If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Business Insider)   Please, please, please let this be true   (businessinsider.com) divider line 357
    More: Hero, Intel, casual games, cable industry  
•       •       •

67260 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Jan 2013 at 1:15 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



357 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-02 12:10:44 AM  
What? You don't want A&E bundled in with the channels you want? But you need to watch 16 minute shows like Storage Wars.

/A&E - Too many f'ng commercials.
 
2013-01-02 12:11:24 AM  
You're salivating over a la carte channels?  Really grampa?  I hear they're getting ready to make these newfangled things called compact discs next year.  They're going to be like cassette tapes, except they'll have lasers!

"Channels" are already obsolete.  You people sit here and biatch that there are 200 channels you don't watch, but you're perfectly comfortable paying for 24 hours a day of programming, even though you only watch like 4 hours of it on average?  It's the same thing in a smaller chunk.

Let me subscribe to a show, and get the episodes instantly when they're released, instead of waiting until the next day.  That's where TV needs to head.
 
2013-01-02 12:12:57 AM  
by some estimates, only about 25 percent of cable customers actually watch ESPN on a regular basis. So if you unbundled ESPN, the per-subscriber cost might shoot up to $20 or more, to account for the 75 percent drop in its customer base.

So why not create bundles targeted at certain demos? Create a sports bundle for sports fans, a nerd bundle with stuff like Siffy, Discovery, The Science Channel etc. Seems like anything would be better than the one-size-fits-all system we have now.
 
2013-01-02 12:21:40 AM  

fusillade762: by some estimates, only about 25 percent of cable customers actually watch ESPN on a regular basis. So if you unbundled ESPN, the per-subscriber cost might shoot up to $20 or more, to account for the 75 percent drop in its customer base.

So why not create bundles targeted at certain demos? Create a sports bundle for sports fans, a nerd bundle with stuff like Siffy, Discovery, The Science Channel etc. Seems like anything would be better than the one-size-fits-all system we have now.


Why only worry about the people who watch ESPN regularly?  They have to watch everything on the channel?  The only sports I ever watch on TV are Virginia Tech football games, so I wouldn't be in the regular viewership category, but me and thousands of other people like me would gladly pay 10 bucks a season to watch all the Virginia Tech football games.  That's going to add up.

From there, it's easy enough to create other relevant bundles.  Make a college football bundle for the guy who likes to watch every game.  Make a Virginia Tech package that includes all the different sports, but only VT.  And have an "everything" package for the guy who just wants to watch sports.
 
2013-01-02 12:27:36 AM  
I'm for this if it's what finally kills MTV.
 
2013-01-02 12:29:31 AM  
I wonder what will happen to the shopping channels, which cable companies claim they need to include in order to offset their expenses?
 
2013-01-02 12:32:55 AM  
Who do I have to f*ck to make this happen?
 
2013-01-02 12:34:00 AM  
About 70% of the time I turn on the TV (and not some other service), I do it to flip through channels I don't normally watch until I land on some random show.
 
2013-01-02 12:37:17 AM  
From one of the linked articles:

gigaom2.files.wordpress.com

Looks familiar...

images2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-01-02 12:39:32 AM  

Triumph: I'm for this if it's what finally kills MTV.


Palladia HD is pretty good, and 95% of it's programming is live concerts of not just current pop stars.
In fact, it's virtually Bieber, Swift, and Kanye free.
I think I would keep that, and kick MTV, which I haven't watched in years, to the curb.
 
2013-01-02 12:41:13 AM  

NewportBarGuy: Who do I have to f*ck to make this happen?


Honey Boo Boo's mom, and don't forget to leave a bag of Cheetos on the night stand.
 
2013-01-02 12:42:38 AM  
Cancelled my cable a year ago. Netflix is way cheaper, on demand, and no commercials.

That's where TV needs to go. Of course it will never happen. Too many people whose only job is to sell you crap you don't need would watch their jobs get flushed away... The lawsuits are already incubating to make sure it never happens. They did it with the cable cards a few years ago to make sure you couldn't make your own DVR without giving them "their" cut.
 
2013-01-02 12:52:16 AM  
From the headline, I expected it to be a release announcement for a 10 foot Lego Death Star with optional 15kW Alderaan-buster.

Although I would certainly miss absolutely nothing on TLC.
 
2013-01-02 01:19:54 AM  

TommyymmoT: NewportBarGuy: Who do I have to f*ck to make this happen?

Honey Boo Boo's mom, and don't forget to leave a bag of Cheetos on the night stand.


I'll give him a sympathy screw afterward if its necessary. Holy crap. DO IT.
 
2013-01-02 01:20:10 AM  
Oh good. I can see it now.

TNT $20 a month
MTV $3 a month
Comedy Central $40 a month
SyFy $10 a month
and so on...

I get the feeling I'd be paying MORE because I like popular channels like CC, USA and TNT.
People who like dreck like MTV will probably end up paying less.
 
2013-01-02 01:20:14 AM  
People still watch TV?
 
2013-01-02 01:20:56 AM  
Going to end up costing more, and more people are going to miss surfing than they think. I don't miss actual TV at all, but I do miss random channel surfing when I'm sick,hungover or can't sleep.
 
2013-01-02 01:21:46 AM  

TommyymmoT: NewportBarGuy: Who do I have to f*ck to make this happen?

Honey Boo Boo's mom, and don't forget to leave a bag of Cheetos on the night stand.


Do I have to fark her vagina or is the neck flab an acceptable alternative?
 
2013-01-02 01:23:38 AM  

Zombie DJ: Oh good. I can see it now.

TNT $20 a month
MTV $3 a month
Comedy Central $40 a month
SyFy $10 a month
and so on...

I get the feeling I'd be paying MORE because I like popular channels like CC, USA and TNT.
People who like dreck like MTV will probably end up paying less.


THIS THIS THIS SO MUCH THIS.
 
2013-01-02 01:24:10 AM  
Then all of you will be pissed once you get this then wind up paying $75 for just the few channels you want, I hate the shop at home stations too but they do subsidize a lot of your cable bill. Sure you may not ever watch them but there are tons who do and buy all kinds of crap.
 
2013-01-02 01:24:39 AM  
The next time we hear about this, it'll be during the bribe-driven show trial portion of the massive multi-corporation lawsuit to stop it.
 
2013-01-02 01:24:49 AM  
Huh, I'd pay for that.
 
2013-01-02 01:25:16 AM  

fusillade762: Do I have to fark her vagina or is the neck flab an acceptable alternative?


First time this year I feel like throwing up.
 
2013-01-02 01:25:57 AM  

President Merkin Muffley: People still watch TV?


I came here to say this. I've haven't watched any TV for maybe 20 years. When I occasionally see it, my god, it's way way overwhelming.
 
2013-01-02 01:26:26 AM  
Already beginning

uncrate.com
 
2013-01-02 01:26:36 AM  

serial_crusher: Let me subscribe to a show, and get the episodes instantly when they're released, instead of waiting until the next day.  That's where TV needs to head.


This ridiculous. Controlling when content can be viewed is an excellent way of maintaining control over a population. For example, in Canada, traditionally traffic on city streets decreases significantly when Hockey Night in Canada is on. So does crime, hospital visits, etc.. it also means that a huge proportion of Canadians are available for targeted messages, like advertising, that runs the economy. Other messages, like political messages, can be run during HNiC as well.

Then let's look at social engineering experiments like reality tv shows where viewers vote. The CBC ran the first show like that, because private industries wanted to make the financial risks public. Canada tested it's infrastructure for cell phones, instant text messaging, and how business and government could coordinate hundreds of thousands of Canadians to obey a message all at once. It was also a cash cow, ensuring that the cellular companies at the time would get a guaranteed income on certain nights of the week, from customers who watched the show sending messages.

Your silly idea would not coordinate all of these things and would seriously fark up city planning, business, and government control mechanisms. It would bugger the economy in advertising alone. it is irresponsible.
 
2013-01-02 01:26:57 AM  
Won't the threat of more people switching to streaming tv just result in stricter bandwith limits? Or are American cable companies and ISPs run totally separately?
 
2013-01-02 01:28:45 AM  

Zombie DJ: Oh good. I can see it now.

TNT $20 a month
MTV $3 a month
Comedy Central $40 a month
SyFy $10 a month
and so on...

I get the feeling I'd be paying MORE because I like popular channels like CC, USA and TNT.
People who like dreck like MTV will probably end up paying less.


No see... now you get to directly fund things you want. Now scifi gets a bigger chunk of the pie if you like scifi, so maybe they can afford to make cool new shows instead of airing ghost hunters 800 times.

/At least, thats what im telling myself
 
2013-01-02 01:30:12 AM  
I'm predicting that within 10 years, professionally created video entertainment specifically for home consumption will disappear. Yes, even Law & Order.
People will still go to new movies for the communal experience.
People will still go to local theater for the novelty of watching live people perform.

But "television" will be replaced by whatever six people with a couple of cameras want to put on the Internet. They'll have day jobs. Their "reward" will be Internet viewings. If they're really good enough, they'll make their entertainment some sort of pay-per-view.
 
2013-01-02 01:30:31 AM  

serial_crusher: Let me subscribe to a show, and get the episodes instantly when they're released, instead of waiting until the next day. That's where TV needs to head.


Thisity thisity this.

Also, global synchronized releases, dubbing and captions on day one, low subscription price, multiple non-credit card payment options (paypal and all its local copycats). You will see global distribution for serialized shows go through the roof.

If you can convince a Chinese university student to pay 50 RMB to buy a pirated dvd box-set of Lost, you can sure as hell convince them to pay 10 RMB a month for a new show. It's all a matter of accessibility and pricing. There's a huge market out there the producers are leaving untapped.
 
2013-01-02 01:31:02 AM  

SquiggsIN: shouldn't the more popular it is, the better bargaining can be reached, thus the CHEAPER it becomes. These are basic principles of economics.


No... there's a limited supply. So the more popular something becomes the more expensive it becomes. Diamonds are very popular but there's only so many of them.
 
2013-01-02 01:31:06 AM  

serial_crusher: You're salivating over a la carte channels?  Really grampa?  I hear they're getting ready to make these newfangled things called compact discs next year.  They're going to be like cassette tapes, except they'll have lasers!

"Channels" are already obsolete.  You people sit here and biatch that there are 200 channels you don't watch, but you're perfectly comfortable paying for 24 hours a day of programming, even though you only watch like 4 hours of it on average?  It's the same thing in a smaller chunk.

Let me subscribe to a show, and get the episodes instantly when they're released, instead of waiting until the next day.  That's where TV needs to head.


Hi gramps. We have these things nowadays. Look up netflix and amazon and others. enjoy your new-fangled on demand services. :-)
 
2013-01-02 01:31:10 AM  
I'd be happy to pay for a channel that would deliver the content I want without me having to seek it out and identify it first. I mean, seriously, just give me the shiat I don't even know I want yet, already. And don't fark it up like with Caprica.
 
2013-01-02 01:31:31 AM  

Alonjar: Zombie DJ: Oh good. I can see it now.

TNT $20 a month
MTV $3 a month
Comedy Central $40 a month
SyFy $10 a month
and so on...

I get the feeling I'd be paying MORE because I like popular channels like CC, USA and TNT.
People who like dreck like MTV will probably end up paying less.

No see... now you get to directly fund things you want. Now scifi gets a bigger chunk of the pie if you like scifi, so maybe they can afford to make cool new shows instead of airing ghost hunters 800 times.

/At least, thats what im telling myself


You mean they could offer up to C grade movies instead of D?
 
