The future of television

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Chris

The FAST channels are linear channels and they exist because the demand is there. All your observations have merit but your conclusions don’t fit your observations - you can see as well as I can that FAST channels came out of nowhere to occupy a space created for on-demand streaming because there is a demand even amongst people who are comfortable with IP delivered television for a pre-determined linear stream.

Once you accept the logic of meeting market demand for a linear scedule, you also accept the same logic that goes with everything else in a competitive marketplace - your offering must be more compelling than your competitor’s. The additional effort required - accurate scheduling of programmes and advertisements, deciding what shows to place where in order to draw in and hold on to an audience - becomes marketing spend that pays a return. Though I also think you’re over-stating how difficult it is for an established professional TV channel with its own play-out suite to actually do all that stuff.

Aside from all that, as long as it is necessary to maintain legacy delivery networks, whether cable, terrestrial, satellite or some combination of those, linear schedules will have to continue to exist because that’s the only way to deliver TV over those networks. I still think your imagined timetable for final shut-off of those networks is wildly optimistic.

I am only saying what the broadcasters want, Chris, and I am pretty confident they will get their way. I have already acknowledged that the FAST channels are a different case altogether, because they rely mainly on old cheap material.

The main channels in this country are becoming too expensive to run when viewed against the cost of new material, the reducing audience share and the amount of money the advertisers are willing to pay for their ads to appear. Their most valuable audiences are migrating to streaming, and that’s where the advertisers will go.

You have not commented on the channels that are leaving in favour of streaming, but you are giving undue weight to those few channels that have returned. If you recall, for example, I said from the get-go that it was too early for BBC3 to go streaming only, and sure as eggs is eggs, the channel returned. That was not unexpected. Similarly, the return of those children’s channels to Sky reflected the fact that they could profit from Sky subscribers who had were not yet able to access streaming services through their subscriptions.

We are never going to agree on this and in the end one of us will be proved right. Only ten more years to go and all will be clear.

[OLD BOY]

The loss of traditional channels in favour of the move to streaming continues. New streaming channels (FAST channels) are being established all the time. It will be interesting to see how popular the FAST channels will turn out to be.

Personally, I don’t think that any of them will turn out to be big players in the overall TV market in the long run. But at this stage, it’s all to play for.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2025/sky-contin...n-the-horizon/

[EXTRACT]

Over 20 channels drop off Sky satellite, with more to come this week.

Some HD channels have closed, incentivising viewers to move to Sky Stream for better picture quality

Decline in services covered by Sky subscription, without reduction in cost

On Sky Stream, traditional channels losses are offset by growth of streaming-only linear channels.

[Carth]

20 different businesses, all delivering the same crap content to your 80 inch TV (with shit sound), all hoping to take your money in whatever way possible whilst reducing their overheads

And they call it entertainment

[OLD BOY]

https://www.cordbusters.co.uk/sky-st...an-end-sooner/

[EXTRACT]

Freeview and Freesat could be switched off by 2034 – and new research from Sky claims only 330,000 households would be left behind.

That’s the headline finding from a major study published this week, and it’s far more optimistic than the government’s previous estimate of 1.8 million households still needing help by 2035.

But there’s a big “if” attached: it only works if the government announces a clear timeline around 2027, giving people seven years to prepare, and invests properly in helping vulnerable groups get online

The broadcasters are becoming increasingly concerned about the cost of maintaining the existing broadcast system and this I believe will decide the date on which the transmitters are switched off for TV broadcasting. My bets are on 2024 as being the year for the switch-off. Satellite broadcasting will already have been run down or terminated by then.

There is still no news on converting channels to streaming on demand at this point, but I think that will happen at the same time. There is not really any point in doing both, but of course there are differing views on that.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

My bets are on 2024 as being the year for the switch-off.

I would not bet much on that year.

Major competitor of Freeview releases sponsored survey which shows Freeview could be switched off early…

[OLD BOY]

Broadcasters are pushing for an on demand streaming future because scheduled TV is more expensive and difficult to run, and advertisers are preferring a more targeted approach for their advertising, which is more easily achieved via on demand.

Live broadcasts will, of course, continue in the same way that Amazon and TNT broadcast football.

While it is still possible that the government will step in, I think the realisation that broadcasters would want compensation for bearing these unnecessary costs will seal the fate of the traditional channels. As the article points out, most of the population is now connected to the internet and if there is a campaign to publicise the forthcoming switch-off, there will be very few people left without it by 2034.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Broadcasters are pushing for an on demand streaming future because scheduled TV is more expensive and difficult to run, and advertisers are preferring a more targeted approach for their advertising, which is more easily achieved via on demand.

This is an assertion about the beliefs of a third party - as you (obviously) don’t have the power to speak for ‘broadcasters’, it’s polite for you to link to a source for the motives you’re imputing here.

Live broadcasts will, of course, continue in the same way that Amazon and TNT broadcast football.

While it is still possible that the government will step in, I think the realisation that broadcasters would want compensation for bearing these unnecessary costs will seal the fate of the traditional channels. As the article points out, most of the population is now connected to the internet and if there is a campaign to publicise the forthcoming switch-off, there will be very few people left without it by 2034.

As per, your predictions are based upon suppositions that are generated by wishful thinking…

[Carth]

If our internet went down, her indoors can still watch her crap on freeview through the aerial.

There's far too much now relies on a constant uninterrupted internet connection, and there are no guarantees you'll get one

Originally Posted by Carth

If our internet went down, her indoors can still watch her crap on freeview through the aerial.

There's far too much now relies on a constant uninterrupted internet connection, and there are no guarantees you'll get one

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.ph...d-outages.html

A new Uswitch commissioned Opinium survey of 2,000 UK adults, which was conducted between 31st October and 4th November 2025, has claimed that 41% of respondents experienced at least one loss of broadband connectivity in the past 12 months and “15 million Brits” (67%) experienced outages lasting for three hours or more...

… The survey goes on to claim that internet outages totalled 238.7 million hours in the past year, which is said to be costing the UK economy an estimated £1.4bn in lost work hours. Some 21% of those affected said they are having to suffer through 3 hours or longer outages “more than once a week“. Problems at the broadband provider were given as the top reason for prolonged outages by 37% of respondents, while 33% blamed it on power cuts and 27% attributed it to their router not working.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Chris

This is an assertion about the beliefs of a third party - as you (obviously) don’t have the power to speak for ‘broadcasters’, it’s polite for you to link to a source for the motives you’re imputing here.



As per, your predictions are based upon suppositions that are generated by wishful thinking…

Those predictions seem to becoming more certain all the time, but we won’t know it until we see it.

As for speaking for the broadcasters, don’t be daft. I am merely pointing out what has been widely reported.

[1andrew1]

From that Cordbuster's article, it will be interesting to see what this report says.

The government is expected to publish its plan for TV’s future before mid-2026. That’s just months away.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

From that Cordbuster's article, it will be interesting to see what this report says.

Indeed. If they are actually capable of problem solving.