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

Would be interesting to see how this looks in the UK. (This is a US report.)

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

We generally go the way of the US!

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

Except it was Pay-TV vs streaming, and over a 3rd of households in the U.K. just use Terrestrial TV.

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

True, but as I have pointed out before, we are looking at the trends, an increasing choice of OTT services (including free advertisement supported services) and super-fast broadband being rolled out across the country, together with an increase of new material being shown on a 'Direct to Consumer' basis, leading to the erosion of quality content available to TV channels over time.The recent abolition of Disney channels except by way of their streamer and Disney's decision to concentrate their content on Disney +, with the clear threat to the future of Sky Cinema Disney, is an example of this. As the quality of content declines and the number of channels on Freeview reduces due to the inevitable decline in advertising revenue, this will encourage the use of OTT services, particularly the free ones.

I get the counter-arguments. However, in my view, the constant stream of evidence coming through that supports my take on this is a fact that is not easily and credibly discounted.

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

You may be right, Chris, but without evidence to support your view, it is a little inadvisable to say it will never happen. Strategies change, just as they have appeared to have changed in respect of CBS All Access.

https://www.digitaltveurope.com/2020...amount-launch/

I believe that Netflix always will be the leader in providing original content. They will never stop that, and I didn't say they would. However, there will be scope for reducing the number of originals they are producing once they are satisfied with the selection available.

Context is important here, Chris. Harry was asking for ideas on how Netflix could save money. That is one.

---------- Post added at 13:32 ---------- Previous post was at 13:18 ----------

Well, there's the thing. Netflix have so many original films and TV series, I cannot see anyone being put off by a reduction of, say, 50% of brand new originals each week.

After 5 or maybe even 10 years, I cannot see Netflix losing any sleep in allowing other providers to have access to selected material. They already do this actually, but I think there is far more scope to do so than they do now.

The reason you would wish to subscribe to Netflix, obviously, is to view more recent material. Remember, The Simpsons pretty well defines Sky One, but they still allow other TV channels have the rights to screen the older programmes. That doesn't stop people from wanting Sky.

---------- Post added at 13:43 ---------- Previous post was at 13:32 ----------

Really, Chris? I am suggesting that PPV could be added to the catalogue, so how that would put people off Netflix is difficult to comprehend?

Look, I know other providers do this. They get a bit of stick for it as well, because they pay a subscription and then they have to pay more. In my view, these streamer service providers have got it wrong. They mix all the free and PPV material up together, which both confuses and disappoints people, leaving them disillusioned. Look how many people on these forums have complained about that very thing.

However, if Netflix entered into PPV as an additional service, with the PPV material in a completely different area of the site, and advertised as a way that their subscribers could still watch material for which the rights were held by a different provider, this would raise the extra money without alienating those with a Netflix subscription. There is a lot to be said about having all your content in one place.

I would have thought the PPV market was quite lucrative, but I don't have any figures to hand to be certain.

---------- Post added at 13:51 ---------- Previous post was at 13:43 ----------

This is a silly argument. Are you actually disputing that I have been specifying 2035 as the date since 2015?

I have explained multiple times that it is the broadband coverage that I believe will be in a state that will enable the vast majority to be able to access the streamers by 2025. I still believe that the TV channels as they exist now will be pretty well dead by 2035.

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

Why do you think Apple and Amazon *don’t* separate out their PPV content from the rest?

Annoying as it is, they do it because that’s how you get people to pay for it - by showing it in a list of stuff they’ve been looking for and tempting them to pay the extra just as a one-off. The substantial amount of bundled content is more than enough for most viewers; if the PPV stuff is hidden most of them won’t bother to look.

Meanwhile I shall keep my counsel and indulge in a private chuckle at you admitting you find anything difficult to comprehend.

---------- Post added at 13:56 ---------- Previous post was at 13:54 ----------

And I’ve quoted your original posts multiple times, showing that this is not what you originally said and you changed your mind after being challenged by multiple other contributors to the thread at the time.

One day when I’m bored enough I dare say I’ll re-quote them again. For the time being, the quotes are not so far back in this thread for anyone interested in looking.

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

Whatever, Chris. That doesn't take away my point that 2035 is the date I have been giving for the last 5 years. That is not going to change.

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

You keep telling us Netflix is the leader in the amount of Original content when in fact many media companies produce far greater amounts of original content annually.

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

This is one thread I will not miss now I have ditched VM

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

That’s a point what does OB do when his Mrs allows him to ditch VM?

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

"Whatever"?

As a counter-argument, that’s up there with "your mum!" :rolleyes:

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

Who?

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

Netflix is the leading streamer in that regard, which is the point I was making.

---------- Post added at 09:57 ---------- Previous post was at 09:46 ----------

An appropriate word to use, in the circumstances.

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

Disney and Comcast are two.

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

Without stats it's hard to prove but I would add WarnerMedia, CBS Viacom and Sony in there too. Plus, there's probably large non-English language companies in Russia, India and China that probably need to be considered too.

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

https://variety.com/2020/biz/news/20...on-1203457940/

The estimates here show Disney & Comcast as the leaders with Netflix a close third.

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

So they don't produce far greater amounts of original content annually.:rolleyes:

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

You should know by now that OB never lets facts interfere with his dream.

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

They produce more and have libraries of original content far greater than Netflix.

The rights to quite a few of the earlier Netflix Originals are actually owned by some of these other media companies as well.

Its not a criticism of Netflix for the price they charge it offers a good amount of original content and some must watch shows.

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

H’mmm. How do you explain this, then?

“I think a lot of people are seeing 5G as possibly the replacement of digital terrestrial television transmission in general. If you talk to key broadcasters in the UK as well as other countries, broadcasters are looking to internet-based delivery as the main channel to the consumer in the next 10 years. Digital satellite, digital terrestrial, digital cable, whilst they are the main tenets of getting to our key audience at the moment, they are going to diminish significantly. There will still be requirements for efficient multicast to consumers and the use of the 5G technology toolkit outside of the service provider offering of 5G is something that’s of interest to broadcasters in that space.”

https://www.tvbeurope.com/media-deli...ption-of-media

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

Your quote doesn't address UHF spectrum at all. What it does float is the idea that broadcasters might be looking at deploying their own 5G multicast technology in order to directly reach viewers in the medium term. If that's the case, then it indicates that broadcasters still essentially have a broadcast mindset - otherwise they would be content to simply put their content on the internet and allow viewers to access it via their ISP (whether that's a 4G/5G mobile operator, ADSL or fibre). If there's any room for UHF here, it is conceivable that a broadcaster might want to use the UHF frequencies currently delivering DVB-T Freeview transmissions to deliver a future 5G based service instead. This, however, would still have more in common with our present understanding of broadcast TV than VOD.

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

I agree, it doesn’t address the UHF spectrum aspect of your argument, but what was of interest to me was the expectation that broadcast TV would migrate to IPTV within the next 10 years and that this would become the main method of broadcasting. I was pilloried for suggesting such a thing not long ago.

I also stated that the BBC had the working assumption that they would move to IPTV in the next TV licence period, and that was scoffed at as well.

It is clear to me which way this is going, but I guess people will believe what they want to believe until it stares them in the face.

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

The main thrust of the argument in this thread has always been over on-demand versus scheduled broadcast. There are a multitude of ways broadcast TV can be delivered. To be honest in our house we access broadcast TV over IP most of the time now, because our TV's iPlayer app boots up more quickly than our Freeat box; plus now we have 4G for our home internet we have the bandwidth available to do that. But in the terms of the thread title - which you chose, back in the day - when we watch a whole Saturday evening on the iPlayer we are still watching linear TV. The delivery method is secondary. The issues around on demand as an alternative to linear broadcast have to do with viewing habits, convenience and consumption of live events (not just sport - major light entertainment competitions and game shows also rely on live broadcast for their impact) on the one hand, and the technical challenge of near-100% nationwide coverage of fast, affordable internet on the other.

VOD platforms, as well as the national data nintrastructure, still rely on not everyone maxing them out at the same time.

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

I don’t think we are as far apart as all that. I have said on countless occasions that by ‘linear TV’ I was referring to the existing broadcast channels. It is pretty obvious to everyone, surely, that live shows and live sport will always be available, but instead of being broadcast by conventional methods, it will be streamed.

Although you say the delivery method is secondary, this was the whole point of the thread. Yes, it’s the content that is important, in fact that is key. But I do not believe that we will be accessing that content the way we do now in about 15 years’ time. We will access it by way of IPTV, and while some of our existing channels may be accessible by that method initially, as you can on Now TV and the BBC I-Player, as people learn the simplicity of choosing programmes from the icons on display, most people will end up doing that. In turn, the various streamers will phase these channels out altogether.

The fact that you have now told us that even you spend Saturday nights on the I-Player is reassuring!

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

Sport is already streamed and has been for years.

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

I spend Saturday nights watching BBC1. The means by which BBC1’s entirely linear schedule arrives at my house is neither here nor there. ;). Hundreds of my near neighbours don’t have this choice, however, because topography means the 4G signal is poor in most places locally, and BT stopped running fibre about 3 miles from here. Internet for most is either ADSL (not very fast) or satellite (not very cheap, and not unlimited).

In fact if the Freesat box is already on we will still use that in preference to iPlayer because the picture quality from the HD sat signal is better than iPlayer, even when iPlayer has access to 7 or 8mbps.

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

But that’s not linear, it’s ‘linear’... ;)

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

I know it has! But this I think will be the only way to watch live TV in the years to come.

There’s work to be done on the latency issue first, though.

---------- Post added at 17:00 ---------- Previous post was at 16:59 ----------

It’s a linear stream.

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

I must ask, therefore, the following:

Yes, but you still have the bother of organising the schedules, filling the ads at specific slots, continuity announcements and so forth. You also have to pay for EPG slots, etc.

Why bother when you can just upload the lot?

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...postcount=1295

Game, set, match.

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

What are you on about? The only ‘schedules’ will be for live events. Most programmes are pre-recorded.

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

It starts with 'I think' - so obviously one persons opinions - hardly enough to set anything in stone.

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

The 'I think' relates to what he believes is the opinion of the majority of people. He then goes on to talk about what key broadcasters believe, which is the issue.

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

I think followed up by ‘possibly’ followed closely by an ‘if’.

A staple of speculative evidence-lacking blog pieces.

If you look carefully at what is actually said and not what you’d like it to say all that’s in the piece of substance is the relatively uncontroversial statement of internet based delivery increasing and traditional delivery decreasing.

There’s nothing about use of UHF spectrum, viability of 5G for mass content delivery over long range in rural areas (like UHF) or the multitude of other conclusions you have reached in your own head on the basis of a blog.

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

Caveat upon caveat...

I believe the opinion of the majority of the people on this forum disagree with your proposition.

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

The 'I think' and 'possibly' both refer to the opinions of the majority of people. Why are you obssessing about that'?

The following 'if' does not indicate doubt. Read it properly.

I really don't care about the point you've made regarding the UHF spectrum - that's your argument not mine. What I am focussing on is what industry chiefs believe, and if you think you know better than them, I would be interested to see your evidence.

Instead of denigrating people and links provided in these forums, why don't you start concentrating on the actual arguments being made? Perversity, I suspect.

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

Industry chiefs? Not in that blog you weren’t.

Not a single quote, from anyone, except the writer. Who thinks... possibly... if... might... something.

The only perverse argument going on around here Old Boy is yours now that scheduled linear television will no longer (in your opinion) see it’s demise by 2035 you are now pretending to have made an entirely different point altogether. I know it’s an entirely different point because I’ve been sat here debating it for the best part of 5 years.

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

What a load of twaddle - as I said, you just try to discredit everything people say on here and every link they provide.

I guess we are just going to have to accept that you know better than everyone else, regardless of any evidence to the contrary.

Yes, well dream on.

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

I don't know why you have decided to personalise it Old Boy. I'm not asking anyone to accept I know better than everyone else.

I think that I've a fairly uncontroversial opinion in this thread and that if you were to canvas wider opinion you'd maybe find that to be the case.

There's no evidence in that blog, or anywhere else, that indicates that 5G will be any sort of game changer in eliminating digital terrestrial television.

The first real consideration is coverage. DTT has 98% coverage. After a £1 billion of investment 4G will only hit 95% in 2025 with the least commercially viable rural areas left outside that. A 4G transmitter will have a range of about 2-3 miles in each direction.

On top of that the highest bandwidth 5G will be short range transmitters on lamp posts, buildings, bus stops. Nobody is going to deploy that much infrastructure in commercially unviable rural areas (plus the associated backhaul) to chase your 2035 pipe dream through 5G coverage.

People with industry experience would know this, of course. Your average blogger, maybe not so much. Although in fairness to the most recent blogger I think, possibly, if you asked him, maybe he would never have intended it to be used to make the point that you proposed it did.

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

Linear tv is dead you know guys so dead that Freeview are starting to catch up with SKY and VM by having HD versions of channels in place of sd channel, not to mention a online service coming too. https://www.cordbusters.co.uk/freevi...annel-changes/

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

That sounds like they are making streaming appear to be a linear channel.

I wonder why they would do that - it flies in the face of OB's predictions

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

What do they know?

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

Thanks for that link about Freeview, very interesting.

---------- Post added at 16:36 ---------- Previous post was at 16:34 ----------

It will all converge one day, so the difference between a linear channel and on demand/streamers will be far less noticeable than now.

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

My view of the future is still fixed on 15 years ahead - you are clutching at straws, Raider.

Open your eyes and see what is actually happening. Even the main terrestrials will not be here forever. To wit:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...t-away-from-tv

To be honest with you, I thought the smaller channels would be the first to go...but Channel 4? Wow!

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

Where in that article does it say anything about Channel 4 ‘going’ anywhere?

4 is a public service broadcast channel, and the company that runs it is state owned.regardless of where they see future *growth* in their overall business, Channel 4 itself will continue to exist, has the same hours to fulfill and the same legal obligations as to what it fills those hours with.

