RE: Pay per view: PH Blog
Discussion
Cant see the longevity of this
The beauty of the web is its free
Ok CH items are good at times but you cant pin all this on one person, what if he goes ??, has a wobbler & falls in love with eco cars lol
In a few years I can see people talking nicely about the thing none of them supported before its demise, there are enough sponsors in the motoring world, fuel companies, polish companies etc to be able to avoid manufacturers sponsorship & get something sponsored but not toooo biased, wait until the likes of shell spot the opportunity to promote there own free channel with just such content
Sorry guys, massive self inflicted nail in your own coffin but for your sakes I hope Im wrong
The beauty of the web is its free
Ok CH items are good at times but you cant pin all this on one person, what if he goes ??, has a wobbler & falls in love with eco cars lol
In a few years I can see people talking nicely about the thing none of them supported before its demise, there are enough sponsors in the motoring world, fuel companies, polish companies etc to be able to avoid manufacturers sponsorship & get something sponsored but not toooo biased, wait until the likes of shell spot the opportunity to promote there own free channel with just such content
Sorry guys, massive self inflicted nail in your own coffin but for your sakes I hope Im wrong
red_slr said:
As much as I like Chris - I think I will have to sit back and see what happens with this.
My issue not being Drive in particular - but Google.
Youtube is just another way for Google to rinse companies (Drive) and the user (us).
I spend a fair chunk with Google and it pains me. Badly.
They play everyone off against each other - but every year we go along with it and throw blank cheques at them....
So, for that reason I am out (for now).
Best of luck though.
That's pretty much what I was about to say. I think this says more about Google's greed than it does about the Drive chaps trying to make money.My issue not being Drive in particular - but Google.
Youtube is just another way for Google to rinse companies (Drive) and the user (us).
I spend a fair chunk with Google and it pains me. Badly.
They play everyone off against each other - but every year we go along with it and throw blank cheques at them....
So, for that reason I am out (for now).
Best of luck though.
Whilst YouTube seems to be a fantastic profit making phenomenon for these Vloggers and viral video makers with minimum production costs, it's killing genuine talent and creativity. It sounds like the rantings of an old man, but why does the modern media seem to reward idiots and punish true talent?
I will watch with interest to see how it goes, but for the sake of a few videos, £25 odd a year seems a lot to pay. £1 a video.....that however would be more appetizing....
Mr Will said:
What somebody really needs to invent is a proper micro-transaction model. Something that would make it practical to charge a penny (or less) per view. Think I'm kidding? Well all of a sudden the McLaren video would go from bringing in £9200 to bringing in £36000. From 1p per viewer. Charge 5p and it jumps to nearly £200k.
Certainly you'd lose a percentage of viewers but more from the inconvenience of paying than from the cost itself. After-all, who'd complain about paying pocket change to watch a video? It's the app-store model on steroids and whoever makes it work will first be rolling in cash.
What he says. Certainly you'd lose a percentage of viewers but more from the inconvenience of paying than from the cost itself. After-all, who'd complain about paying pocket change to watch a video? It's the app-store model on steroids and whoever makes it work will first be rolling in cash.
And it looks like I can't subscribe from Luxembourg.
If there's one thing I hate it's that regional nonsense.
It's the internet FFS.
pvj said:
Hi Chris
I subscribe to car magazines that I could read much of on the web, for free. I subscribe to newspapers that I could largely read for free on their websites. I pay to rent movies and TV programmes from sky or iTunes. I'd rather your drive channel was self sustaining and pay for the content than not have it. You could offer different approaches. Try charging per view, or for a subscription. If we had all paid £1 to watch the F12 video you'd be doing quite nicely out of it, even after you've paid for the tyres! And there's nothing wrong with that. You can count on my support
Thats not a bad idea. Wouldn't pay a quid like, but 50 p maybe? Even if you only then got 50k views you've still made 25k. I can chose what to watch then (which would only be CH on cars and select big muscle shows).I subscribe to car magazines that I could read much of on the web, for free. I subscribe to newspapers that I could largely read for free on their websites. I pay to rent movies and TV programmes from sky or iTunes. I'd rather your drive channel was self sustaining and pay for the content than not have it. You could offer different approaches. Try charging per view, or for a subscription. If we had all paid £1 to watch the F12 video you'd be doing quite nicely out of it, even after you've paid for the tyres! And there's nothing wrong with that. You can count on my support
W124 said:
It's always struck me that part of the success of TG is that the have a fixed yardstick
Possibly, but the real "success" of Top Gear (and the double edges sword also) is that it ain't really about cars as such. That means they have a massive audience pool! How much of the global audience for TG would disappear almost instantly if they had to (directly) pay for it??Please, it's chump change. I waste far more on PPV UFC or boxing fights that turn out to be terrible, but it's worth it for the ones that turn out to be ace. I haven't seen many Drive videos that I've disliked.
I do wish it was delivered via another streaming service like netflix or hulu, but I suspect it's be a deeply flawed revenue model as they'd be requiring far more content and traditional format shows which would kill it. Plus, I'm not convinced significant amount of people would actually watch.
I've enjoyed a great deal of the /drive content so far, so I'm happy to stump up the small amount of cash to help keep it going. For me the real stars are the guys doing the shooting and editing for making it look so professional - compared to some of the other big subscriber base channels Drive knocks out some gorgeous looking content.
I hope it works out for them, it's a brave move asking people to pay for things online, seems they're basically betting the future of the Drive on it, which is a different kind of brave.
I do wish it was delivered via another streaming service like netflix or hulu, but I suspect it's be a deeply flawed revenue model as they'd be requiring far more content and traditional format shows which would kill it. Plus, I'm not convinced significant amount of people would actually watch.
I've enjoyed a great deal of the /drive content so far, so I'm happy to stump up the small amount of cash to help keep it going. For me the real stars are the guys doing the shooting and editing for making it look so professional - compared to some of the other big subscriber base channels Drive knocks out some gorgeous looking content.
I hope it works out for them, it's a brave move asking people to pay for things online, seems they're basically betting the future of the Drive on it, which is a different kind of brave.
Edited by Stu R on Wednesday 30th July 15:05
Why not just get a series commissioned by Channel 4, ITV or Dave? The first two will give you £50-100k per episode to produce it, I don't know how much money Dave has.
Alternatively to pull in the punters, Harris could team up with Guy Martin (check out his tv series SPEED) and make an awesome show! Finally we'll have something way better/more extreme than Top Gear to watch for free.
Alternatively to pull in the punters, Harris could team up with Guy Martin (check out his tv series SPEED) and make an awesome show! Finally we'll have something way better/more extreme than Top Gear to watch for free.
I suppose you have to bank on people's emerging tendency to select content, rather than surfing on a sea of s
t. The trend has been to watch youtube simply to pass time - or for want of something better to do. Trends do change. Netflix looked doomed for a while. 20K looks like a lot though. That is a lot of people expected to do the right thing.
t. The trend has been to watch youtube simply to pass time - or for want of something better to do. Trends do change. Netflix looked doomed for a while. 20K looks like a lot though. That is a lot of people expected to do the right thing. As other people have said, I've always enjoyed Chris' videos on the channel but I've not found anything else by the other presenters half as interesting. I'm not a fan of American muscle cars and I'm not a fan of the presenting style of the other guys (sorry!)
I'll probably subscribe but it will only be for the Harris videos, unless the other stuff improves or there is new content to be added that will appeal to me.
Is there likely to be a minimum/maximum number of videos by him per month? I mean, I wouldn't want to pay my yearly subscription just to view one CH video per month as I wouldn't consider that to be good value for my £ $ € really.
I'll probably subscribe but it will only be for the Harris videos, unless the other stuff improves or there is new content to be added that will appeal to me.
Is there likely to be a minimum/maximum number of videos by him per month? I mean, I wouldn't want to pay my yearly subscription just to view one CH video per month as I wouldn't consider that to be good value for my £ $ € really.
At the risk of teaching you to suck eggs but are there not better choices than youtube?
http://vimeo.com/creatorservices/ondemand
I would be more than happy to pay a quid or two for a video I want to watch but would not be interested in a subscription. It would also appear to take care of foreign customers better than your idea.
http://vimeo.com/creatorservices/ondemand
I would be more than happy to pay a quid or two for a video I want to watch but would not be interested in a subscription. It would also appear to take care of foreign customers better than your idea.
I've always been a fan of Chris's videos, but agree that channels such as Autocar, Petrolicious, evo, Jay Leno's Garage, Motor Trend and Comedians in Cars etc seem to get by pretty well without asking for money. I don't mind the makers shoehorning a product placement into their videos (as Seinfeld does), and am surprised that nobody is prepared to do this seeing as CNBC can (presumably - as I've never had the channel) attract companies to pay for commercials while DRIVE is on there.
Also, I only watch Chris's videos, so this would be like me paying the BBC licence fee just because I like one show on the channel. Murdoch has been able to make paywalls work, so who knows how DRIVE will get on. I do know that each time there's a new Top Gear show that a lot of Americans on forums/Twitter etc appear to be able to view it online on the same night - for nothing.
Also, I only watch Chris's videos, so this would be like me paying the BBC licence fee just because I like one show on the channel. Murdoch has been able to make paywalls work, so who knows how DRIVE will get on. I do know that each time there's a new Top Gear show that a lot of Americans on forums/Twitter etc appear to be able to view it online on the same night - for nothing.
I do occasionally watch some of the other content on Drive but I'm mainly there to see the CH content.
