Official comment on quality of Candidates Broadcast

[Richard Bates]

How does forcing people to log in to the website help to spread the interest of chess among casual fans?

It put me off watching the official feed and I'm already very interested in chess.

Agreed there seems to be a lack of respect for the real chess players that AGON are pretending they are acting in the best interests of. When we don't agree with their arguments they insult us or marginalising us by pretending that we are part of a small majority. If they are genuinely prepared to engage in a meaningful discussion this has to work both ways and they have to listen and not dictate that somehow we are destroying professional chess if we don't go along with their demands.

In fairness to AGON though there is something that is bothering me a bit. Chess 24 and ChessBomb are portraying themselves as some sort of Robin Hood figures I guess. Now when AGON produced the pgns yesterday I put them up in the other thread. It cost me nothing. When I tried to download the pgns from Chess24 and ChessBomb though they wouldn't let me do it unless I signed up for membership. Chess24 for example wanted $9.99 a month as a Premium Member. Is it me or is their an element of hypocrisy here?

I don't really think so because by including access to PGN within their subscription "benefits" they are not denying access - as pointed out the PGNs are freely available elsewhere. I doubt they have included them within their "package" as anything other than padding, it wouldn't really make any difference whether they offered them for free or not.

However I do think the debate has got distorted by the "Agon=Evil" meme that has developed (not withstanding complaints about some of the more intemperate comments and threats that they have been making). Every business involved in sports/games broadcasting will always argue that what they are doing has at its core a desire to promote and expand the specific sport/game they are linked to. And by and large they should generally be taken at their word - of course the problem is often that their basic business model will result in restrictions from the point at which they commence involvement (see any number of sports switching from free-to-air to subscription channels, albeit things are rarely as simple as portrayed because that has often resulted a relatively small amount of coverage being available to everyone switching to a larger amount of coverage being available to a smaller audience (those prepared to pay).

So to some extent I don't deny Agon the right in principle to try and do what they are doing, if that is what they have based their business model on. And as has been pointed out they are not actually trying (currently anyway) to remove free access to coverage. However it is unfortunate for them that their specific business model as currently attempted is probably (some would say definitely) flawed. And frankly, I think the attempts to claim exclusive rights over ALL aspects of coverage are completely unnecessary. An official broadcaster, with exclusive access to the players, the venue, the live video has so many advantages that the vast majority of the potential audience is always going to go there if a decent production is put on. To claim that Chessbomb (offering moves and computer analysis only) is a competitor is silly. Chess24 obviously are, but their coverage of events for which they are not the official site is so obviously cheap and cheerful that (except where they are offering a distinctive service eg. with foreign commentators) it shouldn't be difficult IMO for a well resourced official production to draw viewers away. Perhaps with one qualification that they potentially have the disadvantage that people can go to Chess24 and watch several disparate events simultaneously (Women's world championship, Rejkjavik etc) - but people wanting that must surely be a relatively small proportion of the massive global audience they are claiming to be potentially attracting (assuming of course it exists).

If Agon had spent more time putting together a broadcast production that at least matched the basic standards expected (let alone bring "revolutionary" improvements), and less time seeking legal opinions and issuing threats and causing the inevitable distraction from the tournament then this whole farrago would have been avoided and we would have really been able to spend the whole time discussing the chess.

[MartinCarpenter]

Not entirely sure how good the advantages for the offical broadcast are - ICC/Chess24 etc can hope to get enough money via subscriptions and things to survive, but Agon are seemingly trying to directly monetise the broadcast of a single event.

To do that you're either into direct charges or adverts directly inserted into the stream.

The former of those is presumably entirely unviable, but even adverts will be seriously off putting when an ad free version exists. Or for anyone who has the sunk cost of a subscription to another service. Fairly familar sort of problem for quite a lot of internet stuff I guess.

Probably the only model that ever work(s/ed) was sponsors putting money in for a bit of publicity and no one really trying to derive a profit.

[Paul Dargan]

Well I did manage to watch some of Day1's coverage on the official site (intermittently) and I did see Peter Svidler's interview. Although he was very dimplomatic he didn't seem delighted with the playing conditions (noise from spectators, etc...)

I would talk about the games, but the number of ad breaks - informercials, random breaks is hugely annoying - plus even the WroldChess team sometimes dont seem to have access to the game score - so at times have ot guess the moves to get from the previous position to the current position.

