Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
On demand didn’t kill linear, Sky+/TiVo hasn’t killed ‘live’ television. iPlayer hasn’t killed off traditional BBC viewing.
There’s been plenty of opportunities for this viewing shift that have never come to pass.
I’ve explained before, multiple times, that you have never explained how consumer behaviour changes “to zero” without Government intervention. Internet hasn’t even got 100% penetration let alone the superfast speeds needed for HD broadcasts and not everyone wants to subscribe to an expensive broadband solution for television.
Your view that most other channels closing down is bad for channels left on EPGs is a bad thing. On the contrary it’s a good thing. It is greater prominence for those that remain.
Let’s take it to an extreme and there’s ONE linear channel. Only one. You switch your TV on and it’s there. Are you telling me that Amazon, Netflix, Sky or anyone else wouldn’t fall over themselves to showcase their content there for the paltry sums it costs to broadcast? A 24 hour TV channel beamed into every household in the country. The only one? It’d be Sky Sports News on steroids.
|
First. We agree that streaming services have not killed off the TV channels. Yet. I have never suggested that this change will happen immediately. So why do you think this is significant?
The point I am making is that there will come a tipping point. We have not reached it yet, but give it another 5 years, and you will be ignorant or a flat earther not to notice a sea change in viewer habits.
Your scenario of one channel left...what if no-one even bothers with this mode of transmission anymore? This is a concept you seem to be unable to grasp. If you take your blinkers off, you will start to understand that people will migrate to where the best content is. People will follow the herd. But I know you have a problem with all things ‘herd’!