RE: Pay per view: PH Blog
Discussion
DonkeyApple said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
DonkeyApple said:
To be fair, as someone who is often having to upload key reports while out of the office, it's a bloody nightmare. My domestic broadband in central London is utter s
te and trying to use 3G when out and about is pointless. Hotel broadband is usually st.
Regardless, people seem to be getting a little over emotional about a video being delayed. There's a little bit of 'I've paid £2.49 and that means I own these bhes'. It's £2.49, or whatever, who really cares if a video is a few days late.
And who fking cares if you can't get access in your country? If it's going to happen it will happen and then you can watch all the vids.
to be fair, they are running a business now, uploading content regularly should have been part of their modelte and trying to use 3G when out and about is pointless. Hotel broadband is usually st. Regardless, people seem to be getting a little over emotional about a video being delayed. There's a little bit of 'I've paid £2.49 and that means I own these b
hes'. It's £2.49, or whatever, who really cares if a video is a few days late. And who f
king cares if you can't get access in your country? If it's going to happen it will happen and then you can watch all the vids. it would be like having a mobile phone company and not having the bandwidth to deal with peak demand when a new iphone came out (looking at you O2
)ts and I'm sure they are giving it their best shot. But in also sure that they aren't hard noses specialists with decades of experience launching new businesses or handling retail customer care. It does seem to have been a little bit of a fiasco and with social media businesses you can't really hide bit I think it is far more civilised for a client to offer to help a small business when they have issues rather than resorting to some of the small minded remarks that this thread seems to be descending into. There is something going wrong with the people of this country and it's all going very 'mememe'. Why don't Drive's customers offer to help this small business get up and running and resolve these niggles? It's the civilised way of supporting a fledgling enterprise that you have invested in as an early consumer.
Sure it seems like there is a lack of feedback, content, Google support etc but I'm sure they are all trying to get it to work and I'm sure this is pretty new to most of them. Few journos have good business backgrounds but being supported by clients makes a huge difference.
Would you rather be told the truth, they've screwed up a bit, but bear with us we want to make things right.
Or, my broadband was playing up all week, despite it all working fine right up until Google stopped paying us to do these videos.
If you had the footage there to upload, at worst an 8 min video in HD 1080p is gonna still be small fry to upload if you make it to somewhere with a solid 3G connection... or just drive to a local web-cafe and do it there.
It's the crap excuses that are painful. It's just embarrassing to listen to.
Mr Whippy said:
DonkeyApple said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
DonkeyApple said:
To be fair, as someone who is often having to upload key reports while out of the office, it's a bloody nightmare. My domestic broadband in central London is utter ste and trying to use 3G when out and about is pointless. Hotel broadband is usually st.
Regardless, people seem to be getting a little over emotional about a video being delayed. There's a little bit of 'I've paid £2.49 and that means I own these bhes'. It's £2.49, or whatever, who really cares if a video is a few days late.
And who fking cares if you can't get access in your country? If it's going to happen it will happen and then you can watch all the vids.
to be fair, they are running a business now, uploading content regularly should have been part of their modelte and trying to use 3G when out and about is pointless. Hotel broadband is usually st. Regardless, people seem to be getting a little over emotional about a video being delayed. There's a little bit of 'I've paid £2.49 and that means I own these b
hes'. It's £2.49, or whatever, who really cares if a video is a few days late. And who f
king cares if you can't get access in your country? If it's going to happen it will happen and then you can watch all the vids. it would be like having a mobile phone company and not having the bandwidth to deal with peak demand when a new iphone came out (looking at you O2
)ts and I'm sure they are giving it their best shot. But in also sure that they aren't hard noses specialists with decades of experience launching new businesses or handling retail customer care. It does seem to have been a little bit of a fiasco and with social media businesses you can't really hide bit I think it is far more civilised for a client to offer to help a small business when they have issues rather than resorting to some of the small minded remarks that this thread seems to be descending into. There is something going wrong with the people of this country and it's all going very 'mememe'. Why don't Drive's customers offer to help this small business get up and running and resolve these niggles? It's the civilised way of supporting a fledgling enterprise that you have invested in as an early consumer.
Sure it seems like there is a lack of feedback, content, Google support etc but I'm sure they are all trying to get it to work and I'm sure this is pretty new to most of them. Few journos have good business backgrounds but being supported by clients makes a huge difference.
Would you rather be told the truth, they've screwed up a bit, but bear with us we want to make things right.
Or, my broadband was playing up all week, despite it all working fine right up until Google stopped paying us to do these videos.
If you had the footage there to upload, at worst an 8 min video in HD 1080p is gonna still be small fry to upload if you make it to somewhere with a solid 3G connection... or just drive to a local web-cafe and do it there.
It's the crap excuses that are painful. It's just embarrassing to listen to.
KarlMac said:
DonkeyApple said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
By help, I mean 'not hinder'. They are a small business, they are a start up, this is model a new area for most people. Having a bunch of petulant little Britons ranting about how they expect multinational levels of services or suffering some form of mental health entitlement issues that seem to make them believe that by paying £2.50 the people involved now work for them or I've just noticed 'if you can buy a Ferrari I expect better business practice' or whatever.
Sure Drive can improve and it's clear they will have to if they are to make it but what isn't going to help them are the deluded, self important, petulant buffoons b
hing all the time. That's all. 
king pleb, most people are complaining because the content has got worse since it became a paid for sevice, not because we feel 'entitled'. Its basic economics. Would you pay for a mag sub that only arrived as an when the author could be arsed to get his st together?Anyway, subscription cancelled. Will continue to enjoy the massive range of free content out there.
:irony:anonymous said:
[redacted]
If he's outwardly doing well for himself while doing very badly by his paying customers who are expected to provide those trappings of success, then he will be judged upon that.To think otherwise is bonkers.
Successful people need to deliver successful products/services. The two can't co-exist forever.
Dave
anonymous said:
[redacted]
If he was making videos about kitchen appliances I doubt anyone would have any interest in, or make comments about, the cars owned. But this is a motoring forum and videos about cars so there is bound to be some thought about the relationships between success achieved as measured by the value of cars owned (even if they are on finance) and the delivery of expectations to paying customers. To relate this to the early days of CH as a motoring journalist, if he had promised Autocar a certain number of articles each month and in return they offered a certain amount of money but the articles weren't delivered Autocar would have stopped paying and the career of a journalist who has been successful would have been dead in the water before it got going.
It does seem that some apologies and humble pie would be better to offer now rather than excuses.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Actually, in an article Steve Sutcliffe wrote about Chris Harris turning up at Autocar and asking for a job he did mention the car he was in and, if I remember correctly, going for a ride in it with Chris driving so there was some influence. I know nothing of the detailed finances if Drive over the last two years but it would be normal when putting the time which Chris and others gave done into it for there to be some financial return. If so, unless ringfenced, that money could well have contributed towards the payments for the FF. If payment wasn't received then fair enough, but the implication from what was said is that YouTube funded the channel which surely also means those providing the content for it as otherwise what did they fund?
I'm guessing English can't be your first language so a simple precis. I used an analogy if Chris Harris first motoring journalism job, you said it would have nothing to do with the car he owned, I pointed out it did. Pretty simple.
I do know that the cars aren't funded just by journalism and that there is (or was, at least) a certain amount of car trading carried out. Both that trading and the journalism appear to be financially successful.
I do know that the cars aren't funded just by journalism and that there is (or was, at least) a certain amount of car trading carried out. Both that trading and the journalism appear to be financially successful.
Whether or not Drive+ lives up to its subscriber expectations, I am flummoxed as to how this would be some kind of overall critique of the man's income,lifestyle, personal cars and so on. I have not clue, nor do I care about any of that.
In the end the CH question for me is a very simple one: Is he a good journalist who has opinions I respect, yes or no?.
First of all, he is a very good driver, not always the case with everyone in the profession.
Secondly, he does a good job in articulating why he likes or dislikes a car clearly and entertainingly
Thirdly,successful or not, he has been very much a pioneer in the type of video he produces.
Fourthly, and most importantly, when I have tried , or owned, some of the cars he tested, I was in agreement with the opinions overall.
I had never heard of the man when I picked up a review of the 997.1 GT3RS in Total 911 in 2006, and the article intrigued me enough that I followed up and bought one of the cars. There have been cars where I did not agree of course, but broadly he seems to have judgement. There are others like Andrew Frankel in MS and Dan Neil in the WSJ whom i also like, and they all provide very useful input to future decisions for me.
Where CH lives in a mansion or a tent, drives a Zonda or a white van, makes vast sums or peanuts is all quite irrelevant to me.
So, back to the product itself:
My take is that many people will hold back because the real open question is the emerging business model..are we moving to an iTunes model for most content, in which case the total monthly outlay might end up being significant, and, given the experience of subscribers here, is the funding model sufficient to finance enough content?. I read Octane, Motor Sport,Autoweek,Sports Car Market and Total 911 monthly, so I do pay for content. However, I will want to see if the product here can be launched and maintained successfully and then make a call.
In the end the CH question for me is a very simple one: Is he a good journalist who has opinions I respect, yes or no?.
First of all, he is a very good driver, not always the case with everyone in the profession.
Secondly, he does a good job in articulating why he likes or dislikes a car clearly and entertainingly
Thirdly,successful or not, he has been very much a pioneer in the type of video he produces.
Fourthly, and most importantly, when I have tried , or owned, some of the cars he tested, I was in agreement with the opinions overall.
I had never heard of the man when I picked up a review of the 997.1 GT3RS in Total 911 in 2006, and the article intrigued me enough that I followed up and bought one of the cars. There have been cars where I did not agree of course, but broadly he seems to have judgement. There are others like Andrew Frankel in MS and Dan Neil in the WSJ whom i also like, and they all provide very useful input to future decisions for me.
Where CH lives in a mansion or a tent, drives a Zonda or a white van, makes vast sums or peanuts is all quite irrelevant to me.
So, back to the product itself:
My take is that many people will hold back because the real open question is the emerging business model..are we moving to an iTunes model for most content, in which case the total monthly outlay might end up being significant, and, given the experience of subscribers here, is the funding model sufficient to finance enough content?. I read Octane, Motor Sport,Autoweek,Sports Car Market and Total 911 monthly, so I do pay for content. However, I will want to see if the product here can be launched and maintained successfully and then make a call.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Obviously you know Chris's life story and those I have chatted with who know him and have worked with him don't, or told me things which were incorrect. I bow to your greater knowledge. At no point have I criticised in any way the cats owned, the lifestyle or anything of Chris. All I said was that I could see how people would think someone successful enough to own the cars he has should understand the importance of meeting the expectations of customers. Is that wrong?
I've no idea when Chris first wrote for Autocar but I have read quite a high proportion of the articles he has written in mainstream media (Autocar, evo, PH etc but not Porsche world etc) since he started and appreciate his ability to drive, write about and talk about cars very well. It just seems to me that Drive+ is being handled badly by those involved in it which seems to include Chris.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Well I'm not a paying customer so I don't feel that way. For all I know he lives on beans and toast and doesn't go on holidays to pay for what he has. I don't care.But for all those paying £2.50 a month, or £30 for the year of Drive+ amazing content, then I think plenty will just see a crappy channel and Chris living with expensive cars and put one and one together and get five.
If it's hopeless or not, you're being rather short-sighted to expect others to not feel that way.
Jeez, I've been told I was flash for driving a 5 year old BMW Z4 when I bought it. People do make stupid observations!
Dave
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I think so.Dumb people are a matter of perspective, and when your perspective is that of selling to the wide car-enthusiast demographic then you need to consider them.
Remember Chris also thinks we're dumb, and undermining our intelligence by offering crap excuses like 'poor internet connection' etc.
It goes two ways. Apparently stupid comments beget apparently stupid comments back.
If Chris wants to be judged fairly, then he should judge his audience fairly and be honest with them.
Dave
RDMcG said:
What is strange is that I was reading the consolidated 991 RS thread on Rennlist, and there, lo and behold, was the Drive video on the Camaro vs RS.2 that was apparently behind the paywall, but has already appeared on Daily Motion....go figure.
It is why the donation button as mentioned by dudleybloke just up the page is probably a more realistic business model than monthly subscription; it would allow the original YouTube video to be linked along with the donation button rather than a pirated version which is almost impossible to stop as the legal costs of chasing all perpetrators could outweigh the genuine income received. It shouldn't be that way, but it almost certainly is.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff