Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Satellite lends itself well as a TV distribution platform when you need a huge amount of bandwith over a huge area (such as UHD TV feeds).

As more and more use of streaming TV occurs, owners of coaxial and fibre networks have two huge advantages over satellite and those are bandwith-per-unit-area (in both directions) and latency.

It's interesting to see how satellite became the dominant means for distribution of direct to home pay TV signals - and how that will change again as more and more fibre is planted in the ground and viewing becomes more personalized. Mobile bandwith also lends itself better to streaming single TV channels per user when compared with fixed blocks of UHF spectrum over a wide area. Satellite may again revert to being used mainly for feeds while land-based optical networks become the new norm for multichannel TV.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Yes, I agree. Sky has appeared reluctant to embrace on demand programming until relatively recently, although I accept that this was largely for technical reasons. There is already evidence that Sky is looking to the future and embracing on demand (the advent of Now TV is one example of this).

It will be interesting to watch how Sky monetises its extended on demand offering, because without the revenue from the copious amount of advertising it puts out on its Sky channels, it is going to have to fill the gap somehow in the longer term when the broadcast channels start to disappear. I don't think unskippable ads or pay per view programming would be an acceptable way forward as it would not appeal to most thinking people who have alternative means of accessing content. I guess on demand packages with subscriptions and maybe more collaboration with other providers for additional content may be the solution.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Sky's revenues from subscriptions dwarf what it gets from advertising.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Yes, I believe that to be the case, but the income gap would still have to be covered somehow.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Why are you suggesting there will be an income gap , Sky is already pretty advanced with its Sky Ad smart and Sky Advance services.

Whether you like it or not in one form or another there will still be adverts.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Surely, there is less scope for advertising with the on demand viewing we will be doing in the future? There are no ads on Now TV. Sure, there is still scope for some advertisements, but nowhere near the number that currently appear on Sky's channels.

If they attempt to flood their on demand services with commercials, they will be taking away one of the attractions of subscription based OTT services.

I guess they will be able to get away with a couple of ads before an on demand programme, just as you used to get with DVD rentals, but that's about it. Having said that, they could bring Sky programming to every home if there was also a non subscription based version of on demand services available for those who could not afford, or were not prepared to pay a sub. This would still offer a better alternative than channels controlled by schedules, and would bring more choice to the wider population. Added to which, it does appear that some people actually like watching commercials!

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

The revolution will not be televised: 2016 was the year TV turned upside down
It’s crunch time for television we’ve always known it: 2016 was the first year the most must-see shows went missing from terrestrial channels. Streaming has changed the game forever.
In 2016 the difference was this: the shows that couldn’t be seen in the old ways were frequently the must-see ones.
Three of the most talked-about series of the year neither occupied a time-slot in the schedules nor required a conventional TV: the royal drama The Crown and the retro-thriller Stranger Things were streamed by Netflix, and The Grand Tour, Jeremy Clarkson’s post-BBC vehicle, on Amazon.
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-r...nels-streaming

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

.... as I've said many times, I love on-demand, streaming etc but I worry about what will happen if you can't stream, or can't afford to pay to stream?

Could it be that in the future, the "poor" may be lumbered with the "mainstream" channels "enjoying" a diet of soap, reality and celebrity chefs while the rich can afford to go online and stream high quality dramas like The Crown?

Not great if you're in the poor camp...

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

I do understand that, and it is of concern. However, I believe that in the future, most households will have access to good broadband speeds, just as most now have a telephone. I think it is also likely that many, if not all, OTT services will have a non subscription option with commercials for those who cannot or will not pay.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

None of my friends who scrape by on a very low wage can afford either a fixed telephone or broadband, they rely on their payg mobile for communications and internet, it was a struggle for a couple them to be able to afford the TV license

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Yes, and this is certainly a good reason to scrap the TV licence fee in favour of a subscription model. It's a hangover from the past and those on lower incomes should not have to pay simply for the privilege of watching TV.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

Err with what your suggesting people would have to pay for the privilege of watching TV wouldn't they?

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

A subscription model for the BBC would cost more than the current licence fee.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

There's more to TV than the BBC.

Don't forget, there are other ways to fund the BBC. There could be a non subscription option with commercials, it could be funded centrally by Government, etc. I really don't understand this obsession with the licence fee, which poorer sectors of the population find really difficult to afford and which is costly and unwieldy to enforce.

Re: The future for linear TV channels
 

And your proposed option would make it even dearer IMO.:rolleyes: