Slashdot Mirror
Kellner Says Commerical-Skip Worth $250/year
Steve B writes: "A sequel to Turner CEO: "PVR Users Are Thieves" -- according to this story reported by Broadcasting & Cable, our friend Jamie Kellner says that consumers should be prepared to pay "as much as $250 per year" for the privilege of zapping over commercials. BTW, I'm not being entirely sarcastic when I call Kellner "our friend" -- if we properly exploit this story as an example of why Hollywood wants control over our consumer electronics, Kellner just might dig their graves with his big mouth."
Advertisers aren't stupid. They have been modifing the commercial format so that they still get there message across.
First, why do you think that half of all the commercials on are better than the stupid shows? Hell, the super bowl commercials are awesome! Also, advertisers are making commercials which can be 'effective' when fast-forwarded through with a VCR.
No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
I really want the ability to record programs, and later watch them, and I'd pay a premium for certain PVR features like:
Each of these features is worth money, and if I have to pay a premium to get some or all of these features, I will do so. If the broadcasting networks think that it's worth $250 extra per year to receive their programs without commercials, then why don't they try offering it? Couldn't they offer their content without commercials on a series of premium cable channels? Gosh, no, it turns out that it's not just about skipping commercials -- I think people are more interested in the time-shifting ability than skipping commercials. I certainly am.
While each of these features is promised by one or more companies that claim to manufacture PVRs, I have been unable to see any PVR in use, except for one demo of UltimateTV (which I later learned I cannot use because I apparently can't get a signal at my home).
I've recently been shopping for a PVR and have concluded that none are currently available from companies likely to be in business in 6 months.
I really, really want a Personal Video Recorder, and I'd gladly pay a premium. Indeed, I actually bought an RCA UltimateTV unit and satellite dish, but I can't get a signal and neither DirecTV nor UltimateTV could suggest the name of any installers who would not charge me huge fees just to confirm that I can't get a satellite signal. I sent the system back.
I wanted to try TiVo, which has a "fast-fast-forward" but they signed an exclusive deal with Best Buy, which won't demo the unit (and doesn't have them in stock anyway).
ReplayTV demands a huge premium (charging roughly a $300-$350 premium for its prepaid lifetime subscription for programming -- but the money isn't put in escrow, and I assume that if the company loses or settles the pending lawsuits, it will abandon all customers.)
And that leaves . . . nobody. Oh, yeah, DishTV offers its own PVR, but of course I don't expect to get a DishTV signal if I can't get a DirecTV signal (and I understand the companies are merging).
I really want the ability to record programs, and later watch them, and I'd pay a premium for certain features like dual tuners (so I can record one program while watching another, or record two programs at once), a meaningful "commercial skip," and accurate programming information and proper synchronization so I don't lose the first 2 or last 2 minutes of programs because the system decides that it's 7:59 when Fox thinks it's 8:01.
I'd gladly pay a premium, and $250 per year for the commercial-skip capability would be well worth it.
-- http://www.MarkWelch.com/ Pleasanton California
In other words, if I switch channels just as the hour-long 8pm program on one channel ends, I find that I'm 2 minutes into the second channel's 9pm program. This does not appear to be some kind of isolated situation -- it seems to be happening quite often, certainly I notice it several times per week.
According to my best indicators of the "real" time, most networks seem to run late (e.g. their 9pm programs start at 9:02pm and end at 9:59 or 10:00) but others are "out of sync" by one, two, or occasionally three minutes.
While some might just consider this another example of broadcast-TV incompetence (or perhaps someone can find a way to blame it on cable TV), I wonder if one or more of the networks or local affiliates might be doing this intentionally -- either to gain some kind of perceived competitive edge, or to screw up people who are recording programs using VCRs or PVRs and relying on program start and end times?
Can anyone explain this odd trend? Has anyone else noticed it? Or has it always been happening and I've just been oblivious until recently?
If it matters, I'm in the San Francisco bay area, with AT&T Broadband cable.
-- http://www.MarkWelch.com/ Pleasanton California
I'll pay the $250 a year without hesitation. I already pay around $90 a month now, the extra $20 wouldn't be an issue. However, I want the TV shows to start on time. I don't like sports, so don't ever give me a "We now join the normal broadcast already in progress." I don't want shows put in the guide and then pulled. Just because some larger demographic doesn't like some show that you bought 12 episodes of, don't leave me hanging and cancel after 6 are aired with everything at loose ends, you have enough broadcast assets that you can air the rest on your non-broadcast / 'cable' networks. In other words if you want me to pay you for the privelidge of skipping past commercials, I don't want flack for doing it, and I want much higher quality of service for what I care about. When I say record this episode, I don't want some producer deciding I don't really want the whole thing! Even Showtime is guilty of bad start stop times, get it together 'networks'.
