Lack of golf on terrestrial TV - Golf Monthly Feature

[Dan2501]

Average DL speed gives a very false impression- there are millions of households that don’t get anywhere near the “advertised “.

And Sky go is shocking especially since they removed the URL and forced everyone to use the desktop APP - we have currently thousands of open cases in regards the APP - it’s has thousands of issues.

But ultimately a demographic that golf should be looking at 30’s to 40’s won’t be all over you tube etc

The averages quoted aren't advertised averages, they're from speedtest.net, that's the actual UK average. Also, you need roughly 1.5mbps to stream to a reasonable level, BT failed because their servers weren't capable of handling the traffic, nothing to do with household internet speeds, you could have had FTTP and that stream still would have sucked.

I think should The Open return to FTA, the potential for getting fresh eyes on Golf, the possibilities for driving traffic and opening the sport up to the largest possible audience is not via traditional terrestrial services, it's via popular online streaming platforms which are watched by a wide demographic. We're not going to agree though, so might as well just leave it here.

 

[GreiginFife]

I would like to see some market research and the data on actual routes into golf in the UK. I'm not convinced TV is as significant a gateway as people think because I suspect us golfers add a lot of confirmation bias when thinking back through the rose-tinted spectacles of time.

Correct, and as I said before it matters not a jot how we got in to it and how we consumed our golf 30+ years ago, its about the culture of now where services are consumed in totally different ways.

So many opinions of what the BBC do and don't do, will do and won't do being thrown around as facts.
Does anyone really know the demographic of people who watched the Open FTA? Or if they were already golfers in some form, even lapsed ones?

How does Phil know non golfers won't pay for golf as fact? More opinion?
How do we know how many people watched the open considering non-live and stream views, pausing and catching up etc...?

 

[Jimaroid]

Average DL speed gives a very false impression- there are millions of households that don’t get anywhere near the “advertised “.

And Sky go is shocking especially since they removed the URL and forced everyone to use the desktop APP - we have currently thousands of open cases in regards the APP - it’s has thousands of issues.

But ultimately a demographic that golf should be looking at 30’s to 40’s won’t be all over you tube etc

Yes, yes, no.

Don't forget 4g and soon to be 5g. I had better 4g coverage on tiny little Iona than I did in Surrey last week and could stream everything fine in the Hebrides but not in the urban sprawl. Low end streaming video needs about 1.5Mbps as a stable, acceptable minimum and it's up to about 8Mbps for the best 4K streaming. The problems people generally experience tend to be broadly two issues; first being their own available bandwidth and local loop contention (the receiving end), the other being the service providers ability to scale their content delivery networks (the sending end) in periods of high demand. The two together are a disaster so yeah, the infrastructure needs sorted but it's well within the capability of the major platform holders to do this just fine. Some of the big videogames tournaments stream to between 4 to 6 million people concurrently without much bother for example.

You're just wrong on the demographics of youtube, they are much more diverse than you think.

 

[Imurg]

I got into golf by watching the Masters, Open, PGA and Matchplay on the Beeb - because there was nowhere else to watch it
You had 3 or 4 channels, that was it.
There are hundreds of channels now, loads of streaming services, millions of YouTube videos and creators.
Far more places to watch everything.
Putting golf back on terrestrial, much as I'd like it as it means I wouldn't have to pay more for it, isn't going to get hoards of people wanting to take up the game.
Golf is, I'm afraid, a dull sport to watch until you get into the back 9 on a Sunday. Even watching someone compile a 61 or 60 - you've still got hours of endless 2 putts from 20 feet to view between shots from the leader.
Today's society craves instant gratification. That's one reason numbers are not rising. Unless you're super talented it takes years to get to a decent standard.
Practice is what is needed but practice takes time and time is what most people don't have - for whatever reason.
As a result they don't improve and they give up.
You're far more likely to introduce people to the game, these days, through the likes of YouTube than by putting golf back on BBC 2

 

[Imurg]

You're just wrong on the demographics of youtube, they are much more diverse than you think.

Even my 82 year old Mother-in-law watches YouTube..

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I firmly believe that is what should happen, allows more freedom of choice to the people paying money out then and means the BBC has to become more like everyone else.

However queue many of here as there are everywhere stating the licence fee is well worth it, that it's a national institution and its effectively blasphemy to suggest otherwise. If

I see 2 conflicting arguments about the BBC. That match of the day is worth it due to the millions that watch and that the BBC warrants the licence fee so as it can produce programs without pandering to viewer numbers. Cannot have it both ways.

Football is covered everywhere and I am sure other channels would snap up the free to air highlights package so it really should not feature on the BBC radar at all. It is a stronger argument that the BBC should have golf on as a minority interest sport instead of football.

What about ditching the licence fee leaving the BBC to fend for itself as a commercial entity then people have £200 to spend on whatever subscription service suits their interests.