The actual chess has been fine - you probably expect one game a round to be a non-event preparation=draw type of thing. 25% decisive results seems reasonable and I'm sure it will go up in the second half when the players get fatigued and those in contention feel the need to beat-up on those who are out of form.

Paul

[Richard Bates]

Not entirely sure how good the advantages for the offical broadcast are - ICC/Chess24 etc can hope to get enough money via subscriptions and things to survive, but Agon are seemingly trying to directly monetise the broadcast of a single event.

To do that you're either into direct charges or adverts directly inserted into the stream.

The former of those is presumably entirely unviable, but even adverts will be seriously off putting when an ad free version exists. Or for anyone who has the sunk cost of a subscription to another service. Fairly familar sort of problem for quite a lot of internet stuff I guess.

Probably the only model that ever work(s/ed) was sponsors putting money in for a bit of publicity and no one really trying to derive a profit.

I meant advantages purely in the ability to put on a quality product to attract viewers. Whether attracting viewers (especially non-paying viewers) is sufficient to produce a monetary return is another question (and I accept the point that any model that includes (video) advertising has the problem that it can undermine the product). However I am taking Agon at their word that big corporate sponsorship will come in to an exclusive product. My point being that if you can demonstrate ability to attract the vast majority of viewers, exclusivity shouldn't be necessary.

[MartinCarpenter]

I have a suspicion a fair bit of that proposed sponsorship might be effectively relying on advert money to make sense? Don't know of course
(Exclusivity adding much doesn't make much sense otherwise.).

[Richard Bates]

I have a suspicion a fair bit of that proposed sponsorship might be effectively relying on advert money to make sense? Don't know of course
(Exclusivity adding much doesn't make much sense otherwise.).

Depends what sort of advertising I guess. Some (especially video) is more intrusive than other. And i'm not sure that ad breaks on commentary are ever likely to serve much purpose - chess isn't particularly suited to maintaining a captivate audience at all times.

[NickFaulks]

Agon likes to try something innovative for each major event ( for instance, new design of pieces in diagrams so you can't tell them apart ). Perhaps in New York the clocks will be stopped for five minutes every half hour to allow for some words from the sponsors.

[Andrew Bak]

Agon likes to try something innovative for each major event ( for instance, new design of pieces in diagrams so you can't tell them apart ). Perhaps in New York the clocks will be stopped for five minutes every half hour to allow for some words from the sponsors.

This happens at the November Nine of the World Series of Poker. Although in this case no actual play is disturbed, it does significantly alter the flow and pace of play compared to a normal poker tournament.

[JustinHorton]

Of course there's also the matter of ad breaks in Formula 1 races.

[Paolo Casaschi]

Agon likes to try something innovative for each major event ( for instance, new design of pieces in diagrams so you can't tell them apart ). Perhaps in New York the clocks will be stopped for five minutes every half hour to allow for some words from the sponsors.

Likely scenario: sponsors do not really like all the negative press around the candidates and the Agon restrictions. At that point, Agon already stopped competing websites and forced users to register on the site. The most obvious follow up for Agon to cope with the lack of sponsors is to charge for an entry fee to view the world championship online. After that fails miserably as well, Agon declares bankruptcy.

[Roger de Coverly]

Of course there's also the matter of ad breaks in Formula 1 races.

They don't actually stop the race for these. Incorporating ad breaks into the coverage of a World Championship match where there's only one game in progress shouldn't be that intrusive. Just run the ads during those difficult moments when all that can be said about the most recent move has been said and the player to move is still in deep thought.

[JustinHorton]

Of course there's also the matter of ad breaks in Formula 1 races.

They don't actually stop the race for these..

Yes of course, but they can nevertheless happen at a bad time for the viewer.

[JustinHorton]

I see no sign of a game score on the official site. I can see that they just changed and re-input the moves in Nakamura-Svidler.

[Richard Bates]

I see no sign of a game score o nthe official site. I can see that they just changed and re-input the moves in Nakamura-Svidler.

The net result of the overnight "improvements" appears to be the inclusion of clocks on the multi screen view. I still remain confused as to how the organisers can claim that transmission of moves obtained from the site is restricted, when there is no official record of the moves available on the site! Any alternative transmission is therefore effectively speculation/guesswork anyway!

[Carl Hibbard]

I see no sign of a game score on the official site. I can see that they just changed and re-input the moves in Nakamura-Svidler.

I am watching chess24 they have some moves.