HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Why couldn't we support the ICE?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-24-2004, 03:38 AM
  #1
se7en*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,737
vCash: 500
Why couldn't we support the ICE?

I wasn't living in E-Town at the time so what happened? Because some people are telling me the Runners will flop because Edmonton hockey fans didn't support the Ice, is this true? Thx.

se7en* is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 08:06 AM
  #2
Lowetide
Registered User
 
Lowetide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,281
vCash: 500
I'll have a go.

1. They didn't promote it very well. I'm a hockey fan and often found myself saying "geez, I didn't know they were in town last night" and that's the truth. .

2. They didn't stay long enough. It takes time for people to warm up to these things.

3. They didn't have the advantage of no NHL hockey. THAT is going to be a huge window of opportunity.

4. They had NO star power. At all.

5. They were not a very good team.

6. They didn't have a personality. They were blah.

7. They didn't work the media like the Oilers can and will.

8. There was no radio station devoted completely to sports. Don't kid yourself, the Team will be all over this.

9. The Ice had no connection to the Oilers. The Oilers sneeze, this town catches a cold.

That's all I got.

Lowetide is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 09:27 AM
  #3
hockeyaddict101
Registered User
 
hockeyaddict101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 19,906
vCash: 500
Your last one if the biggest reason

Pocklington owned the team and instead of working with the Ice worked against it.

There were no cross promotions, no marketing from the Oilers. Comparing the situations doesn't work for me they aren't the same.

hockeyaddict101 is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 10:49 AM
  #4
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,823
vCash: 500
also, parking cost way too much given the cost of the event with the Ice, maybe this time around they can knock a couple bucks off parking costs.

speeds is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 10:49 AM
  #5
theoil
Registered User
 
theoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaz44
Pocklington owned the team and instead of working with the Ice worked against it.

There were no cross promotions, no marketing from the Oilers. Comparing the situations doesn't work for me they aren't the same.

That's what I think too. Pocklington (Sather) wouldn't allow it to succeed.

theoil is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 10:52 AM
  #6
oh_canuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootchie Cootchie
I wasn't living in E-Town at the time so what happened? Because some people are telling me the Runners will flop because Edmonton hockey fans didn't support the Ice, is this true? Thx.

If you have ever set foot in the building they played in you would know why noone wanted to attend games.....Agricom SUCKS for everything, bathrooms concessions, just getting in and out of the building is brutal, check it out while you are at k days they put the casino in there...

oh_canuck is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:03 AM
  #7
guymez
The Seldom Seen Kid
 
guymez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,233
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaz44
Pocklington owned the team and instead of working with the Ice worked against it.

There were no cross promotions, no marketing from the Oilers. Comparing the situations doesn't work for me they aren't the same.
I may be way off base here, but didn't Vic Mah own the team?

guymez is online now  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:09 AM
  #8
McJadeddog
Registered User
 
McJadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 12,284
vCash: 500
this doesnt have much to do with anything (other than one point in this thread)..... but for the LOVE OF GOD!!! when is the team going to get an internet feed?? its pathetic beyond all reason that they dont have one..... I'VE had radio feeds before, i have FRIENDS that have radio feeds (and they arent even in business, they are just geeks, lol)...... its sad and ridiculous that the team doesnt have one yet..... buy a clue and step into the 90s please

McJadeddog is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:15 AM
  #9
guymez
The Seldom Seen Kid
 
guymez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,233
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jadeddog
this doesnt have much to do with anything (other than one point in this thread)..... but for the LOVE OF GOD!!! when is the team going to get an internet feed?? its pathetic beyond all reason that they dont have one..... I'VE had radio feeds before, i have FRIENDS that have radio feeds (and they arent even in business, they are just geeks, lol)...... its sad and ridiculous that the team doesnt have one yet..... buy a clue and step into the 90s please
This is a major frustration for me as well. I seem to recall a thread a few months back, where somebody brought up the issue with licienceing, in terms of rebroadcasting some shows.( Jim Rome show ) If this is true they really need to work this out, because it is embarrassing, in the year 2004, not to have an internet feed.

guymez is online now  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:17 AM
  #10
hockeyaddict101
Registered User
 
hockeyaddict101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 19,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guymez
I may be way off base here, but didn't Vic Mah own the team?
Sorry I meant the Oilers not the ice, I didn't make that clear. Pocklington's Oilers didn't support the Ice.

hockeyaddict101 is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:27 AM
  #11
guymez
The Seldom Seen Kid
 
guymez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,233
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaz44
Sorry I meant the Oilers not the ice, I didn't make that clear. Pocklington's Oilers didn't support the Ice.
No worries. Actually, now that I have had my 1st cup of ( strong) coffee, your post wouldn't make a lot of sense if Pocklington had owned the Ice.

guymez is online now  
Old
07-24-2004, 11:55 AM
  #12
HarryStrand
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 85
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guymez
I may be way off base here, but didn't Vic Mah own the team?
Unfortunately, Vic Mah had nothing to do with the Edmonton Ice . If he would have, the team would still be here. Vic Mah is a very smart business man and an honourable gentleman. His dream was always to bring back the Edmonton Oil Kings, and he was not going to do it when the Edmonton Oilers were going through a crisis.

