For future streaming of games if anybody needs them.

[setyoursightsnorth]

Hello all! I know that Marquette games can be difficult to find sometimes, but here is a great website to steam games online if you need them.

firstrowsports.eu

It's a European website that streams games, no downloads necessary, no fees necessary. It's a pretty good site, as it offers many links to games if one doesn't work or has bad quality. Simply find the game, and click the links provided. It's a good website that is pretty safe (no viruses or any of that garbage). Hope you guys enjoy it! Go MU!

[SwoopEm333]

Agreed!!!  I live in florida and have watched almost every game last year and this year so far on first row.  Great site!!!!!

[77ncaachamps]

I thought the FBI should down these sites from an earlier sweep.

Good news then for our MU brethren!

[ChicosBailBonds]

I thought the FBI should down these sites from an earlier sweep.

Good news then for our MU brethren!

In the long run, bad news.  People watching these types of streams mean lower ratings, mean lower conference fees in tv deals for schools like Marquette.  I had to deal with a programmer recently that we were renewing and they, of course, wanted higher fees for us to carry their channel.  I pointed to their ratings being not that strong.  They came back with how their content is viewed illegally as one of the most popular programs on torrents, and such.

She was right.  Unfortunately for her I had to ask the question: "so you want me to pay you all this money for the right to broadcast your channel for our customers who have to pay higher fees and all the while people are stealing it for free on the internet. Come again?"

[avid1010]

i'm missing something?  i would think the fact that people are accessing something online illegally just shows there's solid demand.  dang near any channel or game can be "stolen" online...i'd be worried if i was adding programming currently not available that no one was accessing online.

i also don't understand why it would be bad news for MU...it's an equal playing field...if MU gets less so will all the other teams.  not like the games from the other top conferences aren't available to "steal" online as well. 

[mu_hilltopper]

Indeed .. somewhat chicken and egg, but people are streaming because there's a lack of a legal alternative.

The quality of streams suck, especially illegal ones.  They are a last resort.

[Benny B]

I stand by my comparison of FrontRow.eu to Napster.

Music and film distribution have been revolutionized by piracy... Live TV is next.

[keefe]

I stand by my comparison of FrontRow.eu to Napster.

Music and film distribution have been revolutionized by piracy... Live TV is next.

here here

[chren21]

Music and movies can be pirated today almost as easy as before, it just takes a little more time to find a site operating outside of the laws of usa or other countries that try to regulate. 

Look at www.1channel.ch

You can watch any movie you want some even before they are released to the big screen in the USA.....

Music is no different with a few sites out there that you can get any song you want and load it on your iPhone/pod if you know just a little as to what u are doing. 

Next is live TV.   Google tv and others is coming soon the question is who will take the first chance on it????  The catholic7????

[ChicosBailBonds]

i'm missing something?  i would think the fact that people are accessing something online illegally just shows there's solid demand.  dang near any channel or game can be "stolen" online...i'd be worried if i was adding programming currently not available that no one was accessing online.

i also don't understand why it would be bad news for MU...it's an equal playing field...if MU gets less so will all the other teams.  not like the games from the other top conferences aren't available to "steal" online as well. 

I'm talking at a higher level and giving some real world examples.  It becomes a vicious circle.  The most highly pirated show is Dexter on Showtime, followed by Game of Thrones on HBO and then a number of others close behind.  It's an interesting dynamic as those that pirate it aren't willing to pay for HBO but those that pirate it are driving up the cost for HBO because they are missing out on revenues from providers (Dish, Fios, Directv) because their ratings get hurt.  So they raise their rates, and the circle becomes complete and even more troublesome.  Costs a lot of money to make those shows.

As one studio exec told me about a month ago, they're going to start to go on the cheap on some stuff because it just isn't worth the battle.  They can't keep creating great content and then have it stolen for free.  We'll see if they follow through, but based on two series that were cancelled of high acclaim it does appear to be going that way.

Sports....yes, a different animal than shows.  Absolutely.  I'm merely pointing out how the negotiations work and ratings are a key part.  Dilute ratings, you hurt the conference.  It's the job of ESPN, NBC, or whomever to use every piece of data in their bag of tricks to get a good deal.  Do I think it's material right now?  Not really, but it will become more so over time.  A lot of people in this country think stuff should be for free.  It is truly amazing but that's where we are.

