Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ConnorsDad

Fantastic Article from Open Mat regarding BTS

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Earl said:

LJB - If you’re not on Twitter, you’re missing most of the impetus for the ire and argument. Since you’re not on it, you’re not actually versed enough in the discussion to speak on it with anything other than the whole mob mentality and you’re only point of reference is the website, when there’s social, podcasts and staff all on social media ALL the time. Just because there’s no article doesn’t mean there’s no promotion.

ugh...

i am not interested in your justification...

people bashing flo on twitter or anywhere else is not news... i find it sad you think it is...

why did you post the article on your website instead of just tweeting your thoughts?

how many more shares of that anti-flo article did you get as compared to your normal website traffic?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, LJB said:

do you think i am surprised at all with a very vocal minority complaining about the big bad wolf of Flo?

i don't see that as a controversy at all...

and if it happened only on twitter, then why did OTM choose to post this article bashing Flo (for doing the same thing OTM did not as well) on their website instead of the great news source of twitter?

i mean, the vast majority of the article was bashing flo and only a very small percentage on the wrestling itself... they could have made an 100 part twitter expose' on the big bad wolf... it could have really made a difference...

as far as if flo could have made a difference in actual PPV buys for this event?

i find that fairly laughable... the wrestling community is small (and very whiny)... i find it hard to believe there are significant numbers of people Flo could have reached who did not already know about the event...

those who were going to buy did and those who were not going to buy didn't...

i don't Flo impacted those numbers even a little...

but, it is fun to bash them on twitter and every other platform available, huh?

 

Well for the record, TOM/Earl sent the article out on twitter, which is probably where all the clicks came from, so that part of your argument doesn't hold at all.

Honest question: In your mind, is there any valid way to criticize flo? And if so, could you share it please? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, uncle bernard said:

Well for the record, TOM/Earl sent the article out on twitter, which is probably where all the clicks came from, so that part of your argument doesn't hold at all.

Honest question: In your mind, is there any valid way to criticize flo? And if so, could you share it please? 

 

not where my click came from... 

he is getting more exponentially more shares of this article than anything else that site has ever produced... that may be a bit hyperbolic because i haven't gone through all of their articles, but, of the last 15 or 20 i did look at, there isn't even a close second...

 

"valid" is the key point...

complain about Flo not stepping up while your website made no mention of the event at all...

except to bash flo...

“What you do has far greater impact than what you say”

classy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LJB said:

not where my click came from... 

he is getting more exponentially more shares of this article than anything else that site has ever produced... that may be a bit hyperbolic because i haven't gone through all of their articles, but, of the last 15 or 20 i did look at, there isn't even a close second...

 

"valid" is the key point...

complain about Flo not stepping up while your website made no mention of the event at all...

except to bash flo...

“What you do has far greater impact than what you say”

classy...

I am not a wrestling media figure. I am making the same points as Earl. As a non-media figure, I'm not susceptible to your hypocrisy claim. What do you say to my critique of flo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, uncle bernard said:

I am not a wrestling media figure. I am making the same points as Earl. As a non-media figure, I'm not susceptible to your hypocrisy claim. What do you say to my critique of flo?

i am assuming you are referring to them not tweeting anything out about it?

i think it is fair criticism but ultimately useless as well...

i would think it would be far more effective to acknowledge and criticize all of the wrestling related websites that did not promote that event on their websites...

furthermore, if you want to die on that "Grow Wrestling" grandstanding hill, you should be criticizing every website that does not promote every competitors wrestling related stream/event/result/whatever...

because they are all guilty of the same thing to one degree or another...

Flo is just the easiest to pick on and get that hate riled up... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LJB said:

i am assuming you are referring to them not tweeting anything out about it?

i think it is fair criticism but ultimately useless as well...

i would think it would be far more effective to acknowledge and criticize all of the wrestling related websites that did not promote that event on their websites...

furthermore, if you want to die on that "Grow Wrestling" grandstanding hill, you should be criticizing every website that does not promote every competitors wrestling related stream/event/result/whatever...

because they are all guilty of the same thing to one degree or another...

Flo is just the easiest to pick on and get that hate riled up... 

Flo is the easiest to pick on because they are the largest organization by far and have way more resources and influence. They make a lot of money off the sport. Asking them to give back is reasonable. I don't think any other site (maybe Track?) is pulling in a lot of cash and the guys that run those are doing it for the love of it or as a side gig to a regular job. 

They also talk frequently about growing the sport. The fans are just asking that they follow through.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, uncle bernard said:

Flo is the easiest to pick on because they are the largest organization by far and have way more resources and influence. They make a lot of money off the sport. Asking them to give back is reasonable. I don't think any other site (maybe Track?) is pulling in a lot of cash and the guys that run those are doing it for the love of it or as a side gig to a regular job. 

They also talk frequently about growing the sport. The fans are just asking that they follow through.

so, to paraphrase...

Flo is the only one (possibly track) doing their job well enough to make money off of it, so, they deserve all the criticism fair and reasonable or not...

gotcha...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, LJB said:

so, to paraphrase...

Flo is the only one (possibly track) doing their job well enough to make money off of it, so, they deserve all the criticism fair and reasonable or not...

gotcha...

Making money doesn't necessarily equal doing a good job. Flo had access to venture capital which allowed them to buy a bunch of streaming rights, which is what ultimately gets people to sign up. The journalism is completely secondary to the streaming. That's a big reason they probably don't want to promote other streams. They know that's where there money comes from and they don't want to help a competitor grow and step into that market. What's good for flo isn't necessarily what's good for the sport, so that's why they're being criticized. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

Making money doesn't necessarily equal doing a good job. Flo had access to venture capital which allowed them to buy a bunch of streaming rights, which is what ultimately gets people to sign up. The journalism is completely secondary to the streaming. That's a big reason they probably don't want to promote other streams. They know that's where there money comes from and they don't want to help a competitor grow and step into that market. What's good for flo isn't necessarily what's good for the sport, so that's why they're being criticized. 

then every other outlet that does not shamelessly promote other providers content should be equally criticized as well...

that is the point...

you can't just pick and choose the rules that some have to live by based on your personal feelings towards them...

well, you can...

you are clearly doing it...

praise Odin all the grandstanding on this forum and twitter amounts to fuk all and everyone of the whiners will be tuned into austin next month...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

Making money doesn't necessarily equal doing a good job. Flo had access to venture capital which allowed them to buy a bunch of streaming rights, which is what ultimately gets people to sign up. The journalism is completely secondary to the streaming. That's a big reason they probably don't want to promote other streams. They know that's where there money comes from and they don't want to help a competitor grow and step into that market. What's good for flo isn't necessarily what's good for the sport, so that's why they're being criticized. 

Flo didn’t start out with venture capital, not even close. Martin built the brand up to the point where venture capital started taking notice. And the streaming rights weren’t what got people to sign up at first.  That came much later in their process. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AnklePicker said:

Flo didn’t start out with venture capital, not even close. Martin built the brand up to the point where venture capital started taking notice. And the streaming rights weren’t what got people to sign up at first.  That came much later in their process. 

stop it with all that history and facts...

we only roll with grandstanding and lobbing grenades from a safe virtual distance...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AnklePicker said:

Flo didn’t start out with venture capital, not even close. Martin built the brand up to the point where venture capital started taking notice. And the streaming rights weren’t what got people to sign up at first.  That came much later in their process. 

In their first year at Super32 (just clips and interviews) I don't think Martin even had a camera. Sara tells the story that she drove Martin to BestBuy (might have been a different store) to get a camera or two. On Monday he realized the cameras didn't work right so he returned them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AnklePicker said:

Flo didn’t start out with venture capital, not even close. Martin built the brand up to the point where venture capital started taking notice. And the streaming rights weren’t what got people to sign up at first.  That came much later in their process. 

I know the origins of flo, but their brand exploded once they were able to secure streaming rights with their venture capital. 

I love flo. I've been a premium subscriber for almost 10 years. It's annoying when they pretend wrestling that doesn't happen on their site doesn't exist, and they deserve criticism for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, uncle bernard said:

I know the origins of flo, but their brand exploded once they were able to secure streaming rights with their venture capital. 

I love flo. I've been a premium subscriber for almost 10 years. It's annoying when they pretend wrestling that doesn't happen on their site doesn't exist, and they deserve criticism for it.

so does everyone else that do the exact same...

you want a quick list?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's very difficult to understand what isn't sinking in w/ you. comical, actually. 

Us: The dialogue you're looking for is on twitter.

LJB: I'm not going on twitter. but i will continue being the voice of reason here.

you're not dialed in enough nor make the attempt to be in order to have a valid opinion. 

 

Edited by Husker_Du

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

I know the origins of flo, but their brand exploded once they were able to secure streaming rights with their venture capital. 

I love flo. I've been a premium subscriber for almost 10 years. It's annoying when they pretend wrestling that doesn't happen on their site doesn't exist, and they deserve criticism for it.

