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

[vincerooney]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Except that a decade is not 'light years' away.

Well before 2030, the whole country should be able to receive fast broadband speeds because at long last the Government is getting its act together on this. Once we have that, and with advances in streaming technology, streaming for us all will be as good as live tv on our existing channels is.

Incidentally, whenever I watch the live broadcasts on the i-Player, the streaming is faultless. So it can be done.

I think you're pretty much right Old Boy. Within 20 to 30 years I think television will mainly be streaming. I'm in my 30's currently (spoilers) and I was about 12 then the internet became "big" so i think probably my generation were the first generation to grow up with the internet so to speak. Within 20 or 30 years you've got about 6 generations of people internet savvy so the need for linear channels will have decreased by then.

I think it will take that long though. My mum is in her 60's and is becoming quite adapt at streaming on demand products on her ipad but I don't think many people in her age bracket are confident enough so as a result tv channels will remain for the foreseeable future

My only quip would be your confidence in the government investing in super fast broadband speeds.....if there is no money to be made for the tories in it then it won't happen. With the debacles occurring at the moment in the UK i don't envision super fast broadband being a top priority for a considerable amount of time

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by vincerooney

I think you're pretty much right Old Boy. Within 20 to 30 years I think television will mainly be streaming. I'm in my 30's currently (spoilers) and I was about 12 then the internet became "big" so i think probably my generation were the first generation to grow up with the internet so to speak. Within 20 or 30 years you've got about 6 generations of people internet savvy so the need for linear channels will have decreased by then.

I think it will take that long though. My mum is in her 60's and is becoming quite adapt at streaming on demand products on her ipad but I don't think many people in her age bracket are confident enough so as a result tv channels will remain for the foreseeable future

My only quip would be your confidence in the government investing in super fast broadband speeds.....if there is no money to be made for the tories in it then it won't happen. With the debacles occurring at the moment in the UK i don't envision super fast broadband being a top priority for a considerable amount of time

I think it will be a lot less than 30 years - by 20, it will have happened. We can see the signs already. ITV's heavy dependence on revenues from its commercial channels is already causing alarm, with reduced income forecast for next year. At some point, these channels will become completely unsustainable. This is why ITV is now prioritising its online presence.

https://www.digitaltveurope.com/2018...itv-prospects/

[OLD BOY]

As more and more streaming services commission and acquire new content, this will surely leave our traditional broadcasters with little new drama other than what they come up with themselves. Although the Beeb, ITV, Channel 4 and Sky already do this quite successfully, as US content dries up, this is going to leave large gaps in the schedules.

I have noticed that there is less new stuff that I want to see these days on the Sky channels particularly on Atlantic, which has shown some pretty good stuff in the past.

This can only hasten the move from conventional TV to SVOD.

https://advanced-television.com/2018...l-commissions/

[Chad]

I'm not fussed how the content is delivered as long as I can continue to watch the type of content I enjoy. My concern is that before we know it you'll need multiple subscriptions to multiple services just to keep the status quo. For a nonlinear future to be a success all services need to be available on all platforms, simple to use and available under one monthly payment. There also needs to be a free alternative. We have nearly 13 million freeview / freesat "customers" in the UK who are resistant to move to any form of paid content. I'm sure I read a recent report that showed the majority of households in the UK with Netflix or Amazon Prime also have a pay TV subscription.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Chad

I'm not fussed how the content is delivered as long as I can continue to watch the type of content I enjoy. My concern is that before we know it you'll need multiple subscriptions to multiple services just to keep the status quo. For a nonlinear future to be a success all services need to be available on all platforms, simple to use and available under one monthly payment. There also needs to be a free alternative. We have nearly 13 million freeview / freesat "customers" in the UK who are resistant to move to any form of paid content. I'm sure I read a recent report that showed the majority of households in the UK with Netflix or Amazon Prime also have a pay TV subscription.

Yes, I am wondering about what will happen with subscriptions for streaming services. Almost certainly, there will be multiple choices in the future, but remember, they are all very cheap when you compare them with satellite and cable channels. You can pay £60 per month for a huge number of channels but you end up with nothing to watch. And yet for less than a tenner you can get a huge choice of programmes on just one service - so huge, in fact, that it is difficult to know where to start.

This is why I think what Virgin, Sky and BT have started to do by incorporating streaming services into their packages is the right way for them to go. Once we have a decent choice of these services, I can see subscribers being offered packages of streaming services, either as well as or in place of pay tv channels. I don't think many would be able to afford both.

Think of how much choice you will be able to get once all these global companies start offering their global wares. We would have the choice of Netflix, Prime, Discovery, Disney, Now TV, Hayu, HBO, the new BBC/ITV/Channel 4 venture, and others we don't even know about yet, all for £60 or less if we took them all, I would imagine. On top of that, for viewers who prefer to dip in and out of a particular kind of TV programme on a more occasional basis, there will be a whole range of pay per view stuff available, including Google Play and Startzplay.

Of course, sports programming would be on top of all this price-wise, as it is now, and we have yet to see whether the new streaming services would be able to offer that at less cost than Sky can, given the prices they would have to pay for rights. The complaints about the quality of streamed sport should be addressed over the next few years and the BBC have been trying to get on top of the latency issues, claiming that they have now found a solution.

These are exciting times, and although many will not care about how their TV is delivered, it will become apparent just how easy it is to watch programmes at your own convenience without commercials. Having done that over a period of time, most would not want to go back to scheduled linear channels.

I believe that pay tv channels will be replaced by streaming services first and Freeview channels will be the last to go. It will be fascinating to see how this plays out.

[oliver1948uk]

Remember, even if you only subscribed to streamed services like Netflix, you would also have to pay for decent broadband.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by oliver1948uk

Remember, even if you only subscribed to streamed services like Netflix, you would also have to pay for decent broadband.

Yes, but you could do away with the cable tv channels, thus saving money.

If Sky, BT and Virgin Media only allowed you to subscribe to the streaming services if you also took the pay tv channels (as they do now), the answer would be to buy an appropriate streaming stick or box that provided the services you wanted, such as Amazon Fire or Roku.

[oliver1948uk]

But you will still need to pay for good stand alone broadband without which the streaming services of any kind won't work. This cost must be factored in.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by oliver1948uk

But you will still need to pay for good stand alone broadband without which the streaming services of any kind won't work. This cost must be factored in.

That's true, but most of us are paying out for that anyway, so it's cost neutral.

[Raider999]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

That's true, but most of us are paying out for that anyway, so it's cost neutral.

I thought most people got a discounted broadband because of the package they were on?

Certainly I do

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Raider999

I thought most people got a discounted broadband because of the package they were on?

Certainly I do

Yes, I believe that is correct. However, the cheaper streaming services should still allow you to keep within what you already pay.

[Raider999]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Yes, I believe that is correct. However, the cheaper streaming services should still allow you to keep within what you already pay.

Possibly, but would I get the content I desire - I seriously doubt it

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Raider999

Possibly, but would I get the content I desire - I seriously doubt it

It depends what you desire, I suppose. Now TV, Netflix and Freeview alone will give you a pretty good choice. Add Prime and what would you be missing that you currently really want to watch?

This excludes Sport, obviously, as this is monopolised by Sky and BT at present, although the sports pack on Now TV covers all the Sky stuff.

The only thing that stands out in my mind is some nature and factual programming, but I dare say there will be a Discovery app soon to cover that.

[OLD BOY]

There is an interesting assessment of the cordcutting phenomenon set out in this article. It is most pronounced in the US, where it looks as though the days of pay tv are numbered in the medium term. The UK seems to be going the same way, although we are currently behind the US in terms of their direction of travel.

http://www.csimagazine.com/csi/Is-co...-in-Europe.php

EXTRACT

...At the opposite end of the spectrum to Ukraine is the UK, a market that looks the most like the US in that payTV ARPU is the highest at EUR35.5 and there is a high appetite for US content. “For these reasons the UK is one of the few countries where cord cutting could be happening,” Ourliac said.

Ourliac pointed out that OTT services registered more subscribers in 2018 than payTV (close to 18m versus just under 16m for the latter), although this is only the case when incumbent skinny bundles, namely Sky’s Now TV, are included in the calculation. “So the cord cutting has to be balanced in the UK as well,” she added.

According to Ourliac, the case of Sky implies that should cord cutting happen in Europe it will concern satellite first, although it doesn’t mean DTH operators will lose their customers if they successfully manage to attract them onto their own skinny bundles...

I’ll just leave this here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-45798523

Climate Change: Is your Netflix habit bad for the environment?

The entire information technology (IT) sector - from powering internet servers to charging smartphones - is already estimated to have the same carbon footprint as the aviation industry's fuel emissions.

And it is on course to consume as much as 20% of the world's electricity by 2030, according to Anders Andrae, who is based at Huawei Technologies.

Streaming video accounts for the biggest big chunk of the world's internet traffic.

...

Terrestrial broadcast TV is a lot more efficient than current streaming technologies for TV channels that are watched by a large number of people, say Prof Preist and Dr Schien.