2013-01-02 01:32:04 AM  
The key here is companies like HULU, Amazon, Netflix, maybe Redbox. companies like this needs to start buying programs outright, or individual "TV Channels" need to sell there own shiat, individually on a pay per series deal. After an appropriate 'This show sucks' period.
 
2013-01-02 01:32:07 AM  

Nofun: Cancelled my cable a year ago. Netflix is way cheaper, on demand, and no commercials.

That's where TV needs to go. Of course it will never happen. Too many people whose only job is to sell you crap you don't need would watch their jobs get flushed away... The lawsuits are already incubating to make sure it never happens. They did it with the cable cards a few years ago to make sure you couldn't make your own DVR without giving them "their" cut.


Got rid of cable 4 years ago....They just need to stream March Madness!
 
2013-01-02 01:32:31 AM  

roncofooddehydrator: Diamonds are very popular but there's only so many of them.


you can create all the diamonds you want these days
 
2013-01-02 01:32:37 AM  

Zombie DJ: Oh good. I can see it now.

TNT $20 a month
MTV $3 a month
Comedy Central $40 a month
SyFy $10 a month
and so on...

I get the feeling I'd be paying MORE because I like popular channels like CC, USA and TNT.
People who like dreck like MTV will probably end up paying less.


If that happens it'll give you even more incentive to ditch cable entirely and go to netflix/hulu/etc., like so many people have already.

Nobody's going to pay that kind of money for 3 channels (those 3 channels anyway). Networks can set prices like that if they want, but even a first-year business major can see how badly that will go. Instead of maybe attracting a base of people who wouldn't otherwise buy cable, you wind up alienating them and quite a few other people to boot.

Regardless, HOWEVER this a la carte pricing idea is received by the networks, it will "blow up" cable as we know it. It's whether or not there will be anything left afterward that's in question.
 
2013-01-02 01:33:12 AM  

Zombie DJ: Oh good. I can see it now.

TNT $20 a month
MTV $3 a month
Comedy Central $40 a month
SyFy $10 a month
and so on...

I get the feeling I'd be paying MORE because I like popular channels like CC, USA and TNT.
People who like dreck like MTV will probably end up paying less.


and if ala carte cable is more than package rate, people will stay with their current package.
DUH

on the flipside, if I could get exactly the channels which I watch, at a completely reasonable rate each, I would switch in a second.

premium package rates would be the same
I would need to buy:
comedy central
bbca
syfy (not sure WHY, but something must still be on that channel which I watch, right?)
AMC

meh, it would only save me $20 or so ... but still
 
2013-01-02 01:33:24 AM  
That's why I pay Drew 5 bucks a month, he filters out all the dumb pos.......
 
2013-01-02 01:33:43 AM  

TommyymmoT: NewportBarGuy: Who do I have to f*ck to make this happen?

Honey Boo Boo's mom, and don't forget to leave a bag of Cheetos on the night stand.


I'd go ass to mouth. I'd do it for you farkers and all the future generations.

/and when you speak of me...
 
2013-01-02 01:34:45 AM  
It would be nice if this would help bring AJE over.
 
2013-01-02 01:34:59 AM  

Alonjar: Zombie DJ: Oh good. I can see it now.

TNT $20 a month
MTV $3 a month
Comedy Central $40 a month
SyFy $10 a month
and so on...

I get the feeling I'd be paying MORE because I like popular channels like CC, USA and TNT.
People who like dreck like MTV will probably end up paying less.

No see... now you get to directly fund things you want. Now scifi gets a bigger chunk of the pie if you like scifi, so maybe they can afford to make cool new shows instead of airing ghost hunters 800 times.

/At least, thats what im telling myself


Then they could finally land a director to film my sci fi script!

/Ghost Hunters vs. Mansquito III: Son of Ghosquito
 
2013-01-02 01:35:10 AM  
I was already planning to fire Directv tomorrow, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies.

