Weldon,
I have emailed you and asked you to have a debate on Flotrack Pro.......... But you have said No. Typical Letsrun fashion. Write from behind your computer, but when asked to come out from the shadows you are no where to be found. I think this debate would be great and it would let the community decide the merits of what we are doing.
I am not hiding:
http://www.flotrack.org/speaker/118-Mark-Flotrack/video/684648-CALLING-OUT-LetsRun
Mark
I already made a thread about this
:http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5011674
I dont know how you fanboys over at flotrack do things, but here at letsrun we do not make multiple threads about the same topic. By the way, 20$ is completely outrageous, and that new guy mitch is TERRIBLE. fire him immediately if you want any hope of profit
What was this in reference to? Did Wejo slam Flotrack for something. I've never seen him bad mouth Flotrack and on the contrary he has stated that he does not consider Flotrack a competitor.
"Editor’s note: For a point of reference individual Diamond League meets could be watched this past year for $1.99 on Universalsports.com, yet it will cost $20 to watch a high school/collegiate meet. Parents thousands of miles away might be willing to pay it but track and field fans generally won’t."
The above pretty much covers it. Wouldn't be much of a debate.
Why is it always Weldon? why cant you guys ask ROJO a question for once... btw LANCE IS A DOPER!!! LANCE LANCE LANCE!!!
might be wejo wrote:
"Editor’s note: For a point of reference individual Diamond League meets could be watched this past year for $1.99 on Universalsports.com, yet it will cost $20 to watch a high school/collegiate meet. Parents thousands of miles away might be willing to pay it but track and field fans generally won’t."
The above pretty much covers it. Wouldn't be much of a debate.
If it is that simple, why wouldn't Wejo debate me? Seems like Wejo would destroy me, so you would think he would do it right?
might be wejo wrote:
"Editor’s note: For a point of reference individual Diamond League meets could be watched this past year for $1.99 on Universalsports.com, yet it will cost $20 to watch a high school/collegiate meet. Parents thousands of miles away might be willing to pay it but track and field fans generally won’t."
The above pretty much covers it. Wouldn't be much of a debate.
OK. That's it?????
What is to debate? $1.99 to watch a diamond league meet vs $20 to watch a meet at the Armory. The numbers don't lie. It doesn't matter what Wejo says or does, what matters is how many track fans will pay $20 to watch streaming video.
I know I won't.
Yes, you guys at Flotrack missed your price point.
wejo and lets run never said, "flotrack are a bunch of clowns and rapers and only an idiot would pay so much to watch such a crappy meet!"
in fact, all they was they DOUBT many casual fans will pay that much, ESPECIALLY if the diamond league meets are available at $2 each.
i agree. i like distance or whatever, but see a HS girls race in january for 10x the price vs. bolt/rudisha/pretty much anyone else at any time of year. hmmmm?
I'm not saying the brojos are perfect by any means, but I haven't had a use for flotrack since 2007. I will admit that it was good for what it was back then, but even that wasn't great.
Although I think if Flotrack had priced it at $9.99, that would have lessened the fall, but people have a right to make a buck. You can't expect people to invest that much time and effort into something and not 'have the right' to profit from it. Agent, coaches, athletes and meet directors, etc., are profiting, then why can't content providers do the same. Content providers are adding to the experience, they are providing a product that people use and should be allowed to charge whatever the market will bear.
For the record I did not delete this thread.
The moderators often delete threads when there are multiple threads on one topic. They also delete threads when threads are started with fake controversies to generate traffic to other sites.
This thread fits both of those criteria so I can see why it was deleted. I personally restored it. There can be one thread on this.
Mark emailed me this afternoon saying, "You current post about why we are charging for the live stream is compete BS. I think it is comical coming from you guys. Why don't we have a debate on skype on this topic and post it for the world to see? That would allow the community to decide for themselves. I doubt you guys would do that though, because it would not help your narrative.
I am here and my number is below to do this anytime."
FYI I'm not sure what post he is referencing I'm assuming our comments on the homepage today: "And just think many of you complained that the entire Diamond League Series on UniversalSports.com was too much at $25 with individual meets just $1.99. In our book this doesn't seem to be about track fans, but about getting parents to pay."
I did post in this thread today more about Flotrack but it was after Mark wrote me but before I saw and responded to his email:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5010274&page=2
I wrote Mark back, asking him what part was BS and what my narrative was. I said I personally was not interested in having a skype debate, but would publish any more info on he wanted to share about the agreement with the Armory.
I also asked him some questions about the editorial/promotional separation at Flotrack.
I received no response to my questions but did receive "No Skype debate Weldon? That is what I thought. You stay hidden behind your lil computer.
Robert, you up for one? Thought not?
If you want your questions answered, get on a Skpe debate with me, but you will not, because you are full of it."