I might agree if they weren’t a for profit business. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, LJB said:

then every other outlet that does not shamelessly promote other providers content should be equally criticized as well...

that is the point...

you can't just pick and choose the rules that some have to live by based on your personal feelings towards them...

well, you can...

you are clearly doing it...

praise Odin all the grandstanding on this forum and twitter amounts to fuk all and everyone of the whiners will be tuned into austin next month...

 

For one, most people aren’t asking them to shamelessly promote other providers’ content (although a few are).  But the least they can do is acknowledge that actual wrestling between top level competitors actually happened after the fact, but they didn’t even do that.

I don’t want to get political, but you kinda sound like one of those All Lives Matter memes.   Which maybe you haven’t seen if you’re not on twitter.  No offense to The Open Mat, but no one really cares what they do.   If both ESPN and FoxSports1 ignored a major event that was on NBC (which wouldn’t happen to begin with), I’m sure you’d hear a lot more complaints about ESPN.

But since you want to talk about comparisons, how about when Track made some of its video library available for free when the quarantines started?  Did Flo do anything comparable except throw together some new FloFilms to try to justify the $150/year?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

it's very difficult to understand what isn't sinking in w/ you. comical, actually. 

Us: The dialogue you're looking for is on twitter.

LJB: I'm not going on twitter. but i will continue being the voice of reason here.

you're not dialed in enough nor make the attempt to be in order to have a valid opinion. 

 

Edit... again...

thought you were done?

run on back to Twitter... that’s more your speed... lots of drama and manufactured outrage...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

For one, most people aren’t asking them to shamelessly promote other providers’ content (although a few are).  But the least they can do is acknowledge that actual wrestling between top level competitors actually happened after the fact, but they didn’t even do that.

I don’t want to get political, but you kinda sound like one of those All Lives Matter memes.   Which maybe you haven’t seen if you’re not on twitter.  No offense to The Open Mat, but no one really cares what they do.   If both ESPN and FoxSports1 ignored a major event that was on NBC (which wouldn’t happen to begin with), I’m sure you’d hear a lot more complaints about ESPN.

But since you want to talk about comparisons, how about when Track made some of its video library available for free when the quarantines started?  Did Flo do anything comparable except throw together some new FloFilms to try to justify the $150/year?

 

To be 100%, I was slightly surprised they did not talk about the wrestling on FRL... 

not surprised at all they did not report on it...

tyey may talk about it tomorrow... or they may not...

either way, my argument stands... 

a website that you openly admit no one pays attention to dues an anti-flo rant and gets the most action they ever have... all while failing to acknowledge tyey do the exact thing they were whining about...

most wont bother to even understand that happened...

just re-tweet the anti-flo narrative...

that’s what happened here...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, AnklePicker said:

I might agree if they weren’t a for profit business. 

Totally fair, but they constantly talk about growing the sport. They have every right to pursue profit, but they shouldn't try to brand themselves as ambassadors or activists for wrestling. That's the whole point of the criticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

Totally fair, but they constantly talk about growing the sport. They have every right to pursue profit, but they shouldn't try to brand themselves as ambassadors or activists for wrestling. That's the whole point of the criticism.

They do and have grown the sport tremendouslyThey do and have grown the sport tremendously

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LJB said:

They do and have grown the sport tremendouslyThey do and have grown the sport tremendously

As long as they're the ones who benefit financially from the event, yes they do a great job. You may not have picked up on this yet, but the whole point is how they behave when they don't own the streaming rights. They pretend the events don't exist.

That is bad for the sport, but it's also a bad product. If they're going to brand their content team as experts on the sport, I want to hear them discuss the major happenings even if they didn't stream it. They basically pretended ACCs and Big 12s didn't happen this past year. It was ridiculous. I'm pretty sure I heard they lost the streaming of the Big 10 duals for this season. Are we going to hear any analysis of what goes down in those? Past history says no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

As long as they're the ones who benefit financially from the event, yes they do a great job. You may not have picked up on this yet, but the whole point is how they behave when they don't own the streaming rights. They pretend the events don't exist.

That is bad for the sport, but it's also a bad product. If they're going to brand their content team as experts on the sport, I want to hear them discuss the major happenings even if they didn't stream it. They basically pretended ACCs and Big 12s didn't happen this past year. It was ridiculous. I'm pretty sure I heard they lost the streaming of the Big 10 duals for this season. Are we going to hear any analysis of what goes down in those? Past history says no.

I don’t necessarily disagree with that complaint either… Sure seems like some other industrious website instead of complaining about workflow doesn’t do could step up their game and cover what flow is not covering…

Talk to TEX for the win but you get the general ideaTalk to TEX for the win but you get the general idea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...