|
Post by tamz on Feb 28, 2020 21:29:59 GMT -5
Do I read it correct that NYC overlaps with a 4* in Moscow? You are correct. Then the week after that is the LAST Olympic qualifier event in Italy, which is a 5*. But the virus is growing in Italy too.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Feb 29, 2020 1:28:42 GMT -5
Do I read it correct that NYC overlaps with a 4* in Moscow? Really crummy luck for the avp, if qualification was settled maybe some teams stay home, with all these cancelations, makes it more likely good teams have to go
|
|
|
Post by KAP on Mar 2, 2020 8:46:34 GMT -5
Do I read it correct that NYC overlaps with a 4* in Moscow? You are correct. Then the week after that is the LAST Olympic qualifier event in Italy, which is a 5*. But the virus is growing in Italy too. I could see some of the top teams in the hunt, like Jake/Taylor or Tri/Trevor skipping Moscow, but not to play NYC. They might want to rest and train before Rome, which is probably going to decide who goes to the Olympics. Ostrava and Warsaw are right before Moscow on the schedule, so if anyone is going to play that first week in June, I can't see them going to New York, which isn't home for any of those teams, just to go right back over to Europe. Only team that might entertain it would be the A-Team for the women.
|
|
|
Post by KAP on Mar 5, 2020 10:55:59 GMT -5
Looking at the details for Hawaii, it doesn't say anything about the Gold Series points being the entry barrier. Is it going to be a regular small draw this year? avp.com/event/hawaii-open/
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on Mar 5, 2020 12:10:35 GMT -5
i am also bummed there is not more stops, but that is not the only metric for growth When there is a year or more without growth in stops then fine, lets look at all the other metrics, buts its one stop added in a very long time. Hard to criticize a guy for not going further into the red but seems like this would have been the year to doubledown if ever I am guessing that he is holding fast to the current business plan, awaiting a buyout by a known or unknown at the moment media outlet that needs content... for example NBC sports, or something like that. If you can believe it, the other night "Curling Night" was on one of the NBC channels. Curling? There must be 100,000 people who have played and understand volleyball for every person who has played and understands Curling.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Mar 5, 2020 12:48:34 GMT -5
When there is a year or more without growth in stops then fine, lets look at all the other metrics, buts its one stop added in a very long time. Hard to criticize a guy for not going further into the red but seems like this would have been the year to doubledown if ever I am guessing that he is holding fast to the current business plan, awaiting a buyout by a known or unknown at the moment media outlet that needs content... for example NBC sports, or something like that. If you can believe it, the other night "Curling Night" was on one of the NBC channels. Curling? There must be 100,000 people who have played and understand volleyball for every person who has played and understands Curling. Wouldnt it make more sense to have more events then? Its not a lot of content
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on Mar 5, 2020 23:39:36 GMT -5
I am guessing that he is holding fast to the current business plan, awaiting a buyout by a known or unknown at the moment media outlet that needs content... for example NBC sports, or something like that. If you can believe it, the other night "Curling Night" was on one of the NBC channels. Curling? There must be 100,000 people who have played and understand volleyball for every person who has played and understands Curling. Wouldnt it make more sense to have more events then? Its not a lot of content Well, really I think that Sun bought the rights to the name AVP, is keeping those rights until someone wants to buy them, and is trying to keep the brand alive with as few events as possible, given that each event probably loses $200k. When ESPN bought right to the Ultimate Fighter, which didn't appear on cable channels much, they broadened the brand and expanded the number of events on TV probably by 500%. I don't know the details, only that I see UFC events on regular TV much more than before ESPN bought it.
|
|
|
Post by volleyballjim on Mar 6, 2020 1:46:34 GMT -5
When there is a year or more without growth in stops then fine, lets look at all the other metrics, buts its one stop added in a very long time. Hard to criticize a guy for not going further into the red but seems like this would have been the year to doubledown if ever I am guessing that he is holding fast to the current business plan, awaiting a buyout by a known or unknown at the moment media outlet that needs content... for example NBC sports, or something like that. If you can believe it, the other night "Curling Night" was on one of the NBC channels. Curling? There must be 100,000 people who have played and understand volleyball for every person who has played and understands Curling. Lets leave "curling" out of the mix at this point. Come on, what will we make fun of at the winter olympics if we attack so early? LOL
|
|
|
Post by sonofdogman on Mar 6, 2020 1:55:44 GMT -5
Wouldnt it make more sense to have more events then? Its not a lot of content Well, really I think that Sun bought the rights to the name AVP, is keeping those rights until someone wants to buy them, and is trying to keep the brand alive with as few events as possible, given that each event probably loses $200k. When ESPN bought right to the Ultimate Fighter, which didn't appear on cable channels much, they broadened the brand and expanded the number of events on TV probably by 500%. I don't know the details, only that I see UFC events on regular TV much more than before ESPN bought it. There's a big difference between buying/owning a sports property and purchasing the broadcast rights to it. ESPN pays the UFC for the right to broadcast events because so many people wish to watch it. NBC doesn't pay anything to the AVP as far as I know, because not enough people want to watch volleyball.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Mar 6, 2020 6:32:05 GMT -5
Well, really I think that Sun bought the rights to the name AVP, is keeping those rights until someone wants to buy them, and is trying to keep the brand alive with as few events as possible, given that each event probably loses $200k. When ESPN bought right to the Ultimate Fighter, which didn't appear on cable channels much, they broadened the brand and expanded the number of events on TV probably by 500%. I don't know the details, only that I see UFC events on regular TV much more than before ESPN bought it. There's a big difference between buying/owning a sports property and purchasing the broadcast rights to it. ESPN pays the UFC for the right to broadcast events because so many people wish to watch it. NBC doesn't pay anything to the AVP as far as I know, because not enough people want to watch volleyball. If ESPN or NBC owned the sport I think thats the best case scenario. They would have a motivation to promote, expand etc.
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on Mar 6, 2020 10:25:18 GMT -5
There's a big difference between buying/owning a sports property and purchasing the broadcast rights to it. ESPN pays the UFC for the right to broadcast events because so many people wish to watch it. NBC doesn't pay anything to the AVP as far as I know, because not enough people want to watch volleyball. If ESPN or NBC owned the sport I think thats the best case scenario. They would have a motivation to promote, expand etc. Yes, that's my point. The AVP is a sleepy asset that could be expanded IF a media distribution company felt the need for more or different content.
|
|
|
Post by dunninla3 on Mar 6, 2020 10:30:02 GMT -5
Well, really I think that Sun bought the rights to the name AVP, is keeping those rights until someone wants to buy them, and is trying to keep the brand alive with as few events as possible, given that each event probably loses $200k. When ESPN bought right to the Ultimate Fighter, which didn't appear on cable channels much, they broadened the brand and expanded the number of events on TV probably by 500%. I don't know the details, only that I see UFC events on regular TV much more than before ESPN bought it. There's a big difference between buying/owning a sports property and purchasing the broadcast rights to it. Not really, it's all about cost. If a media company thinks they can fill hours at a cheaper price by buying the AVP vs. paying for individual events, they would consider buying. If "renting" is cheaper, they rent. However, my point isn't about status quo -- I'm saying that a media company might have a business case for filling five hours per week of *something*, and if they think AVP volleyball is that *something* then they buy the brand and expand the events by 5x and fill hours with them. They don't have that option if they don't control (own) the brand.
|
|