Tweet
Re: New WCHA TV - Will it be better then the last
It is clear what the new WCHA is doing in its approach to streaming: It is marketing to parents and family of players by running a streaming service on a shoestring budget and banking any supposed "profits" it makes. It is certainly not marketing to the discerning college hockey fan nor competing with other conferences or options for cable-less TV programming consumer.
I was talking to a woman in a DC coffee shop and she told me her son plays for a junior league in Florida. She said she watched every game online. Sure, the broadcast quality of the streams leaves a lot to be desired, but this market doesn't care. They just care about seeing little Johnny on TV so they can tell him they watched the game the other night. They'll pay the $140 or whatever for a year pass.
On the other hand, you have discerning college hockey fans and cable cutting TV programming consumers. We know prices are completely out of whack with the actual quality of the product. If I paid $140 for WCHA.TV sight unseen and I couldn't get a refund, I would be outraged. And the $10 daily pass is still expensive as well, it doesn't nearly take advantage of the robust (IMO) on-demand and replay market. This is one reason why I like BTN 2 Go, they provide high quality replays sans commercials. I don't have to rush home to watch a game, I can go on with my life and watch the game the next morning or afternoon. Or perhaps days later.
WCHA.tv doesn't like this either, it prominently places scores and twitter feeds (providing spoilers) next to broadcasts when you first start streaming a replay. Very unfortunate. Unfortunately for the new WCHA (and its fans), there are so many free ways to watch college hockey now, even if some do include illicit streaming. Why pay $10 or $140 for a crap product when you can get a "good" value for almost free?
It is clear what the new WCHA is doing in its approach to streaming: It is marketing to parents and family of players by running a streaming service on a shoestring budget and banking any supposed "profits" it makes. It is certainly not marketing to the discerning college hockey fan nor competing with other conferences or options for cable-less TV programming consumer.
I was talking to a woman in a DC coffee shop and she told me her son plays for a junior league in Florida. She said she watched every game online. Sure, the broadcast quality of the streams leaves a lot to be desired, but this market doesn't care. They just care about seeing little Johnny on TV so they can tell him they watched the game the other night. They'll pay the $140 or whatever for a year pass.
On the other hand, you have discerning college hockey fans and cable cutting TV programming consumers. We know prices are completely out of whack with the actual quality of the product. If I paid $140 for WCHA.TV sight unseen and I couldn't get a refund, I would be outraged. And the $10 daily pass is still expensive as well, it doesn't nearly take advantage of the robust (IMO) on-demand and replay market. This is one reason why I like BTN 2 Go, they provide high quality replays sans commercials. I don't have to rush home to watch a game, I can go on with my life and watch the game the next morning or afternoon. Or perhaps days later.
WCHA.tv doesn't like this either, it prominently places scores and twitter feeds (providing spoilers) next to broadcasts when you first start streaming a replay. Very unfortunate. Unfortunately for the new WCHA (and its fans), there are so many free ways to watch college hockey now, even if some do include illicit streaming. Why pay $10 or $140 for a crap product when you can get a "good" value for almost free?
Comment