Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
Each individually yes.
For all of them to make the same that requires more subscriptions, and households taking multiple subscriptions. I don’t believe that market exists at the level required to achieve the current pot value.
That said, each of the six companies (keeping with the hypothetical numbers for ease) believes it can command a greater share and/or force competitors out of the market altogether they’ll rationally see this is a good thing however to a consumer this is less content and less choice. You predicted above a small core of broadcast services I’d go further and predict a small core of subscription services as opposed to a vast array of choice and competition.
I’ll address one point by Old Boy above before leaving this aside (I’m sure we’d all agree that the conversation is circular, looking at it from different points of view that aren’t likely to reconcile).
I’m quite sure streaming services will be the future as global content providers vertically integrate end to end distribution, that’s not what I’ve ever questioned, I’m saying that most people will be worse off for it if they want to maintain an equivalent service to they get now.
If it was about method of delivery they could work with Sky/Virgin/BT but it isn’t- it’s about driving profits upwards. That comes from the customer base.
If you think there’s tens of millions of potential subscribers outside the pay-tv market desperate to jump in at sub £8 a month then fine. If Virgin stripped TV XL out my package I’d save something like £23 a month and to maintain my current viewing I’d have to get BT Sport at a higher monthly cost. If you think that wouldn’t be the same with a £5 provider here, an £8 provider there and it wouldn’t suddenly add up to more for the vast majority then we just fundamentally disagree about the market as a whole.
|
Well, since Netflix and Amazon became available, we have far more choice than before, and my perception is that traditional TV channels have less good content these days.You appear to think that people will not go for multiple subscriptions in a big way, but they already do! I know so many people now who have Netflix and Amazon, and I would wager that many CF members also have Now TV.
If the traditional channels were no longer there, subscribers would have more money available to throw at other streaming services. The 'Full House' of the future will probably be a package of streaming services rather than tv channels and we will be paying out roughly the same.
Of course, everyone is different and they will make different choices. Some will decide to subscribe only to one service and change over to another later in the year. People like me would subscribe to all the services providing a lot of good dramas, documentaries.and wildlife programmes. I would see myself in the future as subscribing to Starz, Discovery and HBO in addition to what I have now, which would be cheaper than now. I wouldn't bother with Disney if it was all kids stuff as there won't be any children in my house, but I would be interested in other programmes if they are made available on that service.
So I do believe that multiple subscriptions will be the norm in future, although many of us may well be paying one operator such as Sky, Virgin or BT, to get them all.