Besides all the reasons previously mentioned, The Ice was a failure because the Chenowyh's bulldozed their way into Edmonton and showed the business community absolutely no respect at all. It was disgraceful. The grassroots businesses who had supported the old Oil Kings were treated incredibly badly by the Edmonton Ice "organization".

HarryStrand is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 12:52 PM
  #13
oh_canuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guymez
This is a major frustration for me as well. I seem to recall a thread a few months back, where somebody brought up the issue with licienceing, in terms of rebroadcasting some shows.( Jim Rome show ) If this is true they really need to work this out, because it is embarrassing, in the year 2004, not to have an internet feed.
Licensing is not an issue in this case for the most part (sarcasm)...other stations just black out the shows which are effected. i.e. Most of the daytime programing, and evening programming would have to be blacked out only leaving probably only 8 hours a day to be fed onto the net is that worth it??

oh_canuck is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 01:25 PM
  #14
McJadeddog
Registered User
 
McJadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 12,284
vCash: 500
an internet feed takes next to no money and next to no tech support for it to be serviceable..... hell, *i'll* come do it *for* them if they want, its not a hard thing to do..... pay a CS student a few hundred bucks from U of A or get one going on the numerous radio feed sites on the net, just get it done...... like i said before, its pathetic that with the CHEAP available options/technology that they dont have one

McJadeddog is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 01:41 PM
  #15
Hydroponic Harold
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Mountaintop ,Somewherein BC
Posts: 349
vCash: 500
Chynoweth never gave the Ice a chance once Cranbrook came and offered a new arena and other incentives .The Oil did nothing to help out and i dont know if its true or not but wouldnt allow the Ice to to play in the coliseum on saturday afternoons like the old Marlies used to do in Toronto .It made for a great day of hockey ..the Marlies at noon at the Laffs at night ..i think it would of done wonders for the Ice .
As a long time season ticket holder of the kamloops Blazers i can say its FANTASTIC hockey ..lots of hits ,fights and despite the memorial cup BORING Kelowna Rockets ..some nice goal scoring.
I have been lucky enough to see some GREAT juniors pass through ,Iggy ,Tucker ,Sydor ,Niedermayer ,Brew,Doaner,Nash,Smittys both of em ..its a great chance to meet the players too as they are great to talk to in junior ..its a win win situation and i know Edmonton would THRIVE with a properly run WHL team .

Hydroponic Harold is offline  
Old
07-24-2004, 09:39 PM
  #16
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by jadeddog
an internet feed takes next to no money and next to no tech support for it to be serviceable..... hell, *i'll* come do it *for* them if they want, its not a hard thing to do..... pay a CS student a few hundred bucks from U of A or get one going on the numerous radio feed sites on the net, just get it done...... like i said before, its pathetic that with the CHEAP available options/technology that they dont have one
Wow... bandwidth, for a live feed is not cheap.

I've done web casts for lacrosse games and the bandwidth bills are huge, and that is for a 2-3 hour game.

I think it worked out to 1 MB/sec of live feed for 4000 online users, which is 3.6 GB/hour. For 8 hours in a day, at the end of the week you will have used 201.6 GB.

Not sure about you, but that is roughly 6 times my monthly bandwidth allotment on my server... and that is a week. You are looking at a cost of roughly $3000/wk for a live feed (that's probably on the low side too).

Bryn has been on here and mentioned that their primary goal is local, and that there are still areas locally that they want to address first.... and locally definitely pays the bills.

__________________
TheSpecialist - MacT thinks he was that good of a hockey player when in actuality he was no better then a Louie Debrusk.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 02:05 AM
  #17
Master Lok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 7,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Wow... bandwidth, for a live feed is not cheap.

I've done web casts for lacrosse games and the bandwidth bills are huge, and that is for a 2-3 hour game.

I think it worked out to 1 MB/sec of live feed for 4000 online users, which is 3.6 GB/hour. For 8 hours in a day, at the end of the week you will have used 201.6 GB.

Not sure about you, but that is roughly 6 times my monthly bandwidth allotment on my server... and that is a week. You are looking at a cost of roughly $3000/wk for a live feed (that's probably on the low side too).

