Just my opinion.... Archery is boring to watch. The last live archery I watched was Kevin Mather winning Gold. I only did that because I've known Kevin for a lot of years.

There is no way I would pay to watch an archery match.

 

Solo la mia opinione... Il tiro con l'arco è noioso da guardare. L'ultima gara di tiro con l'arco dal vivo che ho visto è stata quella di Kevin Mather, che ha vinto l'oro. L'ho fatto solo perché conosco Kevin da molti anni.

Non pagherei mai per assistere a una partita di tiro con l'arco.
[/CITAZIONE]

I understand your point of view, and it's true that not everyone finds archery engaging as a spectator sport, just like with many other sports.
That said, today's matches, especially individual or team head-to-heads, are designed to be short and intense, with close-up shots, slow motion replays, expert commentary, and camera angles you could never get from the stands or the sidelines. This really changes the viewing experience.

Every sport has its own pace. Even in Formula 1, there are long quiet stretches, yet millions of people follow hours of practice sessions, qualifying, and the race itself. In the end, interest often comes from passion, context, the athletes involved, and the quality of how the story is told.

Streaming has great potential, especially when it's designed to bring people closer. That’s what I think is really worth reflecting on.

 

Hey, I pay for YouTube Premium, just so I don't have to endure ads, when I'm watching Henery Cho and laughing. So it's a small step to pay for Archery+.

It's a nice product, well filmed and presented. On the value scale it's a wash for me.

What is not nice: there's no way to easily stream it on my smart TV. The only place that really works is a computer, even a tablet is kinda a kludge. Mrs. Fdog and I love watching archery on TV, sitting on the couch with a martini, and....we can't.

Dang.

All the best, James

 

james, can’t you connect your laptop to an HDMI port on your TV. Or possibly “cast” your laptop browser to the smart tv?

 

If you don't like it, simply don't watch. Personally I don't subscribe to TV services, so I have no problem subscribing to ArcheryPlus just the way it is. Sure I liked when matches were uploaded to YouTube, but WA figured out that if they break up events into single matches they could massively improve the traffic to their channel, which advertisers like. I would rather watch events from beginning to end, instead of searching for the matches in succession. Now excuse me, team recurve is getting ready to start, here's to a couple hours of archery coverage without commercials.

 

Lets look at the game of darts - which has many fans and players in the USA but infrequently gets media coverage here in the States. I like the game, and have watched competitions on the computer and rarely on network TV. Boring? Depends upon the viewer. Reasons for interest in a sport are as varied as the stars. Could archery support what Patrizia suggests? I think if the infrastructure is put in place, it may catch on. But building the base would be a Herculean task.

 

If we hide archery behind a pay wall, we will never get people interested in the sport. The only people who pay are the people who already participate. The goal should be to increase interest. Trying to drive revenue with the size of this sport is not going to increase participation. Primary goal should be to increase membership.

 

Maybe I was watching older YouTube clips because in several the camera angles and editing was terrible. I had to sort through dozens of videos to find one I could enjoy watching. I'd probably never pay, but at least for anyone subscribing, I hope they invest a little more in the output.

 

Before moving to the archery+, WA should have made sure that it is a decent quality service. The video player is terrible and is missing a lot of the functionality YouTube player has. I checked it out 6 months ago and if I remember correctly there was no rewind and forward few seconds, no subtitles (even autogenerated subs can help some people understand the commentary if their English isn't at that level yet) and moving/navigating in the video was without a preview I think.

 

Yes, the video player is rudimentary in basic functions, as you mention. In addition to the impossibility to view it on a smart TV. This early morning I was following the Recurve men's finals on PC, then I moved to the kitchen for breakfast, where I have a smart TV, but I was forced to continue watching on my mobile. Not exactly continue, as when you change device, you should log in again, even if you are under the same wifi domestic network and external IP. Frankly not a good product, while broadcasting from cKorea was excellent.

 

All the more reason to make the service more accessible to enthusiasts, despite certain "technical shortcomings" such as a basic video player and the inability to watch it on a smart TV. This could truly be a turning point both in terms of audience reach and problem-solving, possibly supported by reinvestments generated through new subscriptions.