[keefe]

It's an interesting dynamic as those that pirate it aren't willing to pay for HBO but those that pirate it are driving up the cost for HBO because they are missing out on revenues from providers (Dish, Fios, Directv) because their ratings get hurt.  So they raise their rates, and the circle becomes complete and even more troublesome. 

There are zero incremental costs to broadcasters. Just lost revenue. Big difference.

Perhaps it is the ridiculous rates charged by the likes of Dish and DirecTV?

God bless free enterprise and the entrepreneurial spirit!

[jutaw22mu]

TV should switch to select your own channel packages.  It's bullcrap that the only channel I *really* want is Fox Soccer Channel, yet in order to get it, I have to pay $100 and get a bunch of other channels I could care less to watch.  Not doing it so that I can watch one or two soccer games a week.  So I will stream those instead.

[keefe]

TV should switch to select your own channel packages.  It's bullcrap that the only channel I *really* want is Fox Soccer Channel, yet in order to get it, I have to pay $100 and get a bunch of other channels I could care less to watch.  Not doing it so that I can watch one or two soccer games a week.  So I will stream those instead.

The big broadcast networks have morphed and continue to do so. The cable and satellite players must adapt to new realities too. Consumers rule. Vive l'anarchie! Vive la piraterie

[avid1010]

There are zero incremental costs to broadcasters. Just lost revenue. Big difference.

Perhaps it is the ridiculous rates charged by the likes of Dish and DirecTV?

God bless free enterprise and the entrepreneurial spirit!

+1.  hbo's a failed business model in a market being hit with innovation.  their shows are the only thing saving them...for now. 

[forgetful]

I'm talking at a higher level and giving some real world examples.  It becomes a vicious circle.  The most highly pirated show is Dexter on Showtime, followed by Game of Thrones on HBO and then a number of others close behind.  It's an interesting dynamic as those that pirate it aren't willing to pay for HBO but those that pirate it are driving up the cost for HBO because they are missing out on revenues from providers (Dish, Fios, Directv) because their ratings get hurt.  So they raise their rates, and the circle becomes complete and even more troublesome.  Costs a lot of money to make those shows.

As one studio exec told me about a month ago, they're going to start to go on the cheap on some stuff because it just isn't worth the battle.  They can't keep creating great content and then have it stolen for free.  We'll see if they follow through, but based on two series that were cancelled of high acclaim it does appear to be going that way.

Sports....yes, a different animal than shows.  Absolutely.  I'm merely pointing out how the negotiations work and ratings are a key part.  Dilute ratings, you hurt the conference.  It's the job of ESPN, NBC, or whomever to use every piece of data in their bag of tricks to get a good deal.  Do I think it's material right now?  Not really, but it will become more so over time.  A lot of people in this country think stuff should be for free.  It is truly amazing but that's where we are.

We've talked about it for sports and it goes the same for TV.  Prices have peaked and the old format is broken.  Things will go to all on-demand models soon.  People just aren't willing to pay the prices and fees forever, especially when they are not watching the channels.

Even for many diehard sports fans if you showed them what they are paying each month for ESPN they would reconsider whether it is worth it. 

[77ncaachamps]

There's gotta be a way to embed code to prevent duplication (i.e., create lines when someone tries to copy or stream illegally), no?

EDIT: Considering the last post, how much would you, MU fan, pay to watch MU BK to be streamed online with a higher quality than ESPN3 (which can be pretty cruddy at times)?

[MarsupialMadness]

The ESPN stream on my xBox is much better than the one on my macbook, for whatever reason and FWIW.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I stand by my comparison of FrontRow.eu to Napster.

Music and film distribution have been revolutionized by piracy... Live TV is next.

Yes, because the resources it took to create a music album are close to those creating television (scripts, producers, directors, actors, production, etc).  LOL.  The answer is simple, if the money dries up there is nothing to create anymore...the differences are exponential.

[avid1010]

Yes, because the resources it took to create a music album are close to those creating television (scripts, producers, directors, actors, production, etc).  LOL.  The answer is simple, if the money dries up there is nothing to create anymore...the differences are exponential.

how about movies, software, etc. 

[Marqevans]

In the long run, bad news.  People watching these types of streams mean lower ratings, mean lower conference fees in tv deals for schools like Marquette.  I had to deal with a programmer recently that we were renewing and they, of course, wanted higher fees for us to carry their channel.  I pointed to their ratings being not that strong.  They came back with how their content is viewed illegally as one of the most popular programs on torrents, and such.