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

Considering Channel 4 have a 20 years plan i highly doubt they're going anywhere will check Monday though when we're back in work but nothing about Channel 4 closing has ever been mentioned or even been on our systems.

Are you on about more4? As that has a question mark on it.

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

It’s going to have to jump out and bite you in the bum before you actually acknowledge where all this is going.

Firstly, the first paragraph says:

‘Channel 4 has said it no longer sees its future in traditional television channels, in a decision that could spell the end for some documentaries and other programmes that do not attract younger online audiences.’

You say the channel is a public service broadcaster. So what? Not only can they provide free streaming services through Freeview, but the government is looking to sell off the channel. Additionally, they are also reviewing whether ‘public service broadcasting’ is relevant today, and if so, what it should embrace.

I accept completely that the channel is not closing down tomorrow, but the process might not take as long as I originally envisaged.

---------- Post added at 14:14 ---------- Previous post was at 14:12 ----------

I think it is pretty clear that Channel 4 will migrate to streaming. I never said the company would be closing. The content will still be there.

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

There's nothing to indicate that they will close linear channels or cease broadcasting on digital terrestrial or other platforms.

A streaming future and linear broadcasting aren't mutually exclusive.

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

Except that the message is they see 'no future' in their TV channels. You can interpret that how you like, but the message is clear enough, IMHO.

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

Ian Katz ... isn’t he the one who tried to send a direct message to a colleague about “boring, snoring Rachel Reeves” when he was editor of Newsnight, but actually tweeted it to the entire Twattersphere?

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

“No future” doesn’t feature in the article as you’ve presented it here.

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

Just a timely reminder that the Forum's understanding of " as long as you originally envisaged" is 2025. ;)

Elsewhere, I see that Entertainment One is pulling its films off a streaming service, Amazon, in favour of a contract with satellite and streamer Sky. https://www.cityam.com/sky-beefs-up-...one-film-deal/

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

The exact words were: ‘ no longer sees its future in traditional television’.

I’m not sure how that slight change of wording makes any difference, frankly.

However, sorry for my inadvertent misquote.

---------- Post added at 17:30 ---------- Previous post was at 17:28 ----------

And just to remind you, Andrew, that I have been saying 2035 since 2015. So what is the point you are making?

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

It’s also important to note it’s not a quote of an individual at C4 it was the journalist who wrote it.

Context is important here because at each iteration what has actually been said is being stretched further.

I don’t think anyone sees their future as primarily in broadcast, scheduled, over the air transmission. However it’s a leap to go from a focus on streaming or on demand content to closing down altogether.

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

Channel 4 has a 20 year plan for it's distribution so it won't be going anywhere, if and it is a huge if any of the big 5 go streaming only it'll be Channel 5.
I'll defo check the system on Monday though incase anything about ch4 has come through whilst we've all been off work.

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

Nothing is happening immediately, Legendkiller! This is the mistake so many people are making! Nobody is saying these changes are happening right now. But the process will start within a few years, and then will accelerate exponentially.

I have not seen Channel 4’s 20-year-deal, but I dare say that if you read the small print, there will be no problem in closing down the channels and transferring the content to their streaming service. They will have been pretty incompetent not to have foreseen this.

---------- Post added at 23:01 ---------- Previous post was at 22:51 ----------

Stop nitpicking, jfman, just because it doesn’t suit your narrative. The reporter was quoting what was said, and if he misquoted, no doubt law suits will follow. You are being disingenuous. Let’s just address the way things seem to be going.

Happy to consider any reasoned arguments. I am happy to debate whether TV channels will actually disappear altogether, which is a reasonable point to make, but surely, that is the point we should be debating.

I appreciate that when losing an argument, this can be difficult. But this is a debating forum....

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

The reporter clearly isn't reporting what was said - hence they did not use quotation marks or attribute a quote to that end. They are offering their own input/analysis and no such law suit, on such an uncontroversial topic, would be considered a reasonable or proportionate response.

"The future" being streaming doesn't equate to the end of linear broadcasting entirely. Nobody, at any point, on the forum has contested that the way people are consuming content is changing or that as companies chase revenues/profits they will have to shift their content delivery in a way that suits these habits.

That doesn't equate to the end of linear, scheduled broadcasting over DTT, cable or satellite (or even IPTV - I'm completely agnostic on the technology). You know this already. I wouldn't consider myself losing any such argument - I've set the extremely low bar throughout where if a single linear channel exists in 2035 I'm proven right. With Amazon and Netflix testing a linear channel I think there's life in them for a good while yet.

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

Opinion stated as fact - citation, please...

Have you thought of standing for the US Presidency? ;)

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

I don’t have to explain myself, Hugh. Maybe you should just answer the points I have made. Feel free to disagree.

That is all that’s required.This is a forum. Oh, sorry, you know that, you are a moderator.

God help us all!

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

That entire post is tautological....

You don’t have to explain yourself, but I do - God (other deities are available) help us...

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

I’m not trying to be difficult, Hugh. I just don’t understand why you are responding, but don’t address the points made. If you did, we could have a discussion. Alternatively, I must just accept your point of view.

However, whatever!

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

Ah my bad i forgot you know more about this than the company i work for afterall they only handle contracts worth hundreds of millions of pounds but what do we know eh?

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

Well, if you’ve seen something significant that tells you that Channel 4 will not move over to streaming only in the long term, I will bow to your superior knowledge, but you haven’t made that argument.

I have provided a link to back up what I think, and it is one of many in relation to a streaming only future.

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

The link doesn't back up what you think no matter how often you repeat that it does. It's a clear selective interpretation that you've deployed as you continue to clutch at straws.

No matter where Channel 4s priorities go or where they are extracting revenues from they simply will not give up the fourth most prominent EPG slot.

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

I am not saying that Pluto-like TV channels won’t exist on streamers. What I am saying is that all those channels we currently pick up via the airwaves, over satellite and through our cable services will disappear in time, in favour of Netflix-like, content based VOD interfaces. Pluto-like channels may well exist on streamers, but they will be serving a minority interest - most people will not bother with them, and that’s why the TV channels broadcast traditionally will die out. In my opinion of course. Other opinions are available.

You may be technology-agnostic, but surely this is what the debate is all about.

---------- Post added at 10:46 ---------- Previous post was at 10:40 ----------

The EPG will not be relevant in years to come. All of your answers appear to be based on nothing changing. OK, I accept that’s your point of view. Good luck with that. :rolleyes:

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

And we're back to Shrodinger's linear where it will simultaneously exist (and not exist) to suit Old Boy's incoherent argument.

It will work for plucky upstarts like Pluto TV to still deliver linear, but it's a flawed model for the BBC, ITV, Channel 4, Five, Sky and all the present incumbents to continue doing so. Such a laughably ludicrous notion I'm sure other members will agree.

At no point have I ever said my opinions are based on nothing changing so please don't continue to misrepresent my posts.

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

Hmm a random link or a actual contract document i know which one i believe.

Streaming is certainly going to grow quite rapidly no-one is disputing that but the big 5 channels are going nowhere from tradiotional tv methods.
Channel 4 already has it's own online live tv streaming in place via the all4 app and has done for quite awhile i will give you a snippet of what we had in the documents awhile back obviously i can't give too much out "we Channel Four Television Corporation propose to increase our spend on our over the air channels with intention to grow in HD on those platforms we propose (Sattelite, Terrestial and online)"
I think that puts that link to bed OB.

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

That link was quality by Old Boy's usual standards in fairness. From a recognised publication for a change and not a digital marketing blog. :)

It just didn't say what OB thinks it did.

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

OB has been banging this drum for several years i believe one day he might actual listen to those of us who actually work in that industry.

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

What do they know. :D

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

I know i mean several hundreds of millions of pounds contracts being dealt with but i guess OBs imagination deals with more :D

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

I love dipping in and out of this thread, always makes me chuckle :)

So broadcast TV is slowly dying, that cant be argued. Viewers on average are down and ad revenue is slowly declining, especially in this current Covid world... but heres the deal... Broadcast is so critical to service suppliers like Sky, ITV and others because a huge portion of their income comes from advertising revenue. If these providers move more towards a full on demand service and whittle away their broadcast channels then they will feel the fit in revenue.

On demand is booming, it will continue to overtake the broadcast market but broadcast will probably be here for the very long term. As someone who is actively working on next generation technology that includes broadcast services, i can happily confirm that broadcast TV will certainly be around on the Virgin Media network for many years to come.

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

OB will be along soon to tell you you're wrong the fairies at the bottom of his garden know better than us in the industry :D

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

So i checked systems for OB and nothing at all is on them about Channel 4 leaving traditional tv methods.

Also came through today SKY are proposing Shudder, Amazon prime video and Starzplay apps on the SKYQ box.
This is only at proposal stages at the moment.

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

My dear chap, I am not suggesting that any of these changes I have been going on about will happen in the next few months! How much of the contractual stuff do you see that deals with 2035, or even 2025?

5G broadcast certainly won’t be ready to replace DTT for some good few years - well beyond your modus operandi.

---------- Post added at 20:43 ---------- Previous post was at 20:30 ----------

You have not taken account of the fact that an increase in OTT viewing will rob the TV channels of their audience, thus reducing advertising revenue. Your premise is that viewer habits will not shift in a major way in the future, which is a pretty big assumption, given the way younger people watch TV. Those younger people are growing older, and there is no sign yet that they are changing their OTT viewing habits. Then there is the newer generation starting to come through, who are even more attracted to OTT viewing.

Add to that the declining quality of content on the traditional TV channels, and you are looking at a bleak future for them. I believe that the direct to consumer approach increasingly adopted by the various studios (to wit, the Disney content, which will all now move exclusively to Disney+) will be the final nail in the coffin.

Despite what some people think on this forum, the traditional channels will not carry on broadcasting once a certain audience threshold can no longer be reached. The BBC saved a lot of money when it transferred BBC3 to online only, and therefore OTT-only distribution will become much more attractive. This will be paid for by subscription and/or advertising.

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

Looks a lot like moving goalposts again to me.

https://youtu.be/lz9HDvg_mp0

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

Nearly spat my coffee out at that line.

The usual helping of dubious opinion presented as fact, with no economic grounding, misrepresenting the BBC 3 situation.

Pray, tell, OB what is this audience threshold for a linear channel?

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

:D:D

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

Maybe something you should consider, jfman, since you claim DTT could survive with a handful of viewers. Let’s put your skills as an economist to good use.

---------- Post added at 21:50 ---------- Previous post was at 21:49 ----------

I don’t think you saw any goalposts in the first place, Grim.

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

Can you source where I’ve said this? I’m fairly agnostic towards the technology as I’m not pushing an agenda in the sense that you are. So it doesn’t sound like the kind of thing I’d say.

I know you’ve persistently struggled to address the actual points I’ve made so it suits you to misrepresent them. Especially if your next goalpost shift is to pretend you didn’t mean scheduled, linear television at all and you meant DTT.

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

My dear chap at lot more than you will ever know about contracts i told you already that Channel 4 have a plan for at least 20 years on traditional broadcast platforms which part of that do you not understand?
The way people watch tv is certainly changing no-one has ever disputed that but traditional broadcast tv is not going anywhere, did you know that in 2017 there was a proposal for Channel 6 from Comcast? Neither did i until i looked through old documents today as we all know Comcast went on to buy SKY last year instead.

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

So if you are now denying that you ever suggested the TV channels could survive with very little funding? Who’s really changing the goalposts here?

The reason I mentioned DTT channels is simply that I think the pay TV channels will go first.

I have always addressed your points, jfman, the problem is you are not listening.

---------- Post added at 22:46 ---------- Previous post was at 22:43 ----------

But, Legendkiller, as your very example shows, plans change. And where do you think Comcast is going now? OTT, of course. You will see this play out over time.

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

So I haven’t claimed that DTT channels can exist on very little funding as you suggested a few posts ago.

Thanks for clarifying, OB.

You haven’t addressed any points, and indeed last time I pressed you on the matter moderators got involved due to your persistent use of profanity. Which was a shame really, because it didn’t have to come to that.

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

If by 2035 Channel 4 isn't on traditional broadcast methods i'll buy you a beer if they are still there you buy me a beer, deal?

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

As ever you fail to demonstrate why someone like Comcast cannot, and would not , do both. They aren’t ideological in the way you are. Maintaining linear channels is cheap for content owners. Amazon and Netflix are developing linear offerings in Germany and France.

It’s also an easy way to advertise or showcase your content.

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

Did you ever take any notice at all of the savings the Beeb made when it closed BBC3 as a linear channel? No, you didn’t.

No business would pass up an opportunity like this to make their company more efficient. Once they stop making a decent profit, they will close.

---------- Post added at 23:00 ---------- Previous post was at 22:59 ----------

Yes, you did! DTT channels are linear channels, which you referred to in your very next post!

---------- Post added at 23:04 ---------- Previous post was at 23:00 ----------

Yes, I have! God, you can tell it’s pantomime season!:p:

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

I think the point being made here is that if you own the content rights, the marginal cost of broadcasting it on a linear channel is low.

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

Please cease from misrepresenting this. Closing BBC resulted in the BBC commissioning less content. The savings were not gained from not broadcasting into the air for 12 hours per day, or video playout costs.

---------- Post added at 23:15 ---------- Previous post was at 23:13 ----------

While all DTT channels are linear, not all linear channels are on DTT. Linear channels could, for example, be broadcast over IPTV, cable, satellite or an app. It’d be helpful if you could clarify at this point whether your 20x5 commitment is for the end of DTT or the end of scheduled linear broadcasting. In one word preferably to prevent you from obfuscating.

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

Worth noting that the BBC is actively considering returning Three to linear broadcast, because its penetration of its target audience (16-34s) fell from 22% in 2015-2016, the last it was fully broadcast over the air, to just 8% last year. It seems even within the age group that’s fed up of linear and only interested in on-demand content, is a rather significant constituency that will only engage with BBC Three when it’s served to them in a nice, easy, hands-off linear schedule.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52719883
https://inews.co.uk/news/entertainme...-people-666617

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

So OB isn't prepared to put his money where his mouth is then and agree to my little wager i made him.

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

Of course he won’t as then he’d clearly have to agree to fixed goalposts. No more room to conflate and obfuscate.

He’s clearly realised, for a second time, that his hopes/dreams are over ambitious. Just as 2025 became 2035 the shift is now ‘linear’ to ‘traditional’ broadcasts.

I’ve asked countless times - to no clear answer - whether continuous video accessed through an app where everyone watches the exact same thing at the exact same time to a fixed schedule would be considered ‘linear’ to Old Boy. An example would be the current Sky Sports News app on Now TV.

Now to any objective observer this is ‘linear’ television. You, or anyone else, can opt in and out as you please and at any given time you’d see exactly what I see. If I sat there for 100 hours the broadcast will continue without any need for the user to do anything (energy saving settings permitted). This is how linear, scheduled television works regardless of delivery method. This is what he’s bleated on about for 7 years.

However, this is where Old Boy’s next clutch at straws comes in. He’s going to argue this is streaming as it’s delivered by the internet. Yet, all that posting he did about watching TV to a schedule being for the brain dead at no point debated the merits of DTT vs IPTV.

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

It baffles me how he is still trying to say people who work in the industry are wrong too lol.
On plus side we break up for 4 weeks next friday.

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

How many times?!!

I believe that the traditionally broadcast TV channels will cease, whether by DTT, cable or satellite. They will ultimately migrate to IPTV and the content will be presented a different way - not by channel.

Live content will be streamed, just as live content on the BBC i-Player is streamed, and again, the content will be accessed not by channel, but by event.

I am not ruling out 'Pluto' type services, but frankly, even they are now emphasising their VOD content.

---------- Post added at 07:31 ---------- Previous post was at 07:27 ----------

Well, that is part of the point. Less content is commissioned because you don't have to fill the gaps in the schedule with dross. You know as well as I do that the BBC has a reputation for repeating its programmes over and over.

Instead, you will just get the programmes that are judged to be of interest to the target audience.

---------- Post added at 07:53 ---------- Previous post was at 07:31 ----------

I do not discount in any way your contribution, Legendkiller. I am expressing mine and you are expressing yours.

I don't know exactly what you do, but I know that you can see contracts and proposals coming through. But you are the first to admit that often you don't know what lies just around the corner because sometimes you get notified just weeks in advance.

I would have thought that very little of what gets through to your office relates to 20 years hence, and even if it did, do you really suppose that things are impossible for broadcasters to change? The broadcasting industry recognises that it is up for debate whether DTT will still be broadcast as it is now in the future or whether 5G broadcast is the name of the game in the future. The jury is out on whether existing broadcast system will move over to IPTV in the future as well.

All I'm saying is that I believe it will, because it will be cheaper and more flexible, and easier to run. No scheduling required, except for live events. Yes, I know that channels can be run over IPTV - look at Now TV. But if most people are viewing their content via VOD, as I think they will be by then, why would they do this?

It is just my opinion. I may be proved wrong, I acknowledge that. I'm not claiming to be Nostrodamus!

---------- Post added at 07:59 ---------- Previous post was at 07:53 ----------

We know that, and if you recall, I said at the time that this move was far too early, and it was wrong to pick on this one channel to migrate to online only. Broadband hasn't even finished rolling out yet, and the government is hinting that even this will be delayed now. So the move was rather premature.

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

Until you actually answer the question asked. Can you tell me how a “Pluto-TV” type service varies from scheduled, linear television other than the delivery method?

Stop wasting time. Stop obfuscating. Stop shifting the goalposts.

It’s obvious from your posts you know the game is up. Linear television will exist in 2035 to the surprise of absolutely no-one. Whether it’s broadcast over DTT or not is simply a new discussion as you backtrack further.

Again to save us all the hassle it’d be helpful if you could clarify at this point whether your 20x5 commitment is for the end of DTT or the end of scheduled linear broadcasting. In one word preferably to prevent you from obfuscating..

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

The BBC said that at the time. I don't recall you saying so. If you can link back to a contemporaneous post (i.e. from around the time the closure was announced, or implemented) that would be helpful.

Notwithstanding, premature closure is one thing. Actively going in the opposite direction of where you keep telling us this is all heading ... that's quite something else, and not a thing you get to breezily sweep under the carpet just because it's inconvenient for your predictions.