 

As a person who got into archery from watching youtube, I just know their pay wall completely killed my interest in archery matches. I can't imagine putting up with the main commentator's (if it's the same kareem dude I'm thinking of) god awful commentary after paying for subscription either.

 

Why watch when you can shoot?

 

If we are discussing this it is because I hope for a fair solution for those who value greater visibility. Our beloved community is still small and if access is further limited even for those who are genuinely passionate but have limited resources what will the future hold? Only a select few? If that is the case then it should be openly acknowledged that it is meant for a privileged minority.

 

Part of the learning process is watching others do things.

 

That is entirely valid assuming that your intention is not to improve based solely on cloning someone else's shot.
But it if you watch too much you are cutting into your doing/practicing time which are also part of the learning process.
Watching others at a tournament while you rest and hydrate is an excellent use of time.

There are some people who are much better at the learning by watching thing. My father was one of them. He
would watch someone do virtually anything (no, not brain surgery...) and he could just do it. He taught himself
to figure skate that way. Learning from him was a challenge because he did not understand why someone
could not do the same.

Also consider how unmoderated watching can affect a beginner: I think it was Rick McKinney who had a somewhat
oddly twisted "wind stance" which worked for him but I would hate to see someone try to adopt it as their form.

My grandmother would have moderated this discussion by saying "everything in moderation".

I don't think anyone will dispute that archery will never be a mainstream marketable spectator sport unless we
figure out how to add people getting roughted up like rugby or spectacular crashes like NASCAR.

 

I’ve been involved with a few fringe sport, those that sit on the edge and is not in the main stream.

What I’ve seen successful is a free version that gives the general public enough for them to want to watch. And then an enhanced version that has more detail and stats. Look at F1 in the US. It’s not main stream. It’s on the broadcast channel, but if you subscribe to F1, there is so much more additional content. Content about the drivers, the track, the teams, rule changes, etc.

Maybe we need to look at a country like Korean, where archery is in the main stream and how they promote and advertise.

A side story, I was with my daughter at a seamstress(Korean) and wanted a riser sleeve modified. And brought it in and talk to them about what I wanted. They couldn’t understand what it was. I mentioned Kim Woojin and immediately, they understood what it was and what I wanted done.

 

Shows and crashes...? Once upon a time a poor camera placed in the middle really had a hard time. 😂 Nowadays, with much greater precision, I don’t think it’s possible to put it there anymore and who would want to end up buying a bunch of cameras?

We can imagine that archery will never become as important or widely followed as other things but we expect it to have a respectful place and to be well cared for in the details kind of like the way you shoot or how you would like to shoot.

The leitmotif is always "We want more!" Sound familiar? 😄 🎯

 

I maybe haven't watched enough, and they may, but having different camera angles as the archer is shooting would be something I'd consider.

 

I don't ever think of archery as being less important. I think that shooting sports in general
are of particular benefit to young people. Archery is a sport where a young person can
escape the competitive world of kids (and now social media) with an activity that they
can measure their own progress against themselves. If they do better today than they
did yesterday it is a win. That is a great self esteem builder. I think having sports like that
is very important.

A lot of changes in archery have been attempts to make the sport more media friendly.
While it has worked to some extent (since there has been actual TV coverage) there is
no way to determine if it has helped or hurt the sport long term. As a fairly scrawny teenager
I struggled to make 90m with aluminum shafts but it was a goal.

 

I watch it on my TV by using the smart view function on my phone. I have been enjoying the coverage.

 

As someone just getting into the sport, I do wish I could watch more full matches on YouTube, as I'm certainly not ready to pay for another subscription. But I'm also not mad about it, I understand these sports are all moving towards their own subscriptions/platforms, and I'm grateful for the free content that they put out

 

The “Joymo” Archery+ platform is terrible - as many have said. I can’t speak to how well it runs on a PC. On an iPad it is plain annoying.

