The MIUS Cup (EPTC4)

wildJONESEYE wrote:

GJtheaussiestud wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:

NedB-H wrote:£3 for a day of snooker is reasonable enough for me


It would be good if the streaming became so popular, that the Academy could cover its costs by advertising on the stream and put it out for free. That won't happen if everyone watches pirated streams instead thouhg

yes Pirates are going to in the end cost anyone seeing nothing because it wont be worth it for people like Paul to Bother Getting streams in

OTHER SPORTS DONT MIND

Paul isnt the sport is he he is a independent business trying to help a breast cancer charity best he can

as i have said i donate alot to charity

Even if none of us watch it, this type of streaming will still go on !

wildJONESEYE wrote:anyway you do what you want lol

ill sleep at night

so will i as im the most charitable on here IMO

Treat everything available to you today as you will; but do not complain when things that you cherish are not available in the future because of the ways you have treated them.

I remember when, not that long ago, village folk sold items they had grown or made on a table at the front of their house. These items were normally things they had grown or made too many of for their own consumption and were sold at low costs which helped them make or grow the next batch and gave passers by fresh goods at low prices.
Those that wanted the items stopped, picked what they wanted and put cash in a tin or jar.
This system has been referred to as an "Honour" or "Trust" system.
Over time the number of passers by that took goods for free increased and the number of villagers that sold goods on this basis declined due to disillusionment so the untrustworthy, dishonourable minority has ruined it for the majority.

The cost of streaming broadcast quality snooker matches, such as the Jimmy Vs Tony evening must have been in excess of £1,000 because there were 3 camera operators, 2 commentators, a vision mixer, a graphics controller and a director. Not to mention the costly equipment which is generally available for rent at about £300 per camera.

Large associations, corporations and sports companies screen things free on the internet because they have already made a fortune out of the TV rights and sponsorship etc (out of us).

When small organisations try do do something they must surely look at breaking even otherwise they will not continue. Charging for this, in the early stages, can gain awareness by sponsors which will eventually drive the prices down or may even allow free streaming.

for those that view the streaming free please enjoy it while it's available.

I would prefer to die with honour than live with dishonour

therealist wrote:Treat everything available to you today as you will; but do not complain when things that you cherish are not available in the future because of the ways you have treated them.

I remember when, not that long ago, village folk sold items they had grown or made on a table at the front of their house. These items were normally things they had grown or made too many of for their own consumption and were sold at low costs which helped them make or grow the next batch and gave passers by fresh goods at low prices.
Those that wanted the items stopped, picked what they wanted and put cash in a tin or jar.
This system has been referred to as an "Honour" or "Trust" system.
Over time the number of passers by that took goods for free increased and the number of villagers that sold goods on this basis declined due to disillusionment so the untrustworthy, dishonourable minority has ruined it for the majority.

The cost of streaming broadcast quality snooker matches, such as the Jimmy Vs Tony evening must have been in excess of £1,000 because there were 3 camera operators, 2 commentators, a vision mixer, a graphics controller and a director. Not to mention the costly equipment which is generally available for rent at about £300 per camera.

Large associations, corporations and sports companies screen things free on the internet because they have already made a fortune out of the TV rights and sponsorship etc (out of us).

When small organisations try do do something they must surely look at breaking even otherwise they will not continue. Charging for this, in the early stages, can gain awareness by sponsors which will eventually drive the prices down or may even allow free streaming.

for those that view the streaming free please enjoy it while it's available.

I would prefer to die with honour than live with dishonour

well i give to charity alot more than most people so i am honourable

IF HOWEVER SPORT IS AVAILABLE FOR FREE I WONT BE PAYING FOR IT

It will be available for many, many more years to come for as long as there's demand.

wildJONESEYE wrote:

Bourne wrote:It will be available for many, many more years to come for as long as there's demand.

not if Barry Hearn or Paul Mount or anyone else says sod it let them watch Live Scoring im not going to set up rubbish for people to take advantage of it.

the authorities of other sports dont mind

wildJONESEYE wrote:

Bourne wrote:It will be available for many, many more years to come for as long as there's demand.

not if Barry Hearn or Paul Mount or anyone else says sod it let them watch Live Scoring im not going to set up poo for people to take advantage of it.

I meant live sport streaming in general ... the more popular the sport, the more demand. The better job Hearn does with snooker, the more free live streaming !

Would love to see how Day was getting on and see what's wrong with him.

therealist is right - whoever sets it up should at the very least break even so if that means a small charge for live streaming then it's better to pay up if the charge is reasonable. It would be interesting to see the viewing figures on this EPTC streamed event just to see what sort of market is out there and if it is viable for streaming to be used in future PTC events. Because if there's no demand for it, then we'll be forever in livescoring land and we all know how bad that is.

This is true. If you pay for it you would expect it to be better than some of the live feeds you get for free and also you would expect something like 50p or £1 to cover a whole days play and not just a single match. Also you wouldn't pay if you didn't want to watch the players who were on the live feed. I bet it's a difficult market to make any money out of.

wildJONESEYE wrote:

Bourne wrote:Would love to see how Day was getting on and see what's wrong with him.

i think that's a definite streamed match.

Haha, looking forward to day being thrashed 4-1 and want to see what is actually wrong.

randam05 wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote:

Bourne wrote:Would love to see how Day was getting on and see what's wrong with him.

i think that's a definite streamed match.

Haha, looking forward to day being thrashed 4-1 and want to see what is actually wrong.

I am starting to like Day a bit more now he's struggling, when he was doing well a couple of years ago I just couldn't get to support him at all because he was pretty much a robot out there ...

Ha good point there bourne. Its not so bad now hes poor. I dont reckon I would have liked hendry when he was winning, but I like him now.

When he's on his game, he's a rolls royce ... when he's off, he's barely a Reliant Robin

wildJONESEYE wrote:when will streaming booking be available ?

Mark Allen will be relieved not having to face the mighty Dunn

therealist wrote:Treat everything available to you today as you will; but do not complain when things that you cherish are not available in the future because of the ways you have treated them.

I remember when, not that long ago, village folk sold items they had grown or made on a table at the front of their house. These items were normally things they had grown or made too many of for their own consumption and were sold at low costs which helped them make or grow the next batch and gave passers by fresh goods at low prices.
Those that wanted the items stopped, picked what they wanted and put cash in a tin or jar.
This system has been referred to as an "Honour" or "Trust" system.
Over time the number of passers by that took goods for free increased and the number of villagers that sold goods on this basis declined due to disillusionment so the untrustworthy, dishonourable minority has ruined it for the majority.

The cost of streaming broadcast quality snooker matches, such as the Jimmy Vs Tony evening must have been in excess of £1,000 because there were 3 camera operators, 2 commentators, a vision mixer, a graphics controller and a director. Not to mention the costly equipment which is generally available for rent at about £300 per camera.

Large associations, corporations and sports companies screen things free on the internet because they have already made a fortune out of the TV rights and sponsorship etc (out of us).

When small organisations try do do something they must surely look at breaking even otherwise they will not continue. Charging for this, in the early stages, can gain awareness by sponsors which will eventually drive the prices down or may even allow free streaming.

for those that view the streaming free please enjoy it while it's available.

I would prefer to die with honour than live with dishonour

therealist

Thanks for providing streaming where others have not been able to.

http://www.southwestsnookeracademy.com/livefeeds.html

LIVE NOW and FREEEEEE!!! Luca Brecel v Stuart Carrington