Freecaster to charge to watch World Cup coverage.
- Thread starter Gunner
- Start date
(nb: I'm not suggesting bike industry sponsorship should be perpetual... just till it - hopefully - gets to a point where there is enough perceived value in the Freecaster's demographics for non-bike-industry sponsors to stick in enough ca$h.)
Ill probably just wait for the free videos that sites like Dirt and VitalMTB have during the season. If they do link it up though PayPal then i would consider paying for some of the races i particularly want to watch (I'm hoping to be at 2 in person anyway!)
From the sounds of it those free videos from sites like Dirt and VitalMTB will no longer be allowed.
Really? The ones filmed by the Parkin bros? If not that is pretty ridiculous.
I understand delivering rights to freecaster, but denying those to videographers does nothing to promote the sport.
when freecaster can deliver good, high-bandwidth video with more camera footage than one or two along a 4 minute run i'll gladly pay. Look at schladmings footage. Most of it was of parts of the track no one wanted to see. flats inbetween the woods and the last section.
I hope that they can deliver what we want to see as I said paying $2-3/euro per race isnt ****. I'll do it. Thats the beauty of PPV. It might be $45 but footage is spotless, always there and multiple angles. thats all we want isa more reliable feed. Last year seemed somewhat disastrous with the feeds dropping alot.
For UCI to not allow videographers to produce videos is small minded. I can see there being a delay on publishing footage until post-race results. But denying it altogether is asinine. ****, I buy Clay's videos knowing full well the entire seasons results, why? because independent filmmakers capture something the corporate camera rarely do, the life of the sport. with that being said I also bought UCI's DVD.
when freecaster can deliver good, high-bandwidth video with more camera footage than one or two along a 4 minute run i'll gladly pay. Look at schladmings footage. Most of it was of parts of the track no one wanted to see. flats inbetween the woods and the last section.
I hope that they can deliver what we want to see as I said paying $2-3/euro per race isnt ****. I'll do it. Thats the beauty of PPV. It might be $45 but footage is spotless, always there and multiple angles. thats all we want isa more reliable feed. Last year seemed somewhat disastrous with the feeds dropping alot.
For UCI to not allow videographers to produce videos is small minded. I can see there being a delay on publishing footage until post-race results. But denying it altogether is asinine. ****, I buy Clay's videos knowing full well the entire seasons results, why? because independent filmmakers capture something the corporate camera rarely do, the life of the sport. with that being said I also bought UCI's DVD.
I think it's just the live broadcast... not post-event. Anyone got the facts?
Or maybe they'll purchase them from Freecaster, or be a sponsor like Scott is for the first round.
It almost seems like uci thinks they are a big deal. We are talking about mtb world cups. This isnt nascar, the nfl, or world cup soccer. To even think about denying independent film makers would surely lead to an eventual collapse in the world cup series. Alot of people only see the dirt videos, along with the factory podcasts that are put out.
I cant watch freecaster on my slow ass computer anyway so all I see is the videos that are put up later. Id willingly pay for freecaster coverage, but not if they are going to try and monapalize the already small market. It seems they are just looking at there here and now rather than looking out ahead and trying to bring more people to the sport, which would increase revenue.
I cant watch freecaster on my slow ass computer anyway so all I see is the videos that are put up later. Id willingly pay for freecaster coverage, but not if they are going to try and monapalize the already small market. It seems they are just looking at there here and now rather than looking out ahead and trying to bring more people to the sport, which would increase revenue.
I can see what they're trying to do. They're trying to be like all the other big sports out there that have all the copyrights and legal do-dads. Can you go to a Pro Football game (american, canadian or euro for that matter) and just film it and post it on your website?
But the funny thing is that Ray himself just said most major players consider this a boutique sport. It's not the big leagues UCI. I wish you'd wait until there is big money in this sport before you go all getting ahead of yourself and in the process stunt OUR sport's growth (to be fair there's no evidence that this will happen, but I like throwing gas on the fire
+1 for calling SpecialEd or Trek out for not helping out in this. They've got the deepest pockets IMO.