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

I know you have mentioned Shudder before but the other two are interesting - Starzplay have managed to get themselves across a variety of platforms (even on Rakuten TV) but Sky seems to have been a holdout for sometime - curious to see how whether that’s an app or whether Sky operate that via their own progressive download system.

And it’s been well reported that Sky & Amazon have had a lot of commercial differences preventing Prime landing on Q (Search, transactional content and the channels platform Amazon have) so if they have found some common ground, interesting to see where they have both ceded that ground and if it happens, whether this is reciprocated and gets Now TV onto the Fire TV platform?

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

Ofcourse OB i agree with you to an extent but claiming any of the big 5 channels will leave traditional broadcasting methods anytime within next 50 years is a very long shot.
Also 6G is being tested, i'm serious.

---------- Post added at 12:55 ---------- Previous post was at 12:50 ----------

We think it'll be a stripped down version of Prime video on SKYQ maybe just the included with prime content, SKY are keen to get talks rolling and Amazon are also pretty keen as they want Prime on every device.
Chances are Shudder and Starzplay could be in the prime app itself if/when it arrives on the SKYQ box, Shudder do have a linear channel on their website so that may get a EPG number on SKY.
Things are likely to quieten down quite a lot now in work with the break coming up next Friday a nice 4 week break :D but i think 2021 is going to be a very busy year tv wise.

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

You are being a bit dim, if I may say so. I don’t see why you are (allegedly) confused by the answer I gave last time. But playing your little game:

Will linear TV still exist in 2035? - yes. It will exist for live events, which must be obvious to all. As for scripted TV, I cannot rule out some minor scheduled TV content like Pluto on IPTV, but all the main ones will have died out in favour of streamed content. Pluto is very much a minority interest, but I think now with the increased prominence of VOD, they may take the view that it’s not worth continuing with linear at all. That’s the way I think it will go.

As far as DTT is concerned, even Freeview is now preparing to enhance its VOD offering. My own feeling is that the DTT offering will be replaced by 5G broadcast, but I agree that could go either way.

I have given you the one word answer in bold, with an explanation of it. As I have repeated time and again, that word ‘linear’ was commonly used to describe the traditional broadcast channels back in 2015, and I see this description still used today. You don’t seem to be able to comprehend this, although it seems very Jack and Jill to me.

I am not seeking to persuade you, or anyone on here, that my view of the future is correct. I am simply telling you what I think. You are unpersuadable anyway because you are just argumentative. Others take a different view from me for particular reasons, and that’s OK.

You cannot KNOW anything that might happen in 2035. I don’t, and neither can you or anybody else. But quite why my sharing my vision of it upsets some of you so much I cannot fathom. As you have said in the past, it’s just TV.

---------- Post added at 13:08 ---------- Previous post was at 13:06 ----------

What happens in the short term is not necessarily an indicator of what will happen in the long term. I never said these changes would happen immediately, I said they should have happened by 2035.

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

You may not.

Thanks Old Boy. It's only taken five years.

Well no, it's not obvious. DAZN, NFL Network and others offer ad-hoc events via an app. You could log on and between events find out that there's absolutely nothing there. This is clearly ad-hoc broadcasting and not linear, scheduled broadcasting. You could sit for 165 hours and nothing appear until the next NFL game arrives the following Sunday. Nobody would consider that linear, scheduled television.

Why would Pluto TV exist but not, for example, a Comcast driven or BBC driven scheduled TV channels? Where the economics that says a minority interest provider can deliver it but not a major content owner for whom the pennies it costs to maintain a linear broadcast channels is a tiny fraction of revenues?

It's irrelevant really whether DTT is replaced by 5G broadcast or not. The purpose of 5G broadcast is to make more efficient use of the spectrum in the same way that DTT, satellite and cable have efficiencies - the same content is broadcast once to many simultaneous users.

And it's a clear and obvious shift from your original position.

I'm not accepting your goal post shift here Old Boy and there's years of you calling scheduled television as for the lazy and brain dead to prove this.

The problem is Old Boy you are deploying this device here - I don't, and neither can you - to attribute equal weight to all opinions. That's simply not the case. We have people who work in the industry here. People who are looking at the economic realities and analysing the questions that you often shirk describing the answers as 'obvious' without any insight whatsoever.

At least it's clearer now from the bits in bold that these are moving opinions rather than fixed beliefs. It'd be helpful now if you just stopped insulting those who disagree with you.

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

Can I ask, if linear broadcasts are distributed by different means in the future like 5G, what is old tech about them compared to on-demand content?

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

What absolute nonsense you do talk. When it became apparent back in 2015 that some were taking the reference to ‘linear’ to mean ‘live’, I clarified what I meant by the term and I acknowledged that OF COURSE live TV would still exist - just not as channels - in the sense of conventional channels.

You do love to change history to suit yourself.