Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
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.
|
Call it 'speculation' on the part of the BBC if you want to, jfman, but it is what the BBC believe and it is with that in mind that they will be preparing their negotiations in ten years' time. That BBC view chimes with what the media industry believes. Why you continue to spit in the wind with your 'nothing will change' arguments, I cannot fathom.
You are correct in saying that DTT bandwidth has not been reallocated yet, but as that won't happen for some years yet, I don't think that is a relevant point. Incidentally, you may have overlooked the fact that this process has already commenced elsewhere in Europe.
Yes, I stand by my 'hardly stimulating' comment. That's not being rude to anyone, it's just a statement of fact. However, it is just as easy to click on a streaming service and click on the first programme you see on there as it is to select a channel and fall back in the armchair in a hypnotic state.
Your argument around Sky seems confused, as if the view you express invaliidates my argument. The existing satellite system will soon be complemented by an IPTV system, and although the two systems will exist side by side for probably a decade, it is very likely that their system will be IPTV only after that, when existing satellites are due for replacement. The IPTV system Sky design to replace satellite tv will be a better version of Now TV, and it will be based on the 'on demand' features rather than live tv. In the early days, of course, it will have both, with an ability to record the scheduled programmes. The design of it, I believe, will lead to a better acceptance of viewing by VOD.
Sky could retain Premiership sports rights now that they are a part of the larger Comcast stable, but that isn't guaranteed. It may be that BT is the first casualty of the increasing interest shown by the global streaming companies. If you really believe that Amazon and other companies don't have the financial clout to outbid either BT or Sky, you are deluding yourself.