Thanks Ray for being honest.
But the funny thing is that Ray himself just said most major players consider this a boutique sport. It's not the big leagues UCI. I wish you'd wait until there is big money in this sport before you go all getting ahead of yourself and in the process stunt OUR sport's growth (to be fair there's no evidence that this will happen, but I like throwing gas on the fire
+1 for calling SpecialEd or Trek out for not helping out in this. They've got the deepest pockets IMO.
Thanks Ray for being honest.
I agree that blocking other producers from creating content is a bit archaic, but as a few people mentioned, they'll just wait for the free vids if they have to pay $3. So the only way to guarantee that freecaster can cover costs (and it really isn't a guarantee) is to push them as much audience as possible. They did pay for exclusive rights at the end of the day so...
Also, licensing to the other outlets could be a good option to offer variety as wella s cover costs.
Also, licensing to the other outlets could be a good option to offer variety as wella s cover costs.
So how does this "pay by SMS" thing work? Is it the same price to send the text from anywhere in the world? I'll happily support Freecaster at $3 a race to begin with to see the quality of the feed, but not if my cellphone company are going to whack on the usual 1250% "admin charge".
As far as blocking other videographers, I agree that it's fair to Freecaster if they've secured exclusive rights, but if Freecaster themselves have been denied the opportunity to setup their own infrastructure to film etc, isn't this just the UCI protecting their own interests? Presumably Freecaster pay the UCI a fee for the use of the footage that the UCI provide? If the UCI themselves are the only ones allowed to set up cameras on the scene it seems to me like they're just securing their own monopoly.
As far as blocking other videographers, I agree that it's fair to Freecaster if they've secured exclusive rights, but if Freecaster themselves have been denied the opportunity to setup their own infrastructure to film etc, isn't this just the UCI protecting their own interests? Presumably Freecaster pay the UCI a fee for the use of the footage that the UCI provide? If the UCI themselves are the only ones allowed to set up cameras on the scene it seems to me like they're just securing their own monopoly.
Can mountain biking just succeed from the UCI?
-KT
-KT
Aren't most photographers and video journalists considered media personnel by carrying a media pass from the UCI themselves? These media personnel with the obvious exception of the Freecaster crew; are not broadcasting the event live.
From what I understand Freecaster has exclusive rights from the UCI to broadcast the event live. So how are DirtTv, MTBCut etc violating their exclusive live broadcasting rights?
Will they not allow fans to record any footage or only those who don't have an online magazine? Because that's what it seems to lead to.
If DirtTv and MTBCut etc have to pay a licence fee, will that not force them to charge for content if they can't cover the cost themselves?
I understand that Freecaster can't afford to provide quality coverage without charging for it. Again, I'm all in favor of paying for it because as good as the DirtTv, MTBCut, VitalMTB coverage is; it's no comparison to watching it live, and I would still rather watch it live than watch recap videos afterwards.
The argument that people won't pay to watch the events and only watch the other coverage afterward only works for less than hardcore fans.
From what I understand Freecaster has exclusive rights from the UCI to broadcast the event live. So how are DirtTv, MTBCut etc violating their exclusive live broadcasting rights?
Will they not allow fans to record any footage or only those who don't have an online magazine? Because that's what it seems to lead to.
If DirtTv and MTBCut etc have to pay a licence fee, will that not force them to charge for content if they can't cover the cost themselves?
I understand that Freecaster can't afford to provide quality coverage without charging for it. Again, I'm all in favor of paying for it because as good as the DirtTv, MTBCut, VitalMTB coverage is; it's no comparison to watching it live, and I would still rather watch it live than watch recap videos afterwards.
The argument that people won't pay to watch the events and only watch the other coverage afterward only works for less than hardcore fans.
