[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, jfman, if you are suggesting that people who plonk themselves in front of the box and just gaze at whatever the channel they are on throws at them receive stimulating viewing, I fail to see where you are coming from. For anyone to be so passive about what they watch suggests to me a state which is almost comatose.

Yes, people do watch a mix of live, on demand and streaming, and that is fair enough, but as we all become used to having the choice and only watch what is of interest, live viewing will become less and less until it becomes unviable or not worth the effort.

I think your reference to the barriers new entrants face is aimed at sport, and you are drawing on the experience of Eleven Sports. It is true that new entrants will find it an uphill struggle, but the same applies to existing conventional TV channels, doesn't it? Sky already streams on Now TV, and no doubt they will do so more and more with time as broadband rolls out and people get more used to streaming live TV.

As I have said many times, the demise of the linear channels is not what I 'want' - I don't give a toss personally as I don't watch them - I just think that this is the way it's going. The BBC agrees.

---------- Post added at 19:42 ---------- Previous post was at 19:39 ----------



My point was simply that watching the same old repeats over and over seems mindless to me when there is so much new stuff people could be watching instead.

If you've not seen the programme before, of course, it's not a 'repeat' to you.

When I look at my Netflix watch list, I really cannot identify with your comment about their content. How can you seriously believe that the content on Netflix is inferior to what you can find in respect of dramas on the TV channels? How bizarre!

---------- Post added at 19:46 ---------- Previous post was at 19:42 ----------



As I keep saying to you, Den, the media industry agrees that this is the way we are heading. It is you wearing the rose tinted glasses, not I.

The BBC don’t actually agree with you. One of the proposals for their Charter review includes speculation of what the future may look like, not that it will. Do the Government have a tender out for this DTT bandwidth to be reallocated yet?

No. They do not. Until then the BBC have no genuine meaningful commitment to an all streaming future.

You used the term “hardly stimulating” so I don’t need to defend a description you use.

Do people sit down and consume whatever the TV throws at them? Arguably to some degree, yes. Even you contend that streaming services need prominence in EPGs and integrated with existing search functions. Slots at the top EPGs are considered more valuable than those that are not.

Sky don’t offer Now TV to compete with its premium product. While I accept it proves my point that Sky are best placed to offer both products depending on the wants/needs of their consumers. The uphill struggle doesn’t apply to Sky: they own the content anyway. As long as it’s sales are in addition to the main product it’s easy money for Sky. Now TV doesn’t have any of the challenges of a new entrant because it has far lower costs than a new entrant trying to offer the same content by streaming only.