From a Harris perspective what do we get for our money? How frequent and how long are the films likely to be? Will the films have a regular and reliable release date and time? Currently the arrangements are a bit flaky, that's ok for free content but if you're paying for something your expectations are different and less forgiving. I would also hope we wouldn't just get new car release stuff, Chris' historic racing content is excellent, the 2CV film was excellent. Skiddy uber-wagon comparisons however I find distinctly unexcellent.
On a side note given the fantastic production values of Petrolicious how do they survive as free to view?
From a Harris perspective what do we get for our money? How frequent and how long are the films likely to be? Will the films have a regular and reliable release date and time? Currently the arrangements are a bit flaky, that's ok for free content but if you're paying for something your expectations are different and less forgiving. I would also hope we wouldn't just get new car release stuff, Chris' historic racing content is excellent, the 2CV film was excellent. Skiddy uber-wagon comparisons however I find distinctly unexcellent.
On a side note given the fantastic production values of Petrolicious how do they survive as free to view?
wolves_wanderer said:
At the risk of teaching you to suck eggs but are there not better choices than youtube?
http://vimeo.com/creatorservices/ondemand
I would be more than happy to pay a quid or two for a video I want to watch but would not be interested in a subscription. It would also appear to take care of foreign customers better than your idea.
I would also rather see the videos on vimeo but as the article suggested /Drive seems to have a big history with Youtube (apparently they were funded by Youtube for the first two years?) so I guess thats why they are staying.http://vimeo.com/creatorservices/ondemand
I would be more than happy to pay a quid or two for a video I want to watch but would not be interested in a subscription. It would also appear to take care of foreign customers better than your idea.
Stu R said:
I waste far more on PPV UFC or boxing fights that turn out to be terrible, but it's worth it for the ones that turn out to be ace. I haven't seen many Drive videos that I've disliked.
But you don't have a choice if you enjoy combat sports, you have to pay, plus you're getting to see a live event. Drive will be offering content on cars they can't possibly hope to make exclusive. First of all good luck with this venture.
Obviously the YouTube business model (relying on advertising income) is not paying for the channel, hence the need to look elsewhere - subscriptions in your case. If the old Drive format was paying your production costs and more, then I guess you would not now be asking for subs.
My view is that Drive has not contained sufficiently compelling content to justify the sub either compared with other sub rates for other services (such as Netflix) or with print mags (which have lots of easily accessible content, not least the ads).
The film/editing production standards usually have been high, almost certainly adding to costs, but the content has frequently been weak and insubstantial. For exmple the car reviews with scores for features, were in my opinion both feeble and overly subjective. The Monaco trip video was not worth the time needed to watch it. There are plenty of other car related channels, often connected with print media, who can bring more resources to the table. It will be a challenge fro Drive+ to compete with these. Smoking tyres will not be enough.
Obviously the YouTube business model (relying on advertising income) is not paying for the channel, hence the need to look elsewhere - subscriptions in your case. If the old Drive format was paying your production costs and more, then I guess you would not now be asking for subs.
My view is that Drive has not contained sufficiently compelling content to justify the sub either compared with other sub rates for other services (such as Netflix) or with print mags (which have lots of easily accessible content, not least the ads).
The film/editing production standards usually have been high, almost certainly adding to costs, but the content has frequently been weak and insubstantial. For exmple the car reviews with scores for features, were in my opinion both feeble and overly subjective. The Monaco trip video was not worth the time needed to watch it. There are plenty of other car related channels, often connected with print media, who can bring more resources to the table. It will be a challenge fro Drive+ to compete with these. Smoking tyres will not be enough.
I will pay for a few months until I am satisfied that the quality and frequency is to my liking after which I'll pay the annual sum.
I do not buy in to the arguments about Harris toning down the use and expansion of his personal garage. If he didn't share his experiences with those vehicles then all the content would be the same as every other "Ferrari lent us a 458 and I took it to Bruntingthorpe and here's a 4 minute review" crap.
I do not buy in to the arguments about Harris toning down the use and expansion of his personal garage. If he didn't share his experiences with those vehicles then all the content would be the same as every other "Ferrari lent us a 458 and I took it to Bruntingthorpe and here's a 4 minute review" crap.
wolves_wanderer said:
At the risk of teaching you to suck eggs but are there not better choices than youtube?
http://vimeo.com/creatorservices/ondemand
I would be more than happy to pay a quid or two for a video I want to watch but would not be interested in a subscription. It would also appear to take care of foreign customers better than your idea.
How's Vimeo's network these days? I was going to 'rent' the Smoking Tire roadtrip film until I realised it was on Vimeo and I'd spend 50% of my time buffering.http://vimeo.com/creatorservices/ondemand
I would be more than happy to pay a quid or two for a video I want to watch but would not be interested in a subscription. It would also appear to take care of foreign customers better than your idea.
Of course, it could be my ISP doesn't have the same links with Vimeo as it does with YouTube/iPlayer and I'm suffering from that, but the end result is the same.. .didn't spend the money.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff