can coach. He finally has some talent to work with between Canouse (defensive mid, great work rate), Arriola, Birnbaum, Hamid in goal, Rooney and Acosta. The first four are USMNT level players (all have been in USMNT camps in past 2 years).

Overall # of games managed: 316

Wins: 111

Losses: 130

Ties: 75

Win %: 35.13

What is a DC United? Is it for eating?

We all know that walls don't work so I really don't see the problem here.

In parts of Europe they have as good or better internet as major US cities for the equivalent of $10-20 US. I told a European friend how I'm paying $95/month for 100 mbps internet and he couldn't believe it. He thought I meant for the year! Internet companies are gouging us to subsidize their failing cable subscriptions (all internet companies in my area offer cable for another 20-30 a month on top of internet) and let the fat cats at the top of their companies live luxurious lifestyles.

Sure, sure they offer a good product. But it costs time as well as money to watch their stuff. If I was retired, it would probably be a great deal at 150/year. As it stands, I'd have time to watch 5-10 meets on their service a year (since a lot of what I want to watch is on other services like nbcsports gold, espn, or runnerspace). Imagine if you wanted to watch 3 star wars films, the recent trilogy or something. You could pay for them individually for $10 a piece. Someone is willing to offer you tickets to 3 movies, 2 of them star wars and a live action pocohontas remake for $25. Unless you want to see pocohontas, this isn't a good deal.

Do you watch enough events on each service to justify the price though? The way I see it, with a pay per view plan, where I could pay for individual events, what I want to watch would be more in the $150-200/yr range. You're right that this is better than cable, but its like cable light where you still pay for stuff you don't want to see. Like I don't want to watch peachtree, as I'm racing on the 4th myself!

Yup, and cable is usually bundled with internet in the US! I don't pay for cable (even at $10 a month, what is offered in my area wouldn't be worth paying for, except maybe in olympic years), but if I did, I could get cable and internet for just like 20-30 more a month than either alone.

Or in the case of track, some marathon ends up being on espn only -not tv. Or a race ends up being on nbc the channel, but not nbc sports gold (they've gotten better about this recently maybe). Or for some reason ABC gets the tv rights to New York.

I spent many an hour watching crappy free streams of bbc and eurosport when I was in college that would constantly bug out. The letsrunners who post stuff like that are great men and women. For a track fan with no money, what other option was there.

________________---

Pay per view at affordable rates! I should not have to pay to subsidize content I do not want to watch, bottom line.

Drainthefecesswamp wrote:

How many times did Rojo just type "chord" when he meant "cord?"

A comical amount of times.

I dont have any answers supporting or dissenting with the decision to put up a pay wall.

I will state however that I observe both sides of the problem and a bigger picture problem.

I see the consumer side involving the many opinions echoed and shared here. The internet was free -- free information, free photography, free mp3s -- and now the internet is no longer as free.

On the production side the common consumer does not understand the sky rocketing costs of professional online productions including software, equipment and labor. Everyone in the business wants their piece and fans expect all those service related boxes to be checked -- announcer, statistics, camera quality, viewable app options, etc.

The bigger picture problem is that Pro Sport is a leisurely function for the people of its cities. This dates all the way back to Roman times, charioteering and the Coliseum. Emperors understood that putting on the games kept the city relatively happy. It is people's weekly escape from school, work or whatever else occupies their time. It is a place where they can release all their pent up primitive energy as athletes or fans. It is where we all subconciously find pathways to virtue, higher honor and ethics. Plainly, it allows us to be happy and to mold better ideals. Many of us pre-2000 people formed attachment bonds to these sports and activities as children through hometown teams like the New York Yankees, Chicago Bulls and Green Bay Packers. Or in the context of this website Lindgren, Ryun, Pre, etc. The problem with the pay walls is that some children cannot afford these things unless it comes as *the* most expensive gift on their wishlist at birthdays and Christmas which leads us to the parents whose budget may not condone such costs holiday gift or not.

The paywalls destroy the opportunity for the precursors of nostalgia to form in children on the basis that the window is not there to immediately look through unless you compensate "Middleman Media" with a semi hefty deposit. On the flipside the consumers are unwilling to accept the pay-to-view notion when they grew up having broadcasts and game access on a much more amicable pay scale. More often than not, it was free.

