Slashdot Mirror
Streaming and Cord-Cutting Take a Toll On the Pay-TV Industry
First time accepted submitter ClarkSchultz writes "Harris Interactive confirms that consumers streaming video content prefer the practice of binge viewing.The news isn't a big shocker to streaming concerns such as Netflix, Amazon, and Redbox Instant which have been mining viewer habits data, but it has an important read-through for broadcasters like CBS, NBC, Fox, and ABC. Though ad rates could fall if more viewers wait until series are available for streaming, the payoffs for quality content are proving lush: 1) CBS says it paid $700K per episode for streaming rights to Under the Dome 2) AMC Networks has pointed to Netflix as contributing to the success of Breaking Bad after initial ratings were soft. If streaming wins, who loses? Front and center is the Pay-TV industry. A wave of merger rumors (Charter/Cox/Time Warner Cable/Comcast/Dish Network) indicates the industry knows the trend of subscriber losses to the cord-cutting phenomenon will continue. An online TV initiative from a tech heavyweight like Sony, Apple, Google, or Intel could also disrupt the industry enough to put cable and satellite companies into an even bigger tailspin."
140 bucks per month for Dish... I'm really thinking about going to just streaming and getting the Tivo with 4 ota tuners.
And they also own the politicians who might otherwise support net neutrality. That gives them a lot of power in this fight. Basically, most people (in the U.S. anyway) have to rely on cablecos for internet. The only other option for most of us is DSL (which is much slower, such as in my area where the DSL isn't even fast enough for Netflix HD).
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
Will they finish airing the season? Will they air episodes in the correct order? Will they move schedules around so you have no idea where to find a program? Ahhh... obsolete broadcast model.
...and really don't miss it. We've found that there are so many free options that it doesn't really make sense to pay for TV, especially when there are repositories with large numbers of episodes available, legally, completely free with no ads, and there are other repositories like Crackle with lots of movies and TV shows free with the caveat of having to sit through an ad every little bit.
Last time we had cable, there were ads that we had to sit through. If I'm going to have to see ads, I don't want to pay out-of-pocket for the content.
Best part is, it's easier to turn off the damn TV to go outside or to go do something else when one isn't paying for it and isn't so dependent on a set schedule.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
1. Show your programs as scheduled.
2. After the show ends, post the episode for purchase within 24 hours.
3. After the season ends, post the entire season at a discount over individual episodes.
People want content and they want it right away. If you wait too long they will pirate it, or they'll just stop caring. Get the money while you can and stop worrying about breaking your business model, because TV is dying anyway. Adapt or die a quick death.
The only other option for most of us is DSL (which is much slower, such as in my area where the DSL isn't even fast enough for Netflix HD)
Yet another reason that TPB is so popular. Again, not only is it free, but better. My DSL connection sucks. Trying to stream HD from the iPlayer or 4OD or something is painful in that it comes out blocky, jerky and stops for buffering.
Or, I can go to TPB and download a nice, high quality file which I can view without all the problems. And yes, I do actually get stuff off TPB which is available on 4OD (I am a license payer!) since the service is substantially better. For iPlayer I use the get_iplayer script which uses some mild back door to save it to a file. Though I must say finding stuff on TPB is easier than the on the BBC.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
While I have a tendency on Slashdot to post conservative posts. (I try not to be crazy conservative though). However I think it the governments responsibility to offer us a high speed Internet Infrastructure, and not the Cable, and Telephone industry who is in essence competing against itself.
Companies nowadays don't want to get involved in big infrastructural projects, such as laying fiber to every home. Because of a lot of reasons. But much like Power it is becoming a situation that the internet is needed to function in modern society.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
In my case, we still have cable only because they gave us a good deal on cable TV + Internet. The amount we'd save just going to Internet-only would be chipped away at by needing to purchase programs that we can't get from Netflix or Amazon Prime streaming. (For example, new episodes of Mythbusters and Doctor Who.) There were enough of these that it just didn't pay to cut the cable. However, my cable company (Time Warner Cable) has indicated that they're not cutting deals of this sort anymore. If they don't then cable will be going away when our current deal ends. I simply can't afford to pay $100 more a month for cable. We'll get our TV entertainment from OTA, Netflix, Amazon VOD (both Prime and pay-per-episode), and DVD rentals from our local library.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Maybe. It has been a losing game so far.
There is the old quip for business that advertisers always wastes 50% of you money – the problem is figuring out which 50%. So, on one hand advertisers can better target ads – so less money is wasted so few advertising dollars. On the other hand you can now target your ads and thus charge more.
IIRC, over the past 20 years, less money as a percentage spent on advertising, has gone towards T.V. (broadly defined to include all streaming services.). Data is a few years old so take it with a grain of salt.
There's billions at stake, created out of virtually nothing (replicating a digital signal). This supports thousands and thousands of rent-seeking monopolists. The holy grail of capitalism.
The RIAA/MPAA fights are just kindergarden name calling compared to the fight that's getting ready to be fought.
From society's perspective, we should be well into the fiber optic cabling of the entire planet. These people will fight that, because it obsoletes their model. Once you have fiber to your door - and I do, in small down Canada - it's over. It's just a matter of time and everyone knows it.
Google's fiber projects are just a small piece of what's to come. The dirty little secret is rolling these networks out isn't hard. It's all legislation and poltics stopping. The tech is ready.
Get some popcorn. It'll be fun. I haven't had a TV subscription in 7 or 8 years now.. saving me $100/mo or so. That's a lot of money, especially when it starts paying dividends.. but I sure don't own any broadcasters. :)
..don't panic
That's the position I'm in. I can use Time Warner Cable for my ISP or Verizon DSL. Not only is DSL slower, but Verizon has all but said they want out of the DSL business. They've ignored their DSL lines and outright ditched them where possible. Verizon didn't run FIOS to my neighborhood so that's not an option. Meanwhile, Time Warner Cable and the other cable ISPs have financial interests in people not doing a lot of video streaming. That's why they've introduced caps and "per bit billing." They frame it as a "fair billing" or "protect our network from data hogs" practice but really it is a method of killing streaming so that people go back to their (uncapped) VOD solutions.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
If they know everyone is adjusting their schedules to watch the 6PM sitcom, then they can charge advertisers twice as much for that slot.
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
I can't remember who it was now, but I just read an article about a black stand-up comedian who is making millions off of a business he created where he produces low-budget TV shows. The key to his success? He realized there are many time slots out there on TV stations that need to be filled with content, but especially for the early morning (1AM to 5AM) -- the low number of viewers means they can't justify paying the prices usually demanded for the right to air existing programming. (That's why you see so many ridiculous 30 minute to 1 hour long infomercials in those time slots.)
So what he does is he cranks out material on an accelerated time-table (shooting a whole episode of a comedy show in a day, where it would normally be done over the span of several days to a week), and using non-union labor. Half of the actors/actresses are friends of his from the stand-up comedy scene and others are "fresh out of college" people who want to catch a break in the business. Then he gives the shows away FREE to the TV stations to air, with the stipulation that they split ad revenue earned while it's airing with his company, 50/50.
His latest tactic is creating multiple Court TV type shows, except none of it is real. (He said he was able to buy a complete courtroom set for only a $1 when a real courtroom wanted to remodel and get rid of all of the old furniture and decor.) He saves a bunch of money on production since there are no real litigants who need to be flown in, put up in a hotel while filming is taking place, etc. And the real win for him? These types of shows draw in a lucrative advertising crowd of people offering legal services!
Sure, this guy might just be creating a bunch of garbage quality television ... but I think he's on to something. It speaks to the "big picture" changes, where studios need to come down to earth on the costs of producing programming. Today's actors are where yesterday's rock stars were before the music industry was turned on its head by digital distribution. People, now, are starting to say, "Hey.... I like the entertainment you make, but enough's enough! I'm not going to keep giving you this much of my paycheck for the right to enjoy it! Make me a better deal....."
My problem is that the government allowed the telecom industry to charge the public to build the infrastructure to build high-speed and they've taken the money and done nothing with it. And the government hasn't taken the industries to task.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
I don't know where everyone else lives, but I have yet to find a free wireless or wired streaming video capable Internet connection anywhere in the place I live. I use Netflix and Hulu but I still pay a communication utility for Internet access, so while I am not paying that same provider for cable content, it still is not free. All I have done is separate the data access utility from the content provider. Cord cutting is really a misnomer, few (if any) are truly cutting the cord, they just choose to consume content as Internet data rather than TV signal.
