Not replying to anything specific but to the thread in general.
 
Broadcast.Com - as it now is - despite their $250 million initial public
offering (how stupid am I?) lost over $6 million dollars last year.
 
I have had a bunch of discussions with them on this issue, but in my opinion,
they won't become profitable until they start being a separate entity - a third
medium - providing original content -- not just a regurgitator of other content
(though it is nice to hear Mets games in Iowa).
 
Their vision of the future is being a 3rd medium, but they're not ready to make
the leap headlong yet.  Wider availability is the key.
 
But in addition to that, I'll continue to stress the need to create incentives
for third-party producers by ensuring they will have exclusive Internet
"rights" - thus enable them to get some money through advertising. That's still
tough because the amount of listeners is relatively small, but it's cut into
even further if there are three different Real Audio feeds of a hockey game. The
re-gurgitation of the local feeds are not trying to make extra money off the
RealAudio broadcast - it's just a service. But an Internet-only broadcaster
relies on that income. Of course, this is all still theory.
 
Maybe I'm wrong, but to me what makes something like Broadcast.Com exciting is
the possibility of becoming the ESPN of the Internet -- NOT being a simple
utility used just to extend the range of a home-town radio station.
 
Broadcast.Com believes out-of-towners want to hear the "homer" feed, but in a
mass appeal game, like the NCAA Tournament, does anyone out there agree that a
high-quality neutral feed (a la NBC or CBS) should be the goal?
 
In addition, the other thing that I believe will make Broadcast.Com take the
next leap is the ability to easily charge money for the service.
 
Now don't go crazy.  I am talking about miniscule amounts like 15 cents per
listen.  It is completely impractical right now to ask people to put in a credit
card number for a measly 15 cents.  It will drive away more people than it's
worth.
 
But when the day and age comes when everyone has electronic money, and clicking
on something automatically deducts 15 cents (with a warning of course), without
any hassle by the user, then it will be worth it.  This way, an advertiser is
not as necessary, but it will allow third-party people to re-coup some losses.
 
Would you pay 15 cents to listen to a college hockey talk-show online each week
that you can't get anywhere else (such as, gee, like "Around the Rinks" :-)), or
the NCAA Tournament, or ECAC Tournament, or game-of-the-week.
 
I know I've harped on this before -- but if anyone out there agrees, please let
me know. I would love to be able to go to Broadcast.Com with proof that the
average college hockey fan out there agrees with me. Anyone?
 
AW
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.