She was right.  Unfortunately for her I had to ask the question: "so you want me to pay you all this money for the right to broadcast your channel for our customers who have to pay higher fees and all the while people are stealing it for free on the internet. Come again?"

If the cable networks were able to block all streaming, it would not mean that those that were illegally downloading would then pay to watch.  In all likely hood they just would not watch.

[ChicosBailBonds]

There are zero incremental costs to broadcasters. Just lost revenue. Big difference.

Perhaps it is the ridiculous rates charged by the likes of Dish and DirecTV?

God bless free enterprise and the entrepreneurial spirit!

The "ridiculous charges" are driven by those programming costs.  When ESPN goes out and spends billions for Monday Night Football, who do you think pays for that?  ESPN?    Dish, Directv, AT&T, Charter, Cox, TimeWarner pay for it.  Guess what, who do you think has to pay for them?  The customers.   That over the air channel you can get for free from CBS with rabbit ears, Dish, Directv, Comcast, etc all have to pay several dollars per subscriber per month for something that is "free" to retransmit those feeds.  I've seen some in the last 18 months where stations have demanded over 500% increase in fees. 

Thievery isn't part of the free enterprise or the entrepreneurial spirit....it's thievery.  It will continue to raise rates for honest folks, just like insurance fraud and others like it.

When the money dries up, it will be fun to watch what people will steal next.  In the meantime, it's always interesting to read about the latest thief busted, the fines that these folks have to pay and the jail times they serve.  That's the spirit.   Da judge recently sent one guy up (a repeat offender) to do 4 years in the pokey and $100K fine.  Most of the fines and punishments less severe. 

[forgetful]

There's gotta be a way to embed code to prevent duplication (i.e., create lines when someone tries to copy or stream illegally), no?

EDIT: Considering the last post, how much would you, MU fan, pay to watch MU BK to be streamed online with a higher quality than ESPN3 (which can be pretty cruddy at times)?

That's exactly my point I would rather pay the $5 per month for quality MU broadcasts and jettison ESPN all together.

[ChicosBailBonds]

We've talked about it for sports and it goes the same for TV.  Prices have peaked and the old format is broken.  Things will go to all on-demand models soon.  People just aren't willing to pay the prices and fees forever, especially when they are not watching the channels.

Even for many diehard sports fans if you showed them what they are paying each month for ESPN they would reconsider whether it is worth it. 

I've heard this now for 10 years straight.  Congress has heard it.  Programmers have heard it.  Distributors have heard it.  Yup, you could do it, and basically for the $75 you pay today, you'll lower your bill to say $60 and cut your channels by at least 50% if not 70%.  But if you like sports, your rates will actually INCREASE and you will still get most of your channels cut.  Basically your per channel cost will go through the roof.

ESPN is on the hook for billions through 2023 to the various leagues.  BILLIONS.  They are penetrated at 88% through all tv services right now.  About $5 to $6 of your monthly bill goes just to ESPN, even though half of that 88% doesn't give a damn about ESPN, sports, or anything associated with it.  NOT. A. DAMN.  Go a la carte, that $5 to $6 just became $12 to $15....at $12 to $15, many more check out and it now becomes $18 to $25.  ESPN still has to get their revenue, they need to pay the NFL, MLB, SEC, ACC, NASCAR, etc, etc.  That's just ESPN \ Disney.  Now do the same for Viacom.  HBO.  Liberty. Turner.  CBS.  Universal.  NewsCorp.  A&E.  Etc, etc, etc.

We'll see what happens, but some very bright minds at McKinsey, Deloitte, Accenture, Cap G., Stanford school of Business, Harvard school of Business, lawmakers, have looked, relooked, relooked again...there are disruptors like Apple, Google, etc that have looked, relooked, relooked again.  Maybe someone comes up with a way to do it that doesn't destroy the innovation, creativity, the content, etc.  We'll see.

[ChicosBailBonds]

If the cable networks were able to block all streaming, it would not mean that those that were illegally downloading would then pay to watch.  In all likely hood they just would not watch.

More like somewhere in between.  HBO already knows that some people pirating used to pay for it.  They know that from their own studies.  Now, is it true that some would never watch it at all and no lost revenue?  Of course.  The answer lies in between.

[avid1010]

Thievery isn't part of the free enterprise or the entrepreneurial spirit....it's thievery.  It will continue to raise rates for honest folks, just like insurance fraud and others like it.

are you talking about the insurance fraud that takes place when over-billing and unnecessary treatment is applied?