The better solution that should occur rather than multi-billion dollar industries crying poor is for advertisers to come up with better ads. There have been a few that have caught my eye that I stopped and watched. I don't think the broadcast industry has the stomach to actually develop quality products though. Just look at the rash this season of the replacment shows and then the replacements of the replacements. Monty Python would be proud. It takes time for a cast to jell and the chemistry to build. Just look at how disjoint the first season of so many shows that are now well watched were (Buffy is a great example, as were the first dozen 'Trek episodes (pick any of the trek family, it seems universal, er paramount:)). But until you get a network executive that understands the TV watching audience and that it takes time to build an audience, that you can't show 2 new episodes followed by 2 reruns and a month hiatus and build a following, they just don't get it. I could do better, heck almost anyone could do better than most of them this season. It comes down to salesmanship.
Lastly, if we skip the commercials, just charge more for product placement. Put those blue "dial down the center" buttons on the phones (or the 1-800-collect stickers, like "Tracker" has on set), leave a Coke truck in the background of the shot, have someone actually unwrap a package of Hanes underware. Just don't make it part of the story make it natural and incidental and through repitition people will associate the products with the stars and you gain that influence vector, and you gain name / brand recognition.
Also, the reason I skip commercials is I want more TV in less time. I can watch 1.5 hours of broadcast time TV in 1 hour realtime by skipping. So if they went subtle with product placement I'd see 1.5 times as much advertising per hour than the broadcast viewer, so I should get paid to watch at that point. (and in fact the raw demographics that are gathered represent a valuable comodity that you'd otherwise pay big bucks to gather through multiple focus groups, etc. So don't come crying that you are losing revenue when you are gaining information on the cheap, particularly when you use the courts to get it for free.)
- Tjp
I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!
I'd be happy to pay US$250 a year to have all my TV without ads. No product placements either. I've got my credit card handy.
Are you prepared to pay more and more as they move the target? That's what I got cable for. Later it turned into tons of Lifetime and Sports Ilistrated adverts. Now the commercial free stuff is on the premium channels. Notice even now some of them are running adverts? How long will it be before the commercial free stuff is all PPV? Pay per view is not commercial free in a theatre anymore. Advertisers will pay what ever it takes to get their placement where the eyeballs are. Money talks. I have dropped cable entirely about 12 years ago. It got too expensive for the little time I spend on the tube anymore. I get the news on TV, but to get the rest of the story, I go online. I now find the real content online.
In the US, the lack of real content (studios will not release good features due to fear of taping) is what is killing the adoption of HDTV. I don't see any progress in this field until DVD's come out in HDTV format. I don't have to sit and wait 4 minutes at a time waiting for ads to end before I can find more content while online. I can hit the go button and move along to the content.
The truth shall set you free!
I haven't watched Bugs Bunny lately, but I heard that there was humour on several levels, thus entertaining the child [because it's a cartoon] and the adult [because it's witty].
I haven't either, mostly because none of the networks carry it. It's now primium content requiring a subscription (cable/dish/cartoon network) to receive. I haven't seen it on ABC, NBC, CBS on Saturday mornings in years. It seems to have been replaced by infomercials.
The truth shall set you free!
Simple: They are putting them to the test. If they really are addicted to TV, they will see the 250$ fee as the price of comfort when they sign up for an ad-skip device. Or they chose not to use such a device, which is just as good from the TV networks' perspective. The third option however is that people are neither willing to pay the 250$ nor willing to watch commercials interspersed with content and thus may be turning to TV-free alternatives. How likely is that?
Why not charge for what I watch? Why am I paying for 15-20 channels that I never watch? I don't mind commercials, I understand the tradeoff, I can zone out when they come on or whatever. But why am I paying for them in the first place?
To address the issue, Kellner's on crack if he thinks it's stealing. Also, he's not offering no commercials for $250/year, he's telling you that for you to have the "privelige" of doing a 30 second manual skip on your PVR. If he were offering that, sure, lots of people would take him up on it. Also, the idea of him being a "friend" has some merit, because I'm betting that aside from the techies and geeks, it's high-dollar CEOs that have these devices and make the most use of the commercial-skip feature to save their own time, and once these comments travel back up the food chain, he'll probably get a smack or two from his buddies at the country club.