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

That’s quite an astonishing claim considering a mere 8 posts ago you admitted to causing confusion with the word linear. I can’t “deliberately” misunderstand and cause “unnecessary” confusion where you have already accepted your terminology could have been clearer.

I get that you don’t like your posts being challenged as due to their speculative nature they rarely stand up to scrutiny, but to accuse me of confusing matters is quite a leap from there.

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

What is there not to understand? You really are the limit! I will leave you to ponder....:walk:

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

Spot on, OB, everytime you post he goes through it with a fine tooth comb, just causing trouble as per usual.

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

l am sure you will agree a forum is full of differing views and opinions as if we all agreed on everything there would not be much to talk and debate about would there on here MM.:)

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

I am sure you will agree jfman takes that to a whole new level.

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

Absolute nonsense.

If Old Boys statements don’t hold up to scrutiny, nor even consistency with themselves over time, that’s not an outcome specific to my existence or participation in these threads. Indeed, I’d suggest anyone who claims to believe so is simply troublemaking themselves.

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

Being diplomatic one can apply that sentiment elsewhere as well.:D;)

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

It’s not troublemaking to scrutinise what are frankly outlandish and speculative predictions that don’t hold up when challenged.

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

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

That's amazing, Hugh!

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

I'm not saying that it's troublemaking to scrutinise anything, what I am saying is that you nit pick every little thing that he posts, imo he has provided links from experts in the industry, which suggest that what he predicts will eventually come to fruition, also, what's outlandish about what he has provided links to? Have you come up with any evidence on the contrary?

---------- Post added at 15:31 ---------- Previous post was at 15:25 ----------

I don't disagree with that, Den, there's good debate, and then there's debate offered by others, which, quite frankly brings nothing to the debate apart from arguing and causing trouble, my opinion of course....:)

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

Where are these links from experts? I see plenty of opinion pieces from digital marketing blogs, online polling from a VPN provider, and similar.

There’s presently no plans to switch off DTT. Analogue switch off took 14 years. Eutelsat are planning to renew their orbital fleet at 13 degrees east for a further 15 years.

Remember it’s not that I’m denying streaming will be huge. I’m denying that linear scheduled broadcasting reduces to zero in the timeframe OB suggests. Viewers have been able to avoid linear for years with on demand and DVRs if they really wanted to. Yet, they still watch it.

The consumer behaviour change required would need state intervention to enforce it.

Round and round we go...

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

Worth bearing in mind that the only reason those pieces get written is for SEO. They are designed from top to bottom to paint a fast-changing vision of the future that their potential customers will naturally need marketing support in order to exploit, and to put the agency in question at the top of the Goooooogle rankings where they're easy to find and, by implication, authoritative in what they say.

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

You are pretty prone to outlandish statements yourself, jfman, and this post is typical. Why is it 'outlandish' when supporting information that leads to certain conclusions is provided? Just because you don't believe something will happen doesn't mean it won't.

Yes, of course some of my posts are speculative - so what? Many posts on this forum are. I don't need to be 'scrutinised' by you, I'm not standing for election!

You need to get off your high horse and enter into a decent debate instead of slamming everyone that comes out with an opinion on something. There is scarcely anything you ever agree with on any thread I've read where you are involved.

---------- Post added at 16:57 ---------- Previous post was at 16:54 ----------

I certainly agree with that, but obviously what these articles describe couldn't be that outlandish otherwise executives in the industry would not take them seriously, in which case, there would be no point.

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

The point is the evidence doesn’t support your, rather fanciful, conclusions.

Even your own digital marketing blogs don’t describe linear channels reducing to zero, or claim that tried and tested pay-tv operators will be unable to move seamlessly into the streaming market with their existing customer base using a mix of live, scheduled and on demand content.

I don’t necessarily feel the need to post “I agree” with other people, but if it helps I agree with denphone and Chris most of the time in this thread.