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."

Comments

I'd pay it!

[markwelch]

I'd gladly pay an extra $250 per year for the commercial-skip feature, if it were actually available somehow, at some price. (Hmm, does that price include commercial-skip abilities for all programming that comes into my home, including cable-only channels like Comedy Central, or just broadcast channels?)

I really want the ability to record programs, and later watch them, and I'd pay a premium for certain PVR features like:

• Dual tuners (so I can record one program while watching another, or record two programs at once)
• A meaningful "commercial skip" (I'd even accept a 30-second-skip button or a working fast-fast-forward mode)
• Accurate programming information (not data that's six weeks old, but data that's updated to reflect programming changes
• I'd pay an additional premium for a system that would not record the last 10 minutes of an overtime sports event and then cut off recording 10 minutes before my program ends.
• I'd pay extra for a system that recognizes my programming preferences and suggests new programs I might enjoy.
• I'd like the ability to pause live TV.
• I'd like the ability to "record the past," with my PVR recording and storing the last minute or two so I can hit a command to save it to watch again (hey, sometimes those nude scenes are worth seeing again, and sometimes you want another look at a flash of skin in a commercial).
• 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.

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.

Are networks screwing with program start times?

[markwelch]

I have recently noticed more and more situations in which the networks (or maybe it's the local affiliates) appear to be "out of sync" regarding the time.

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.

Re:It;'s a deal

[Technician]

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.

Re:Paying more for tv may be a good thing.

[Technician]

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.