dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
14
share rss forum feed
« wth
This is a sub-selection from Just a question


tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to 88615298

Re: Just a question

Absolutly not. Television (just as most of the web) is an advertizing driven medium.
not only would TV bills be higher (5x is very low) inovative shows would cease to be tried.
NObody would risk money on anything that wasn't strickly low cost formula crap.

UncleDirtNap

join:2006-08-26
Pittsburgh, PA
Not a single word of what you wrote is true. The facts are not in dispute but the media companies that are profiting from the current system want people to believe they are so they can continue the scam that is lining their pockets.

The are five major companies that produce the vast majority of the content currently on TV/CATV/SATV and they earn 60% of their revenue from CATV and SATV customer bills. It's simply a fact and ad revenue makes up a very small portion of their overall revenue.

These are all publicly traded companies, their financials are a matter of public record and they've been poured over by every concerned group from government regulators to consumer protection groups.

The media companies are lying through their teeth to protect the current systems that allows them to reap billions they could not otherwise extract from consumers.


tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
said by UncleDirtNap:

The are five major companies that produce the vast majority of the content currently on TV/CATV/SATV and they earn 60% of their revenue from CATV and SATV customer bills. It's simply a fact and ad revenue makes up a very small portion of their overall revenue.

If that were true, WHY subject people to ads at all?
Certainly they could EXTRACT higher CATV fees if it was totally ad free.
CATV pays SOME of the production cost, and Some of the money CATV earns is from advertisers for inserted ads, that is shows are designed with a couple of blank spaces for the local station or cable provider to place ads they sold which was to help defray the local costs of broadcast or running the local cable plant.

the show itself is paid for by the network that orders episodes based on selling the remaining ad spaces.
certainly you can remember when a show or an actor did something controvertial which caused a sponser to with draw, sometimes killing an otherwise popular show in the process.

the content producer gets money from the network, from advertisers (for product placements), and if sucessful, reruns and DVD's, streaming fees, etc.
It takes ALL those things to make it a big financial sucess.
But it starts advertisers will to pay the networks and the network willing to buy shows quite a few of which will not last beyong a pilot plus 8 (about the minmum order for 1/2 hours because startup costs are so high) and it takes a network ad buy to get anything started.

The reason you only see five major companies at the top end is the networks won't throw money at a small company on their own, fearing they won't have the money or other resources to complete a project on time.



GlennAllen
Sunny with highs in the 80s
Premium
join:2002-11-17
Richmond, VA
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Verizon FiOS
reply to UncleDirtNap
The last report I saw said:

broadcast TV (networks/stations) -- about 90% of revenue was from advertising**
cable TV -- about 50% of revenue was from advertising
(**where else would they get money)

I can't say how accurate the report is, but I have no reason to dispute it... sounds "logical" to me.