![]() |
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Quote:
My point is that there will be a sharp reversal at some point in the near future when people start to appreciate the benefits of streaming in particular. The broadcast channels must surely be planning for this eventuality. The question is, how will they deal with it? As more and more programmes are taken up by streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon, broadcasters will be relying more and more on their own home grown material and cheap lifestyle programmes. That will accelerate their decline. |
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Then they will simply shift the advertising onto the VOD broadcasting like you see in 4od and the way channel 4 relaunched their whole 4od world and experience, no brainer, its big money and consumer still has the luxury of choosing what and when to watch, but still needs to be paid for and done by non passable adverts.
More of these programmes being competed for exclusitivities, or being originally made its need to be paid for. money will come direct from raising subscription, merchandise or advertisement, there is no other stream (i discounted goverment and very rich nice person) |
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Quote:
Adverts will just shift to VOD and we will be forced to sit through them, mainly because people don't realize how well things work at the minute and how lucky we are to have a choice to skip adverts. As well watch ad free OTT services. Streaming companies most likely want people to transfer their viewing to online so they can charge the businesses more money by forcing people to watch adverts they can currently skip through. ---------- Post added at 14:26 ---------- Previous post was at 14:25 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The on demand TV market (and to some extent the linear pay TV market) is nowhere near the same level of saturation , so they have a *lot* more room to increase revenues. Quote:
In 2012, Channel 4 spent about £450m on programming. The BBC spent around £2.276bn on programming last year.. On a side note, while I like Netflix and Prime Instant Video and use both, that article presents the study as being so pro streaming, I'm wondering who paid for it. |
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Tv companies might well use more live tv programs that encourage the viewer to interact such as BGT where you vote for your favourite act? That`s one way live tv can win over on demand I guess. And of course football matches are always better watched live in my opinion
|
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Quote:
The advertisers themselves will withdraw their advertising or pay much less for advertisements if people are being drawn away from broadcast channels in great numbers. True, they may move to on demand, but punters are not going to use on demand if they get flooded out with commercials as they are on broadcast channels and there are advert free alternatives available. ---------- Post added at 12:18 ---------- Previous post was at 12:07 ---------- Quote:
I guess there may be a proportion of viewers who cannot afford to pay for on demand services that are on subscription and would be prepared to put up with the adverts rather than have nothing, but the question is whether these are the viewers who are valued by the advertisers and whether they view in great enough numbers. I suspect that the viewers most likely to spend money in response to ads are those who would rather pay subscriptions. But we will see. |
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Wonder why Sky has invested millions into Sky Adsmart then ?
|
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Quote:
I have not made any assumptions about ITV except that they are likely to have to close some or all of their channels down in favour of on demand/streaming services. Although there may be an advertising option for those not willing to pay subscriptions, I believe that they will offer a subscription service and any advertising on there will be on the index pages, through programme sponsoring and product placement. The comparison on the figures was for information purposes I believe. It was designed to show that the total number of people watching TV had increased marginally whereas viewership of streaming services was increasing significantly. A great amount of this must be at the expense of linear channels. I think you are grossly underestimating the increasing presence of Netflix and Amazon and other providers that we can expect to come into play over the coming years. Netflix alone has some pretty good new series coming on stream on a regular basis at the moment. It's as much as I can do to keep up with them. I'm still getting through 'Orange is the New Black', 'House of Cards', 'Angel Black' and so on, and they are still adding new Netflix originals such as Sense8. Forget ITV's expenditure and the BBC's expenditure (which will probably be curtailed by the Government), it is the results in terms of programmes you want to look out for. I suspect that most American series will be scooped up by these providers in the short to medium term. This probably explains why Sky 1 is going downhill rapidly with very little worth watching these days. Seriously, there is an obvious problem here and I am a little surprised that you cannot see it. Advertising will cease to be a dominant feature as an income stream and this will put the broadcast channels in a very difficult position. I am sure there are some answers, but I don't believe that linear channels are going to last much longer in their present form. Live TV (mainly news and sport) may be an exception to this for the foreseeable future, although I wouldn't bet on it. ---------- Post added at 12:42 ---------- Previous post was at 12:37 ---------- Quote:
However, I think the diminishing revenue trend will continue over time, with the caveat that no-one can foresee the unexpected in terms of developments that no-one has yet anticipated. They will need something big to arrest the anticipated move away from this method of viewing. ---------- Post added at 12:44 ---------- Previous post was at 12:42 ---------- Quote:
I think there is money to be made out of exciting game shows using interactivity, but I see no sign of anyone testing this out. What happened to Sky Poker, by the way? :D |
Re: The future for linear TV channels
The lack of advertising on VOD isn't an act of kindness. It's because it's a technically difficult thing to do. It involves splicing video and audio streams that are often in different formats, which makes life hard for the decoder.
I'm sure eventually the issues will be resolved, so you advertphobes enjoy it while you can. |
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Sky has spent millions on its On Demand library and now makes some of its shows available On Demand before airing on linear so that's a silly point.
Who owns the large production companies ? That's right the broadcasters and large media companies you keep telling us won't be around much longer. |
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Quote:
Whatever happens in the future, I have absolutely no intention to watch programmes that are constantly interrupted by advertisements. Most people will come around to my way of thinking about this, I am absolutely certain. |
Re: The future for linear TV channels
I do like your world you depict Old Boy, where i choose soley what i want to watch, and when, and just watch live shows as/when they on.
My fear is without advertisment , this utopian world you depict will cost a hell of alot MORE cash to replace the lost revenue of advertisement which we musnt underestimate. (or is full of endorsement/product placement which is the same) I yet to see in your arguement how they would get the alternative cash, as I said subscriptions would sky rocket from their current amount which is too much for some now |
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Quote:
Perhaps a good balance would be to have sites which give the option of more expensive subscriptions or advertising, but I can't see the likes of HBO going for that. For me, the ability to choose from a huge library of material without commercials getting in the way, is heaven! |
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Quote:
The likes of Netflix may hold back the adverts for the time being because they want their product to be as attractive as possible, but in the long term it simply isn't sustainable without cranking up subscriptions. And when you do that, you immediately become a niche provider, rather than a mass-market or universal distributor. Sky did this in the 1980s. Sports and Movies were all part of the package when they launched. It didn't last. There will always be a substantial audience for completely free-to-view TV, and the most cost effective way of delivering it will always be over-the-air scheduled broadcast. |
Re: The future for linear TV channels
Quote:
OTA broadcasting is getting more expensive for providers you only have to look at the cost of freeview slots to see this however linear tv isn't going anywhere anytime soon isps are investing in tv now and even though bt,talktalk and plusnet tv is online they are still linear channels. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:01. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum