Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Or they could just have been trying to quash a false rumour.

Actually, some brands are international (e.g. car manufacturers), so Netflix's world wide audience would be attractive to them for advertising.

I think that Netflix have no intention of advertising, as the 'no-adverts' is a massive part of their attraction and a great selling point.

If they ever did advertise, I think it would be a last resort, no option decision.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Just had an email from them saying the price is going up again, the 2 screen option is increasing from £6.99 to £7.49, not sure if the other ones are increasing too.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Members who signed up before the last price increase, get to keep the original £5.99 price until May 2016.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

They charge me £6.99 and i've had the account for years. I'm guessing because i don't have the sub continuous, i stop and start it quite a bit. Not complaining as it's still dirt cheap.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Very very few brands advertise in the same way across territories. Products are packaged and promoted diffreently. Production occurs in different places at different rates, necessitating diffeerent promotional approaches. Even things that ought in theory to be saleable worldwide, simultaneously, e.g. DVDs or their downloadable equivalent, arent for all sorts of reasons. In fact active steps are taken to prevent it. So no, Netflix's worldwide customer base is entirely irrelevant to the issue of whether it is worth their taking adverts. The only relevant figure is their customer base in any one territory or market.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

There is no reason why a company such as Ford could not come up with a global general promotional piece, and, also, modern technology would allow Netflix to insert regional variations easily and automatically.

And as far as 'any one territory', the user base for US Netflix is more than sufficient for an add campaign.

Are you sure you're not looking for hidden meanings, in what is actually, just a simple statement?

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

I think Chris is using this argument to justify his view that linear TV is safe. He is basically saying that if all on demand and streaming services were flooded with adverts, everything would stay as it is, and I agree that it probably would in those circumstances.

However, it is not going to happen. Streaming services will continue to be funded primarily through subscriptions, and this is what will make them attractive to viewers.

Netflix has confirmed that this is the approach they will take and I don't think an argument based on the premise that they are lying is sustainable.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Well his view stands up to scrutiny more then your absurd view that Linear TV is suddenly going to disappear because it will still be around when l have gone the way of the dodo OB.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Why is the idea absurd, Den? I have explained why viewers will be attracted away from linear TV as streaming services develop without advertising and at a reasonable subscription price. This will mean that income from advertising will decline. Why is that not a rational argument?

What is your reason for saying that linear channels will still be around in years to come? Things change over time and I know it is sometimes difficult to imagine things being different looking ahead. However, change happens.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

TBF, I don't think OB has ever said 'suddenly' :D

I think Freeview linear TV will be around for a very long time and Netflix, Amazon Prime and Now TV are complementary to it.

Netflix, Amazon Prime and Now TV realise the attraction of add free viewing and will resist adds for as long as economically possible.

If Sport ever becomes fully freed up from a pay TV subscription, then pay TV channels may start to suffer subscription losses, but many people just want the simplicity of just 'switching on the telly' and so it will take a long time before any significant number of people abandon pay TV.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

BIB. Yup, but to be fair to OB has been banging his drum about tv in 10/20 years time. All of them will probably be advertising by then. As has been reported, Netflix are putting their prices up again and next year my bill will probably rise from £5.99/£6.99 (I can't remember the price I pay - I think its £5.99) to £7.99 next year when they probably put prices up again - I don't know if that package will even include HD. I will not pay much more for Netflix if this continues each year. I can rent the DVD's from lovefilm by post if I am desperate to watch any of their shows/films in future. Yeah, I have to wait a bit longer to see them but I am patient enough for that.

There is no way they will not be advertising in 10/20 years time. If, somehow, they choose not to advertise I imagine they will have to flog the rights of some shows to linear TV channels.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

As soon as the football becomes available my paid tv will be cancelled and will just have a broadband line. I think there is so many other people in a similar position. Netflix and Amazon have changed how I watch TV in that I wait and watch series in bulk. I prefer it that way and with shows like GoT its nearly better to watch it that way!

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

But how do you know that Lovefilm by post won't be getting an increase in the not too distant future?

---------- Post added at 16:25 ---------- Previous post was at 16:11 ----------

For non sports fans, Freeview plus several streaming services, is the way to go. But people lead busy lives with little spare time and having it all delivered through a single pay TV box has it's benefits. And that is why conventional delivery methods will go on for many more years.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

As with so many arguments advanced in this thread, you start with the assumption that someone could change something about the (usually entirely successful) way they do things in order to accommodate a limitation of VOD.

It's pointless. People and corporations do things the way they do because they work.

I wasn't looking at any statement. Statements are irrelevant - no company can absolutely rule out a revenue stream forever, especially not a revenue stream that is the ordinary, uncontroversial means by which most TV stations fund themselves.

Sooner or later, they will run adverts. That's a fact. The only thing stopping them doing so now is that as a marketplace for ad agencies, they are small beer indeed, and it is worth their while to make a virtue out of a necessity.

No pledge to remain ad-free is sustainable. Eventually it will become too tempting as a revenue stream and they will adopt it. Continuing to run without adverts will eventually make their subscription rates uncompetitive.

As for whether that makes them more or less attractive to viewers - who cares? It's irrelevant. Linear TV will not come to an end based on the success of any non-linear subscription service. Linear TV will not come to an end at any point in the next 30 years at least, and probably much longer than that, because it does a lot of things that non-linear TV, by its very nature, is incapable of doing.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

It seems to me that you're the one limiting things (and in a kind of patronising way). I've pointed out that it is perfectly feasible to do it. In my view, at this point in time, Netflix don't have adds because they don't want them. If they ever wanted to, they would work with the corporations to make it work successfully for both parties.



And that is the crux of our difference of opinion on this 'advertising' aspect of Netflix at this point in time: You believe they want to run adds, but advertisers aren't interested in them. I believe that, at this point in time, Netflix have no intention of running adds because they don't want to.