GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   UFC Is Going After GideonGallery (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=980162)

kane 07-29-2010 01:27 PM

I think Gideon is still busy looking for that email he supposedly send Doc, but it appears to have gotten lost in the "swarm" and he is having trouble "access shifting" it back to his computer.

marketsmart 07-29-2010 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Far-L (Post 17373059)
One of our attorneys came from mainstream film biz, experts at shells, offshore, etc. and going after offshore companies is not so difficult. All those places people think are safe harbors like Curacao, Macau etc., guess again.

Dana White will have an army of attorneys to chase those dollars down... and he will strike with great and furious vengeance on those who come against him.

i guess we will see how far he is willing to go...

i seriously doubt these are corporations streaming these fights..

flashfire 07-29-2010 01:50 PM

I have watched those streams for a few minutes or so just to see the main event but would NEVER spend $60 to watch that roid rage

Robbie 07-29-2010 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flashfire (Post 17373132)
I have watched those streams for a few minutes or so just to see the main event but would NEVER spend $60 to watch that roid rage

Nope, but the people who enjoy MMA fighting would. And those are the ones watching the free streams that the UFC is losing potential sales to. Not people like you who don't even like it.

MrBottomTooth 07-29-2010 04:36 PM

I believe he sued the bar owner that let someone hook a laptop up to his bar TV for $640,000 plus legal fees. Ouch.

bronco67 07-29-2010 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopottomouse (Post 17372167)
There's no way of knowing how many of the free watchers would have even wanted to watch it if they had to pay though.

The UFC's product went through the rod and cone receptors in their eyeballs and went into their stupid brains, which caused them to enjoy the UFC's product, gay as it is. Does it matter if they "would have" or "wouldn't have"?

Let's say that hypothetically, you don't like Urban Outfitters clothes. You're hanging with a friend and they go to Urban Outfitters, so you tag along and and steal a shirt while one of the skinny hipster employees isn't looking. You wear the shirt, even though would have never bought it. Is it stealing?

Paul Markham 07-30-2010 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrBottomTooth (Post 17372183)
The root of the problem is the ridiculous price they charge for these. $59.99 in HD up here.

I would buy every one if they were $19.99. If they were $29.99 I would buy just the really good ones. $60 is a rip off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by signupdamnit (Post 17372206)
I wonder why they don't set up their own stream at $5 - $10 a pop at comparable (to these pirate streams) or slightly better quality? If you've ever used one of these streams you'd know that usually they aren't very reliable and the quality is pretty bad. I would have gladly paid $5 for something more reliable and slightly better quality. Turn a percentage of the pirates into paying customers. You can still try to upsell them the better quality PPV or HD streams and your PPV customers aren't going to want to go from 1080p to some crappy pixellated stream unless they are truly broke so you shouldn't lose money there.

They have an advantage over us in that their content has a sort of time factor involved in that most people prefer to see it live. It's a bit different than selling porn.

So lets apply that thinking to the paysite market.

People are unwilling to pay $30 a month for a membership and if we bought it down to $15 approx we would all be making a lot more money.

Great thinking.

Downside. There's little space to cut on hosting, programs, content, admin, etc. So the cut will have to be be on the traffic side of the business. Affiliates will get $1-$5 a join. :1orglaugh

Back in the real world where most of us live...................... :1orglaugh

zuffa 07-30-2010 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie (Post 17372181)
I don't buy that "they never would have bought it anyway" argument.

Fact is that every one of those people were interested enough in that product to actively seek it out for free. It stands to reason that a percentage of those folks would have paid to see it.


You said a mouthful just in that statement. :thumbsup

MrBottomTooth 07-30-2010 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Markham (Post 17374366)
So lets apply that thinking to the paysite market.

People are unwilling to pay $30 a month for a membership and if we bought it down to $15 approx we would all be making a lot more money.

Great thinking.

Downside. There's little space to cut on hosting, programs, content, admin, etc. So the cut will have to be be on the traffic side of the business. Affiliates will get $1-$5 a join. :1orglaugh

Back in the real world where most of us live...................... :1orglaugh

I never said to apply it to the paysite market. Obviously that doesn't work. I am applying it to the situation of the UFC only, and other LIVE PPV events. I have stopped buying fights because they are too expensive. I'll just read the play by play on sherdog.com from now on. Like I said, I would buy most of them if they were $30 cheaper. Every person I know that is a fan would too.

Now compare this with porn. UFC PPVs are live events, not something you just access every time you want to rub one out. I don't care what you charge for a porn paysite membership, because I would never pay for one. Why would you when everything is available free on the tubes? Totally different scenario. Their PPVs are too expensive, that is my only point.

Porn is a totally different ballgame, because everyone wants to give it all away for free. You don't need to pirate porn.(at least the end users don't)

rowan 07-30-2010 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SykkBoy2 (Post 17372411)
So pricing is justification for stealing?
If I want a Ferrari, can I tell the salesman that I only want to pay $20k for it and if I can't get it at that price, then I'll just come and take the car and share it with all of my friends and everyone on the street I can find?

The difference here is that we're talking about intangible goods, so the cost to copy them is very small. Using your car analogy, another shop would have found some way of making a slightly inferior Ferrari clone at near zero cost (and would price them accordingly)

Theft of a physical item results in an absolute measurable loss - the value of the item.

Theft (by copying to multiple receivers) of a digital stream will result in a loss, but it is not simply the value of original_stream_cost X pirate_viewers.

Just look at the comments on the torrent related articles that gideongallery posts, those guys have zero intention of ever paying, and even think it's their right to stick it to the man... :2 cents:

Robbie 07-30-2010 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rowan (Post 17374788)
Just look at the comments on the torrent related articles that gideongallery posts, those guys have zero intention of ever paying, and even think it's their right to stick it to the man... :2 cents:

The thing about that is...only a very small percentage of those thieves would even think that way if it weren't for piracy.

If they HAD to pay to see porn, eventually they would. Even if it was just one time. Curiosity and human perversion would get to them.

But when it already is sitting there for free...and then places like GFY and a thousand other forums give thieves like gideongallery a voice to encourage theft...and then surfer forums with millions of uniques a day and links every paysite's entire ripped members areas are posted and categorized for ease of use...

Well those kinds of things convert people into BECOMING a person who "would never pay".

All those people WERE potential customers and it used to be our job as marketers to convince them to buy. But now? Good luck.

stocktrader23 07-30-2010 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrBottomTooth (Post 17374728)
I never said to apply it to the paysite market. Obviously that doesn't work. I am applying it to the situation of the UFC only, and other LIVE PPV events. I have stopped buying fights because they are too expensive. I'll just read the play by play on sherdog.com from now on. Like I said, I would buy most of them if they were $30 cheaper. Every person I know that is a fan would too.

Now compare this with porn. UFC PPVs are live events, not something you just access every time you want to rub one out. I don't care what you charge for a porn paysite membership, because I would never pay for one. Why would you when everything is available free on the tubes? Totally different scenario. Their PPVs are too expensive, that is my only point.

Porn is a totally different ballgame, because everyone wants to give it all away for free. You don't need to pirate porn.(at least the end users don't)

What you would do is fucking irrelevant. Do you not think that these people, worth millions of dollars, haven't studied what effect each price point has on their bottom line? I assure you, they don't need your fucking help.

MrBottomTooth 07-30-2010 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stocktrader23 (Post 17375200)
What you would do is fucking irrelevant. Do you not think that these people, worth millions of dollars, haven't studied what effect each price point has on their bottom line? I assure you, they don't need your fucking help.

That's OK. They don't need my $59.99 either.

kane 07-30-2010 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rowan (Post 17374788)

Just look at the comments on the torrent related articles that gideongallery posts, those guys have zero intention of ever paying, and even think it's their right to stick it to the man... :2 cents:

Yep, not only do they never have any intention of paying, the are proud to be pirating, say that any law against pirating will only make them do it more and in many cases they actually see themselves as some kind of revolutionary.

I actually read one comment where a guy said that they should band together and petition state attorney generals to ask for help in stopping the RIAA, MPAA and other media producers for using intimidating and heavy handed scare tactics against them. I almost fell out of my chair laughing. Imagine the letter: "Dear State Attorney General. I would like report an abuse. I download movies and music and games and whatever I want for free from various torrent sites. The copyright holders of this material are angry about this because they don't understand how the swarm works and that the VCR is legal. They are trying to scare me by threatening to sue me if I don't stop taking their stuff. Please tell them to stop and to leave me alone to take whatever I want. Thank you. "


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123