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

Again you've got lost arguing a point that nobody actually made.

Nobody is claiming advertising revenue will continue to be 'lucrative' - only that it'll continue to exceed the negligible costs of maintaining a linear presence for major media companies who own the rights anyway.

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

Well, this is an example of how scheduled linear tv will lose content to the streamers. Face it, the conventional channels are being attacked on all sides. They have no long term future. Make the most of it while you can.

https://www.rxtvlog.com/2019/08/disn...ch-window.html

Sky, which at one point looked as if it would come under the control of Disney before being snapped up by Comcast, has announced in the past week that it will be saying goodbye to two Disney-run services on its German and Austrian platforms, including film channel Cinemagic, sparking debate on whether Sky Cinema Disney and other linear Disney channels will continue in the UK and Ireland on Sky when current arrangements end in 2020. The current deal with Sky is likely to be the reason why the UK isn't among the first countries to get Disney+.

Disney already pulled its children's TV service off Sky's Now TV in 2016, in a move linked to Disney's desire to control more of its rights on online platforms. But Disney has since gained access to a lot of content that's traditionally been broadcast on Sky, including National Geographic programming and first-run The Simpsons on Sky 1, meaning the stakes will be high for Sky.

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

Discovery have previously said that ultimately they will only have one linear channel to showcase their content available via VOD.

The BBC have said that they will ultimately replace linear broadcasts with an internet delivered system. When asked when this would take place, it was said at least ten years, more like fifteen.

A company that I own shares in used to own the DTT infrastructure, but sold it on. At first I thought that this was a mistake, but thinking back they probably sold it whilst it was still worth a decent amount.

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

Streaming providers face the same content challenge. This isn't a victory for streaming over linear, it's simply the end to end vertical integration of content by a single provider.

The question you haven't asked is whether Disney doing this makes a viable platform as opposed to the guaranteed income month in month out from existing platforms. As yet untested.

Of course, your digital advertising blogs won't ask that question!

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

So you think it will just be Disney doing this and the platform is untested? Disney owns Hulu and ESPN+ both tried and trusted platforms in the states so far from untested. They also own Pixar, Marvel, Lucasfilm, National Geographic, and 20th Century Fox. So their offering will be a huge library of existing content plus new content being added continuously of films, series etc.

It is merely the start of new content delivery that you've all been slagging OB of for. I've agreed with OB before and still agree with him.

Time to get your heads out of the sand.

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

Which is another way of saying that multiple TV channels will be replaced by far fewer streaming services, which is what I've been saying all along.

The fact that you question the viability of these platforms does not mean it is a problem. If it was, these companies wouldn't be taking this route, would they?

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

With the end result people paying far more.

A Now TV Cinema pass subscriber can get it for £11.99 normal or even less if they shop around for passes and 3/6 month deals.

Under this new world you'll need a Sky sub (Universal) , HBO Max (Warner) , Disney + (Disney) plus whatever the likes of Paramount and Sony decide to do.

Good luck at getting that in anyway near a tenner and there are many who like to watch movies from across the studios.

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

I didn't say the platform was untested, I said the business model was. It remains to be seen whether Disney retailing direct to consumers makes more profit than their wholesale distribution models.

---------- Post added at 12:17 ---------- Previous post was at 12:15 ----------

Hmm.

No, because not every business is a success, failure is a possibility. Some may find themselves coming cap in hand to existing platforms or other streaming services to bundle their content.

The perfect example of this is Eleven Sports / La Liga. They believed a market was there for a product that simply wasn't.

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

That pretty much tell us quite a bit that is for sure.

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

Each streaming service will offer a wealth of programming and will be good value for money.

I don't buy the argument that everyone will be obliged to subscribe to every streaming service imaginable. That would be a waste of money because even if you spent every waking hour watching TV, you would never be able to make much headway in getting through all that content.

I understand what you are saying about some people wishing to watch films from different studios. However, most people I would suggest would achieve that by switching streamers periodically. There are no contracts locking you in, and so it will be pretty easy to do this.

I dare say there will also be free versions of many of these streamers, funded by advertising, in the fullness of time. There seems to be a large sector of the population who would not mind sitting through unskippable advertisements, particularly if they are targeted.

Needless to say, I am not one of them. I have just taken up a YouTube Music subscription, and it is such a relief not to have these commercials interrupting everything.

---------- Post added at 14:03 ---------- Previous post was at 13:59 ----------

There might be a market for it, but not having a platform like Sky or Virgin to broadcast from, they were sunk.

---------- Post added at 14:05 ---------- Previous post was at 14:03 ----------

There might be a market for it, but not having a platform like Sky or Virgin to broadcast from, they were sunk.

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

Come off it OB your admitting it's more costly by going around the houses , the politician in you again.

Most people prefer a value for money one subscription covers it all (ie all the latest movies irrelevant of the Movie Studio )

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

You said it would be more expensive and I've told you why it wouldn't be.

Despite what you say, there are plenty of people on these forums who endlessly talk about switching, obtaining the best deals and so forth. With streamers, you are able to access huge amounts of good content very cheaply. Switching streamers is extremely easy, as you well know.

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

Another statement , another load of bollocks...

---------- Post added at 14:26 ---------- Previous post was at 14:24 ----------

They were sunk even if they had gained carriage on Sky and Virgin.

The market for them was just not there end of.....

---------- Post added at 14:31 ---------- Previous post was at 14:26 ----------

So given your obsessive narrative of the last 5 years plus regarding streaming then you are obviously not putting your money where your mouth is and here we are you are still a Virgin customer but alas it seems someone else is wearing the trousers in your household it seems..;)

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

Except you aren't switching for the same content , so to get just a fraction of what Sky Cinema has you'll pay more.

It's not difficult for most to understand. Who can be arsed to keep switching when a new movie is released talk about a step backwards.

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

What planet are you on, Den? How many times to I have to repeat that when I have access to pretty well all the programmes I want, and when Virgin offer me the option of subscribing to the streaming services I would select without having to subscribe to the pay tv channels, then I will do so.

If I made the move now, I would not get all the streaming services on one box and there would be a few programmes my wife and I watch now that I could not access. I am not shooting myself in the foot by making my move prematurely.

I make good use of Amazon, YouTube and Netflix as well as the BBC i-Player. I also get Now TV on my Roku, but with far fewer programmes than before worth watching on Sky Atlantic, I might ditch that in favour of StarzPlay before much longer.

So I am half way there.

---------- Post added at 16:19 ---------- Previous post was at 16:12 ----------

To keep switching? You mean to tell me that switching streaming providers every three months gives you brainache? I switched my music provider last night after a skinful and it was a cinch. I really can't understand why this is such a big deal for anyone.

No-one in their right mind is going to subscribe to a dozen or more providers because the programmes would not be accessed - it is simply too much. That's why switching a service now and then will give you better access to a whole variety of programmes through different providers.