(12-28-2015 10:58 PM)Claw Wrote:  If all programming was on demand it would hurt conferences like ours rather than help.

Today we benefit from simple availability. We are on one of the channels. People watching football will tune to an AAC game because their game is a blowout or our game is a close one. That type of viewer simply disappears if everything is a la carte.

I seriously doubt the non-P5 benefit from this trend. The more likely effect is that market share will freeze. It will be very difficult to market a product people can't see for free. The only way you get market share is to give away your programming, and that won't fund an athletic program.

I don’t quite understand what you meant by free. The only sports that are free are the ones on your local stations in your area.

All of the others (that I know of) you have to pay for in some way. This could be subscribing to cable, U-verse, and others. Even with an ESPN subscription in your package you still have to login to ESPN3 to use it, even the mobile app. Same with U-verse unless you pirate them.

I could be wrong and if so someone correct me.

(12-28-2015 02:13 PM)Tiger46 Wrote:  

(12-28-2015 12:22 PM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  For cell companies, traffic on networks can be an issue....for fiber optics, it's not. Ever change your internet speed? Did they dig a new line to make it happen? No. The infrastructure is already there for data.

The caps are simply a grab for more revenue. There's actually petitions you can sign to try to change this as it is simply an unfair practice to consumers.

It's akin to paying extra if your family watches more TV than the neighbors even if you're on the same channel plan.

I am an old telecom guy from the 70s to now. There has always been bandwidth, even if they had to multiplex phone/data over copper and decode it on the far end or send it via microwave. But there are still a lot of areas that need fiber and new switchboxes even though the Central Offices are all up to speed with the latest and greatest.

My neighborhood has AT&T land and DSL but we cannot get U-Verse because there are only 30 houses in the subdivision and that isn't enough to recover their cost of tunneling under a railroad track. Fiber is running along "the other" side of the BNSF railroad track less than 200 yards from our house.

Maybe the laws are different in Texas but here we bore under RR tracks anytime we need to. We also place fiber overhead especially if there is an existing cable which includes a current easement.

I worked pre & post surveying U-verse sites and there were many times we could not use the proposed route for various reasons. This was mainly do to things in the ground that were not on the record.

We use directional boring machines to tunnel and we go quite deep under RR tracks. Only problem is the time it takes for the railroad company to issue the permit and to set the exact time & date. All companies now use directional boring machines…




We’ve bored placing fiber under lakes, tree groves, buildings, even portions of a golf course. IDK maybe the fiber by the RR track doesn’t have enough spare fibers in it to support a U-verse cabinet. Or maybe the RR company wants too much $MONEY$ for an easement.

Here’s my take on live streaming D1 college games.

Even if say the AAC decided to setup streaming for an AAC network I seriously doubt they could afford the initial cost. Sponsors would initially be reluctant until it was up & running to get an idea of viewership. And what if the viewership wasn’t as high as expected, then what?

What if all of the conferences setup to stream their games and combine ALL of the streams to view on a single site sorta like ESPN3? This would give subscribers an easy way to look at a list and click on their choice.

Deciding how much money each conference would get would have to be solved along with bowl games, NCAA Tourney games, and other factors. But the real problem I see is the initial investment would be…

$1,000,000,000,000

Yep. Other than equipment to stream games they will need HD cameras, special audio equipment for live games, tractor trailer rigs, plus thousands of fulltime employees with broadcast experience, and the list goes on & on.

So I don’t know if conferences setting up a live stream for their games is a good idea or not. It’s going to be hard to beat the established networks at their game. It’s going to be difficult to match a network like ESPN and when you think about it, the price isn’t unreasonable for sports fans.

When cable DOES go does this mean the 7 year tribulation has begun?

(12-29-2015 09:41 PM)BealeStreetTiger Wrote:  Here’s my take on live streaming D1 college games.

Even if say the AAC decided to setup streaming for an AAC network I seriously doubt they could afford the initial cost. Sponsors would initially be reluctant until it was up & running to get an idea of viewership. And what if the viewership wasn’t as high as expected, then what?

What if all of the conferences setup to stream their games and combine ALL of the streams to view on a single site sorta like ESPN3? This would give subscribers an easy way to look at a list and click on their choice.

Deciding how much money each conference would get would have to be solved along with bowl games, NCAA Tourney games, and other factors. But the real problem I see is the initial investment would be…

$1,000,000,000,000

Yep. Other than equipment to stream games they will need HD cameras, special audio equipment for live games, tractor trailer rigs, plus thousands of fulltime employees with broadcast experience, and the list goes on & on.

So I don’t know if conferences setting up a live stream for their games is a good idea or not. It’s going to be hard to beat the established networks at their game. It’s going to be difficult to match a network like ESPN and when you think about it, the price isn’t unreasonable for sports fans.

Not trying to derail here but love the resonator profile pic. I'm building a 4 string res and a 4 string license plate now.

(12-29-2015 01:34 PM)80sTiger Wrote:  Yes, streaming is the future. It's not necessarily a zero-sum game though. Money is money.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/prices-add-u...1413501679

Nail on the head 80's. One just replaces the other. We'll all still pay in the end. Nobody gets a free lunch.

(12-30-2015 12:23 AM)eltigre Wrote:  Not trying to derail here but love the resonator profile pic. I'm building a 4 string res and a 4 string license plate now.

There’s nothing like a 4 string Dobro especially for slide. I’ve seen some guys using 3 string resonators like the Cigar Box guitars which BTW are now very popular. I’ve never played a License Plate guitar and all I know is they sound great on the tracks I’ve listened to.

I’ve also built about 20 guitars in the past 10 years but mainly solid bodies. I’ve also built from scratch and restored vintage amps that I use in the studio. Nothing like cranking up a 1watt tube amp in the studio.

Anyhow good luck with your builds & enjoy.