VOD : The future for linear TV channels

[spiderplant]

Can anyone make sense of this?

it’s not worth making a distinction between linear and digital anymore, just as the walls between cable and broadcast melted away years ago

It's like something from one of those random buzzword generators!

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by spiderplant

Can anyone make sense of this?


It's like something from one of those random buzzword generators!

I think he's saying that the focus will be more on content and not how you access it (ie through conventional channels, on demand and streaming).

[muppetman11]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Looks like YouTube is joining the linear TV streaming party next year.

Will it though the article states they have no agreements in place. The studios seem set to do this via Hulu do they need Youtube ?

[1andrew1]

Another boost for broadband-delivered channels in the UK. Freesat has been cleared to allow pay sports channels on its platform via broadband. This could work out well for sports subscribers looking to downgrade from Sky.
http://cdn.freesat.co.uk/freesat/fre...016%5B2%5D.pdf

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Will it though the article states they have no agreements in place. The studios seem set to do this via Hulu do they need Youtube ?

I hear what you say but the article says "The project, for which YouTube has already overhauled its technical architecture, is one of the online video giant’s biggest priorities and is slated to debut as soon as 2017, one of the people said." "YouTube has been working on an online cable package since at least 2012, one of the people said, but these plans have taken on new urgency in the past few months."
I guess the benefits of YouTube suggested in the article are:
1) Potential large market "While Apple, Amazon and Google have frustrated media companies over the years with on-and-off content negotiations, they are more popular among young consumers than any cable company. These technology giants also have a large reservoir of customers buying their devices, and each sells a set-top box to stream video from apps like Netflix Inc. and Hulu."
2) "large media companies expect new providers to pay more per channel than existing partners Comcast and AT&T Inc." So if the TV companies could sell more profitably via YouTube than Hulu then they could be tempted to do so.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Another boost for broadband-delivered channels in the UK. Freesat has been cleared to allow pay sports channels on its platform via broadband. This could work out well for sports subscribers looking to downgrade from Sky.
http://cdn.freesat.co.uk/freesat/fre...016%5B2%5D.pdf

Although no respite for the wallets of football fans, the majority of whom take Sky Sports for the Premiership football.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Although no respite for the wallets of football fans, the majority of whom take Sky Sports for the Premiership football.

I guess if Now TV goes on there then the minimum monthly price for Sky Sports would be £32 pm v about £50pm for Sky Sports with a base pack on the Sky platform. So that's a £240 annual saving if you subscribe every month. The saving increases to £300 per year if you take Now TV for 10 months of the year only to mirror the Premier League season.
I guess that this situation could give Sky a dilemma - would it be better or worse for Sky to offer Sky Sports through Now TV on Freesat?

[OLD BOY]

64% of 18-34 year olds choose streaming over legacy pay tv channels.

http://www.rapidtvnews.com/201605204...#axzz49DpQNJl6

[denphone]

And the vast majority still watch linear TV......

[Mad Max]

Originally Posted by denphone

And the vast majority still watch linear TV......

Source?

[denphone]

Here we are MM.

https://www.themediabriefing.com/art...trends-to-know

[Mad Max]

Originally Posted by denphone

Here we are MM.

https://www.themediabriefing.com/art...trends-to-know

Cheers, but how do those figures match up to what OB posted??

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Mad Max

Cheers, but how do those figures match up to what OB posted??

He is basing his argument on what young people watch and not what the majority watch so l thought a bit of balance was needed.

[Mad Max]

Originally Posted by denphone

He is basing his argument on what young people watch and not what the majority watch so l thought a bit of balance was needed.

I know what you mean, but i'd tend to go along with OB's previous posts with regards to linear TV declining pretty rapidly in 20 years time or so, because if 64% of 18-34 year olds are using streaming or on demand services today, then it would seem that those habits would continue into later life, which imo would strengthen OB's prediction.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by denphone

He is basing his argument on what young people watch and not what the majority watch so l thought a bit of balance was needed.

I don't disagree that the majority of people are currently watching 'old fashioned' TV, Den. I have never doubted this, nor the likelihood that this will continue to be the case in the short term.

However, the 18-34 year olds will be 38-54 year olds in 20 years' time and by then the landscape will look completely different.

My Grandkids are frustrated with conventional channels because you can't fast forward them and you can't access what you want when you want. Nearly everything they watch nowadays is through on demand/streaming and recordings. My 10 year old grandson will be 30 in 20 years.

It doesn't take a genius to see the way things are going, but statistics that show the majority of the TV audience currently watch conventional channels does not interfere in any way with the premise of this thread, which is about the future, not the present.

Looking at the direction of travel, I don't understand why some people are in denial that our conventional TV channels will be in trouble in the not too distant future.

---------- Post added at 20:05 ---------- Previous post was at 20:03 ----------

Originally Posted by Mad Max

I know what you mean, but i'd tend to go along with OB's previous posts with regards to linear TV declining pretty rapidly in 20 years time or so, because if 64% of 18-34 year olds are using streaming or on demand services today, then it would seem that those habits would continue into later life, which imo would strengthen OB's prediction.

Correct, and their way of viewing will rub off on a substantial proportion of the older generation too, just as internet shopping has taken off in all age groups.

[harry_hitch]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

64% of 18-34 year olds choose streaming over legacy pay tv channels.

http://www.rapidtvnews.com/201605204...#axzz49DpQNJl6

Have you actually read the article OB? I would suggest it is clear you have not.