The Sunday Game

[thewobbler]

well that's it sorted then. It would appear that anything can be achieved. Let's ignore EasyTiger's 20 years of experience in favour of enthusiasm.

Sit down and do a business plan folks. Go optimistic on it all you want.

But do remember to factor in that if you want to people to buy into this, it'll need a minimum level of production values. Not sky tv. But not the videos that clubs take either. It has to be an enjoyable experience or people will tune out.

1. Videographer costs (for 3 cameras minimum).
2. Editor costs (we will expect replays and real-time scores on our screens).
3. Commentator costs.
4. Sound operator costs.
5. Equipment purchase, hire and maintenance: cameras, booms, gantries, editing hardware and software. Satellites and/or fibre broadband if we are going live.
6. Legal fees and insurance.
7. Streaming and hosting costs.
8. Website development and maintenance costs.
9. Customer service costs.
10. Marketing costs.

11. And this is a rather important one: ultimate costs to county boards for loss of match day revenue. Remember that when Johnny & Mary go to a game, they both pay in, one of them buys a programme, one of them a ticket for the half time draw,  and if they've brought Johnny Og and Mary Jnr with them, they will do well not to spend a fiver on refreshments. Oh and that falling attendances means less ground rent for the burger van and a reduction in programmes sponsorship charges.

I'm sure there's many more things could be added to this list. But those will be the big ones. And if you really want this service to take off you cannot aim it at what is a niche audience of GAA diehards who'll spend money on watching any aul muck, but can't actually make the games. It has to have a broader interest.


I'd say you'd need to generate average revenues of about €10,000 per game just to ponder this (frankly mad) idea. I've no real reason for that figure other than scanning the list above and doing quick sums.

Factor in that the plum matches are still going to be available on free to air TV, and tell me how you'd price this up. And remember again, Johnny and Mary won't be paying separately. It'll be (at best) one revenue per house.

[AZOffaly]

Wobbler, how much does it cost Armagh TV to broadcast their games? Surely one could extrapolate that business case out into a model for the entire country? I think you are over egging the costs involved and the revenue required.

[easytiger95]

Plus give me some examples of the sports services who are syncing live radio comms with live video pics (rather than making a commentary from the video available for radio). I'd like to have a look at that.

BBC regularly provide red button radio commentary for sports that BBC Radio are also covering.

You're also again showing you lack of knowledge of web hosting - the cost of storing video that's not being accessed isn't particularly high. The cost only really comes into it when that video is accessed at scale. Having an archive recording of a Mayo Intermediate group game is not going to cost much to host indefinitely because the viewership is going to be so low.

BBC is an integrated broadcasting corporation - the biggest one in the world, including its world services and website. What was being discussed here was taking local radio commentary and combining it with the video pics coming from a separate outside broadcast. Very different from what you are describing at BBC. What you could do is simply say to the radio station that your commentator is actually going to do the TV comms and then have the radio piggyback off that - however, you are then getting into having some form of OB truck with two separate codecs for two audio feeds you are producing, thus eliminating any savings of scale you were going to make.

With regard to web hosting, I'm currently heading up, as one part of my job, the conversion of multiple years of archive footage into digital formats, which will also be accessible online. I've had to do a lot of research on web hosting and the attendant costs. We don't know how much this is going to cost, because I am the only who is actually fleshing out this suggestion. If we don't know how much content we have, or how often and at what quality people want to access it, then we can't put a figure on it, sensibly. I do know that cloud storage is coming down in price, but I work with files that are at a minimum over an hour long, MP4s at broadcast quality 50MB - it really adds up Syf and you would want to be sure of your revenue flows.

My main problem with your thesis is the quality problem. You are asking people to pay money (presumably on a ongoing subscription basis because a one off charge for each customer just wouldn't be viable) to look at previously non-available games. However, as part of saving costs, you are both storing and streaming this footage at a bit rate of 2MB, which is standard enough. You are also shooting these games on single camera and streaming them live from the ground. Now I'm sorry to tell you this, with the existing broadband infrastructure at club grounds, the low bit rate and the attendant problems of single camera footage (whip pans, player identification, staying on a wide shot) then it is going to be like looking into a bowl of soup - especially if you are looking at it on a mobile device. i don't think anyone is going to pay for it on a continuing basis.

No one has done it so far. I think there is a reason for that. Maybe because broadcast is my industry that I am biased towards having the best coverage possible rather than throwing up anything on a screen. That doesn't mean Sky or BT style bells and whistles. Three cameras can cover anything, but not everything should be covered.