People who grew up in the 60s to 90s were in a good place. The early 2000s were perhaps the best of the best of years for accessible sports broadcasts, niche sports to pro ball sports, and, moreover, the quality of broadcast which is something else that has dwindled era-to-era. People now dont have those same opportunities and, yes, when we limit the fanaticism we limit the far reaching capacity of the pro sport realm. Who do the kids look up to as idols? How about the political realm (joke but not)? The ways of the world currently -- "Big Media", "Middle Media trying to make it to Big Media" and entitled spectatorship are all destroying the function of sport. Sport is for the city and its people. Sport is for the nostalgia. Sport is for the utopian release. When we lose sight of these functions and roadblock the potential interest we in essence start destroying parts of ourselves.

rojo said: thought the headline of the article using the term "cuts the chord" was interesting, but shows the origination of the term cutting the chord really isn't really understood or used properly by the press and even executives. To me, cutting the chord represents people fighting back against exorbitant cable costs.

the expression predates cable TV and has precisely zero to do with exorbitant costs.

the expression "to cut the cord" refers to children breaking loose from their parents, where the cord in question is the metaphorical umbilical cord that binds children to their mothers. over time it came to refer to breaking away from any overly claustrophobic relationship.

note on spelling: chord is either a) a musical term for a group of notes sounded together, or b) a technical term from mathematics, engineering and aeronautics that refers to a line bisecting the circumference of a circle or arc. whereas cord is a medical term used to refer to the spinal cord, umbilical cord, vocal cord, etc. it can also sometimes refer to thin rope that is properly called cordage.

cheers.

Why on earth would anyone watch the MLS ? The players are mostly average and the stars are over the hill donkeys. Rooney was finished 3 years ago. The league is a joke. Watch the EPL on NBC and join a soccer bar that covers the real game in England or better still, spend some money and go watch a real rivalry in the EPL.

Sportsworld wrote:

People who grew up in the 60s to 90s were in a good place. The early 2000s were perhaps the best of the best of years for accessible sports broadcasts, niche sports to pro ball sports, and, moreover, the quality of broadcast which is something else that has dwindled era-to-era. People now dont have those same opportunities and, yes, when we limit the fanaticism we limit the far reaching capacity of the pro sport realm.

Internet pioneers were competing to show what was possible in this new information age. After capabilities were proved (for free on the behalf of pursuit and discovery) those pioneering noticed they were always at a net loss in their productions.

I stand by the fact that Google's Mobilegeddon Search Engine Update (APR 2015) and everything that led up to it (from ~2012) changed all that we had known of the first version of the internet. Google had basically financed a large portion publishers and advertisers on the internet before the USA and, more so, the EU hit them with antitrust lawsuits in 2014-2015. Everything after become pretty shady especially as it relates to niche websites and small businesses relying on the internet for organic marketing.

The EU barked heavily up the Google tree and in return Google tightened the faucet on everyone. Google sneezes, the rest of the internet gets sick is the parable here. Alphabet Inc (formerly Google Inc) is now structured to do what it wants and remain legal even if encroaching on illegal.

YMMV wrote:

Sport Climbing almost made this move, but the opposition was near-unanimous against it, and the (excellent) coverage is free and live, thus saving this sport from the Flovultures.

Nothing ruins climbing more than competition.

I am genuinely curious to see how Flotrack's acquisitions pan out.

We know this:

- They took VC money awhile back and it seems like they are spending it acquiring rights in different verticals.

- In the short-term, it would appear that most of their acquisitions are losing money. They lost a lot of money, for instance, on their foray into "professional wrestling"

- It seems like their endgame is an acquisition. Right now, they are trying to become something worth acquiring.

- Their older acquisitions need to pay off. They increased their headcount, and have to pay them. Even if their revenue is growing, their labor and production costs have skyrocketed. One wonders if they will be running out of the money from their latest round. If so, what do they do next (another round, cut headcount?)

Here's what I think they are getting right:

- More people are willing to pay for subscriptions.

- A few of their verticals have to be profitable at this point (wrestling?)

Here's what I think they may be getting wrong:

- They're spreading themselves too thin. I think the PAC 12 Network had similar struggles in trying to do everything.

- They're on the front edge so they are having to learn from their mistakes. I see the DC United as a test case. It makes sense,... if they can make it work, they can replicate for much more lucrative European teams. My gut feeling is that the DC United deal won't move the needle, at least they can say they are involved in soccer now.

- A lot of folks resent what they are doing, and in the long term, niche sports may have less rabid fans because of paywalls and restricted access.

The bolder the move they make the more we can observe they are feeling the heat for survival.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=8444610

https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/FloSports-Reviews-E814301.htm?sort.sortType=RD&sort.ascending=false

And to the shock of nobody, flosports isn't getting it done!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2019/03/10/dc-uniteds-new-streaming-partnership-gets-off-rough-start/?utm_term=.f9ceae25c80d

Flosports is also the broadcaster for the Concacaf League of Nations (except for USA games, I think). I would not be surprised to see them have some games in World Cup qualifying. Probably not the USA games and maybe not the Mexico games, both of which are worth vastly more than any other games on the slate. Not sure if that is better or worse than having them carried by Bein.

People really need to disaggragate their internet bill from their television bill. I mean, if you are getting a great deal from bundling them, good for you. I cut the cord for television, but before and after I was getting my internet through the phone company. I get enough speed to stream television with no issues at all, so I'm not sure what wejo is referring to needing to improve (unless it is business/server level issues). I did not have a cable option for internet anyway, but when I did it cost pretty much exactly the same. I was getting DirectTV. I am saving about 70 per month after accounting for the streaming services I have chosen. The online downside is that streaming lacks some for live sports, but I had basically quit watching those anyway.