Cyclocosmblr

How NBC and Versus Still Aren’t Getting It Right

ohhleary:

Eyeroll.

Do you realize how much it costs to produce coverage of a constantly-traveling 21-day event overseas?

Yes, I do. I also know that the ASO does the lion’s share of production, and sells it at a tidy profit. Cost to buy their work is 6 million EUR for a package including all ASO events, from Qatar to Paris-Tours.

And you’re bitching that they charge you to access a robust site

I’ll see your eyeroll and raise you another…

that includes rider tracking, GPS data, and commercial-free HD video streaming? Boo fucking hoo.

I didn’t ask for these features. There’s a reason why base model cars don’t come with hydraulic suspension and spinning rims. All I want is people speaking a language I understand over pictures that don’t look like the camera’s got cataracts. Forced features are no way to build an audience.

Even by charging for online access, Comcast/NBC is losing loads of money covering the Tour de France. It’s a very, very niche event with a small audience. Without a big audience, you can’t charge big ad rates, which means very little ad revenue.

Overlooking the fact that NBC even manages to lose money on the Olympics, am I supposed to get warm fuzzies for the network because they broadcast cycling without a profitable business model?  Are you calling me a Socialist?

And guess what? If you have a television and get Versus, you can watch EVERY SINGLE STAGE LIVE FOR FREE!

You can also do this EVEN MORE FOR FREE by not having cable and plugging your TV into your computer. But I digress.

NBC/Versus’ devotion to the television market is the problem. Broadcasting via television is still astronomically expensive, and because you can’t bill over the one-way medium of TV, you need a massive audience to recoup expenses via advertisers.

Streaming HD video online costs 25 cents per viewer per hour—and at the risk of violating an NDA, lower rates have been negotiated. Now, the Tour is a unique event in that some days I want the full, 4 hour smorgasbord, but others I’d be content with the final 10 minutes.

Billing viewers as they go would allow consumers the flexibility to watch what they wanted, and for broadcasters to accurately scale their server expenses to demand. Hell, you could even availability price it like MegaBus seats, or offer group discounts to increase audience share on slow days, a la Groupon.

But NBC doesn’t do that. Instead, it charges a TV-style flat rate, meaning that if you’re pulled away for a family emergency, or if the race sucks, or if you’re at work and can’t watch, tough luck—they still have your money. They then have the temerity to double-down on their charges if you want to use a mobile device, despite the fact that it’s the same data, from the same website, over the same Internet. 

If you’re particularly sharp, you might be ready to cite the example of Cycling.TV, who’ve been trying (and failing) to deliver cycling coverage online since 2004. But from nonsense workflow, to browser incompatibilities, to god-awful customer support, their efforts have been hamhanded at best.

Seven years later, with drastically improved broadband availability, the rise of online video via YouTube, the marketing potential of social networking, and a generation raised watching online video on mobile devices, you’ve got a market any technically adept firm should be able to turn a profit on.

I’ll close on your point that the Tour is a niche race because it’s an accurate one. NBC can’t recoup six million euros from the American TV cycling audience as it currently exists—nor should it try. If the ASO stopped being able to fob the race off on NBC/Versus for that princely fee, you can bet Sporza and NOS and Eurosport would fight each other tooth and nail to deliver the coverage to a now-contractually-open American market for twice the quality at a fraction of the cost.

(Source: wannabebikegirl)