[2006alum]

Charging $500 to watch Pac--Whatever sports? You might get parents, but zero broad audience. Great way to attract players too: Come to the Pac, where your friends and family can watch you if they pay through the nose. . . .

Yep

Cardcrimson likes to discredit larger points by discrediting small sub-points that ignore the full picture.

In this case, he focuses on "$500" to watch (live games)," while ignoring the larger point that was to add more benefits to the product than just watching live games. There absolutely is a product to be had at that price point, if you figure out how to develop it. 

The conference paid who knows how much to media consultants to tell them how to sell what media buyers want. They could have spent the same money doing market research on how to develop a product to fit a new business model they could control.

As for your larger point, you stated that you wouldn't change from DirecTV to get the Pac-12 Channel. Help me understand why you'd now pay $500 to get it streamed? Why would anyone else? What larger point am I missing? Please explain.

As for the ad hominem attack, you've been granted a cloak of immunity here, so continue to bring it on.

I'm not going to wade into the merits of this debate, but yes, as CardCrimson noted, let's please leave the ad hominems to the side. No need to attack the poster - attack the post. Next violation will be a three-day suspension, per Admin's directives, then a ban. I'd prefer not to do that, because there's been a lot of good debate here, and it's clearly directly relevant to the Stanford sports we all love. 

So let's keep things civil. Thanks.

[2006alum]

Charging $500 to watch Pac--Whatever sports? You might get parents, but zero broad audience. Great way to attract players too: Come to the Pac, where your friends and family can watch you if they pay through the nose. . . .

Yep

Cardcrimson likes to discredit larger points by discrediting small sub-points that ignore the full picture.

In this case, he focuses on "$500" to watch (live games)," while ignoring the larger point that was to add more benefits to the product than just watching live games. There absolutely is a product to be had at that price point, if you figure out how to develop it. 

The conference paid who knows how much to media consultants to tell them how to sell what media buyers want. They could have spent the same money doing market research on how to develop a product to fit a new business model they could control.

As for your larger point, you stated that you wouldn't change from DirecTV to get the Pac-12 Channel. Help me understand why you'd now pay $500 to get it streamed? Why would anyone else? What larger point am I missing? Please explain.

As for the ad hominem attack, you've been granted a cloak of immunity here, so continue to bring it on.

I'm not going to wade into the merits of this debate, but yes, as CardCrimson noted, let's please leave the ad hominems to the side. No need to attack the poster - attack the post. Next violation will be a three-day suspension, per Admin's directives, then a ban. I'd prefer not to do that, because there's been a lot of good debate here, and it's clearly directly relevant to the Stanford sports we all love. 

So let's keep things civil. Thanks.