Bryn has been on here and mentioned that their primary goal is local, and that there are still areas locally that they want to address first.... and locally definitely pays the bills.
AGreed. CJSR thought it sounded cool and tried it and boom.. Big Costs. I also worked for an ISP and EVERYTHING costs, it just might not be evident to the user.

Master Lok is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 02:17 AM
  #18
MoeLemayStays
Registered User
 
MoeLemayStays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cowtown
Posts: 292
vCash: 500
As already mentioned... The Agricom is a lousy place to watch hockey and Chynoweth snubbed Vic Mah and other stakeholders so there was little community support.

What I always found interesting was that I believe that the crowds were good enough for WHL back then (at the games I was at) and it was just that Chynoweth was waiting for the sweet deal and Kootney soon came calling. Everybody knew that the Ice were only passing through.

Also as that time Oiler support was still suffering due to those lousy Corson-Arnott years and the dislike of Pocklington. I think the Oilers were still barely drawing 11 or 12 on good nights, with lots of empty season seats as well.

MoeLemayStays is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 04:19 AM
  #19
oh_canuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Wow... bandwidth, for a live feed is not cheap.

I've done web casts for lacrosse games and the bandwidth bills are huge, and that is for a 2-3 hour game.

I think it worked out to 1 MB/sec of live feed for 4000 online users, which is 3.6 GB/hour. For 8 hours in a day, at the end of the week you will have used 201.6 GB.

Not sure about you, but that is roughly 6 times my monthly bandwidth allotment on my server... and that is a week. You are looking at a cost of roughly $3000/wk for a live feed (that's probably on the low side too).

Bryn has been on here and mentioned that their primary goal is local, and that there are still areas locally that they want to address first.... and locally definitely pays the bills.
Excellent post dawg sometimes people on this board just have to easy of a time spending other peoples money....

oh_canuck is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 09:03 AM
  #20
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by oh_canuck
Excellent post dawg sometimes people on this board just have to easy of a time spending other peoples money....
Jadeddog is right though... the costs aren't huge, but huge is a relative term. The most important thing when you are running a business is to:

1A). Make sure you meet your current clients needs before trying to appease the clients you don't have.

1B). Make sure your costs aren't cutting into your income to the point where it hurts the good/service you provide.

So $3000/wk may not be much for a Radio Station like the fan590 in Toronto, but it could be for a startup radio station elsewhere.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-25-2004, 01:31 PM
  #21
oh_canuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 868
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Jadeddog is right though... the costs aren't huge, but huge is a relative term. The most important thing when you are running a business is to:

1A). Make sure you meet your current clients needs before trying to appease the clients you don't have.

1B). Make sure your costs aren't cutting into your income to the point where it hurts the good/service you provide.

So $3000/wk may not be much for a Radio Station like the fan590 in Toronto, but it could be for a startup radio station elsewhere.

I dont see any way it can generate any money having the internet feed as the advertising dollars are from a local area and if you are outside the local area you have no value to the advertisers.

second if they can only air a third of the broadcasting day over the internet feed then it really doesnt make any sense....to me anyway

oh_canuck is offline  
Old
07-26-2004, 04:17 PM
  #22
PigeonCamera
Registered User
 
PigeonCamera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Petr Klima's Trunk
Country: Canada
Posts: 955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oh_canuck
I dont see any way it can generate any money having the internet feed as the advertising dollars are from a local area and if you are outside the local area you have no value to the advertisers.

second if they can only air a third of the broadcasting day over the internet feed then it really doesnt make any sense....to me anyway
Just to throw this up in the air, how many of you folks would be willing to pay a monthly membership to 1260 to support an internet feed?

I would certainly be willing, as long as it wasn't too nasty. (The irony of me pitching this while still not having ponied up HF sponsorship dough isn't lost on me, by the way.)

PigeonCamera is offline  
Old
07-26-2004, 05:50 PM
  #23
McJadeddog
Registered User
 
McJadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 12,284
vCash: 500
200 GB/week (800GB/month) would not cost anywhere NEAR $3000 per week ($12,000/month).... like not even CLOSE, not by a mile, not by a country mile..... i seem to recall that one of the hosting companies i dealt with last year gave you 100 GB of traffic a month for about $30-40 US and any more data was billed at around $2-3/GB .... now of course, thats the cheapest i can think of off the top of my head, but im sure with some research you might even be able to get cheaper than that...... also, the fan would not get 4000 listeners 24 hours a day, during the night it would be MUCH MUCH slower.... to be honest, i would be surprised if they got 4000 at their peak times for an online feed.... you could also use a high compression method because its just voice grade that you would need to broadcast (as there isnt music on the fan)..... i would estimate that it would cost around $750-1000 per month to do this, depending on the volume of feeds of course.... now before you jump all over me, im guesstimating this (of course), but ive done enough of this that im fairly confident in my estimation.... and this is not taking into account the setup of all of this, but that would be a few thousand dollars at the absolute most

if they really wanted to, they could do it for free by doing it through one of the many internet broadcast sites out there that allow you to feed directly.... you could also do a shared feed (where the listeners broadcast as well as receive)..... there are lots of options here and not near as many excuses

