VOD : Linear is old tech - on demand is the future

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by muppetman11

Thanks for the explanation I'll leave it there , let's agree to disagree as none of that makes sense to me.

Ok, put simply, if you're paying £70 for your Full House VM bundle but ditch that for 4 different streaming services at, say, £6.99 each, the saving is £70.00 - £27.96, a £42.04 saving. Now does it make sense?

If you are not paying £70 for Full House, just substitute your own figure. OTT services are still cheaper.

---------- Post added at 18:58 ---------- Previous post was at 18:56 ----------

Originally Posted by Travelstar

It drives me to get HBO Nordic and a VPN service. I can't get Sky and I have zero interest getting normal TV through Virgin. I live part of the week in the Nordic region anyhow so when I do watch it in the UK, I get the HBO programming in both 1080p and DD5.1. I also get to avoid giving money to Murdoch.

OTT services work for you, then!

[Joedm45]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Ok, put simply, if you're paying £70 for your Full House VM bundle but ditch that for 4 different streaming services at, say, £6.99 each, the saving is £70.00 - £27.96, a £42.04 saving. Now does it make sense?

If you are not paying £70 for Full House, just substitute your own figure. OTT services are still cheaper.

---------- Post added at 18:58 ---------- Previous post was at 18:56 ----------


OTT services work for you, then!

Remember you need broadband for all that to work, probably around £30 to £40 a month off your savings figure

[buckeye]

Originally Posted by Joedm45

Remember you need broadband for all that to work, probably around £30 to £40 a month off your savings figure

Yeah you're right, I'm currently paying VM £44 a month for the basic TV package, basic phone and 200 meg BB.
My online subscriptions worked out over the year come to £79 a month, so it looks like I am paying more than having a full package on VM.
However I am only paying for the content I want rather than subsidizing a service 90% of which I don't want and lots of that streaming content I am paying for is either not available on British TV or the cost is being shared with someone else, so in effect I'm paying around £83 a month for content I want or not available via traditional TV, not cheap but better than the pay TV alternative

[OLD BOY]

For many, the BBC i-Player is now the preferred method of watching BBC content. In July alone, there were 145 million requests for programmes for both live and on demand programmes on this service.

https://www.rapidtvnews.com/20170818...#axzz4q6cluuk6

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by buckeye

Yeah you're right, I'm currently paying VM £44 a month for the basic TV package, basic phone and 200 meg BB.
My online subscriptions worked out over the year come to £79 a month, so it looks like I am paying more than having a full package on VM.
However I am only paying for the content I want rather than subsidizing a service 90% of which I don't want and lots of that streaming content I am paying for is either not available on British TV or the cost is being shared with someone else, so in effect I'm paying around £83 a month for content I want or not available via traditional TV, not cheap but better than the pay TV alternative

You've hit on what I think the main problem with all of the Linear Pay TV providers. Packages. I'm in the same position as you. We (as a family) watch around 10% of the channels I pay for, but the trouble is, they are spread amongst the packages Virgin Media offer. I suspect my bill would be a lot lower if VM offered per channel charging rather than bunging them into packages. I also suspect that is a major reason why VM won't offer it. Yes, I know VM's billing system may also be unable to cope, but if VM thought the change would be profitable enough, they can change the billing system.

One day, I probably will go through all the packages looking at what I can drop, but I don't really get much time for that sort of stuff at the moment.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Stuart

You've hit on what I think the main problem with all of the Linear Pay TV providers. Packages. I'm in the same position as you. We (as a family) watch around 10% of the channels I pay for, but the trouble is, they are spread amongst the packages Virgin Media offer. I suspect my bill would be a lot lower if VM offered per channel charging rather than bunging them into packages. I also suspect that is a major reason why VM won't offer it. Yes, I know VM's billing system may also be unable to cope, but if VM thought the change would be profitable enough, they can change the billing system.

One day, I probably will go through all the packages looking at what I can drop, but I don't really get much time for that sort of stuff at the moment.

Packages are good for families with diverse tastes. What I would like to see is bundles of the most popular channels.

They could also easily bundle channels together on the basis of the cost of those channels. So popular channels like Sky 1 would be bundled with Sky Living and Fox, for example. Likewise, the cheap and cheerful channels like Drama, CBS Drama and True Movies might go together.

The way things are, streaming services are much more attractive on the basis of both content and price.

---------- Post added at 17:45 ---------- Previous post was at 17:38 ----------

Further evidence here of sports rights being picked up by OTT providers.

Coming to the UK soon...

http://www.digitaltveurope.net/73315...league-rights/

[denphone]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Further evidence here of sports rights being picked up by OTT providers.

Coming to the UK soon...

http://www.digitaltveurope.net/73315...league-rights/

l don't think so OB.

[buckeye]

Originally Posted by Stuart

You've hit on what I think the main problem with all of the Linear Pay TV providers. Packages. I'm in the same position as you. We (as a family) watch around 10% of the channels I pay for, but the trouble is, they are spread amongst the packages Virgin Media offer. I suspect my bill would be a lot lower if VM offered per channel charging rather than bunging them into packages. I also suspect that is a major reason why VM won't offer it. Yes, I know VM's billing system may also be unable to cope, but if VM thought the change would be profitable enough, they can change the billing system.

One day, I probably will go through all the packages looking at what I can drop, but I don't really get much time for that sort of stuff at the moment.

I probably should have also said that the vast majority of my subscription costs are for sport, without trying to work things out again I'd guess if I didn't need sports my subs would be 50-60 percent lower.

---------- Post added at 18:20 ---------- Previous post was at 18:15 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Packages are good for families with diverse tastes. What I would like to see is bundles of the most popular channels.

They could also easily bundle channels together on the basis of the cost of those channels. So popular channels like Sky 1 would be bundled with Sky Living and Fox, for example. Likewise, the cheap and cheerful channels like Drama, CBS Drama and True Movies might go together.

The way things are, streaming services are much more attractive on the basis of both content and price.

---------- Post added at 17:45 ---------- Previous post was at 17:38 ----------

Further evidence here of sports rights being picked up by OTT providers.

Coming to the UK soon...

http://www.digitaltveurope.net/73315...league-rights/

OLD BOY I am in agreement with some of what you post, but the US pay TV market is markedly different from the UK,
what happens there is not necessarily coming here.
Until Ofcom grow a pair we are going to be the 3rd world in digital rights compared to America!

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by buckeye

I probably should have also said that the vast majority of my subscription costs are for sport, without trying to work things out again I'd guess if I didn't need sports my subs would be 50-60 percent lower.

---------- Post added at 18:20 ---------- Previous post was at 18:15 ----------



OLD BOY I am in agreement with some of what you post, but the US pay TV market is markedly different from the UK,
what happens there is not necessarily coming here.
Until Ofcom grow a pair we are going to be the 3rd world in digital rights compared to America!

I understand the point you make, Buckeye, but the reason I point out what is going on with OTT sites in the States is that some Forum members do not believe that sport will ever be shown on streaming sites like Amazon or Netflix. I think it's the 'live' aspect that causes them confusion.

I wouldn't rule out the likes of Amazon or one of the other major streaming players going after the Premiership this next time around. We know they are interested.

---------- Post added at 19:09 ---------- Previous post was at 19:07 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

l don't think so OB.

You are such a doubting Thomas these days, Den.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

You are such a doubting Thomas these days, Den.

Its what you call reality OB.

[theone2k10]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Packages are good for families with diverse tastes. What I would like to see is bundles of the most popular channels.

They could also easily bundle channels together on the basis of the cost of those channels. So popular channels like Sky 1 would be bundled with Sky Living and Fox, for example. Likewise, the cheap and cheerful channels like Drama, CBS Drama and True Movies might go together.

The way things are, streaming services are much more attractive on the basis of both content and price.

---------- Post added at 17:45 ---------- Previous post was at 17:38 ----------

Further evidence here of sports rights being picked up by OTT providers.

Coming to the UK soon...

http://www.digitaltveurope.net/73315...league-rights/

Where does it say coming to uk soon?
I'm 50/50 with you on this i do agree with you streaming is growing and becoming more and more popular and widespread however live sports i feel will be linear for quite awhile.
Maybe they'll be streaming and linear as SKY already do this via nowtv/skygo and SKY.
I certainly wouldn't dismiss your theory though.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by denphone

Its what you call reality OB.

It's the reality of your continuing cynicism, Den!

---------- Post added at 22:58 ---------- Previous post was at 22:57 ----------

Originally Posted by theone2k10

Where does it say coming to uk soon?
I'm 50/50 with you on this i do agree with you streaming is growing and becoming more and more popular and widespread however live sports i feel will be linear for quite awhile.
Maybe they'll be streaming and linear as SKY already do this via nowtv/skygo and SKY.
I certainly wouldn't dismiss your theory though.

It doesn't. I'm inviting you to make what you will of it.

[Mad Max]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

It's the reality of your continuing cynicism, Den!

---------- Post added at 22:58 ---------- Previous post was at 22:57 ----------


It doesn't. I'm inviting you to make what you will of it.

I agree with a lot that you say OB, but imo, and many others, there's no way that I would delay watching a live sports event, it will always be linear imo, ok it may be streamed by other providers, but it will always be watched by the majority of people as it happens.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Mad Max

I agree with a lot that you say OB, but imo, and many others, there's no way that I would delay watching a live sports event, it will always be linear imo, ok it may be streamed by other providers, but it will always be watched by the majority of people as it happens.

...and that is the confusion, MM! You can live stream sporting events!

[muppetman11]

Turner which is in fact a US broadcaster and will be making games available on it's channels also. It's only going OTT to extend the product to those who don't currently choose a pay TV package in the USA.