Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
I don’t think you are getting my drift. At some point in the future, VM will have to take account of the fact that TV channels are closing and the content added to the streamers. As we’d otherwise have fewer channels, it would make sense to have packages of streamers instead of pay-tv channels.
Look at what happened with all those Disney channels, and think about what will be the result when they all do that. It’s just a matter of time.
My point is that you won’t be able to choose between scheduled linear channels as now and the streamers, because the linear channels will no longer exist. Just like happened with Disney.
|
I do realise that your fantasy situation is to have world where only streamers exist and linear channels no longer exist. Nobody else is going to look at broadcasting with exactly the same extreme viewpoint as yourself. It isn't going to make anyone who doesn't want to seek out content on a streamer to suddenly think "oh! OLD BOY dreams of a world where linear channels no longer exist. I must change my life around and stop watching scheduled TV". Really, it just isn't going to happen.
Okay, let's look at Disney, it tried and failed to acquire Sky. If it had been successful I don't think they would have gone through the scheduled channel cull we have now seen. When the Disney kids channels closed, reports were that Disney was asking too much to recontract for channels with declining viewing patterns. Nothing unusual there, viewing patterns change and pay-tv providers no longer consider them to be worth the asking price. The profit margin is no longer there for the pay-tv provider.
Disney is fairly unique, it has the global scale to throw all its weight behind its streaming service. As a global provider, it doesn't even matter if their decision in the UK and Europe loses viewers. They are charging their subscribers far more than they were getting from the pay-tv providers so they still have some income, even in the worst case scenario. In America, they still have the ABC network as an outlet for scheduled content, so very little risk in that market.
Looking at the other channel closures over the last few months, I don't see anything to be of concern. CBS/Viacom killed off a few music channels, viewing figures have been dropping for years in this genre, so understandable. Discovery killed off a few of their under-performing channels. They have recently acquired channels from UKTV and were spreading their content too thinly across their channels. Some fairly routine and far from unexpected changes there.
No real indication of the pay-tv providers haemorrhaging channels.
---------- Post added at 19:54 ---------- Previous post was at 19:46 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
I’m still lost is the streaming model direct to consumer or reliant upon Sky/Virgin or whoever else for wholesale revenue?
Still nothing on where/when BBC/ITV/Sky arbitrarily close down linear channels rather than continue to support their cross platform offerings.
Nothing on who/where/when this becomes as seamless as an EPG.
Pipe dream stuff.
|
I wonder how he thinks it will be funded. If Sky dropped the Disney channels because the profit margin was too small, why would they be happy to move from selling scheduled channels direct to their own customers. The small amount of cash received from acting as a subscription collector for global streamers isn't going to be enough to run a viable TV platform.
Not to mention that the streamers will be reluctant to wholesale their streaming platforms, it cuts into their profit margins too.