Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

It happens now so no reason to think it won't happen in the future. It can be controlled to an extent by limiting the number of connected devices.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

A lot of those so called shows are finished! Most look pretty rubbish too imo, mind you if you get off on that, then fine, all to their own i suppose...:erm:

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

It's about the catalogue , ITV has a huge library of content with many great shows I believe The Bodyguard which was shown on BBC One is an ITV production as an example.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Celebrity Fit Club might appeal to you MM.:D

---------- Post added at 17:26 ---------- Previous post was at 17:23 ----------

Don't ITV own the production company Mammoth Screen that was behind Poldark as they have bought several production companies in the last few years.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Yes that's right Den their list of production conpanies is huge.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I am fit........:D;)

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

This raises an interesting point. Do subscribers see value themselves or collectively?

I’m sure the geniuses at these deep pocket multinational companies can hazard a guess to the extent it goes on. However if they stop it, do they gain a net subscriber or lose one?

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I did a bit of comparing like for like so for example HULUs top package is $96p/m around £79p/m which is about the same as SKYs top package i believe?
So streaming isn't really cheaper at all.
I know HULU is USA and Japan only at the moment but i thought it'd be ideal to compare.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Don't know where you got that figure from

Link

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Where did i get figure from?

Say showtime, starz, cinemax and hbo = equivalant of Sky cinema, then live tv and no ads addon = skys package including sports and boxsets.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Is live tv streaming? Why would I sub to Hulu via Showtime, Starz, Cinemax or HBO when it's cheaper direct?

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

It's an example and yes live tv on hulu is streaming as you get it via your internet connection.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Just making sure you knew. Now explain why you would pay for the streaming service and then pay for live TV?

$44.99 pm gets you live TV and all streaming content.

Link

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Presumably because live TV has the content worth watching? The poster has built a like for like package - from a streaming provider. Hardly unreasonable. $44.99 doesn't include much of the available content.

I'm going to hazard that the vast majority of TV subscribers care for the content not the delivery method.

Like for like subscribers won't be any better off - this is a land grab and battle between global conglomerates.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I've gone for like for like also with live tv you get more channels including live sport, you do not get the live sport or local channels aka cbs,cw etc on the $11.99 package.
As i already explained Showtime, hbo, starz and cinemax are being used as a like for like for SKY Cinema.
Live tv like for like for SKY entertainment plus kids plus sports plus hd,
on demand as a like for like for sky boxsets.

I'm not knocking streaming btw as i too believe that streaming is the future for tv.
The $44.99p/m is live tv and ad supported on demand it does not include HBO, Showtime, Starz or Cinemax these are addons.

Another to look at is playstation vue https://www.playstation.com/en-us/network/vue/ or sling tv .

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Building a like for like package defeats the idea of streaming. You will end up paying for channels you will never watch just as you do now with virgin and Sky.

The whole point of streaming is that you only pay for access to what you want to watch which is why I suggested earlier that most would settle for 2 or 3 streaming providers and pick up an occasional month here and there with another.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Oh defo i agree with you, after the free trial i'll use the $44.99p/m of hulu as the movies are ad free apparantly and it'll give me the sports too, combine it with netflix and my vpn be all tv i need.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

You end up with content you don’t watch on streaming services as well.

Are any of your hypothetical two or three streaming services offering the latest movie releases or premium sports?

If and when they do that’s more money. You’re also forgetting, as many do, that when Sky/Virgin strike wholesale deals it’s pennies per subscriber per channel due to economies of sale.

When these distributors are trying to recoup the same money from tens/hundreds of thousands of subscribers it’ll be much more expensive for those who do. Two or three subscriptions and I’d already pay more for that plus broadband than I do for Virgin.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Streaming is becoming ever more popular in the States. Interestingly, cord cutters are said to like the increased value they are getting, contrary to what some on here are predicting.

https://advanced-television.com/2019...ntent-by-2024/

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

A study conducted by Roku.:D

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Yep.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Nothing like cherry picking certain articles to suit his agenda.:D

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I post all the relevant articles I can find, no matter which way they lean.

It may be news to you, Den, but they all seem to be leaning in the same direction.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

If your search term is “digital marketing streaming is the future” then you will only see the same articles.

I don’t see you updating us on the continuing success of pay tv incumbents.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

l think OB yearns for the headline of where have all the customers gone but alas he is going to be very disappointed waiting for that headline to arrive.;)

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I do not search in that way.