It’s a shame that anytime one of these threads start it ends up with a slagging session against the BBC - yes we know some would like to ditch the fee but that ignores millions that rely on it but we have a whole thread about that and FTA and Terrestrial is more than just the BBC

 

[Wolf]

It’s a shame that anytime one of these threads start it ends up with a slagging session against the BBC - yes we know some would like to ditch the fee but that ignores millions that rely on it but we have a whole thread about that and FTA and Terrestrial is more than just the BBC

Nobody is slagging the BBC its merely pointing out a preference so don't twist things that others are saying.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Nobody is slagging the BBC its merely pointing out a preference so don't twist things that others are saying.

Maybe read all the thread - do believe just seen one post calling the BBC draconian? Sometimes you seem far to eager to reply to score a point and that’s twice now you have done so without actually reading what’s posted. You are very quick to point the finger - may I suggest you look in the mirror before doing so.

 

[Pin-seeker]

Yet another thread LiverpoolPhil’d 🙄

 

[Wolf]

Maybe read all the thread - do believe just seen one post calling the BBC draconian? Sometimes you seem far to eager to reply to score a point and that’s twice now you have done so without actually reading what’s posted. You are very quick to point the finger - may I suggest you look in the mirror before doing so.

Maybe you should Have quoted those posts instead of mine like you usually do then👍
Because funny enough you say point finger but you've quoted my post in your slagging the BBC post and not those other ones.. As always Phil you are trying to drag the poster down again and threads then become about you being correct because others don't agree. As also with those threads I'll stick to the subject matter at hand and not bother with you any further.

 

[Wolf]

Yet another thread LiverpoolPhil’d 🙄

Don't you know its not his fault 🙄

 

[GB72]

Maybe read all the thread - do believe just seen one post calling the BBC draconian? Sometimes you seem far to eager to reply to score a point and that’s twice now you have done so without actually reading what’s posted. You are very quick to point the finger - may I suggest you look in the mirror before doing so.

Not slagging the BBC off as such just feel in the current environment with the services available it has had its day. There will remain free to air TV and so those who rely on it will still have TV. It is possible to proffer that it is time to end the BBC without deriding what it does. My arguments on a sporting level is that in both TV and radio the BBC is far too biased in favour of broadcasting football when it's remit is to broadcast minority interests that would otherwise not be covered.

 

[Jimaroid]

I think the bbc are one of the few groups of people that could do streaming well and compete with YouTube as they have the technical nous to do so. But they’re not allowed to do it due to the restrictions placed upon them by government and rivals.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Not slagging the BBC off as such just feel in the current environment with the services available it has had its day. There will remain free to air TV and so those who rely on it will still have TV. It is possible to proffer that it is time to end the BBC without deriding what it does. My arguments on a sporting level is that in both TV and radio the BBC is far too biased in favour of broadcasting football when it's remit is to broadcast minority interests that would otherwise not be covered.

The BBC has to cater for the whole country and it ends up going for the popular route and there are millions who rely on it. Its restricted due to government and budget constraints but for what we pay what it’s offers is vast .

And it favours football because it’s the one area that it can afford to get and get the most viewers - but there are still a vast array of sports available on the bbc through the year - none more so than the big summer events.
End the BBC and what do the millions who rely on it watch ? The license fee doesn’t go far in regards subscription services

I think the bbc are one of the few groups of people that could do streaming well and compete with YouTube as they have the technical nous to do so. But they’re not allowed to do it due to the restrictions placed upon them by government and rivals.

Yep - it’s I Player and online services are superb but they just can’t afford to compete

 

[GB72]

What will people lose if the BBC became a free to air commercial channel or if the free to air football package was on ITV or channel 4

 

[Pin-seeker]

The BBC has to cater for the whole country and it ends up going for the popular route and there are millions who rely on it. Its restricted due to government and budget constraints but for what we pay what it’s offers is vast .

And it favours football because it’s the one area that it can afford to get and get the most viewers - but there are still a vast array of sports available on the bbc through the year - none more so than the big summer events.
End the BBC and what do the millions who rely on it watch ? The license fee doesn’t go far in regards subscription services




Yep - it’s I Player and online services are superb but they just can’t afford to compete

Rely on it?
Really?

 

[Fish]

What will people lose if the BBC became a free to air commercial channel or if the free to air football package was on ITV or channel 4

Nothing, it would just become another commercial entity able to compete, as in its current form, it can’t.

It’s completely antiquated and dare I say biased in its reporting and lack of at times, so it wouldn’t go, so nobody would lose out on anything, if anything, it could become stronger and more respected, a few adverts aren’t going to change people’s views of watching what it shows currently, but it could compete to show more with revenue from advertising.

Whilst in its current form it will get left behind and the divide will get even greater and less people will pay the licence fee.

 

[clubchamp98]

I think it needs a sort of Match of the day programme.
Maybe on Sunday night and repeated in the week at 5pm when kids are home from school.
But young people don’t watch much tv now it’s all computers and phones.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

What will people lose if the BBC became a free to air commercial channel or if the free to air football package was on ITV or channel 4

They would have to deal with adverts - one of the biggest complaints in television broadcasting adverts - and let’s be honest the level of programs on ITV compared to the BBC is night and day , the level of funding would drop significantly also

As for the free to air football package - itv did have it for a while and the drop in viewers was quite drastic

 

[Jimaroid]

The BBC have everything they need to be the same as Netflix, without advertising. It’s just not allowed to do it.