And then this thread. (And a few posts after this one was deleted)
My modus operandi is not to get on Skype and have a debate every time I have a difference of opinion with someone. That's now how I operate.
We could easily discuss it via email.
I'm not interested in using my time to being used as part of a fake controversy to generate Flotrack some hits today. Plus they'd probably put it behind the FloTrack Pro pay wall:) (That's a joke) Maybe if they\'ll pay me for the interview I'll reconsider.
And one thing, Mark said in his rant (which was about 15 seconds on Letsrun and 1:15 on the benefits of Flotrack Pro) the letsrun business model is about creating controversy. LetsRun is not out to create controversy. We are out to cover the sport of track and field. If there is a controversy that means covering it. If there is a question that needs to be asked that makes an athlete or a sponsor uncomfortable that means asking it. Sadly, because of how small our sport is, it is often covered by people who are fans first, not journalists, so not many others do this.
If there ever was a case of "creating a controversy" out of nothing I think this is it.
Is that a "no"?
wejo wrote:
For the record I did not delete this thread.
The moderators often delete threads when there are multiple threads on one topic. They also delete threads when threads are started with fake controversies to generate traffic to other sites.
This thread fits both of those criteria so I can see why it was deleted. I personally restored it. There can be one thread on this.
Mark emailed me this afternoon saying, "You current post about why we are charging for the live stream is compete BS. I think it is comical coming from you guys. Why don't we have a debate on skype on this topic and post it for the world to see? That would allow the community to decide for themselves. I doubt you guys would do that though, because it would not help your narrative.
I am here and my number is below to do this anytime."
FYI I'm not sure what post he is referencing I'm assuming our comments on the homepage today: "And just think many of you complained that the entire Diamond League Series on UniversalSports.com was too much at $25 with individual meets just $1.99. In our book this doesn't seem to be about track fans, but about getting parents to pay."
I did post in this thread today more about Flotrack but it was after Mark wrote me but before I saw and responded to his email:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5010274&page=2I wrote Mark back, asking him what part was BS and what my narrative was. I said I personally was not interested in having a skype debate, but would publish any more info on he wanted to share about the agreement with the Armory.
I also asked him some questions about the editorial/promotional separation at Flotrack.
I received no response to my questions but did receive "No Skype debate Weldon? That is what I thought. You stay hidden behind your lil computer.
Robert, you up for one? Thought not?
If you want your questions answered, get on a Skpe debate with me, but you will not, because you are full of it."
And then this thread. (And a few posts after this one was deleted)
My modus operandi is not to get on Skype and have a debate every time I have a difference of opinion with someone. That's now how I operate.
We could easily discuss it via email.
I'm not interested in using my time to being used as part of a fake controversy to generate Flotrack some hits today. Plus they'd probably put it behind the FloTrack Pro pay wall:) (That's a joke) Maybe if they'll pay me for the interview I'll reconsider.
And one thing, Mark said in his rant (which was about 15 seconds on Letsrun and 1:15 on the benefits of Flotrack Pro) the letsrun business model is about creating controversy. LetsRun is not out to create controversy. We are out to cover the sport of track and field. If there is a controversy that means covering it. If there is a question that needs to be asked that makes an athlete or a sponsor uncomfortable that means asking it. Sadly, because of how small our sport is, it is often covered by people who are fans first, not journalists, so not many others do this.
If there ever was a case of "creating a controversy" out of nothing I think this is it.
Why are people so quick to demand public online "debates" that aren't necessary? Is this a pointless by-product of the American political process? Wejo said everything he needed to say and this Mark fellow (who makes either Johnson brother look like Bill Shakespeare, although that's beside the point) has done the same.
If the Flotrack guys want to argue shit, they should forget about the two Letsun admins and focus on the people they are trying to convince to sign up for a paid service. Virtual brawls between Web site owners are about as useful as dick-measuring contests and in fact are scarcely different in practice.
Mark, why won't you debate Wejo over email? Are you afraid of the written word?
Mark has been pwn3d.
Mark From Flotrack wrote:
Weldon,
I have emailed you and asked you to have a debate on Flotrack Pro.......... But you have said No. Typical Letsrun fashion. Write from behind your computer, but when asked to come out from the shadows you are no where to be found. I think this debate would be great and it would let the community decide the merits of what we are doing.
I am not hiding:
http://www.flotrack.org/speaker/118-Mark-Flotrack/video/684648-CALLING-OUT-LetsRunMark
u mad bro?
Mark,
Why don't you explain to us why your content is more valuable than a Diamond League meet? Especially why it is 10 times more valuable?
I look forward to your response.
Learn to sell ads. Price your product reasonably. Not at $20/month for what is mostly shit content.
I thnk both of these men should go in front of our almighty judge of souls none other than Oprah. This way shell get some answers but not dig too deeply as to truly offend either LetsRun or Flotrack.
All I want is awesome coverage both sites provide. The sport needs both, and I need both.