Home News Forum Articles
  Welcome back Join CF
You are here You are here: Home | Forum | The future of television

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most of the discussions, articles and other free features. By joining our Virgin Media community you will have full access to all discussions, be able to view and post threads, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own images/photos, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please join our community today.


Welcome to Cable Forum
Go Back   Cable Forum > Alternatives to Virgin Media > Other Digital TV Services Discussion

The future of television
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 13-06-2021, 13:55   #286
jfman
Architect of Ideas
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,228
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY View Post
Doesn't Sky already offer Netflix, fully integrated into their system? I think some contributors are arguing that something cannot happen when it already has.

Just to be clear, the incentive to be on as many platforms as possible is to be more visible and to encourage more people to subscribe to the service. Streamers may or may not accept discounts for those services that can attract more customers than they might otherwise have had. Some may only be prepared to offer introductory deals.

I'm not sure how you make out that acquiring more customers equates to having less revenue. Could you explain what you mean, please?-
Gladly.

In your “content aggregator” hypothesis you propose that streamers should be made available on platforms such as Sky/Virgin.

Such wholesale deals need to be finely balanced - a customer who leaves your service as a direct subscriber to become an indirect subscriber via a wholesale arrangement means less revenue for you.

E.g. a BT Sport subscriber who joins Virgin to get BT Sports reflects a substantial revenue drop compared to a direct BT subscriber. This needs to be finely balanced.

Quote:
'Pennies per month'? Where did that come from?
Sky’s own accounts. And Virgin’s.

Both have in the past included what their expenses are to third party content providers. That amount, averaged over the subscriber base and the number of third parties, leads to the obvious conclusion that they are only paying pennies per month.

Indeed, if one casts our minds back to the Sky Basics dispute this was over Sky wanting something in the region of 90 pence per subscriber per month for the most popular channels on pay television.

If you think there’s a magical pot of money out there where Sky/Virgin are in a position to pay every fledgeling streaming service pounds per month then you are very well mistaken. If that money comes from anywhere it will be the end user.

Quote:
It is quite possible that there will be no discount for some streamers - others, like Apple +, Britbox and Acorn may be prepared to do so to access many more customers that they otherwise would have.
I’d contest that it’s not only possible but extremely likely. This content isn’t new or magical, it’s simply television distributed across another means. There’s no incentive for Sky/Virgin to encourage further dilution of their own content by propping up all of these streamers.

Quote:
As an interim stage in a transition away from TV channels, I would envisage a completely revised offering including Netflix, Prime, Discovery +, Disney + and Now (or Peacock if we get that in this country later on), together with the Freeview channels on an EPG. There could be slimmer packages for those wishing to pay less. The pay tv channels would disappear.

This would be as affordable as what we are paying now for the maximum package, there or thereabouts. For those of us with a multitude of streamers already, it would be cheaper.
Would it be affordable or cheaper than traditional pay-tv services? Who is getting squeezed because all of their direct to customer offerings are significantly more expensive than people are paying for their TV package to Sky or Virgin.

Last edited by jfman; 13-06-2021 at 13:59.
jfman is online now   Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Old 13-06-2021, 14:17   #287
1andrew1
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 14,187
1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze
1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze1andrew1 is cast in bronze
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman View Post
Would it be affordable or cheaper than traditional pay-tv services? Who is getting squeezed because all of their direct to customer offerings are significantly more expensive than people are paying for their TV package to Sky or Virgin.
I think the future savings may come by getting rid of satellite/box installations and more expensive boxes that record. But that still won't account for the difference between £1 per subscriber that Sky probably gets from VM for its entertainment channels and the £10 (albeit often less) it gets for its entertainment channels when sold directly under its Now brand.
1andrew1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2021, 15:05   #288
epsilon
cf.geek
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 698
epsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation era
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY View Post
...The pay tv channels would disappear.
Why the obsession with pay channels disappearing?

It's as if you are in a race and see only that as the finish line. But to get there everyone has to be running towards the same finish line. Some people may be running alongside you but you will also find people running in the opposite direction, maybe they tried streaming services and weren't happy with the experience. Others will be on the sidelines, enjoying a mixed diet of streamed and scheduled content. Yet more will be anchored to the spot, as determined to stay with scheduled pay-TV as you are to see it end.
epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2021, 15:50   #289
Hugh
laeva recumbens anguis
Cable Forum Team
 
Hugh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 67
Services: Premiere Collection
Posts: 42,041
Hugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden aura
Hugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden auraHugh has a golden aura
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY View Post
Doesn't Sky already offer Netflix, fully integrated into their system? I think some contributors are arguing that something cannot happen when it already has.

Just to be clear, the incentive to be on as many platforms as possible is to be more visible and to encourage more people to subscribe to the service. Streamers may or may not accept discounts for those services that can attract more customers than they might otherwise have had. Some may only be prepared to offer introductory deals.

---------- Post added at 11:42 ---------- Previous post was at 11:40 ----------



I'm not sure how you make out that acquiring more customers equates to having less revenue. Could you explain what you mean, please?-

---------- Post added at 11:52 ---------- Previous post was at 11:42 ----------



'Pennies per month'? Where did that come from?

It is quite possible that there will be no discount for some streamers - others, like Apple +, Britbox and Acorn may be prepared to do so to access many more customers that they otherwise would have.

As an interim stage in a transition away from TV channels, I would envisage a completely revised offering including Netflix, Prime, Discovery +, Disney + and Now (or Peacock if we get that in this country later on), together with the Freeview channels on an EPG. There could be slimmer packages for those wishing to pay less. The pay tv channels would disappear.

This would be as affordable as what we are paying now for the maximum package, there or thereabouts. For those of us with a multitude of streamers already, it would be cheaper.
1000 customers subscribe direct from Netflix at £11.99 per customer, Netflix get £11,990.00 per month; 1500 customers subscribe, through Sky, to Netflix at £9.99 per month, of which Netflix get £6.99, Netflix get £10,498.50 per month.

(subscription amounts for illustrative purposes only).
__________________
There is always light.
If only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it
.
If my post is in bold and this colour, it's a Moderator Request.
Hugh is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2021, 16:59   #290
OLD BOY
Rise above the players
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wokingham
Services: 2 V6 boxes with 360 software, Now, ITVX, Amazon, Netflix, Lionsgate+, Apple+, Disney+, Paramount +,
Posts: 14,568
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by epsilon View Post
Why the obsession with pay channels disappearing?

It's as if you are in a race and see only that as the finish line. But to get there everyone has to be running towards the same finish line. Some people may be running alongside you but you will also find people running in the opposite direction, maybe they tried streaming services and weren't happy with the experience. Others will be on the sidelines, enjoying a mixed diet of streamed and scheduled content. Yet more will be anchored to the spot, as determined to stay with scheduled pay-TV as you are to see it end.
I’m not ‘obsessed’ with it, but if we have access to all the main streamers through our boxes, why would we pay for the same content on pay tv channels?

If we had both, it would be far too expensive for most, and pointless, what is more.
__________________
Forumbox.co.uk
OLD BOY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2021, 18:23   #291
jfman
Architect of Ideas
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,228
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY View Post
I’m not ‘obsessed’ with it, but if we have access to all the main streamers through our boxes, why would we pay for the same content on pay tv channels?

If we had both, it would be far too expensive for most, and pointless, what is more.
A statement you’ve been invited to evidence on numerous occasions yet to date never taken the opportunity to do so. Your clear obsession with this subject won’t make this happen all by itself.

Right now linear ensures quality of service to end users, in high and ultra high definition. Something not achievable by streaming in a uniform way as broadcast television does.
jfman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2021, 19:53   #292
muppetman11
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 12,313
muppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny stars
muppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny stars
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 View Post
I think the future savings may come by getting rid of satellite/box installations and more expensive boxes that record. But that still won't account for the difference between £1 per subscriber that Sky probably gets from VM for its entertainment channels and the £10 (albeit often less) it gets for its entertainment channels when sold directly under its Now brand.
Good points , I can see the satellite platform hemorrhaging customers especially with every additional bit of content it loses going forward. I have lots and lots of friends and colleagues who have already cancelled their Sky subscriptions with many moving to Freeview/Freesat complemented by Now for Sport and streaming apps.

I can see Sky going over to IPTV with a box sent out in the post and installed by the customer , Now pretty much does this already but at some point I see the two meeting in the middle.

The extra money Sky saves on third party content will be invested into its own content with content from the NBCUniversal stable also.

Linear will still be very much part of its offering specifically for Sport and News.
muppetman11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2021, 20:17   #293
epsilon
cf.geek
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 698
epsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation era
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY View Post
I’m not ‘obsessed’ with it, but if we have access to all the main streamers through our boxes, why would we pay for the same content on pay tv channels?

If we had both, it would be far too expensive for most, and pointless, what is more.
So don't buy them twice. You wouldn't buy your eggs from Asda and then go to Tesco to buy them again. Make a choice. Eventually you will choose the streamers but other viewers will choose scheduled content.

Happy days for everyone.
epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2021, 20:47   #294
jfman
Architect of Ideas
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,228
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by epsilon View Post
So don't buy them twice. You wouldn't buy your eggs from Asda and then go to Tesco to buy them again. Make a choice. Eventually you will choose the streamers but other viewers will choose scheduled content.

Happy days for everyone.
Or scheduled content with an on demand catalogue as now. Satisfying everyone who, unlike Old Boy, are agnostic about the whole thing.

His desperation for the end of television, whether he watches it or not, is completely irrational.
jfman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2021, 21:40   #295
OLD BOY
Rise above the players
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wokingham
Services: 2 V6 boxes with 360 software, Now, ITVX, Amazon, Netflix, Lionsgate+, Apple+, Disney+, Paramount +,
Posts: 14,568
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman View Post
A statement you’ve been invited to evidence on numerous occasions yet to date never taken the opportunity to do so. Your clear obsession with this subject won’t make this happen all by itself.

Right now linear ensures quality of service to end users, in high and ultra high definition. Something not achievable by streaming in a uniform way as broadcast television does.
What point are you making here? Is it not self evident that if we are paying for pay-tv channels as well as streaming services, it will be more expensive than if we just had a bouquet of streamers providing the same content?

Yes, it is true that TV channels provide a service that some are perfectly happy with, but people are not going to pay twice for the same content, are they? Even if they are obsessed with channel numbers and advertisement breaks.

I’m not sure either what you are getting at in inferring that ‘quality of service to end users, in high and ultra high definition’ is even applicable to scheduled TV. There is far more content in UHD on the streamers, and nothing in SD.

So your assertion that this is not achievable by streaming is palpable nonsense.

Perhaps you should clarify yourself.

---------- Post added at 20:37 ---------- Previous post was at 20:34 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by epsilon View Post
So don't buy them twice. You wouldn't buy your eggs from Asda and then go to Tesco to buy them again. Make a choice. Eventually you will choose the streamers but other viewers will choose scheduled content.

Happy days for everyone.
No, quite clearly you wouldn’t, and that is my point. If your satellite or cable subscription gave you a package of streamers with all that content that gives you almost unlimited choice, why would you want to pay for TV channels as well?

---------- Post added at 20:40 ---------- Previous post was at 20:37 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetman11 View Post
Good points , I can see the satellite platform hemorrhaging customers especially with every additional bit of content it loses going forward. I have lots and lots of friends and colleagues who have already cancelled their Sky subscriptions with many moving to Freeview/Freesat complemented by Now for Sport and streaming apps.

I can see Sky going over to IPTV with a box sent out in the post and installed by the customer , Now pretty much does this already but at some point I see the two meeting in the middle.

The extra money Sky saves on third party content will be invested into its own content with content from the NBCUniversal stable also.

Linear will still be very much part of its offering specifically for Sport and News.
I agree with all of that, except your last sentence. Why pay twice for the same content?
__________________
Forumbox.co.uk
OLD BOY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2021, 21:50   #296
muppetman11
cf.mega poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 12,313
muppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny stars
muppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny starsmuppetman11 has a pair of shiny stars
Re: The future of television

You don't expect Sport and News to be consumed live
muppetman11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2021, 21:53   #297
jfman
Architect of Ideas
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,228
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY View Post
What point are you making here? Is it not self evident that if we are paying for pay-tv channels as well as streaming services, it will be more expensive than if we just had a bouquet of streamers providing the same content?
Well, no.

The more content splinters, and the greater demand for limited content becomes, drives up prices.

I see DAZN have trebled their prices in Italy following acquisition of Serie A rights.

Quote:
Yes, it is true that TV channels provide a service that some are perfectly happy with, but people are not going to pay twice for the same content, are they? Even if they are obsessed with channel numbers and advertisement breaks.
Why would they pay twice? As far as I can tell all the linear channels of any note have a streaming presence. They’re not mutually exclusive in the way you seem to portray.

Quote:
I’m not sure either what you are getting at in inferring that ‘quality of service to end users, in high and ultra high definition’ is even applicable to scheduled TV. There is far more content in UHD on the streamers, and nothing in SD.
Not for end users without internet or with slow speeds it isn’t.

For someone who objects to the Now TV boost I think you’ll find many more object to having to pay ever increasing amounts for a quality internet service just to receive television.

Quote:
So your assertion that this is not achievable by streaming is palpable nonsense.
Palpable nonsense? See above.

Quote:
No, quite clearly you wouldn’t, and that is my point. If your satellite or cable subscription gave you a package of streamers with all that content that gives you almost unlimited choice, why would you want to pay for TV channels as well?
Because the average user isn’t dogmatic like you are OB. They’ll watch linear when it suits, record when it suits, and stream when it suits (if of course their internet is up to it).

Quote:
I agree with all of that, except your last sentence. Why pay twice for the same content?
As you’ve been unable to quantify the cost of maintaining a linear presence in addition to streaming for existing linear channels - essentially the status quo - it’s clearly palpable nonsense that users are paying twice for the same content.
jfman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14-06-2021, 00:15   #298
OLD BOY
Rise above the players
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wokingham
Services: 2 V6 boxes with 360 software, Now, ITVX, Amazon, Netflix, Lionsgate+, Apple+, Disney+, Paramount +,
Posts: 14,568
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetman11 View Post
You don't expect Sport and News to be consumed live
Who said that? Of course we will always have programmes to watch that are live. But live tv doesn’t have to be consumed on a conventional channel.

As I have said before, you can watch live tv on the BBC I-player.
__________________
Forumbox.co.uk
OLD BOY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-06-2021, 00:27   #299
jfman
Architect of Ideas
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,228
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
jfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronzejfman is cast in bronze
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetman11 View Post
You don't expect Sport and News to be consumed live
No he just expects it to be more convenient to access it through the jumble sale that is a streamers menu. Which brings us to if you can’t remember who is broadcasting a game having to access multiple different apps just to check.

Or buy a TV guide - how quaint - just to know who is showing what.
jfman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 14-06-2021, 02:03   #300
epsilon
cf.geek
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 698
epsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation eraepsilon has entered a golden reputation era
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY View Post
No, quite clearly you wouldn’t, and that is my point. If your satellite or cable subscription gave you a package of streamers with all that content that gives you almost unlimited choice, why would you want to pay for TV channels as well?
As I said, not everyone is in the same race as you, heading for a common finish line. Those viewers determined to stay with scheduled pay-TV will have no reason to switch to these larger bundles, which you seem to desire, packaging the streamers. If they don't like the experience of searching for content on the streaming apps, they won't be be paying more to add the streamers to their TV bundle.
epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 19:47.


Server: osmium.zmnt.uk
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.