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

When one has a differing opinion l would not call it bending the facts OB as healthy reasoned rational debate is part of what a forum is all about.

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

I have no problems with healthy, reasoned debate, Den, but I was talking about bending the facts of what I have said in the past. Much of the dessent on here is not supported by facts, reports or articles, but by personal opinion.

Personal opinions are fine, particularly about the future, which cannot be predicted with great accuracy, but what is inexcusable is those who insist a person is wrong without any supporting evidence. That is no better than the flat-earther brigades who tried to ridicule those who said the world was actually a globe, and that it was the earth revolving around the sun instead of vice versa, and so forth.

What we all agree on is that the viewing of streaming services is increasing at the expense of our TV channels. Where will it all end? That is the debate. However, there is little debate - just silly remarks and people saying it won't happen without any justification. That is not debate, is it?

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

Oh this is hilarious.

OB, all you have ever offered here is your opinions, with the opinions of others as your ‘evidence’.

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

So answer how ITV is going to be without good content despite having one of the biggest production companies in the world.

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

Whilst OB does sometimes come across more as a Comical Ali type and less a Nick Davies type, the issue with ITV is the huge cut in advertising spend which is reducing its ability to invest in productions and bid for talent.

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

Indeed.

The five PSBs plus Sky all have their own studios, plus the capacity to commission external companies to produce ideas that have been developed in-house. None of them rely on bidding for third party content to fill their schedules - not even Sky, which saw the threat coming some years ago and has been developing its in-house capacity for some time now.

The smaller channels largely rely on endless repeats of content previously shown on one of the PSBs+Sky, similar to the syndication system in the US. It is these channels that provide simple, free-of-charge access to old shows that are nice to dip into for old times sake but are not often worth having the sort of box set access you get from Prime Video. This is the stuff you watch on a whim when you can’t be bothered through Netflix menus or entering search terms using your fiddly remote control.

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

And nobody can argue about its cut in advertising revenue but to suggest it will be left without any decent content is a little extreme to say the least especially as I say owing to the fact it owns huge production businesses.

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

Pretty sure quoting from from a leading Technical expert in Broadcast technology at the BBC, as I have done, is "supporting evidence", which in his case, is unbiased...

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

Because of Covid, there is very little new content anywhere - the exception being live sport.

A look through the listings shows repeat after repeat (especially on BBC).

I'm sure it is little different on the streamers.

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

What media press? I only see blogs.

You are now being ridiculous Old Boy. You are asking me to admit to a point that I've literally never contested. What I've contested and asked you to demonstrate, but been unable to, is where linear live broadcasting - over any method (DTT, satellite, cable or IPTV) reaches zero. Not small/tiny/limited. Actually zero.

All of those examples have high costs despite limited use with the fixed costs being absorbed over a smaller customer base as demand diminishes. The continued manufacture of products of limited or near-zero demand have - what we call in economics - opportunity costs. What else could that factory make? What else could the distribution chains be used for?

The same principles don't apply, regardless of how much you wish them to, to linear, broadcast television. The costs of broadcast (for major content owners and distributors) are near zero in terms of overall revenue, reach is millions of homes.

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

The abolition of the licence fee (Mod edit, Chris) ... is clearly not the topic of this thread, as I’ve already stated.

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

While I certainly don’t see the point in this thread discussing the merits or otherwise of the licence fee - it’s a tedious subject exhausted plenty of times for over 20 years now - I do think it’s abolition is key to Old Boy’s dreams being realised by critically undermining the UK television industry.

If there’s a way to ensure any North American tat dominates the airwaves (or the fibre) it’s the terminal decline of the UK television industry.

While there’s a licence fee there’s going to be plenty of low cost, affordable, British repeat content (from BBC and ITV) for linear channels to feast upon for decades to come.

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

More pesky linear TV channels launching on selected smart TVs.
https://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2020...ermany-and-uk/

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

Apart from Hisense this is not on any major brands or devices has fail written all over it unless they pull their finger out.

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

I have provided plenty of links to support my views on this over the last five years or so and I would remind you that I was once ridiculed for suggesting that streaming services were the future. Now the streaming services are starting to dominate viewer choices, the main issue is whether the TV channels will close down. Perceptions change over time.

I have said why I believe what I do, and whilst others can prefer other outcomes, they express these in a way that indicate very strongly that I am wrong, with no evidence to support these views themselves, and not wanting any debate about it.

Nobody knows who will be proved right as we are talking about what things will look like 15 years from now. I am just stating my belief in what will happen, and I stand by that.

I am not the only one offering opinions on here, but it is obvious that some contributors don't want any change - they want no dissention on that, and cannot contemplate life without inflexible schedules, EPGs and channel numbers.

Well, good luck if you hold that view, that's what I say!

---------- Post added at 15:43 ---------- Previous post was at 15:39 ----------

It's so not! The only connection is that as people pay for more streaming services, they will question more why they are paying for services they don't use.