Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
Of course it's not! Have you ever stopped to think how many people are involved in drawing up the schedules, fitting the advertisements within the limited openings within and between programmes, working out how to fill the gaps in the schedules where insufficient first run programmes are available, the need for an announcer before programmes start, etc, etc. It is far easier to simply upload a programme with advertisements included without regard to precise timing.
Have you forgotten the problems ITV experienced a few years back when advertisers reduced the amount of commercials due to the recession? That's how tight the margins are, and it would not take much for advertisers to reduce drastically the amount of advertising on commercial channels as viewership dropped off.
The smaller channels will go first. Keep your eye on Sky 2. I can't see that surviving for much longer.
|
All of those channels rating 0.1 on BARB manage to carry out the tasks associated with broadcast television on a shoestring budget so forgive me for once again not accepting your viewpoint.
Advertising revenue will fall, that’s an inevitability, but you are ignoring (perhaps deliberately) my repeated assertion that it will largely be the same companies providing the same content on both mediums. Streaming/linear are not mutually exclusive and you are really questioning the marginal cost of maintaining a linear presence for someone who does both.
A streaming service that insists on inserting 12 minutes per hour into their content is destined to fail over those who don’t. Advertising would be eliminated altogether except product placement.
This, by paradox, will cause a price premium for advertising slots on linear channels that remain at the same time other costs will fall (leasing bandwidth) if there is reduced demand.