Millennium and Eurosport

[Rider]

The paintball landscape has radically changed in the last year, the financial demands being placed upon teams has not ......

one of the big problems starting to pinch now is the lack of funds and increasing financial demands brought about by our relatively rapid economic downturn and incresing cost of living (inflation beat the 5% mark recently).

so the financial demands in terms of entry fees, paint, kit, etc may not have changed hugely, but the actual disposable income available to many has begun to dry up.

i reckon this is going to be most noticeable among those teams that were already running with little true sponsorship. these teams will be looking at whether to run with the new bling from their sponsors (which they may be forced to in order to hold onto that sponsorship) or make savings elsewhere. that might mean turning down entry to european legs of the millenium and sticking to home series, or facing a struggle to live beyond there means, or perhaps folding altogether.

none of this is good for the sport. seeing teams collapse from lack of funds, buying less kit, or playing less can only bring about a downturn in the industry. although it seems to be heading that way anyway....

perhaps a TV deal may bring about some interest - but how much? and when? Like a lot of "extreme sports" that began being televised, it will be purely novelty value to start off with. people thinking "hey that looks cool" but watching for a bit then flicking over. it takes an awful lot of exposure for what is seen as an outside sport to become accepted as more common and mainstream.

the millenium/eurosport could be a bit of a catch-22. teams not willing to fork out early for something there not certain of getting - eurosport not willing to guarantee a deal unless the teams sign up.....

what would be interesting would be to know how much income the deal will generate for the millenium - it might be an idea to see that reinvested - at least in the first year - by reducing the teams fees by a proprtionate amount.

dropping fees would be likely to at least prick the interest of the teams, get them on board, and get the TV sorted.

 

[Robbo]

Forget TV - it's a false dawn and a humongous money pit, if in doubt, just call up Adam and Billy Gardner at Smart Parts and ask them ...and the rest of the guys associated with those failed TV endeavours Stateside ..... we can all hope, we can all bang the 'Ooooh don't be pessimistic' drum but the harsh reality is, paintball on TV don't work and won't work.
And just how many times does it have to be proved to us before commonsense finally takes a hold?

Jerry Braun kicked it all off back in the day asking teams and the indursty to back him - it died quicker than one of Shipman's patients

You had all the money of the PSP coupled with Dick Clark's millions - it sunk like a brick.

The NPPL under its original owners Pure Promotions lost lord knows how much in failed TV endeavours, they also bombed.

The Smart Parts lone initiative of a couple of years back (hundreds of thousands of dollars) - that also bombed.

The new NPPL TV deal under Bruce Freidman........ not a damned thing !!

The list goes on and on.. and I'm not even bothering with the Euros coverage of it which from memory was an abject embarrassment at best ....

And yet...and yet, we are still being pitched with, 'Ooohhhh, send in your money, it's definitely gonna be big, you will earn millions, just give us your money and you can all be part of it'.

We might learn one day

 

[BUG01]

Without getting into a huge argument. It is vital to understand the huge difference in Eurpoean/UK and US television and the way sports are broadcast and financed. This is a massive factor int he reasons the ventures stateside failed.

Andy, I would be very interested in the level of commitment from Eurosport, who themselves dont make any televison. They merely broadcast it.

 

[Robbo]

Without getting into a huge argument. It is vital to understand the huge difference in Eurpoean/UK and US television and the way sports are broadcast and financed. This is a massive factor int he reasons the ventures stateside failed.

Andy, I would be very interested in the level of commitment from Eurosport, who themselves dont make any televison. They merely broadcast it.

I would have thought it even more vital to detail those differences if you are asking us to understand them ...........

I have been party to a lot of these TV endeavours so I am interested to hear what you think is the 'massive' reason that you say explains their demise and has eluded everybody.

 

[BUG01]

In the states the basis for broadcasting sports relies on the sale of airtime. This in turn must generate enough viewing figures to sustain the interest of those paying for it ie the sponsors, advertisers etc. In Europe, especially with broadcasters such as Sky and Eurosport, the way that they sell advertising is different. It is correct to say that the larger audience programmes generate the bigger income slabs and can have advertising slots sold at a premium. However, the aim of these broadcasters is to fill the airtime around the major events and programms. To this end it is far less important to generate huge or even average viewing figures to justify putting a programme to air. However, in the states because of the problems outlined, if a show does not attract and then maintain good viewing figures it will quickly die.

