Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

With last year most school charging for webcast to help make up some of the money they lost at the gate on tickets sale, and this year hopefully we will back to full stands.  Should schools this  year charge for webcast?

In truth I have no problem with if 

1. It is a good quality 

2.  If the people doing the game know what there are tanking about and have done some kind of homework or the teams.  

Also If a school is going to charge I would like to see them do a package deal for the season to go with the game by game purchase.

 

Edited by Trojanmp52
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Open gates.  Full capacity.  Done.

For those that want to watch a webcast, yes, there should be a minimal cost involved.  Pay the normal price of a ticket per webcast.

Edited by DE
Link to post
Share on other sites

I acknowledge that webcasts are the wave of the future. I can’t help but think it will detract significantly from the in-stadium atmosphere. I have been going to high school football games for over 50 years. One of the greatest aspects of the whole experience is the energy generated by a supportive crowd cheering their team on. Really sorry to see that going away. But I see it as an inevitable consequence of the increasing broadcast coverage.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors should be able to pay for the cost of the webcast I’ve watched many games free via Facebook because of the generous sponsors from the city of whiting.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Whiting89 said:

Sponsors should be able to pay for the cost of the webcast I’ve watched many games free via Facebook because of the generous sponsors from the city of whiting.

I agree, but I know about how much it cost a year to have a good webcast. And the money we would pay to watch the game goes to the school not the people doing the webcast

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see both sides. Charging a nominal fee would still incentivize people to attend the game in person if they are local. It also allows the schools to generate some revenue for the athletic program including money to help cover any costs associated with the broadcast. But offering the stream for free is good to raise more awareness of casual fans and allow family around the country to more easily see their family member play. I appreciate the schools/services that make their games available on demand so we can watch the game we work to get additional views than what Hudl provides. It can help us review our work. Many were doing that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Goose Liver said:

The sun goes down, the lights come on and for several hours you can be lost in the ambiance of a High School game. 

Amen brother. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have been broadcasting all of our school's games for 3 years now on Youtube and Facebook.  What we have found is that we are drawing in more casual fans and other people in our community who wouldn't normally go attend games in person.  This includes teachers, elderly people, and those with large families of small children.  Our ticketed attendance has been relatively unchanged (excluding this year).  The only time that we have seen poor attendance due to a livestream is when the football team is playing in terrible weather.

 

Instead of charging people to watch, we just asked for donations.  That way people could donate if they wanted, but didn't feel obligated.  They also didn't have to get a credit card out for every game, just to pay $10 to watch a 50-0 blowout.  This also ensured that 100% of the proceeds went back into the athletic department, rather than 50% that most PPV platforms do.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been used to watching a high quality webcast for free. Wasn't a huge fan of having to pay during the pandemic (others not my regular), but understood why. I thought some individuals should have been offered a reduced price or free viewing based on the strict guidelines. I'm not opposed to having to pay if they can offer some type pricing incentives to purchase a season purchase early. I think any nursing homes or similar places should get a free version. Now for the IHSAA, let the local webcasts do tournament games deeper into the postseason including State. Charge the same as a ticket to the game in person. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2021 at 11:22 AM, DE said:

Open gates.  Full capacity.  Done.

For those that want to watch a webcast, yes, there should be a minimal cost involved.  Pay the normal price of a ticket per webcast.

So would you pay the cost of an NFL game ticket to watch it on tv?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Indiana Fan said:

So would you pay the cost of an NFL game ticket to watch it on tv?

😂 Nice try. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DE said:

😂 Nice try. 

Worth a shot 😂😂

 

I just hope these webcasts go back to being free. Or at least allow more games to be on tv.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...