McJadeddog is offline  
Old
07-26-2004, 06:13 PM
  #24
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by jadeddog
200 GB/week (800GB/month) would not cost anywhere NEAR $3000 per week ($12,000/month).... like not even CLOSE, not by a mile, not by a country mile..... i seem to recall that one of the hosting companies i dealt with last year gave you 100 GB of traffic a month for about $30-40 US and any more data was billed at around $2-3/GB .... now of course, thats the cheapest i can think of off the top of my head, but im sure with some research you might even be able to get cheaper than that......
Ah no... but you'd need A) a dedicated server (which you don't get in your hosting service) B) at minimum a T3 line connection, and C) someone to maintain and monitor it. I guess I should have mentioned that I was accounting for everything in the cost, not just the bandwidth... that's my fault for the confusion. This isn't a radio cast out of your basement to 30 computers that happened to google you up... the quality, speed, and everything has to be there to make it a worthwhile event. There is nothing worse than listening to a choppy webcast, that needs to try and reconnect every 10 seconds because it is jammed.

Quote:
also, the fan would not get 4000 listeners 24 hours a day, during the night it would be MUCH MUCH slower.... to be honest, i would be surprised if they got 4000 at their peak times for an online feed.... you could also use a high compression method because its just voice grade that you would need to broadcast (as there isnt music on the fan)
I never said 24 hours a day... I said 8 hours per day. The fan in Toronto gets roughly 60-100,000 people who listen to their webcasts. Don't forget, it's not just the out of towners, but people at work, sitting by their computers, etc...

I'm sure they'd get at least 4000 listeners per day just from Edmonton on their webcasts, nevermind the out of town content. It's huge. If I can get 2800 listeners for a junior a lacrosse game on a friday night, I am sure the Team could easily surpass that number.

Quote:
..... i would estimate that it would cost around $750-1000 per month to do this, depending on the volume of feeds of course.... now before you jump all over me, im guesstimating this (of course), but ive done enough of this that im fairly confident in my estimation.... and this is not taking into account the setup of all of this, but that would be a few thousand dollars at the absolute most
I too have done this several times... I've also done video and live concerts... my costs are an estimate too, but their based on numbers that I have encountered, and factored out to an estimated audience. I think your number of listeners and my number of listeners

Quote:
if they really wanted to, they could do it for free by doing it through one of the many internet broadcast sites out there that allow you to feed directly.... you could also do a shared feed (where the listeners broadcast as well as receive)..... there are lots of options here and not near as many excuses
If the rumours are true that the TEAM is looking to do a lot more local programming, including live events, that option isn't the best (in fact it's terrible). Those options are all well and good if you are small potatoes, but the problem is I think they will have a very popular webcast, and the effect will be a big time distaste from the listeners who have to put up with shoddy quality and slow speeds.

I think our differences stem from a disagreement in numbers... as in the number of people who will tune in.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
07-26-2004, 06:27 PM
  #25
McJadeddog
Registered User
 
McJadeddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
Posts: 12,284
vCash: 500
yeah i dont think the numbers would be very high, but i might be wrong there

as far as a dedicated server, thats true, you do in fact need one, but you dont need it all to yourself.... many hosting companies have the offer of streaming content, and have numerous feeds from the same server (different servers having differing numbers of feeds according to listeners i would assume).... unless your running the feed yourself or some such thing, any reputable hosting company has more than adequate bandwidth for your needs (although you usually have to pay for a higher package)..... the maintenance and monitoring would just be done by the IT guys for the fan, which im assuming they have already

your completely right about the numbers going through the roof if they started doing live events (such as university sports etc) and this would obviously increase their costs rather dramatically

the free options (or next to free) are still there though.... and while these are not the most "professional" (especially the shared feed since you have to DL some software to make it work) they still get the job done..... in fact i would argue that the shared feed is the BEST option for people on a tight budget whom also want to reach a large audience, as the quality of the feed actually increases as the number of listeners increases (ala bit torrent)

i suppose our numbers mght not match up and all, but i still think its a travesty that they havent gotten anything up yet.... i know the guy who helps runs www.di.fm (which as i write this has about 12,000 listeners) and have talked to him in passing about their site and what they use, and it hasnt really sounded all that impressive to be honest.... im not saying that they are running off 3 home computers and a DSL line, lol, but they arnt exactly having to build new racks each day either

*edit* yeah, my estimated costs were just for the bandwidth per month, not for maintaining it or the setup of it

McJadeddog is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:03 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.