The other issue with European sports broadcasting is that people like Eurosport and Sky very rarely pay the costs of these filler programmes. The cost is recuperated by the production company through event sponsorship (the Stella Artois tennis for example), although strict OFCOM rules govern the way these events can deal with television and attract sponsorship at their inception, or by buying the rights to the event itself and selling on the associated merchandise/entry fees/advertising. A good example of this last method would be Matchroom sport who created a whole new darts series themselves and then televisied it.

The european model therefor allows for more flexibility and sustains shows that may not have large audiences straight away.

 

[Bolter]

Why are they emailing and hoping for the best? (Maybe I've just answered my own question)

Wouldn't it make more sense to call the captains, seeing as they want a quick response? Mr Piper, can you tell them Storm have written in blood our answer, and it is now strapped to a hand reared homing pigeon, and has been released south.

Hopefully they get it, cause I'm not hand rearing any more pigeons.

 

[BUG01]

Because email provides a written confirmation that can be supplied to Eurosport as evidence of team participation.

 

[Robbo]

In the states the basis for broadcasting sports relies on the sale of airtime. This in turn must generate enough viewing figures to sustain the interest of those paying for it ie the sponsors, advertisers etc. In Europe, especially with broadcasters such as Sky and Eurosport, the way that they sell advertising is different. It is correct to say that the larger audience programmes generate the bigger income slabs and can have advertising slots sold at a premium. However, the aim of these broadcasters is to fill the airtime around the major events and programms. To this end it is far less important to generate huge or even average viewing figures to justify putting a programme to air. However, in the states because of the problems outlined, if a show does not attract and then maintain good viewing figures it will quickly die.

Sounds right to me ......

The other issue with European sports broadcasting is that people like Eurosport and Sky very rarely pay the costs of these filler programmes. The cost is recuperated by the production company through event sponsorship (the Stella Artois tennis for example), although strict OFCOM rules govern the way these events can deal with television and attract sponsorship at their inception, or by buying the rights to the event itself and selling on the associated merchandise/entry fees/advertising. A good example of this last method would be Matchroom sport who created a whole new darts series themselves and then televisied it.

I'm not sure if you have appreciated the point of all this Bug, nobody is denying you can't get paintball on TV, or even that it is more likely that European TV will persist for longer because of different funding structures and ethos. It's why do people want it there?

And herein lies one of the problems, the tournament promoters want it because they can make a shed load of money in charging the vendors/ industry and teams for exposure and participance, the industry want it because they believe it will expand their market base and the players want it because they wanna be on TV with some of them believing they can make their fortunes.

It's a complete mish mash of expectations and in some cases, conflicting expectations.
And so, just suppose we get it on TV over here, big deal, so what?
Do you think it's gonna expand the game?
Well if you do, you're mistaken and the reason for this is plastered right across the US; any difference between the US and Euro evaporates at this point because televising paintball has to generate interest outside of the existing baller to keep it going and I'm afraid it falls at the first fence regardless of any business models.

If you are suggesting the existing paintball demographic will underwrite or maybe even substantiate any TV uptake, once again, you are wrong, the demographic won't hold up because it hasn't got the numbers to attract outside sponsors to advertise during the ad slots.

You make mention of snooker and darts but these are completely different 'sports' but they lend themselves to being televised, paintball does not, there is NO focus for spectators and we will never be able to get past this problem unless we drastically change the game itself.

The European model therefor allows for more flexibility and sustains shows that may not have large audiences straight away.

Maybe so ......and?

All you then do is, prolong the agony, nothing else.

 

[Bolter]

Because email provides a written confirmation that can be supplied to Eurosport as evidence of team participation.

Its a bit hit and miss though with the medium of email, is what I mean.

 

[BUG01]

I think that televising paintball will ultimately aid its development. It may not be the only way or the most successful way of increasing participation and awareness, but it wil certainly play some form of role.


A recent event that i have been part of was the Leamington Spa Race Walking event. The aim wasnt to get more people into race walking (hardly the most popular of sports), it merely served the organisers to have their sponsors on telly. Air time, whatever the form, has a market value for event sponsors. If you can guarantee a certain amount of airtime for a television series based on an event, then the money will be there (ignoring the economic downturn and looking at a longer term outlook).

The questions isnt why we shoudl televise paintball, the questions is why not? If companies are willing to look at it seriously then why stop them?