This is interesting.

[WorkingClassRugger]

Of late we have seen social media companies of the likes of Twitter etc. begin to venture into the world of sports broadcasting. I've also seen suggestion that it could eventually be an option for streaming services like Netflix. It now looks like that may be the case with Amazon looking at sports rights.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-sports-streaming-rights-from-tennis-to-rugby

 

[TOCC]

Optus Sport are already doing it in Australia with the EPL.. Foxsports are doing a version of it with the NRC.

The short to medium term issues of streaming live sports is the quality and reliability of the product, the risk for any sport is that the busines model of streaming live sport is a yet to be proven product.

In theory it should work, however as Optus have discovered, even little things like the 90sec delay between their steam and the actual live event is enough to enrage consumers.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Optus Sport are already doing it in Australia with the EPL.. Foxsports are doing a version of it with the NRC.

The short to medium term issues of streaming live sports is the quality and reliability of the product, the risk for any sport is that the busines model of streaming live sport is a yet to be proven product.

In theory it should work, however as Optus have discovered, even little things like the 90sec delay between their steam and the actual live event is enough to enrage consumers.

How did the consumers work out there was a delay?

 

[Strewthcobber]

How did the consumers work out there was a delay?

People watching on their computers are also on social media!

 

[Inside Shoulder]

People watching on their computers are also on social media!

Hmmmm.
Solution lies in their hands - get off one or the other!

 

[Hugh Jarse]

Like watching the cricket on the TV with the sound off and the wireless tuned in to the ABC call.

Sucks when the TV (usually) has a minor delay and Aunty's call is out of synch.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Or like watching the springbok test and commenting on the game thread at the same time

 

[Highlander35]

When illicit streams are more live than legal ones, the problem is not with the illicit stream.

 

[Pfitzy]

When illicit streams are more live than legal ones, the problem is not with the illicit stream.

Exactly.

The next disruption will be moving away from massive contracts for a product (like the SANZAAR Fox deal) into the sport owning the rights, and distributing direct to consumers ala NFL, NHL, MLB etc.

Buying a shedload of Fox channels I don't need is rubbish. Paying $1 per game for streaming capability is what I want. And if that means a season pass to Super Rugby for $150 I would pay that if the streaming is in HD and there are no restrictions on putting it on my smart TV. I'll even pay an extra $40 for NRC. Both need to come with free replays as well.

I will NOT pay Fox $80+ a month for HD and an iQ3.

Like watching the cricket on the TV with the sound off and the wireless tuned in to the ABC call.

Sucks when the TV (usually) has a minor delay and Aunty's call is out of synch.

With a digital unit you can add a delay to get them sycnhed up. Had it on an amplifier I previously owned with tuning capability.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

The next disruption will be moving away from massive contracts for a product (like the SANZAAR Fox deal) into the sport owning the rights, and distributing direct to consumers ala NFL, NHL, MLB etc.

Buying a shedload of Fox channels I don't need is rubbish. Paying $1 per game for streaming capability is what I want. And if that means a season pass to Super Rugby for $150 I would pay that if the streaming is in HD and there are no restrictions on putting it on my smart TV. I'll even pay an extra $40 for NRC. Both need to come with free replays as well.

I will NOT pay Fox $80+ a month for HD and an iQ3.

Bingo. I don't want to pay for Foxtel, but I will pay specifically for rugby or cricket coverage streaming over the Internet.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Exactly.

The next disruption will be moving away from massive contracts for a product (like the SANZAAR Fox deal) into the sport owning the rights, and distributing direct to consumers ala NFL, NHL, MLB etc.

Buying a shedload of Fox channels I don't need is rubbish. Paying $1 per game for streaming capability is what I want. And if that means a season pass to Super Rugby for $150 I would pay that if the streaming is in HD and there are no restrictions on putting it on my smart TV. I'll even pay an extra $40 for NRC. Both need to come with free replays as well.

I will NOT pay Fox $80+ a month for HD and an iQ3.






With a digital unit you can add a delay to get them sycnhed up. Had it on an amplifier I previously owned with tuning capability.

One wonders that if Amazon's move into sports broadcasting may prompt Netflix to get involved in some way. While they have previously stated that they were not interested at present they also didn't rule it out in the future.

But I'm with you on the season pass. I'd be happy enough to pay $1 per game to watch Super Rugby and NRC. I've even thought it would be worthwhile SANZAAR looking at establishing one bundled product with supplementary review shows, highlights, replays etc. Could actually have quite a package. Super Rugby, NRC, Mitre 10 Cup, Currie Cup, Top League, Argentine Club Rugby. Then there's the option of creating extra content in the form of 7s or chasing new leagues such as PRO Rugby.

I'd happily pay say, $29.95 a month for that.

 

[Braveheart81]

Or like watching the springbok test and commenting on the game thread at the same time

I think it was worse than that on the opening weekend. I believe they had a news alerts on the coverage that obviously got added via a different feed so it was providing goal alerts before the goals had been shown on their own stream.

There are also vast numbers of people complaining about the quality of the stream accompanied by pictures that are so blurry you can't really see anything.

Hmmmm.
Solution lies in their hands - get off one or the other!

I think it's a pretty big deal especially for a sport like EPL that most viewers are likely to watch by themselves because of the time it is on. Twitter etc. or chatting with friends in England are pretty substantial parts of the overall experience for plenty of viewers.

 

[KevinO]

Not going to lie, I've streamed my fair share of Ireland and Munster games at times. The main problem is Australian Internet speeds are too slow to stream live sport in HD.

 

[mst]

IMHO, I think streaming will slowly plateau and be the cheap alternative for niche sports as its just not providing the quality viewers want, and its problematic. The best it will ever be is an add on for convenience like FOXTEL GO. The criteria most want that streaming cant deliver:
HD and crystal clear on 50inch or above screen, can be recorded or replayed and will with no more than a 10sec delay, while other devices are online and without a big spend on hardware to make it happen.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

IMHO, I think streaming will slowly plateau and be the cheap alternative for niche sports as its just not providing the quality viewers want, and its problematic. The best it will ever be is an add on for convenience like FOXTEL GO. The criteria most want that streaming cant deliver:
HD and crystal clear on 50inch or above screen, can be recorded or replayed and will with no more than a 10sec delay, while other devices are online and without a big spend on hardware to make it happen.

Are you sure about that? Look up the likes of the NFL Game Pass. If you do it on the cheap then yes, it's problematic but if done right it could ge well worth it. Additionally, you can ensure its chromecast enabled ($59), Xbox and Playstation compatible.

 

[boyo]

Like watching the cricket on the TV with the sound off and the wireless tuned in to the ABC call.

Sucks when the TV (usually) has a minor delay and Aunty's call is out of synch.

The problem is digital TV broadcasting v analogue radio.

 

[Hugh Jarse]

^^^No. The problem is that the Channel Nein Cricket callers are not particularly interesting.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

The speed of my Internet connection at home is more than enough to stream sport in HD and I'm ready to do it now. I've got all the right gear and do it already with the TV catch up apps (SBS is particularly good) and Netflix, so I'm just waiting for the sporting world to catch up.

 

[mst]

Are you sure about that? Look up the likes of the NFL Game Pass. If you do it on the cheap then yes, it's problematic but if done right it could ge well worth it. Additionally, you can ensure its chromecast enabled ($59), Xbox and Playstation compatible.

Yep, I am sure. The NFL game pass is the same as Foxtel Go in that its just a way to control the digital rights and on-sell a lower cost and quality product (left overs or replays) to non-cable or satellite TV subscribers. We can't compare the US and European markets to our as we don't have the same available markets (population).

The reality is steaming is a lower quality product, and you can see that with broadcasters attitudes - Like NFL, EPL, F1 etc the "main"content is not streamed unless its been on-sold to an audience that they cant market or sell advertising to.

Stop and look back at the Optus EPL for a moment. people still would prefer it was on Foxtel at a higher prices, the coverage has had issues, the prices have been reduced etc etc.

Like Brown Hornet above I can and do steam a lot of content in HD, but even the NRC steam is low quality at times and you can see it dropping to SD. I also hate the idea of being at the mercy of a third party (ISP) between the broadcaster and my device.

The risk i think people don't get is if we lose the likes of Foxtel or Skysport etc, even i would be tempted to buy the rights to a sport and get the webcam out on to a roof top and laugh as you pay for what you wished for as i run the whole gig from my home PC! Good luck emailing customer service! "Its not us its your ISP" - and by the time you work through that nightmare if your game for round two, email customer service again!

The other and biggest factor is that the profitability of standalone steaming services is still open for debate. With moves etc, maybe, for live sports is shown the overheads are higher (so cost more to subscribers) and advertising could be impacted reducing general revenue. So essentially, the Super Rugby $40mil would be significantly less and no NRC unless the ARU funded it.

The technology is a side issue, its mostly about economics.

 

[TOCC]

The technology is a side issue, its mostly about economics.

Technology is a fundamental aspect of the economics/buisness model, any technological improvement also impacts on the economics or the product through overheads and cost base.

When it comes to streaming live sport, technology is the key factor influencing the economics. Technology will inevitably improve to the point where your average consumer will have the bandwidth to stream HD, and technology will also improve the reliability of any live streaming service..

It's not a matter of it, it's a matter of when.