I would recommend re-visiting your research. Orad Hi-Tec Systems patented a technology prior to either PVI OR SportsVision, which was used in Europe for soccer prior to FDL in the United States. Orad has done more games than either PVI or SportsVision over the years.

Further, to consider Vistas a leader in the space is inaccurate. PVI is a leader in the space, but Orad and SportsVision are arguably larger in the number of games produced with virtual enhancements than PVI. Vistas has only done a handful of events. Further, the Orad system requires no camera modifications, does things like compensates for the crown of the field with FDL, and other features.

When it comes to pure advertising, Orad is clearly the world leader with its AdVision product. Orad’s AdVision has been used for years to put virtual advertising on many fields across many sports. Orad’s AdVison can even run clips or live video, create virtual jumbotrons with video, and many other virtual applications, all without camera modifications.

Relative to MSG, it should be noted that MSG and PVI are owdne by the same parent. It should aloso benoted it took PVI several years to get an ad on the boards that was usable. It shoudl also be noted PVI requires a small truck to pull this off, while other systems used a 3RU unit. Cost of operation should also be compared and examined. Profit margin is at least as important to the broadcaster as technical capabilities.

I would be happy to speak to your editorial staff.

I thought you were arguing that there was going to be a direct correlation between ESPN acquiring Vistas and an increase in Virtual Advertisements in sports, which I don’t think is the case.

Very true that the technology is getting better and that networks and leagues will be looking to use this stuff more. That’s a definite. But, as the technology gets better the price falls, and Regional Networks (like your FSN Pittsburgh example) will have that market opened to them. I bet it makes even more sense for a smaller network to use a virtual the behind-the-plate ad as opposed to the vinyl conveyor belt ad that already esists in each stadium.

Imagine that Bob’s Hardware Store is having a sale this week. It’s got to be cheaper to change a computer graphic than it is to reprint a physical sign.

I think we both agree that Virtual Ads will become more prevalent. I just don’t see ESPN buying Vistas as really changing that fact.

I think the thing that will begin to make these things more formality than they would have been in the past is 1. technology is getting better and 2. everyone looking for different revenue outlets in the post recession era. 5 years ago the NFL wouldn’t have been involved with state lotteries, the NBA wouldn’t have allowed courtside liquor ads etc. Everyone is looking for new ways to make money now a days, and like I said before, if ESPN or whoever else is able to create something that does not interrupt the fan experience, then i see the leagues being much more amenable to allowing those things to happen.

Regarding k-zone, you’re right, I misspoke. After your first post I had gone to look at SportsVision’s site, I was reading about k-zone and about virtual ads and inadvertently referenced k-zone in the comment and forget to go back and change it. It should have read in reference to ads behind home plate as referenced on their virtual ads tab.

As far as an ESPN monopoly, sure its a debatable point. But I don’t think you need to literally show every sporting event on television to have a monopoly. Do they show all of the football on television? No, but they arguably have the single most important football piece in MNF. They show more baseball than Fox and Turner combined I think (correct me if I’m wrong, cause I’m not certain), they show just as much, if not more basketball than Turner, I don’t think anyone else goes into Soccer (at least MLS) as much as they do either. I don’t know a lot about racing broadcasts, but I think ABC covers the major races (right?). Versus carries hockey, but other than that, it looks like ESPN is pretty entrenched in every sport, as far as coverage goes.

Beyond that, once you start getting into regional-ized coverage, there is an issue of “how many people are watching”? Sure, there’s plenty of viewers w/NESN, but compare that to an FSN Pittsburgh…that’s not even a blip on ESPN’s radar, and I don’t know if there are enough YES’s and NESN’s out there to challenge an ESPN majority on an across the board scale.

But then again, maybe there is. Like I said, its certainly debatable. Just my opinion.

You mentioned K-Zone… As I understand it that system is not simply virtual advertisement insertion. It’s a pretty complex tracking system. Seems like it’s one thing to put an ad on a field, another thing to track 95mph objects with such accuracy.

You wrote “there is a legitimate question as to whether or not there are enough non-ESPN/ABC sports to make the other companies relevant.”

Non-ESPN/ABC sports… Like NBC Football/Oylmpics/Hockey, Fox Football/Baseball/Motorsports/Soccer, Turner Baseball/Basketball/Motorsports, CBS Football/Basketball, and all the various Regional Sports Networks (CSN, FoxSportsNet, MSG, NESN, etc), plus SpeedVision, Versus, and on and on? I think you’re giving ESPN a bit more monopoly status than they possibly deserve.

I am aware that ESPN would have to get league approval for any in-game advertising, I just sort of saw it as a formality. If ESPN can create an in game ad that isn’t obtrusive (i.e. the various ads behind a batter during a baseball game) then I don’t really see any reason why MLB or any other sport would be opposed to that technology being used, especially if it had a benefit to MLB(i.e. if Home Depot is some official sponsor of MLB then ESPN putting home depot ads behind home plate during a game, etc.).

Generally though, as far as the other companies are concerned, if ESPN is able to create the same services (ala SportVision’s K-Zone) in house, then I think that could easily turn Sportvision into a bottom of the barrel sort of company, unfortunately. ESPN wouldn’t purchase a virtual ad company to still outsource projects, and there is a legitimate question as to whether or not there are enough non-ESPN/ABC sports to make the other companies relevant.

Also, you didn’t do a very good job with your research. Ever heard of Sportvision, Orad, or SportsMedia? Do a little homework, bud! PVI and Vistas are bottom of the barrell.

With that said, assuming that their leagues are fine with this, I wonder where they are looking at placing ads.