It's too expensive, and I need to spend less time planted in front of the TV anyway. Kids can get cartoons from Netflix etc anyway.

I just hope NHL Gamecenter will be satisfying to view should the league and NHLPA get their shiat figured out.
 
2013-01-02 01:36:26 AM  
Are you farkers under the impression that these channels are individual companies, or that their customers are you?

Bwaaa haaaa haaaaaa. Disney, Viacom, and other firms hold bundles of channels. Their customers are the cable and SatTV firms. The latter provide marketing, billing, customer service.

Now imagine you're a business who sells all of your output as one package, to only a handful of customers. Would you piss off your five or six customers, and break apart your core product to sell the high value parts separately, suddenly have to own a lot of the marketing yourself, to do business with a small niche player?

Intel's only hope - and it's slim - is to cut an agreement to sell bundles of channels in overseas markets. Even that is dicey as geo-IP is not hard to get around.

Know why its expensive if not impossible to get all of your sports, live, over the internet? Yeah, same reason this won't happen. Its a cozy arrangement for content and distribution providers. You are just the field they graze on.
 
2013-01-02 01:36:47 AM  

apoptotic: Won't the threat of more people switching to streaming tv just result in stricter bandwith limits? Or are American cable companies and ISPs run totally separately?


well, I have a cable modem ....
and basic cable is forced on everyone who lives in the building. DSL is pretty much the only other internet option and I am canceling DSL this month.
 
2013-01-02 01:39:17 AM  

7th Son of a 7th Son: Zombie DJ: Oh good. I can see it now.

TNT $20 a month
MTV $3 a month
Comedy Central $40 a month
SyFy $10 a month
and so on...

I get the feeling I'd be paying MORE because I like popular channels like CC, USA and TNT.
People who like dreck like MTV will probably end up paying less.

THIS THIS THIS SO MUCH THIS.


And you both would be completely wrong.

What is never mentioned in these a la carte vs all inclusive comparisons is that competition would fundamentally change. For the first time EVER the channels would be selling directly to the consumer. The costs aren't laundered through BigCableCo - they are directly charged to the customer. If your price is too high, your customers will look elsewhere. See, content providers can make a lot more money selling advertising than they get patting-down cable and satellite companies. They will actually want to keep access fees as low as possible or their ratings will drop. Low ratings means advertisers will seek greener pastures.

The key benefit of this is that a lot of the crap channels will start folding. And this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Instead of content copying each other, it is more likely to shift toward high-quality / high-loyalty programming. Essentially following the HBO model. The me-too hacks will fall because consumers will stop buying the expensive buffet and instead ordering exactly what they want off of the menu. You will also expect to see more advertisements for programming outside of the channel playing it.
 
2013-01-02 01:39:41 AM  

steamingpile: Then all of you will be pissed once you get this then wind up paying $75 for just the few channels you want, I hate the shop at home stations too but they do subsidize a lot of your cable bill. Sure you may not ever watch them but there are tons who do and buy all kinds of crap.


Read an article on shopping channels last week.  QVC does over $8 billion per year in merchandise sales.  Home Shopping Network, about $3.5 billion.
 
2013-01-02 01:39:58 AM  

roncofooddehydrator: No... there's a limited supply. So the more popular something becomes the more expensive it becomes. Diamonds are very popular but there's only so many of them.


"No" in pretty much every respect when it comes to entertainment content. 1500 people can watch a show as it airs from one guy's cable box if said box is streaming to the internet. One camera recording or DVD of a movie becomes 250k copies as people download it. The only scarcity even mildly related to the market is the ease or difficulty of viewing the original broadcast/showing.

It's been this way since the first Betamax players and blank tapes arrived on store shelves. Where were you?
 
2013-01-02 01:40:17 AM  

apoptotic: Won't the threat of more people switching to streaming tv just result in stricter bandwith limits? Or are American cable companies and ISPs run totally separately?


yeah, we have free enterprise here
;-p
 
Displayed 50 of 357 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report