Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
Well, Den, while viewers are watching streaming videos, they can't be watching broadcast TV, can they, and that is the whole argument. Once the balance tips too far towards SVOD, advertising revenue will decline, leading to cheaper programmes, widening the gap in quality and hastening the decline.
|
If you lose the rose tinted spectacles for a bit, you'll see that while you are right, people don't usually watch two things at once, they can. There is also a lot of time when people don't currently watch anything that thanks to widespread 3 and 4g adoption, they can. For instance, my journey to work is between 40 minutes and one hour. As I commute via train, I don't have to worry about anything more than being at the right place at the right time, so I have two hours a day I can do what I want on my mobile. Often, this includes watching video. Often video I have stored on the device, but I do sometimes fire up Netflix and watch something. This is two hours a day when I would likely not be watching a linear channel anyway. Plus, not being able to drive, I have to get public transport when I go out socially. This can mean a good hour of time as well.
In short, people don't necessarily have to cut down their viewing of linear channels to fit in streaming.
Quote:
|
It is a shame, I know the existing balance is what some wish to retain, but the writing is on the wall, I am afraid. Maybe a solution will be found, but frankly I doubt it. I certainly can't think of one, can you, Den? Serious question.
|
As long as I find a programme that is interesting, I personally don't care where it comes from. Linear channel or streaming service. I've bought up practical reasons why streaming is not for everyone and while there is some effort to solve these problems, they aren't going to be solved quickly whatever the government says.