[thewobbler]

Wobbler, how much does it cost Armagh TV to broadcast their games? Surely one could extrapolate that business case out into a model for the entire country? I think you are over egging the costs involved and the revenue required.

Once you move away from letting hobbyists do their thing, and towards structured programming, expectations soar, and so would costs.

The beauty of our game is that there are 32 counties and the day you're born, you become attached to one of them. So we expect equality. But we aren't equal, in terms of size, skills, infrastructure and volunteerism. Demands to run a roughly equal broadcasting service for 32 counties would, ultimately, destroy this dream you all are having.

[Syferus]

Plus give me some examples of the sports services who are syncing live radio comms with live video pics (rather than making a commentary from the video available for radio). I'd like to have a look at that.

BBC regularly provide red button radio commentary for sports that BBC Radio are also covering.

You're also again showing you lack of knowledge of web hosting - the cost of storing video that's not being accessed isn't particularly high. The cost only really comes into it when that video is accessed at scale. Having an archive recording of a Mayo Intermediate group game is not going to cost much to host indefinitely because the viewership is going to be so low.

BBC is an integrated broadcasting corporation - the biggest one in the world, including its world services and website. What was being discussed here was taking local radio commentary and combining it with the video pics coming from a separate outside broadcast. Very different from what you are describing at BBC. What you could do is simply say to the radio station that your commentator is actually going to do the TV comms and then have the radio piggyback off that - however, you are then getting into having some form of OB truck with two separate codecs for two audio feeds you are producing, thus eliminating any savings of scale you were going to make.

With regard to web hosting, I'm currently heading up, as one part of my job, the conversion of multiple years of archive footage into digital formats, which will also be accessible online. I've had to do a lot of research on web hosting and the attendant costs. We don't know how much this is going to cost, because I am the only who is actually fleshing out this suggestion. If we don't know how much content we have, or how often and at what quality people want to access it, then we can't put a figure on it, sensibly. I do know that cloud storage is coming down in price, but I work with files that are at a minimum over an hour long, MP4s at broadcast quality 50MB - it really adds up Syf and you would want to be sure of your revenue flows.

My main problem with your thesis is the quality problem. You are asking people to pay money (presumably on a ongoing subscription basis because a one off charge for each customer just wouldn't be viable) to look at previously non-available games. However, as part of saving costs, you are both storing and streaming this footage at a bit rate of 2MB, which is standard enough. You are also shooting these games on single camera and streaming them live from the ground. Now I'm sorry to tell you this, with the existing broadband infrastructure at club grounds, the low bit rate and the attendant problems of single camera footage (whip pans, player identification, staying on a wide shot) then it is going to be like looking into a bowl of soup - especially if you are looking at it on a mobile device. i don't think anyone is going to pay for it on a continuing basis.

No one has done it so far. I think there is a reason for that. Maybe because broadcast is my industry that I am biased towards having the best coverage possible rather than throwing up anything on a screen. That doesn't mean Sky or BT style bells and whistles. Three cameras can cover anything, but not everything should be covered.

http://www.mayogaatv.com/

Relying on mobile coverage is an issue at club grounds but with nearly all semis and finals of the club championship taking place at county grounds providing live service for money is something that is already being done. And you don't need to rely on piss-poor cellular networks there. If it can be done in Mayo and Armagh, the suggestion the GAA with much more resources can't is a seriously tough sell.

[thewobbler]

Syf. 15 years ago every club in Ireland had an active website and many of them (including my own) were kept up to date with an astounding depth of content.

Last time I went looking a few years ago, most club websites that I would have followed had fallen to the wayside, and if they exist now house little more than results streams and 5 year old news.

Partly owing in no doubt to how Facebook and WhatsApp changed how we communicate. But mostly because it was exhausting for one or two men to keep their sites afloat with content worth reading.

My gut instinct is that's mayo TV and Armagh TV will go the same way. The time commitment involved from volunteers makes it so difficult to keep it going once one or two volunteers step aside (which happens in every walk of GAA life - except the skills needed to broadcast aren't easily transferable).

[Syferus]

Syf. 15 years ago every club in Ireland had an active website and many of them (including my own) were kept up to date with an astounding depth of content.

Last time I went looking a few years ago, most club websites that I would have followed had fallen to the wayside, and if they exist now house little more than results streams and 5 year old news.

Partly owing in no doubt to how Facebook and WhatsApp changed how we communicate. But mostly because it was exhausting for one or two men to keep their sites afloat with content worth reading.

My gut instinct is that's mayo TV and Armagh TV will go the same way. The time commitment involved from volunteers makes it so difficult to keep it going once one or two volunteers step aside (which happens in every walk of GAA life - except the skills needed to broadcast aren't easily transferable).

Trying to compare text-based content fifteen years to video now is a terrible comparison to make. One was at the end of its useful life, the other is on the crest of a wave.

Young people don't read anymore and want visual and video content and they are very willing to pay subscriptions for it if it's the right price and it's something they're interested in. You skate to where the puck is going to be, to quote Wayne Gertzky, and that's exactly what Armagh and Mayo are doing.

[thewobbler]

But if you are right syf, then all clubs websites and Facebook accounts would surely be awash with video content of what's happening in their clubs. Very few of them are. Mainly because video looks and sounds like shite unless recorded by someone with half a clue.

Communications trends didn't kill club websites so much as the effort involved in maintaining them.

[Syferus]

But if you are right syf, then all clubs websites and Facebook accounts would surely be awash with video content of what's happening in their clubs. Very few of them are. Mainly because video looks and sounds like shite unless recorded by someone with half a clue.

Communications trends didn't kill club websites so much as the effort involved in maintaining them.

The best clubs have the best social media strategies. The ones that don't are the fools that will be left behind and either having to play catch-up or simply die from lack of players and membership.

[DuffleKing]

Wobbler, how much does it cost Armagh TV to broadcast their games? Surely one could extrapolate that business case out into a model for the entire country? I think you are over egging the costs involved and the revenue required.

This is the point that RTE are missing.

Noone is expecting a complete package or anything like it. I - and I am confident a huge body of supporters - would pay for the bare minimum. Do we not all get our hands on matches via a "DVD" which is a single fixed camera? What is wrong with streaming that live on a national league Sunday?

I would wager that noone wants the shite that RTE offer as analysis anyway and certainly they are space wasters on league sunday (which should be a Breaking Ball type program with no studio element).

Rough and Ready is infinitely better than what is laughably described as a "highlights package" currently.

Major Universities in the states have an inhouse sports streaming service. Pay your weekend pass and access their content across the varsity weekends. The might have 4/5 basketball games, 4/5 American football, Lacrosse, soccer, etc. More games than a full football and hurling weekend.

Camera quality varies from 3/4 and decent to single stationary. Commentary varies from well informed volunteers with some professional skills, through enthusiastic fans to no commentary. You know what you're buying and if you're looking for the soccer ladies thirds then you will take what you can get.

[thewobbler]

But if you are right syf, then all clubs websites and Facebook accounts would surely be awash with video content of what's happening in their clubs. Very few of them are. Mainly because video looks and sounds like shite unless recorded by someone with half a clue.

Communications trends didn't kill club websites so much as the effort involved in maintaining them.

The best clubs have the best social media strategies. The ones that don't are the fools that will be left behind and either having to play catch-up or simply die from lack of players and membership.

Did you enjoy your introduction to digital marketing course?

[thewobbler]

Wobbler, how much does it cost Armagh TV to broadcast their games? Surely one could extrapolate that business case out into a model for the entire country? I think you are over egging the costs involved and the revenue required.

This is the point that RTE are missing.

Noone is expecting a complete package or anything like it. I - and I am confident a huge body of supporters - would pay for the bare minimum. Do we not all get our hands on matches via a "DVD" which is a single fixed camera? What is wrong with streaming that live on a national league Sunday?

Define huge.

[Syferus]

But if you are right syf, then all clubs websites and Facebook accounts would surely be awash with video content of what's happening in their clubs. Very few of them are. Mainly because video looks and sounds like shite unless recorded by someone with half a clue.

Communications trends didn't kill club websites so much as the effort involved in maintaining them.

The best clubs have the best social media strategies. The ones that don't are the fools that will be left behind and either having to play catch-up or simply die from lack of players and membership.

Did you enjoy your introduction to digital marketing course?

You don't need a course to know all about how social media works when you grew up with it.

[thewobbler]

Perhaps not syferus, but when you come out with absolutely turgid sound bites about clubs needing social media strategies and young people not reading anymore, it would suggest that you're good at hearing things, but not so good as listening to the message.

[Syferus]

Perhaps not syferus, but when you come out with absolutely turgid sound bites about clubs needing social media strategies and young people not reading anymore, it would suggest that you're good at hearing things, but not so good as listening to the message.

You're the one who thinks VOD services are soon to be a thing of the past..