Although it's going to take a couple of years, you can expect H.265 to help DSL big time. I've read and watched several industry talks on H.265 and by far the two biggest things that H.265 will help is mobile/low bandwidth content delivery (DSL users were specifically mentioned) and of course video conferencing.
Figure a DSL user has a downstream capacity of 1 to 1.5Mb/s of downstream capacity. H.265 will make decent 720p over those throughput capacities a reality.
The problem in my area is the total lack of real competition. In my area, I can only get Time Warner. Verizon FIOS isn't available. AT&T U-verse is not available. Another cable provider is not available. Yet most of them clutter my mailbox with flyers and ads about their service that I can't get. In Austin, it looks like AT&T is offering fiber finally (but only because Google is coming). My friend who works in the industry says that AT&T is hedging their bets by offering it in adjacent areas that Google Fiber will not initially service (if only to survive).
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Yeah, it sucks, but there are other options. Here's one. Start your own ISP. No, I'm not crazy. Here's an excellent example. Here in Lincoln, Neb., a guy with an idea started a company called WideRange Broadband. (standard disclaimer, I have no connection to them other than as a very satisfied customer) They're a wireless ISP. They rent tower space on a few tall radio antenna towers around town, toss some Ubiquity antennas up there, and call it good. Yes, that's over simplifying it, but in the end, I have a little antenna on my roof about the size of my forearm, and I get a solid high speed connection for $30/month. And they're pissing off the local telco (Windstream) and cableCo (TimeWarner) because they can offer as good or better speeds for less money. Yes, there are some line-of-sight issues if you're in an older neighborhood with lots of tall trees, but it's a solid start. Shortly after I cut off TimeWarner, I had one of their people stop by the house trying to get me to resubscribe (at $49/month). I told him who I was using, and he got a nervous look on his face and said "Oh, they're not a real company, that's just someone's hobby" and left. I mentioned that to the WideRange installer a few months later when we bought a house and they were moving my antenna. He chucked and said "Yeah, we hear that a lot."
I get 113 channels OTA here in Houston. With that many channels it's not uncommon to have 4 shows being recorded at the same time (especially older series that are broadcast just before/after midnight). I've been recording older shows like That '70s Show and watching them in order. Have seen a number of episodes I missed back in the day. Also recording cable series I'd missed in the past, like Burn Notice and Psych, that are now being broadcast OTA.
I purchase other cable series, like Dexter and The Walking Dead, à la cart from iTunes or on physical media. I've saved $1300 since dropping DirecTV in January (savings = old DirecTV bill - à la cart series).
I went a little overboard on the Mac mini setup (Drobo raid system, extra RAM, CPU upgrade, etc) so it'll probably be another year before the savings pay off the hardware investment.
If anybody's interested, I've been documenting my DVR Project in my blog.
Comcast and its brethren are disrupting themselves with high prices, packaged offerings cluttered with unwanted channels, and the truly awful customer service.
One of my peeves is when I watch an old show, some of it gets cut because there are more commercials than when the show originally aired.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
I see very little difference between government and private monopolies as an end user, and letting the government do it puts me in the additional position of having to make good on any debts or liabilities they incur. I think you put up a competitive bid process for a heavily regulated monopoly infrastructure provider, and just accept that it won't be the most efficient thing ever. Then let anyone rent the "pipes" to be the ISP/cable/telephone provider. In other words, the utility model. Crap customer service, not as cheap as it could be, and a little behind on the technology curve - but fairly reliable and available everywhere.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
The telco/cableco industry owns the FCC, which is why cablecos are now allowed to encrypt basic cable and force everyone to extra-cost rented boxes (or put them through hell if they have the audacity to ask for a CableCard so they can use their own equipment).
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
On the contrary, encryption of basic-tier cable was NOT ALLOWED until FCC 12-126 was adopted on October 10, 2012, as a result of intense brib...err, "lobbying" by the cable TV industry.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz