Flotrack Monopolizing NCAA Coverage - Charging $29.99 for D1, D2 and D3 Nats - Will we ever get anything free anymore!?!?

The pressure needs to come from AD's on the TV deal but here is the real problem. Lack of interested parties to put it on TV under current set up.

Here is a change I have long argued would help the sport.

Move Nationals to 2nd Saturday in December. Only football game is Army-Navy game. Host D1, 2 and 3 at same site. Free streaming for D2 and D3 and on TV for D1.

Regionals held on Friday before Thanksgiving or day after. Conference meets a week or 2 later than currently. This also allows the regular season to squeeze in another meet for developing runners who need an extra race or hold experienced runners out.

Flotrack is fine for other meets but nationals needs to be free. No discussion. Now Flotrack needs to have a lower long-term price and then people would subscribe. Not worth the cost in the current biz model. I'm as super into the sport as anyone but its just not worth it for HORRIBLE audio and sketchy video that their XC coverage provides. Track not much better.

They've destroyed track and XC. Sickening.

Let's start a new channel that can compete with these morons. I swear, Flotrack/Milesplit picks up the most idiotic and annoying "reporters" imaginable.

Relyk wrote:

Let's start a new channel that can compete with these morons. I swear, Flotrack/Milesplit picks up the most idiotic and annoying "reporters" imaginable.

You get what you pay for and milesplit has never really paid their "employees". Someone in the other "predict when flotrack will shutdown" thread noted flocasts is a company that you end up paying for not vice versa.

Most people who do this really dont have much else going for them in their lives. If youre a young person and cant draw up some basic database queries through one of the many programming languages fit for online production you are behind the curve. If you cant draw out passion through writing you are behind the curve. If you cant step outside of yourself to view yourself as a broadcaster through the eyes of spectators and subscribers you are behind the curve. People who look to monetize their hobby of distance running through flotrack or milesplit are generally very behind the curve. It is not a "real world" job nor is it really a "real world" interest. So we get what is left behind.

TRACK IS BACK BABY!!!!!! SOLINSKY MIGHT GO UNDER 13!!!! PAY UP OR MISS OUT!!!

I’ve literally watched NCAAs on their website live before and they’ll probably do it again. Either that or watch it on tv. Plus the commentators are way better than what flotrack has (if you can even call them commentators, aside from ma boi Ryan Fenton of course who kills it).

Old XC dude wrote:

Now Flotrack needs to have a lower long-term price and then people would subscribe. Not worth the cost in the current biz model.

The biz model is simple, pay for the rights to an event, then attempt to package it and resell it. Repackaging is mostly impossible as the audience is microscopic so advertisers are largely disinterested. And then to make things worse, the NCAA sets "the price." Flotrack has no way to lower prices when their paying audience shrinks annually.

Imagine having to pay $30 for CFB on TV

Flotrack is literally 3 times the cost of Netflix.....think about that for second

that is the issue I have with flotrack, I think they would GREATLY benefit from mixing a PPV model with their subscription service. Maybe keep the monthly fee they have now, but also give the option of watching NCAAs for say, $9.99. I feel like they would get a lot more money in the long run doing that.

They have now ruined xc. No real meets where they are going all out until nationals and now we cannot even watch D3 nationals without paying $30 for what is likely to be a bad telecast. In other words, we won't be watching it anymore.

+1 to Jeff

And to the guy who said a company BUYS the patent and then has the gall to make money on the patent....um, that’s why they bought it. And if the university bid it out, the tax payers got paid back.

Do you realize one of the most expensive part of most businesses is customer acquisition? A patent is less valuable without a go to market plan/network to get it to customers.

Most folks on this board should try being an entrepreneur for a couple months. They’d feel a lot differently about many things is my guess.

Netflix is a subscription model. Flotrack is a single event with a (very) niche audience where they need to harvest full payback immediately.

Lets use a Letsrun comparison for all the quality complaints.

Letsrun’s user experience is right out of the 1990’s. Similar to craigslist. It’s poor quality and hasn’t been upgraded.

Yet, letsrun is a great site because it provides access to a community otherwise not available (craigslist too). Same with Flotrack. It provides access to a niche audience. So you don’t like the shaky camera work. Big deal. You get to see a meet. It’s about access. If you don’t want to watch, don’t. As for growing the sport? Most sports are in decline because now people have lots more options with their time. Running isn’t going to buck that trend. Doesn’t mean this community can’t enjoy it.

This isn't an example of capitalism working the way it's supposed to. It's actually a market failure caused by misaligned incentives. The underlying problem is that the NCAA (and a lot of ADs and meet directors) are willing to let Flotrack handle broadcasting because they don't want to worry about it. They don't really care about growing the sport, or even maximizing revenue. If Flotrack does the broadcasting, it's just one less thing for them to have to deal with, and the fact that the audience for the sport's showcase event is a fraction of what it would otherwise be is totally irrelevant to these people.

As for flotrack's prices, I don't have any problem with a for-profit enterprise charging its profit-maximizing price. I'm just incredibly skeptical that flotrack is actually doing so. It looks a lot more like they're dangling their only worthwhile event as a desperate ploy to get people to buy annual subscriptions so that their numbers look better for VC purposes.

Lets see. How often do managers pay to handle a low value task to make their lives easier and so they can focus on other items? ALL THE TIME. It’s actually smart and good business. Not a market failure.

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

kalidesnooper wrote:

With volume comes profit. By charging that much money they will only hit a small number of potential subscribers. Lower the price and the ball game is changed. Yes, it's that simple.

Faaaalllllllssssse. Two things going on:

1. You seem to think whatever business you claim to run are like the NCAA. "Lowering your price" doesn't do what you think it does when that thing has no competition.

2. The current religion is to discover the price that maximizes profit, not viewers. The NCAA has no interest in a larger audience that nets them the same profit. Profit first, viewers seconnd.

Don't listen to pop_pop, he's a complete liberal failure. Check out the Trump Thread for proof of that.

Lowering your price doesn't do what you think libby pop pop>>>>>>>it DOES provide a better price point which in turn draws in a bigger audience (think volume and more money) as it spreads quickly.

Business 101 for pop_pop wrote:

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

Faaaalllllllssssse. Two things going on:

1. You seem to think whatever business you claim to run are like the NCAA. "Lowering your price" doesn't do what you think it does when that thing has no competition.

2. The current religion is to discover the price that maximizes profit, not viewers. The NCAA has no interest in a larger audience that nets them the same profit. Profit first, viewers seconnd.

Don't listen to pop_pop, he's a complete liberal failure. Check out the Trump Thread for proof of that.

Lowering your price doesn't do what you think libby pop pop>>>>>>>it DOES provide a better price point which in turn draws in a bigger audience (think volume and more money) as it spreads quickly.

Business 101. You’re right it could. If the market is large and elastic. Somehow the “watch a cross country meet remotely” audience seems unlikely to fit that category. Charge what the market will bear to profit maximize as the small audience is likely price inelastic.

I would pay a few bucks to watch an individual meet.

I will not pay $20 to watch one meet or sporting event through an online stream with garbage commentators. Ever.