The future of television

[OLD BOY]

One of the big benefits of streaming that I detected was the amount of content and the lack of advertising. Consequently, it appeared disingenuous to dilute that model in the way that commercial pay-tv channels do.

However, I was not considering a possible tiered approach, and I do think it makes sense to either have a cheaper or a free service with ads as options for those who cannot afford to pay (or will not pay on principle) for their TV content.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

One of the big benefits of streaming that I detected was the amount of content and the lack of advertising. Consequently, it appeared disingenuous to dilute that model in the way that commercial pay-tv channels do.

However, I was not considering a possible tiered approach, and I do think it makes sense to either have a cheaper or a free service with ads as options for those who cannot afford to pay (or will not pay on principle) for their TV content.

A bit like linear broadcasting and streaming - not a zero sum game.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

One of the big benefits of streaming that I detected was the amount of content and the lack of advertising. Consequently, it appeared disingenuous to dilute that model in the way that commercial pay-tv channels do.

However, I was not considering a possible tiered approach, and I do think it makes sense to either have a cheaper or a free service with ads as options for those who cannot afford to pay (or will not pay on principle) for their TV content.

Almost as there might be different options including a variety of delivery methods and scheduling, as one size doesn’t fit all…

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

One of the big benefits of streaming that I detected was the amount of content and the lack of advertising. Consequently, it appeared disingenuous to dilute that model in the way that commercial pay-tv channels do.

"CEO tells shareholders it's disengenuous to maximise profits by accepting advertising" was an unlikely long-term proposition.

[OLD BOY]

The likely timeline towards the end of terrestrial and satellite TV is set out in this link. We seem to be on track for 2035.

Of course, there are still some unknowns which may throw a fly in the ointment, but for the moment, this is the accepted projection.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2023/timeline-o...-satellite-tv/

There was a word missing from the article headline…

"potential"

Timeline of potential changes to Freeview and satellite TV

Also, from the last section

The current preferred end date for digital terrestrial television, when multiplex licences expire.

Preferred by who?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

There was a word missing from the article headline…

"potential"

Still clutching at straws, Hugh?

Happy New Year!

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Still clutching at straws, Hugh?

Happy New Year!

No, just factual accuracy and correct use of language - you should try it, you might like it…

A timetable is a schedule of things that are going to happen at a certain time - that article was a mixture of things that were going to happen and of things that may happen…

Happy New Year to you and yours.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

No, just factual accuracy and correct use of language - you should try it, you might like it…

A timetable is a schedule of things that are going to happen at a certain time - that article was a mixture of things that were going to happen and of things that may happen…

Happy New Year to you and yours.

Thank you. Incidentally, I agree with you at last. All I’m doing is supporting my original prediction, which some are taking far too rigidly. I have acknowledged quite a number of times that the prediction is just what I think will happen, and if the facts change on the ground, such as a failure to roll out broadband as indicated by the government, or a decision not to permit the broadcast bandwidth for mobile services, then 2035 won’t be achievable. However, as things currently stand, we are on target to be IPTV only by the date I set originally about seven years ago now - by 2035.

I think the one thing people find it difficult to accept is my assertion that the channels are likely to disappear in favour of content being categorised instead. I said that because content is easier to manage for the broadcasters if it is done that way rather than scheduled. Additionally, as people get used to IPTV, most are likely to prefer watching what they want, when they want.

In case of doubt, although I have already made this clear, I’m talking about the existing EPG channels on Sky and Virgin, not the FAST channels, which will attract a smaller number of niche viewers. It is worth saying that even Pluto is prioritising ‘on demand’ viewing over scheduled viewing, which appears to indicate I was right to say that this is the option most people would choose in the future.

Sky wants to exit its satellite TV service.

Unless it wants to lose customers, it wont be doing that for a while.
For many areas, TV via the internet (Sky Stream/Glass) is still not practical.

[OLD BOY]

That’s right. It is too early to ditch satellite right now, but the first steps to that goal have been made.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Thank you. Incidentally, I agree with you at last. All I’m doing is supporting my original prediction, which some are taking far too rigidly. I have acknowledged quite a number of times that the prediction is just what I think will happen, and if the facts change on the ground, such as a failure to roll out broadband as indicated by the government, or a decision not to permit the broadcast bandwidth for mobile services, then 2035 won’t be achievable. However, as things currently stand, we are on target to be IPTV only by the date I set originally about seven years ago now - by 2035.

I think the one thing people find it difficult to accept is my assertion that the channels are likely to disappear in favour of content being categorised instead. I said that because content is easier to manage for the broadcasters if it is done that way rather than scheduled. Additionally, as people get used to IPTV, most are likely to prefer watching what they want, when they want.

In case of doubt, although I have already made this clear, I’m talking about the existing EPG channels on Sky and Virgin, not the FAST channels, which will attract a smaller number of niche viewers. It is worth saying that even Pluto is prioritising ‘on demand’ viewing over scheduled viewing, which appears to indicate I was right to say that this is the option most people would choose in the future.

And lo, it came to pass, the caveat "most" appeared upon the land, and the initial invariable "all programming will be on-demand, and scheduled programming will be cast into the pits of Hell and never be seen again" was modified to agree with what everyone else had been stating, that there would always be a place for scheduled programming and dogmatic approaches would be proven false…

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

And lo, it came to pass, the caveat "most" appeared upon the land, and the initial invariable "all programming will be on-demand, and scheduled programming will be cast into the pits of Hell and never be seen again" was modified to agree with what everyone else had been stating, that there would always be a place for scheduled programming and dogmatic approaches would be proven false…

On what basis do you believe that ‘there will always be a place for scheduled programming’ as we have it now? FAST channels excluded, of course.

While I accept that’s what you might want, I don’t think there’s much evidence within the industry that this is a real possibility.

Clearly, broadcasters could choose to continue providing scheduled TV by channel over IPTV, but why would they? Unless, of course, Ofcom required it, and as an organisation struggling to keep up with progress, that wouldn’t surprise me.

On what basis do you believe that ‘there will always be a place for scheduled programming’ as we have it now? FAST channels excluded, of course.

So you believe there won’t be a place for scheduled programming, except for the scheduled programming you want to exclude from the discussion?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

So you believe there won’t be a place for scheduled programming, except for the scheduled programming you want to exclude from the discussion?

There will be a place for the existing non-FAST TV channels in the future, just as there will for the FAST channels, of course there will. Nobody’s going to stop it from happening. I simply believe that as on demand viewing becomes prevalent, the broadcasters will choose not to take that route.

I know you and some others who have contributed to this thread disagree, but that is their right. I’m just expressing my opinion, nothing more. I have heard you, and you have heard me. We can all make up our own minds.