Quote:
Originally Posted by Horizon
That's what the discussion about streaming is all about.
The existing Hollywood companies currently have guaranteed revenue streams from all the existing deals they have with broadcasters all around the world and streamers like Netflix. But if they withhold their content from other channels and streamers and keep the stuff exclusively on their own streaming services, they lose the guaranteed income with no certainly that they will get enough people to sign up for their own streamers.
If they don't do it, Netflix will destroy them, if they do do it, Netflix might still destroy them. A catch 22 scenario which is why Rupert Murdoch threw in the towel and sold out. That's how big a deal it is. One of the world's largest media companies doesn't exist now because of the threat posed from Netflix and the other tech giants.
|
Although many of the new streaming companies may choose at first to make their content exclusive to their own streamers, I think that in the end, they will be forced to allow their shows to be screened on other TV channels and streamers like Netflix to make up for lost income. The more streamers there are competing against one another, the more likely this becomes. Good news for the linear TV channels if the content drought for them is eased or comes to an end.
As far as I am concerned as a consumer, an ideal situation would be for all content to be loaded up into the cloud, and for a subscription, to be permitted to watch up to a certain number of hours of content over the month (say 80 hours). After that, a further subscription for the month or PPV would be the option. The studios would get the appropriate cut of that subscription according to the number of views.
Whether that ever comes to pass or not, I have no idea, but it would be a good solution for punters.
---------- Post added at 19:00 ---------- Previous post was at 18:50 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horizon
That's what the discussion about streaming is all about.
The existing Hollywood companies currently have guaranteed revenue streams from all the existing deals they have with broadcasters all around the world and streamers like Netflix. But if they withhold their content from other channels and streamers and keep the stuff exclusively on their own streaming services, they lose the guaranteed income with no certainly that they will get enough people to sign up for their own streamers.
If they don't do it, Netflix will destroy them, if they do do it, Netflix might still destroy them. A catch 22 scenario which is why Rupert Murdoch threw in the towel and sold out. That's how big a deal it is. One of the world's largest media companies doesn't exist now because of the threat posed from Netflix and the other tech giants.
|
I don't see Netflix as a kind of internet monster. Netflix is not specifically out to destroy the competition and I don't see any predatory signs as I did with Sky in the darkest Murdoch days.
The success of each streamer will depend on the quality and genre(s) of its content, the amount of it and value for money compared with the alternatives. Other factors will also come into it, such as whether an AVOD alternative is available for those who do not wish to subscribe, whether they are accessible on all major platforms and whether they agree to being part of bundled services on these platforms.
Eleven Sports is an example of what happens when you can't get onto a major platform, although other factors were also at play in that example.