3 ms·
I hate to say it, but this "solution" doesn't work. It was a good idea worth testing, but it's just not useful. I'm not a surfer, but if surfers are dying for
by sixQuarks 14y ago
I hate to say it, but this "solution" doesn't work. It was a good idea worth testing, but it's just not useful.
I'm not a surfer, but if surfers are dying for this kind of info, wouldn't they be willing to pay a subscription fee for access to an up-to-date surf report?
These days with TaskRabbit.com, you can hire someone to go take pictures at multiple times throughout the day. Let's say you can get your costs down to $25/day, which is about $750/month per surf "spot".
You would need to get 38 surfers paying $19.95 per month to break even. How many surfers do you think would be interested in this per location?
- shaharsol 14y agoThat's worth thinking.
- swang 14y agoWhy take just a picture? Have the guy take a video panning the entire ocean for 15? 30? seconds and then allow surfers to view video. Capture some random images of the video for people who don't want to look at video.
- shaharsol 14y agoI agree that video is a better way to communicate the surfing conditions. This is why I added Youtube videos as well to the SwellPhone feed. However, Youtube seems to have far less geo tagged UGC media than Instagram.
- sixQuarks 14y agoOr actually, if there are residents living nearby who could setup a web cam, you would pay them a fee each month. But yeah, video would work better.