blue ranger
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2008
- Messages
- 2,665
Love listening to the pod, but my 2 sons listen separately on own devices and I wont pay £12 per month. Assume will be able to cater for this?
I'd have thought a fee to remove ads would have been a better approach. That way you'd receive revenue from advertisers and fans who are happy to support and/or want to remove the ads. Something like acast+ perhaps.
Does an outright fee not limit potential audience?
Love the show and want to see it continue to be successful and brilliant.
Love listening to the pod, but my 2 sons listen separately on own devices and I wont pay £12 per month. Assume will be able to cater for this?
Wasnt Livefootyonline about £30 a year for streamed matches for a season? - Great value!
Personally I thought half that price might be about right to get plenty of listeners.
It's probably easier providing many good quality shows now, when there's so much speculation and activity around City's transfers. At other times it may be much harder to create unique content shows at such short intervals.
I thought a lower priced annual cost might give mass appeal and take the pressure off the team having to produce output when there's little going on. (Perhaps I'm more hard up than many City fans?)
Fair! I hope it's a roaring success for you all, look forward to the new shows.We considered a few options but ultimately this is the one we chose. We honestly feel like 12 months from now those who subscribe will say it was well worth it as were only going to get better and better!
Personally I would prefer less shows but all the highest quality, exclusively about City. So when there's not much to report on, no pressure alter the frequency, take a well deserved break.Spot on about summer content. But the reality is doing two shows minimum around matches ends up being a lot of work. Next season it'll be 3 plus shows that aren't totally City-centric looking at the rest of the league.
There'll be no issues with creating unique content. :)