Last edited:
I'd be happy to pay to download the whole race rather than stream it. Sometimes the streaming connection would stuff up and I'd miss parts of the race. If the video was consolidated and immediately available for download somehow I'd be able to watch it smoother and easier anyway.
I guess it would lose that live-action feel a bit though.
I guess it would lose that live-action feel a bit though.
Ok, so can someone who knows confirm whether Dirt and Vital will be allowed to produce videos, or if all of our WC video coverage will exclusively be thru freecaster? I can't tell if freecaster owns exclusive rights to live coverage, or exclusive rights to ALL coverage.
I think you mean secede. succeed would mean... well... success
I've kinda also always wondered the same thing, but I think it would be a rather massive undertaking, caus' we'd also have to create national level independent federations in every country that is currently represented in the UCI... The UCI actually provides a pretty robust system from what I gather. it would just be nice if it were more transparent and accountable...
Why did UCI offer exclusive rights to videos? It appears absolutely counter the idea maximum exposure and promotion of the sport! How is tons of video coverage, in every corner of the internet a bad thing for the sport? Instead it's going to be behind a $3 fee - which is fine for the hardcore audience who wants to see it live, but mass audience? No chance.
You sir, read my mind!I think you mean secede. succeed would mean... well... success
I've kinda also always wondered the same thing, but I think it would be a rather massive undertaking, caus' we'd also have to create national level independent federations in every country that is currently represented in the UCI... The UCI actually provides a pretty robust system from what I gather. it would just be nice if it were more transparent and accountable...
However, if it meant that DH would succeed as a sport, then I guess I could go that route too!
-KT
If I pay for WC coverage and Freecaster crashes, I will f*ck somebody there in the a$$ with my fist.
.
.
Now thats classy..............but I sympathise with the sentiment.
For $3? Harden the f**k up.
a) it's $3, not $50
b) how it is that we got to see all this AWESOME stuff for free for so long is still almost beyond me. I think it's incredible that we have SO much media coverage of this sport, it truly does have some of the most dedicated people on earth involved in it. Blaming potential sponsors is just lame - "hey that OTHER guy should pay for the footage that I want to see!" The whole reason nobody sponsors MTB racing is that, as you've just proven, the average mountain biker is a tightarse who will bitch and moan about every little thing and never want to spend a cent. Nobody owes you free coverage of whatever you want, if you happen to get it then be grateful, if you don't get it then keep your trap shut. (This rant not directed exclusively at you RNP)
Assuming I'm in a position to be able to actually watch the races, hell yeah I'll pay $3 for live coverage.
Last edited:
Fyck, charge 15 bucks a race or 50-60 a season and hire a couple extra people to film footage, keep feeds going, host it for later, etc.
Just, allow it to be done via visa or paypal.
edit: I actually have been hoping you'd start charging. I feel like there is room for improvement, and have always wondered how the fyck you got money out of this. I've always worried that you wouldn't charge, you'd go under, and nobody would ever want to put a foot forward for DH video/races again. Charge more, people will bitch and moan for a bit, and then pay it and be stoked.
Just, allow it to be done via visa or paypal.
edit: I actually have been hoping you'd start charging. I feel like there is room for improvement, and have always wondered how the fyck you got money out of this. I've always worried that you wouldn't charge, you'd go under, and nobody would ever want to put a foot forward for DH video/races again. Charge more, people will bitch and moan for a bit, and then pay it and be stoked.
The fee is not enough.
I look at it this way. If I spend both money and time to have a feed freeze during a crucial moment in the I'm VERY bummed. It's not the amount, rather the principle.
On the other hand; If the coverage is good and the feed is consistent, $3 per race is not nearly enough. I love watching this racing and freecaster has been a real blessing.
I feel that if money is the problem, they should charge more. I wouldn't pay half price for a rotten apple. I'd rather pay a fair price for a good one.
.
