Results 3: App and Streaming
How and what we want to watch.
Question 30: Have you purchased the WEC streaming service in 2016?
Reasoning
This question aims to establish an idea of how many fans use the member section of the WEC app and paid streaming service.
Participating users
516/519 [99.4%]
As you can see in the graphic above, the WEC app and streaming service is a divisive product. Almost as many fans have a full annual subscription as those who didn’t use the service at all.
A total of 59 percent of survey participants said they used the product in some way in 2016, with 39 percent of those going for the full annual subscription. It’s clear that those who used it really supported it and opted for a complete version of the product.
This chart is promising for the app because it shows that there’s a strong user base but also significant room for growth.
Action
No further action required.
Question 31: How do you rate the price tag of €34.99 for 72 hours of racing?
Reasoning
This question aims to assess how fans perceive the representative value of the WEC app and streaming service in the context of content versus pricing model.
Participating users
508/519 [97.9%]
In the context of other digital media services such as Netflix or Hulu, the WEC app may appear as quite expensive. It delivers 72 hours of video (plus onboard live streams) for an annual fee of €34.99, whereas sites like Netflix can charge more than double that price because their service contains thousands of hours of material.
In the context of other motorsport-based digital media services, the WEC app is competitively priced. Services such as WRC+ (the World Rally Championship equivalent) costs €49.99 annually for a service that provides 106 minutes of edited highlights and a maximum of three hours live coverage per event. The Virgin Australia Supercars Championship covers every race and qualifying session live as well as allowing on-demand access to all video for roughly €27.99, though this is somewhat of a domestic race series.
The main issue that presents itself here is that there is a high number of motorsport series that provide entirely free live coverage online. The IMSA Weathertech Sportscar Championship, Blancpain GT Endurance, Blancpain GT Sprint and the Hankook 24h Series are all direct competitors for the WEC and provide their race coverage online for free. The IMSA series even goes so far as to provide free live coverage of support races like the Continental Tires Sportscar Challenge and Porsche GT3 Challenge Cup. Regardless of how competitively priced the WEC app is alongside other paid streaming services, it will find itself struggling to compete with high-quality free services.
Action
No further action required. Fans believe that the product is fair value.
Question 32: How do you feel about seeing race results and news articles on the home screen of the WEC app?
Reasoning
This question aims to see whether race results and news articles on the home screen of the WEC app represent a help or a hindrance. Many users have complained of seeing race results while navigating to a race replay, thus “spoiling” the outcome of the race they wanted to watch.
Participating users
501/519 [96.5%]
The majority of users found race results an issue when navigating towards the replay section of the app. The WEC is a series with races in every corner of the globe, and as such, the timing of those races are often placed towards accommodating the host country. This results in a large number of fans either adjusting their sleep pattern to watch these races or making use of the WEC app’s race replay feature. If a fan falls into the second category, they absolutely do not want to see race results before they get to see the actual race. Many users take an optimised approach by covering most of the screen with their hand in case they see “spoilers” and ruin the experience of watching the race as if it was live. The race replays can only be viewed via the app and not via a desktop app or website, which means that the app design needs to work well for the user.
On the flip side, 43 percent of users found this a non-issue and liked the ability to click on the WEC app and immediately get up to date with the latest news. For these users, the layout works fine, and this design does what they need it to do. However, it’s important to note that when cross checked with Question 30, almost half of those who voted for this option declared as users who did not purchase any WEC streaming product. Users who declared as full-annual subscribers weighed heavily in favour of no race results by a margin of 132–70.
Action
A reasonable compromise would be to include an option to toggle on/off the display of race results and news on the app home screen. This would allow all users to enjoy the service, without compromising the enjoyment of the race for paying customers. This is an option implemented very well on the National Football League’s streaming service “GamePass”, which gives users to hide or reveal the scores of games on the main display. For the WEC app, the option to open the app to news or to a basic FIA WEC logo would be beneficial to all involved.
Question 33: Would you be interested in additional features for the WEC streaming service?
Reasoning
This question aims to assess which features might make the WEC app and streaming service more attractive to fans.
Participating users
491/519 [94.6%]
The number one complaint about the WEC app and streaming service is that the race replays are only available on the app and not via the website. You can watch the race live on the website, but not the replay. The app itself works great, and if the website could achieve the same features then users would be much happier with the product.
Additionally, fans would like the ability to watch older WEC races. The championship has only existed since 2012, and with less than ten rounds every year, it means that there are less than 50 races in its entire run. The FIA WEC YouTube channel posts 52-minute race reviews, however, up to half of these videos contain pre-race pre-ample, location promotion and driver interviews. Fans want to watch the sport, and they want to watch it in full. The rights to publish full race replays on the WEC app and streaming service would be an excellent investment and would be a sure-fire way to improve the attractiveness of the product.
Video coverage of events like race practice and test days would be a costly investment, but it would increase the number of people who think the product is worth investing in. Having fixed cameras on-site would be an inexpensive solution to broadcasting practice while keeping overheads relatively low.
Both foreign language commentary and commentary-less options would be smart inclusions for the product. If the organisers can’t provide foreign language commentators, then the commentary-less option would be a more enjoyable experience for viewers who don’t understand English. The Radio Le Mans commentary team are a well-respected and enjoyable source of information, but for any non-native English speakers, may be a distraction to the on-track action. The ability to mute the commentary but retain ambient track noise would make the product more attractive to regions where the WEC has proven popular (Asia and South America as prime examples) but which have large non-English speaking populations.
Action
Investing in more features would improve the app and, as the next question explains, potentially generate significantly more revenue.
Question 34: If the WEC streaming service contained every feature you wanted above as well as its current package, how much would you be willing to pay annually for the service?
Reasoning
This question aims to assess the market price of a perfect product. If the product is going to evolve beyond its current state to include new and better features, the cost of development is going to increase too. If the product was more attractive to WEC fans, what would they be willing to pay?
Participating users
513/519 [98.8%]
The number one point to emphasise about this question is that it does not refer to the product in its current form. This question references a product containing many features which the current product does not. The general outcome of this question is positive and points to the idea that some users would pay more for the product, but it is imperative that this does not mean that one could raise the cost of the product without raising the quality and content to a respective degree.
If we cross reference this with Question 30, we learn that 131 of 211 users who answered that they did not purchase any aspect of the product in 2016, would be likely to purchase it if it offered all the features that they wanted. That’s 62 percent of non-users. And 32 percent of non-users even said they would pay more than its current price.
Some survey participants are willing to pay up to twice the price of the current product with 17% declaring that they would pay up to €75 or more if the product did the things they wanted it to do.
By exporting a product that doesn’t fulfil its full potential, the WEC is losing money. Whatever way you look at these numbers, they point to missed opportunities to capitalise on fans who would use the product if it received the right amount of attention and investment.
Action
Immediately implement the ability to watch full race replays via a desktop app or web browser. This is a low-cost and easy way to increase the desirability of the product.
An archive of race replays dating back to 2012 gives the fans a reason to use the app even in the off-season, and thus, they can justify paying a larger amount for the product.
Only increase the price if you are willing to increase the value of the product. Fans don’t mind paying more for something if it is genuinely a better product (the success of Apple products are a great example of this). A well-built feature-packed app and streaming service are worth paying for.