What success, anyway? Audiences continue to decline.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Subscriber numbers. Profit margins. ARPU.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I don't think that most people will be switching services every month. Most who switch will do so from time to time as they run out of programmes that appeal on the platform they are currently subscribing to, or when a competitor offers some programming that appeals more.

These streamers mean much more choice, and far too much to view all of it. That cannot be a bad thing. Those who worry about the cost needn't, because there will also be free services with ads available as well.

This may reassure those who are worried about cost!

https://www.digitaltveurope.com/2019...t-ceo-roberts/


Comcast CEO Brian Roberts has laid out the company’s plans for its new streamer, Peacock, saying that the company is looking for the “fastest way to get to profitability with the least amount of investment” with an ad-supported model being the way forward.

The CEO was speaking at a Q&A during Goldman Sachs’ annual Communacopia conference.

He said that the company wanted to “do something different in a very increasingly crowded field”.

Clarifying the situation, Roberts added that Peacock will be offered for free to existing US Comcast customers. The streamer will be available for non-Comcast users for free with ads, or with no ads for an as-yet unknown monthly fee.

He added that “advertising with a light ad load,” combined with “the premium content that will be on this network” will create a platform “unlike any advertising inventory available”.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Well as the yanks are getting it free, I would hope we will as well!

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I suspect Comcast would be reluctant to put Now TV's subscription revenue at risk by offering a subscription-free option.

---------- Post added at 20:46 ---------- Previous post was at 20:23 ----------

Interesting article in the FT suggesting that the only streaming service winners will be YouTube and ByteDance (a Chinese service similar to YouTube).
https://www.ft.com/content/24be6faa-...b-77216ebe1f17

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Comcast's streaming service will be made available free to Sky subscribers not sure on other platforms though

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

YT is doing superb with it's original content isn't it? :D

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

No, but then again, would you watch it if it were free?

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

A lot is now free mate, YT have put their premium content free to view with ads.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Younger viewers grow up (eventually)!

Comcast would not lose out by having a free version as their income on sub-free services would emanate from commercials. I think most streamers will be offering both subscription and subscription-free versions of their services in the future.

---------- Post added at 19:42 ---------- Previous post was at 19:40 ----------

I know, but my point was, is it worth watching anyway? I am not even attempting to look at that stuff.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Younger viewers do grow up but whether they will shift their current consumption patterns as they grow up is unknown.
Revenue from subscription services is far greater than advertising. Comcast would risk losing the subscription revenue if some subscribers defected to the advertising model.
If advertising models generated better revenues, VM and Sky would opt for this over subscription.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I have been reporting on a lot of depressing news about the likely fate of the linear channels over the last four years, but here is a glimmer of light for those who cannot imagine life without them.

I have been struck by how few new dramas are now finding their way to the TV channels, and next week's TV & Satellite Week appears to confirm the decline of our conventional channels. No new dramas starting at all next week apart from a new series of Arrow on Sky One, whereas just three years ago, there were always lots of new good drama series commencing every week at this time of year.

Compare that with all the new stuff on Netflix, Amazon and now Apple+. TV & Satellite Week have gone from two or three pages of programmes on the streamers to nine this week!

Then, this afternoon, I read the article in the link below, which seems to suggest a change in thinking about programme distribution, and it got me wondering. Given that the number of views of programmes on the streamers is likely to decline with time, what if they then allowed the linear channels to have the right to broadcast them, either exclusively or shared with the streamer? This would bolster the revenues of the streaming companies while replenishing the content of the TV channels.

Of course, this will only work if sufficient people continue to watch scheduled TV interrupted by commercials, but it is, as I said, a glimmer of hope.

https://tbivision.com/2019/10/18/how...-again-column/

[EXTRACT]

After Netflix CEO Reed Hastings suggested at the RTS Convention in Cambridge last month that the US streamer may now be more flexible with the global rights they once pushed for so rigorously, it feels that the rules have yet again been re-defined for distributors and broadcasters. Indeed, it was reported in Cannes that rights to Netflix’s epic original drama The Crown will apparently soon be heading back to Sony Pictures Entertainment – a massive reversal to linear distribution. How the game has changed.

In the past, some traditional linear broadcasters could have seen Netflix as the enemy, but are they now viewing them as more of a strategic partner? Will more of the shows that originated on these platforms now actually be up for grabs by linear broadcasters going forward?

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

The quality of Netflix dramas has been poor of late it's probably the least I've used the service , quantity sadly doesn't always bring quality.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I can't say I've seen any poor ones, but I am actually quite selective of what I watch (On the contrary, the shows I watch on Netflix are excellent). I do think that flooding the market with shows isn't going to do Netflix any favours though. I'd rather they cut the quantity down a little, and concentrated on the quality. We are going to get to the point where instead of getting excited about a new Netflix drama, people are just going to roll their eyes, shrug and say "Meh, it's another Netflix drama".

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Passive-aggressive much?

On your other point about new material on broadcast TV, reality does not coincide with your view...

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom...n-of-streamers They delivered more than 32,000 hours of original, homegrown productions across their channels in 2018, which was around 125 times more than was shown on paid streaming services (221 hours). The vast majority of programmes available on streaming platforms are US-made productions, created to play out in multiple countries.

Lots of quotes in there about the growth of streaming, but broadcast TV has lots of life in the old dog yet, as traditional channels still form 70% of TV time, and the five main public service broadcasters’ channels held their share of viewing – at 52% in 2018 compared to 51% in 2017.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I agree about the quality, but if you scroll through the Netflix menus these days, more often than not, you are getting Netflix's own shows and films.

Netflix had to go down the quantity route in preparation for when it loses much of its third party content. There used to be just House of Cards and Orange Is The New Black, now they've got tons of their own stuff.

Can anyone name every single Netflix original now? I bet they cant.

---------- Post added at 21:21 ---------- Previous post was at 21:13 ----------

I would expect our broadcasters to show more UK stuff that foreign services, even though one of the main broadcasters is foreign owned. But how many of those 32k hours of programmes are decent dramas, comedies, factual shows? The vast bulk of original stuff is cheap reality shows, celebrity chefs (still going strong...) panel shows and other stuff that is made in bulk and cheaply.

I've just noticed that my Fire TV stick has the Apple ap on it now in preparation for their full launch next month. If Apple, Amazon and the other big American tech/media giants start investing in UK made content, as some like Netflix are already doing, our own broadcasters don't stand a chance of survival in the long term, in my opinion.

---------- Post added at 21:29 ---------- Previous post was at 21:21 ----------

It's worrying for those of us who need to watch our pennies. In the not too distant future, we could end up with "poor man's tv" ie a handful of linear, ad invested channels filled with pretty much the same crap that is on tv now and "rich man's tv" where all the decent dramas are on all the streamers, many of which will require subs.

I still think linear tv will go on for some time yet, especially the main broadcast channels, but it will be the cable/sat channels that will feel the effect of the streamers the most over the next 5-10 years.

Everything goes full circle. Before satellite tv, there was only a few tv channels and in the streaming world in the future, it may go back to that.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Laughable introductory rhetoric there. It’s easy to imagine life without linear, even life without television!

I can’t imagine life without economics though and that’s always where your argument consistently falls down.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

For an argument to fall down it has to stand up in the first place, even briefly. ;)

Take the latest pronouncements from Old Boy’s armchair, for example. He’s flipped through this week’s TV guide, mentally compared it with all the other TV guides ever published in the last week of October, and produced an obviously rigorous and statistically significant finding in support of his thesis.

Or not.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

tbf, he did provide substantive detailed evidence to support his proposition... ;)

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Oh, here we go, popping his head up just to start another argument, you don't know where to stop do you, are you a troll?
As for his argument, as you put it, falling down, has any of the streamers gone bust yet?

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Does Eleven Sports UK operation count? Or is it still ploughing on with no content? I’ll be honest it’s so far off my radar I don’t know, but happy to use it as an example that supply does not equal demand.

As for your trolling remark probably best to leave moderating to the actual moderators. Incidentally, the two posts between your post and my post above were both posted by moderators of the forum. None appear to have taken issue.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

All you ever do is come on here when OB posts something, and more or less take it apart with your boring economics argument, imo OB is posting what he believes is happening in the streaming industry, he posts links to articles posted by people more in the know than, imo, you are, but you continue to put his points down, and imo that's just arguing for the sake of it, if you are so brilliant with economics, why don't you apply to one of the big streamers offering to sort out their financial issues?

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Thanks for your insight, but economics and finance are two different things.

I don’t think I can really be described any more “arguing for the sake of it” when I quoted a post that included the immortal line:

I’m not aware of anyone on the forum who feels that strongly about linear television. The closest would be Old Boy’s wife who insists he spend £100 a month on a combined package including linear content despite, in his own words, there being nothing worth watching.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Eleven Sports has more or less gone bust.

OB believes streaming rules and linear to will die. This may happen in the future but I seriously doubt it will happen as soon as he thinks.

What I am unsure about is why anyone thinks the demise of linear TV will be a good thing for the consumer?

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Interesting article here on preparations for 5G.

https://www.rxtvlog.com/2019/11/wrc-...-assigned.html

In particular, the passage regarding terrestrial channels preparing to give up their frequencies in favour of internet broadcasts is confirmed here, for those who have been doubting it.

UK broadcasters and regulators are already preparing for the day digital terrestrial television loses its frequencies, with the BBC readying itself for an all-IP future and Ofcom policy-making as far back as 2013 planning for the release of TV frequencies in 2030.

Five years ahead of my prediction, hey!

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Is that this prediction OB or the many others before that.:D

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Tell me which predictions you are talking about, Den, and I'll try to answer your question. I said linear channels are likely to have disappeared by 2035. This seems to imply that the Freeview channels at least will have disappeared by 2030, to free up the airwaves for 5G.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

It implies nothing of the sort , it's merely the distribution method that will change.

Funny linear is still mentioned here

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

“Mobile phone lobby to make case for more bandwidth” - it’s hardly news, is it Old Boy?

If you actually read the 2013 OFCOM document it merely refers to the possibility of using UHF frequencies in the “long term” of which the date 2030 features consistently throughout as an entirely arbitrary date. Further away than 2020 which is medium term (now actually a mere few weeks away). There’s also many assumptions made and outlined throughout the document and it’d be interesting to see if they held up through to 2020.

Considering it took from 1997 to 2012 to switch of analogue television I’d not be holding my breath for 2030. That said, it doesn’t preclude live linear channels from broadcasting over 5G, satellite, cable or fixed line internet in any case.

---------- Post added at 19:54 ---------- Previous post was at 19:52 ----------

The DVB-I ecosystem
While DVB-I refers in particular to the forthcoming specifications for service discovery and programme information, the ecosystem extends to other DVB specifications. DVB-DASH was recently updated to include a low latency mode, while a specification for Multicast Adaptive Bit Rate streaming will be finalized in early 2020. Both are key to achieving scalable, efficient delivery of linear content over broadband networks.

This looks magnificent.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

When most people refer to 'linear channels', they are talking about existing scheduled broadcast channels and I was using that commonly understood terminology.

Strictly speaking, of, course, 'linear' channels embraces live broadcasts, and of course they will continue, just as the BBC i-Player is able to provide live broadcasts. If we didn't have the ability to do this, we wouldn't have any live sport anymore, which would be unacceptable.

My point was that the idea of having, say, ITV, ITV2, ITV3, ITV4 etc is unlikely to continue when the existing transmission system is changed to IPTV. Everything will be under just one ITV banner or maybe grouped completely differently, as Britbox does.

Of course, we will still get our programmes and it is, as you say, a different means of transmission. However, everything will be presented differently and you will just be able to pick the programmes you want to view, which brings the choice of what to watch and when to the viewer instead of the scheduler. Obviously, news and sport will still be shown live, which goes without saying, really.

---------- Post added at 08:11 ---------- Previous post was at 07:46 ----------

You are right to say that 2030 is not cast in stone, but it cannot be. Things are moving so fast, it could be before that, or if there are unforeseen technical difficulties, it could be later. However, what cannot be denied is that Ofcom policy-making as far back as 2013 was planning for the release of TV frequencies in 2030. That being the case, my prediction that existing scheduled TV channels will have disappeared by 2035 cannot be far off.

For the sake of clarity, I am not saying that 'live' broadcasts will disappear, simply that they will be streamed instead. I really do not think the broadcasters will want to perpetuate the clumsy scheduled system that we have now. On demand viewing is growing in popularity and is really taking off now. There will be such a small demand for viewing in the conventional way by 2030 that broadcasters will seize the opportunity for change when existing broadcasting measures cease.

Maybe there will still be some Pluto-type options available for those who like that sort of thing, but I doubt that will prove to be a mainstream method of viewing.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Old Boy shifting the goalposts again. We will have linear television after all, just perhaps not over Digital Terrestrial, and maybe not 2030 as mentioned in a seven year old speculative OFCOM document.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Pretty much as some of us have been saying all along ... any TV that is broadcast to a schedule is linear, regardless of whether it’s made available by terrestrial, satellite, cable or over IP.

The nature of some forms of TV, such as live sport and rolling news, is such that there will always, always be linear TV. The fact that even on streaming platforms, some big-ticket items are released according to a weekly schedule shows that even the streamers understand there is a role for controlled release of new entertainment content.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

No goalposts have been moved, I've been saying the same thing for years now.

It is patently absurd to say there will be no live TV because news and sport is always live. What I have been saying all this time is that scheduled TV channels will most likely have closed down by 2035 and these will be replaced by video on demand and streaming.

A different method of broadcasting, yes, but also a very different experience for the viewer.

---------- Post added at 16:08 ---------- Previous post was at 16:05 ----------

I do not disagree with any of that. But the scheduled TV channels as we know them now almost certainly will not exist with IPTV. That is all I am saying.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Ach, just the usual from him mate, arguing for argument's sake.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Hello Old Boy,

My opinion on this remains the same as I've said before and as people choose streaming services over traditional pay tv, many linear channels will close.

However, in many regards, I see tv of tomorrow looking very much as it did thirty years ago with there remaining a core group of linear channels acting as shop windows into their respective streaming services.

Until true intelligent tv comes along (some way off) many people do not want to wade through endless menus or have to "think" about what they want to watch after a long day and a core group of linear channels which are broad in nature, as our main channels used to be, with a varied selection of programming, will dominate I believe. Having wall-to-wall reality crap and celebrity chefs will become a thing of the past as those channels with poor quality content close.

Don't be surprised within five years to find a Netflix One channel, (perhaps a Netflix Kids channel, or Netflix Crime channel etc) which shows the best of what's on offer on Netflix's streaming service. And if people want to break away from the linear schedule and binge watch a certain show, rather than waiting for the next episode to appear in the linear schedule, they've only got to enter the streaming service to do it. Ie Press the red button to binge watch the whole season of a show you're currently watching.

Who runs these linear channels in the future though, I think is very much up for debate and all depends on which streaming services survive over the next ten years or so. I believe Disney and Netflix will survive, not sure on the others yet and I believe ultimately our own UK broadcasters may well collapse.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

All these doubters about linear getting reduced think of this with 5g more bandwidth needs to be found and say 10 years down the line we could have 6G which would require even more bandwidth putting more squeeze on the freeview transmitions at least.
So i don't think OBs theories are as wild as some think.
What i think will happen is we will see linear tv delivered more and more via our broadband using multicast.
The reality is technology is moving very fast, in 1998 we only had wap now we have 5G that's quite a huge jump in 20 years so i wouldn't pah pah OBs theories.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

It’s hardly arguing for the sake of argument. Old Boy has, once again, made a material change to his ongoing argument

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...postcount=5884

This post, and those around it, he was clearly talking about television working to a schedule. Not digital terrestrial/cable or satellite.

---------- Post added at 12:13 ---------- Previous post was at 12:07 ----------

If he’s making the case that linear TV will exist but not over Digital Terrestrial then fair enough, it’s not that bold an argument as cable/satellite and IPTV are superior technologies in any case.

Is the DTT space even desirable for 5G? I thought much higher frequencies were being utilised to deliver the required bandwidth.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

At last, the penny seems to have dropped!

Yes, my argument is that existing scheduled TV will ultimately be replaced by video on demand and streaming. I thought page 1 of this thread made this clear, but evidently not, as it seems to have taken a few years for this to sink in.

I accept part of the blame for initially using the term 'linear', but at the time, all the press articles I was coming across referred to our existing channels thus. Then, having (I thought) clarified the position, there was much pedantry going on revolving around terminology and other nonsense.

Finally, maybe there is at last an element of agreement about the thrust of the argument presented in this thread, even though some may still be of the view that existing channels will continue much as they are now. For that, we must wait and see, but I believe that the broadcasters will adapt to new technology by the time IPTV takes off and replaces existing transmissions. I would not be at all surprised if at that point, if not before, Sky will cease to broadcast via satellite, thereby reducing costs.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

No matter how much effort you make to sugar coat your climbdown on this issue - there are countless posts where you describe viewers not watching linear TV and therefore the advertising revenue wouldn’t support it.

It’s hardly pedantry to pin you down on your use of terminology given your track record in moving the goalposts.

The only think that has “sunk in” is your own realisation that people will continue to watch linear television, no matter how backward you believe it to be.

Indeed, let’s revisit the opening post:

Digital terrestrial had nothing to do with it.

This thread from 2015 seems equally to be clearly talking about scheduled linear television as a whole.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...php?t=33699901

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I didn't say it did. I was merely pointing out the obvious, the all these scheduled channels that we have now will die off in favour of on demand and streaming. If you read my last post, I admitted that my use of the word 'linear' was not the best word to use, even though it was used that way in common parlence at the time.

I'm not sure what goalposts you think I've moved. Maybe it's just your understanding of what I said on the first page of this thread.

Even David Bouchier used the term linear, to demonstrate the point.

“We are talking about moving away from simple linear TV and that [old] multichannel line-up,” he said. “Linear is the old technology and…not a valid pay TV proposition on its own.”

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Now we’re back to no linear television. Make your mind up...

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

What I said was that instead of live TV channels as they are now, they would be streamed instead. Stop being so argumentative. You know perfectly well what I'm saying.

Since you responded, I added David Bouchier's quote about 'linear' TV in my earlier post to underline the point that most people were using this terminology to describe existing TV channels and their demise in the future.

So channels such as BBC1,2,3 and 4 will all be found only in one place in the future - the BBC i-Player or its successor, and if the licence fee is abolished, maybe Britbox. There will simply be no point in having those separate channels, content will be listed by title/categories.

They will all be on demand except live events such as news and sport, which will be streamed.

Is that clear enough for you?

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Its what you call a hotchpotch of obfuscation and confusement.:D

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Fair enough, we’re back to the same lines that have been consistently debunked over the last five years. No real need to revisit your tired old arguments.

---------- Post added at 13:53 ---------- Previous post was at 13:53 ----------

Almost thought we had a breakthrough of common sense on Old Boys part but sadly not. :)

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I think most reading these forums will appreciate what I am saying, whether or not they agree. You are deliberately misunderstanding and causing unnecessary confusion. But you do this with practically everything you post

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

That’s quite an astonishing claim considering a mere 8 posts ago you admitted to causing confusion with the word linear. I can’t “deliberately” misunderstand and cause “unnecessary” confusion where you have already accepted your terminology could have been clearer.

I get that you don’t like your posts being challenged as due to their speculative nature they rarely stand up to scrutiny, but to accuse me of confusing matters is quite a leap from there.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

What is there not to understand? You really are the limit! I will leave you to ponder....:walk:

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Spot on, OB, everytime you post he goes through it with a fine tooth comb, just causing trouble as per usual.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

l am sure you will agree a forum is full of differing views and opinions as if we all agreed on everything there would not be much to talk and debate about would there on here MM.:)

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I am sure you will agree jfman takes that to a whole new level.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Absolute nonsense.

If Old Boys statements don’t hold up to scrutiny, nor even consistency with themselves over time, that’s not an outcome specific to my existence or participation in these threads. Indeed, I’d suggest anyone who claims to believe so is simply troublemaking themselves.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Being diplomatic one can apply that sentiment elsewhere as well.:D;)

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

It’s not troublemaking to scrutinise what are frankly outlandish and speculative predictions that don’t hold up when challenged.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

That's amazing, Hugh!

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

I'm not saying that it's troublemaking to scrutinise anything, what I am saying is that you nit pick every little thing that he posts, imo he has provided links from experts in the industry, which suggest that what he predicts will eventually come to fruition, also, what's outlandish about what he has provided links to? Have you come up with any evidence on the contrary?

---------- Post added at 15:31 ---------- Previous post was at 15:25 ----------

I don't disagree with that, Den, there's good debate, and then there's debate offered by others, which, quite frankly brings nothing to the debate apart from arguing and causing trouble, my opinion of course....:)

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Where are these links from experts? I see plenty of opinion pieces from digital marketing blogs, online polling from a VPN provider, and similar.

There’s presently no plans to switch off DTT. Analogue switch off took 14 years. Eutelsat are planning to renew their orbital fleet at 13 degrees east for a further 15 years.

Remember it’s not that I’m denying streaming will be huge. I’m denying that linear scheduled broadcasting reduces to zero in the timeframe OB suggests. Viewers have been able to avoid linear for years with on demand and DVRs if they really wanted to. Yet, they still watch it.

The consumer behaviour change required would need state intervention to enforce it.

Round and round we go...

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Worth bearing in mind that the only reason those pieces get written is for SEO. They are designed from top to bottom to paint a fast-changing vision of the future that their potential customers will naturally need marketing support in order to exploit, and to put the agency in question at the top of the Goooooogle rankings where they're easy to find and, by implication, authoritative in what they say.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

You are pretty prone to outlandish statements yourself, jfman, and this post is typical. Why is it 'outlandish' when supporting information that leads to certain conclusions is provided? Just because you don't believe something will happen doesn't mean it won't.

Yes, of course some of my posts are speculative - so what? Many posts on this forum are. I don't need to be 'scrutinised' by you, I'm not standing for election!

You need to get off your high horse and enter into a decent debate instead of slamming everyone that comes out with an opinion on something. There is scarcely anything you ever agree with on any thread I've read where you are involved.

---------- Post added at 16:57 ---------- Previous post was at 16:54 ----------

I certainly agree with that, but obviously what these articles describe couldn't be that outlandish otherwise executives in the industry would not take them seriously, in which case, there would be no point.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

The point is the evidence doesn’t support your, rather fanciful, conclusions.

Even your own digital marketing blogs don’t describe linear channels reducing to zero, or claim that tried and tested pay-tv operators will be unable to move seamlessly into the streaming market with their existing customer base using a mix of live, scheduled and on demand content.

I don’t necessarily feel the need to post “I agree” with other people, but if it helps I agree with denphone and Chris most of the time in this thread.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Link

Link

Link

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

That's all genuinely interesting, pip, but the thing is none of it says there will be no linear channels in the future, and even if you could stretch it to that point it doesn't say 2035.

The BBC obviously has to justify its own existence, and the licence fee, by ensuring it is as widely available and adapts to consumer behaviour. Otherwise, the tax would easily be swept aside by a political party aspiring for votes at a General Election.

I've covered on a number of occasions the very low bar that is the threshold for it to remain worthwhile broadcasting linear television because of how cheap it actually is for a company who already holds the rights to the programming.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Did OB say that there wouldn't be any linear channels? I'm pretty sure he didn't, he did say that there has to be linear TV to show live sports!

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Well there doesn’t really. A live stream can be set up ad-hoc to deliver sport (like Sky red button streams).

Linear TV as I think most of us understand it is a (usually) 24 hour broadcast where they schedule programming at specific times. Usage of the word linear aside that’s what we’ve all been talking about al this time. And yes, he said there would be no linear channels as advertising revenue wouldn’t sustain the model.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

No, but it does say
What will that figure be by 2035?

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Who knows, it could be 10% by 2035. Linear will still be viable due to the low cost of broadcasting. Just look at the number of countries with less than 10% of the population of the UK that have independent TV channels. As with all projections the low hanging fruit is the easiest to achieve. The final ten per cent will be much harder.

I don’t expect it to be as low as 10%, but linear is still viable at that level. If you are Sky or anyone else paying hundreds of millions in rights the actual broadcast (over and above the rest of delivery methods you are using anyway) is relative pennies. As channels close the 10% becomes quite a captive audience.

DTT was viable even in the ITV digital days (the pay platform obviously wasn’t) when it was a gateway to a couple of million homes.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

That was before we even had Netflix!

As for your 10%, you won't get much in the way of quality viewing on that small audience! Just a few short years ago ITV nearly went under because there was insufficient advertising to support the cost of programming.

It should be clear to you, particularly with your outstanding economics expertise that is, we understand, second to none, that 10% of the audience is not going to generate the same amount of revenue from advertising. Something has to give, and why, when the system changes to IPTV, would the broadcasters would want to duplicate a system which provides an unsatisfactory plethora of channels when the content can be packaged into all-embracing streaming services?

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

There's absolutely no need for sarcasm in your posts Old Boy, although it's unsurprising as you don't have a case so you persist with personalising it against me.

You are also arguing against points I didn't actually make - which is the norm.

At no point did I make reference to the quality, or otherwise, of linear television. Neither did I claim there would be the same amount of ad revenue floating around - pro rata - as there is today. The fact ITV nearly "went under" as you put it was programming costs which would exist anyway for ITV streaming. You are the one seeing the world in a dull black and white options when the rest of us are watching in colour.

Why would the broadcasters want to duplicate? Same reason they do today I presume with repeats, plus 1 content, on demand and online live streams. It costs virtually nothing compared to all the other operating costs of TV channel/streaming service/pay tv platform.

There's also the risk that if one company doesn't another will - and that company gets "free" advertising every time someone switches their television on and it goes to channel 1/101, in every bedroom, in every hotel room - hell even in every caravan in the country. I think Sky, or anyone else frankly, would jump at that opportunity in addition to the pay platform, streaming, Now TV and the multitude of other ways their content is available.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Well, we'll see how that works out, jfman.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Hi, Horizon; sorry I did not respond before now.

I guess this could all play out in a number of ways, but I cannot help thinking that the conventional TV channels will lose their appeal over time, and when DTT and satellite transmissions are switched off, we will all be viewing over the internet.

If scheduled channels have not already disappeared before, this will be the point at which the remaining ones will close down. That doesn't necessarily mean there will be no Sky, Discovery, BBC or ITV content of course - as jfman is fond of pointing out, it will simply be a different way of broadcasting. However, the viewer experience will be quite different, because access to this content will be via SVOD and AVOD streamers.

https://www.csimagazine.com/csi/Tren...and-adtech.php

I understand your point about some viewers just wanting to sit back and watch what's showing at the time, but in the future, this will be more personalised content rather than TV programmes for all put together by human schedulers. I believe that this is the way Roku may be going and I think it will be popular.

I would not rule out some showcase channels popping up before everything goes IPTV, but I doubt they would survive once that switchover happens.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Despite your protestations to the contrary, it is quite obvious that you really don’t understand that delivering television entirely over IP does not in any way necessitate an end to broadcast scheduling and a switch to VOD.

This is what Jfman and I keep telling you. IP is just another way of delivering television. The means of transmitting the signal does not mandate an end to a linear stream. The main public service channels all stream their linear schedules via their IP based services, despite not doing so when the earliest versions of those services launched. A great deal of technical research and development has been expended in making HD streaming of the broadcast schedule available, as close to real-time as possible. A lot of work has also gone into resolving rights issues that previously prevented IP delivery (in a pure catch-up service this was resolved by simply omitting programmes from the menu where internet delivery rights hadn’t been secured).

All the evidence is that the major TV channels continue to see a place for their linear schedules even when offered directly alongside their VOD menu.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Chris, I understand what you are saying perfectly well. Now TV and Pluto TV carry linear channels this way. What I am saying is that linear channels will become much less popular with time and that broadcasters will conclude that there is no point in continuing with them as programmes are far more accessible on demand. When all broadcasting goes to IPTV, the natural conclusion broadcasters are likely to make is that this is the appropriate time to change for the future.

As anyone who has had to change over from manual systems to computer systems knows, you don't try to replicate how your existing systems operate on your new software. You look for more efficient ways of inputting and accessing your information.

Similarly, when DTT and satellite become a thing of the past, the broadcasting industry will be looking for the most appropriate means of making their content available, and I doubt whether scheduled linear channels such as Sky One will be on offer. Instead, the content would be displayed more in line with the BBC i-Player, Netflix and Now TV. And yes, I do acknowledge that Now TV also carries scheduled linear channels at present.

I agree that it is perfectly possible to display TV channels on IPTV, I have never said otherwise. However, this will be seen as a very antiquated way to present content on IPTV. Why would they wish to do that?

For those too lazy to actually select anything for themselves, I would wager that companies such as Virgin Media would offer a service which learns what you like to watch and then just adds programmes from streamers to which you are subscribed (or are free) on a personalised channel that just starts playing when you access it.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Here’s the very heart of your problem. You just find it impossible to understand how anyone could see things in some way other than you. And that, ultimately, is why however many threads you start on this topic, they will all go round in endless circles, with the end of broadcast TV permanently just a few years in the future.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

H'mm. You may see things differently when superfast broadband comes to your house, Chris.

Re: Linear is old tech - on demand is the future
 

Why would he ? I have superfast broadband available and still watch a mix of linear , recorded and On Demand content.

Many times I end up watching programmes from the TV Guide in fact I find Netflix overwhelming sometimes and give up.