Well that's a way more reasonable way to put it than "I will shove my fist up somebody's ass if I pay $3 and the feed freezes"
Personally I'll gamble that $3 a couple of times to find out though, it's just not enough money to care about given how much I love watching the races. Hell I usually spend $15-20 on the beer I drink whilst watching it anyway.To be honest though, I think there'll always be transmission glitches with any live streaming stuff on the internet, hopefully few enough of them to be insignificant, but the data is passing through so many re-routing points and so many bottlenecks that it's not the sole responsibility of the broadcaster if the feed messes up.
Best of luck to the Freecaster guys though, hopefully this IS enough money and hopefully we do get even better quality coverage this season. I have to admit, I was pretty lucky with almost all the broadcasts I've watched over the past few years, sometimes I've had to refresh em regularly and all but I think only one was so bad as to be unwatchable. The actual video clarity has been impressive too (again, for me at least).
Last edited:
Word......3 euros is absolutely nothing.......most people here spend infintely more upgrading bike parts that aren't even broken.
They should charge more and use the money to have more cameras or one of those cameras on a rope, like the one they used to follow the riders for the 4x ski race in the winter olympics.
They should charge more and use the money to have more cameras or one of those cameras on a rope, like the one they used to follow the riders for the 4x ski race in the winter olympics.
we had free olympic streaming in hd in germany, worked perfectly. but i only hard minor problems last year with the freecaster stream...Well that's a way more reasonable way to put it than "I will shove my fist up somebody's ass if I pay $3 and the feed freezes"
To be honest though, I think there'll always be transmission glitches with any live streaming stuff on the internet, hopefully few enough of them to be insignificant, but the data is passing through so many re-routing points and so many bottlenecks that it's not the sole responsibility of the broadcaster if the feed messes up.
Best of luck to the Freecaster guys though, hopefully this IS enough money and hopefully we do get even better quality coverage this season. I have to admit, I was pretty lucky with almost all the broadcasts I've watched over the past few years, sometimes I've had to refresh em regularly and all but I think only one was so bad as to be unwatchable. The actual video clarity has been impressive too (again, for me at least).
Well that's a way more reasonable way to put it than "I will shove my fist up somebody's ass if I pay $3 and the feed freezes"
Either beer is really cheep here or I am very impressed
I know nobody seems to have the full facts yet, but IF the UCI were planning on stopping Dirt, MTBCut etc. filming, do they have a legal leg to stand on? I could go outside now with a video camera and film in the street (eh, I think..), so on an open hillside why is this any different? At the Ft. William WC, people get charged to gain entry via the pits, but they can't barricade a whole mountain, you can easily get in from any other direction. If you happen to be filiming the scenery and some pesky DH'er gets in the way, that's a goddamn inconvenience to you!
Come on Fraser, we all know you'd be singing a different tune as well if the UCI announced 'Okay guys, we have hired 3 of our own personal photographers to sit in specific spots to shoot photos. We are not going to allow ANY other website/team photogs to take photos w/out UCI permission'
Just preposterous that the UCI thinks that this is going to help our sport. Yes, nothing beats the excitement of watching the race live and not knowing who is going to win. I don't think anyone will argue with that, and that's why people are going to pay to watch. Hell, after sleeping on it last night, I'd def pay $3 a race to watch (granted that im not sleeping at the time). I went to the coffee shop yesterday and spent $3. Next time I'll skip and be sleepy for a few hrs.
But there's so much that goes on at a race weekend that none of us would see if it weren't for team/website videos. This is the sort of stuff that gets me (and hopefully others) pumped for race day. Everything leading up to that final run like practice clips, interviews, etc. Team/website videos are what can give us that extra fill of our favorite rider, hometown hero, or man-crush rider that live coverage might not even shed a small light on. I could go on for pages on why it would/will hurt our sport if this 'ruling' holds up. This isn't the NFL, MLB, FIFA, etc. We are a uber niche sport. At this point, our sport needs as much coverage/exposure as much as Whitney Houston needs her crack. (and she NEEDS it)
Until the day that million dollar sponsorships start pouring in and we can have MEGA-MO cameras at every turn, helicopter top-to-bottom race run coverage, and hundreds of umbrella & podium babes....let us do work, son.
Good one.Come on Fraser, we all know you'd be singing a different tune as well if the UCI announced 'Okay guys, we have hired 3 of our own personal photographers to sit in specific spots to shoot photos. We are not going to allow ANY other website/team photogs to take photos w/out UCI permission'
Just preposterous that the UCI thinks that this is going to help our sport. Yes, nothing beats the excitement of watching the race live and not knowing who is going to win. I don't think anyone will argue with that, and that's why people are going to pay to watch. Hell, after sleeping on it last night, I'd def pay $3 a race to watch (granted that im not sleeping at the time). I went to the coffee shop yesterday and spent $3. Next time I'll skip and be sleepy for a few hrs.
But there's so much that goes on at a race weekend that none of us would see if it weren't for team/website videos. This is the sort of stuff that gets me (and hopefully others) pumped for race day. Everything leading up to that final run like practice clips, interviews, etc. Team/website videos are what can give us that extra fill of our favorite rider, hometown hero, or man-crush rider that live coverage might not even shed a small light on. I could go on for pages on why it would/will hurt our sport if this 'ruling' holds up. This isn't the NFL, MLB, FIFA, etc. We are a uber niche sport. At this point, our sport needs as much coverage/exposure as much as Whitney Houston needs her crack. (and she NEEDS it)
Until the day that million dollar sponsorships start pouring in and we can have MEGA-MO cameras at every turn, helicopter top-to-bottom race run coverage, and hundreds of umbrella & podium babes....let us do work, son.
The problem i have is the Freecaster feeds have not lived up to expectations the last few seasons. Every year improvements were promised and nothing really improved. It has nothing to do with the $3 it has to do with the investment in time. It was then left for All_the_Other viedoegraphers to fill in the gaping holes in the Freecastrer coverage. DirtTV has done a absolutely fabulous job the last 2 seasons. Basically setting the tone of how it should be done. That is going to be sorely missed...
We had HD olympic streaming here in the US as well (if you had cable coverage), and it was incredible. 3.5mb/sec download speed via Silverlight was probably clearer than my (non-HD) tv signal. Obviously NBC has a lot more $$$ to throw around than freecaster, but if the signal is anything similar it'll be well worth the $3.
However, I think that charging for the exact same content, the exact same 3-4 camera angles, the exact same... unprofessional commentary would leave a lot to be desired. Previously it was fun because it was underground, it was fan-based, and we excused Warner or Fabien, or Rachel or the crappy footage because it was free. If we're suddenly paying for coverage, I think that the standards that people will demand will be higher.
Done right the fan base is definitely there. I paid $5 back in '06 ('05?) to watch Worlds, and was PISSED when I couldn't get a live feed (even by paying for it) in 2007. I think that looking forward you might want to charge *more* and offering better coverage. Bump it up to $5/event, and offer more cameras, more angles, better commentary, etc. Hell, if it was put on like a true professional event I'd even pay up to $10. Real HD coverage, great commentators, 90%+ course coverage, etc.
I'm just concerned that everything is going to be identical to last year, except this year we'll be paying for the privilege...
Any news on the nuts and bolts of the operation? What's the stream rate going to be? My internet speed is virtually unlimited here in Japan (for the purposes of this discussion anyway), what kind of quality can I expect? The SMS thing has a limited future too, for example, here in Japan no-one uses SMS.
they absolutely do.
all professional sports here in the States broadcast statements at the beginning of the game that there can be no broadcast or reproduction without written consent from the respective governing body.
http://forums.dirtmag.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1557
Good to know about it.
I was worried about no more Dirt, Mtbcut, Clay Porter and other filmakers at WC's.
Now...about that Scott facebook fan for freecaster.
How does it work?
Good to know about it.
I was worried about no more Dirt, Mtbcut, Clay Porter and other filmakers at WC's.
Now...about that Scott facebook fan for freecaster.
How does it work?