• If you have to stop mid match (live or replay) it will have logged you out at worst and lost your location at best.
• It plays the same 30 second World Archery on the front of EVERY video (you can skip if you remember it is coming)
• The quality is usually very good but audio and video streams frequently get out of sync.
• The video controls are pathetic - it is not hard to program slow motion, skip fwd, skip back etc functions. They just haven’t bothered.
• The ability to search, find your place etc is very poor - at least on iOS - it is impossible to scrub with any accuracy. There are no indexes for matches.
• As others have said, it logs you out a lot because their tech sucks

So as as subscriber I don’t mind the monetisation (although doubt it does them any favours) but as an end user they have gone back to dark ages type capabilities when compared to YouTube. Suspect somebody knows somebody….

Native casting would be nice but in the overall scheme of things I have managed to cast to a bigger screen from an iPad and it is no worse quality.

This is not a platform to attract new archers - or engage people with a new interest - it is just a way to pump money out of those who actually enjoy watching it (which would be OK on a decent platform).

Stretch

 

The “Joymo” Archery+ platform is terrible - as many have said. I can’t speak to how well it runs on a PC. On an iPad it is plain annoying.

It’s disheartening to know there are several issues.
May I ask if anyone has reported them and received a response? Thank you.

 

I contacted them about an accessibility issue a while ago and the only response I ever got was a "we'll look into it," and thatsas far as it went.

My only experience (not as a subscribed user) was to confirm whether it was possible to subscribe by paying with PayPal. They responded in a couple of days, saying that it wasn’t possible, which is a pity, but at least they did respond.

 

To give a concrete example of the interest archery generates, consider that in around two days, the surprise live streams of the European Archery Field Championships 2025 in Poland, which were not originally planned, attracted over 10,000 views. This clearly demonstrates the strong audience engagement and public interest.

Streaming this discipline through video and social media platforms proves to be a powerful tool for promotion.
Ideally, most content should remain freely accessible to the wider audience, while monetization opportunities can be considered for premium material, such as enhanced footage, exclusive perspectives, and in-depth insights.

Playlist on Youtube:

 

Even at 10k view, if each was a unique user, at $10/user, that’s only $100k

 

It’s true that €100,000 may seem like a modest figure when compared to the numbers generated by more mainstream sports events. However, the key point here is not the immediate economic value, but rather the clear signal of interest represented by over 10,000 views, achieved in just two days through unexpected live streams, minimally promoted, and covering a European event in a niche discipline.

I hope this perspective, which involves broadening free access to content to reach a wider audience, will be taken into consideration in the future.

PS: (I can count in euros from where I am, but it doesn’t make much difference to the overall point 😄)

 

The conversation is not about interest, it’s about how to grow the sport. And does a paywall help or hurt.

At only 10k views, most will be folks ready involved with archery. How does this grow the sport.

 

The conversation is not about interest, it’s about how to grow the sport. And does a paywall help or hurt.
At only 10k views, most will be folks ready involved with archery. This does. It grow the sport.

Major events with impressive locations and staging are available only through paid access. Someone unfamiliar with the world of archery who only sees, for example, a few highlights of high quality, longer but outdated footage, or even amateur videos, how can they gain a wider perspective on this world? They are likely to have a narrow, limited and unengaging view.

 

I believe it's wrong to assume archery will always be a niche sport. It used to be far more popular in the past. Also what does archery lack that golf and bowling have in terms of the sport itself?

Paywall shows WA gave up trying to expand archery population and decided to coast on the few existing enthusiasts.

 

Archery has never been in the mainstream. And it probably never will.

The difference is that the other sport are more relatable than archery. And the industry promotes the sport. Your example of golf, look at places like top golf in the US. It’s not golfers that go to top golf, it’s the everyday joe going to drink and hang out. In contrast, there isn’t that support from the archery industry

 

I think it makes sense to have another service for live archery, but I feel like (and maybe I am incorrect) that YouTube posts of tournaments have been greatly lacking since archery+ became a thing. When I first getting into archery, I grew my love of the sport through watching matches on YouTube, and I am sure this isn't a unique experience. But while I do love watching older matches, I think losing the ability to stay current in archery without paying up is a bad thing and will make people lose interest.