dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
28
share rss forum feed


skeechan
Ai Otsukaholic
Premium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FiOS
reply to pnh102

Re: MSOs are afraid of being relevant again

It doesn't look like Apple was looking for direct carrier deals. I thought they were looking to partner with MSOs to stream the channels to Apple TV, just like Cox already does with their iPad app.

If it is direct producer deals, MSOs can cry exclusivity all they want, like Dish Network did over AMC, but what are they going to do? They can get away with telling AMC no. But they can't get away with telling AMC, USA, TNT, HBO, ESPN, HGTV, FX, and everyone else no. Once one domino falls, like Disney, the MSOs have lost this war.

Meanwhile for the content creators this other model would simply be a NEW revenue stream. They don't have to make more than they get from the MSOs because that revenue would be in addition to what they get from the MSOs.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
said by skeechan:

It doesn't look like Apple was looking for direct carrier deals. I thought they were looking to partner with MSOs to stream the channels to Apple TV, just like Cox already does with their iPad app.

The problem here is that instead of going into a new (and very small, as per my previous post) market, they are now competing with every pay tv provider who offers a similar app. They'd also be doing it at a disadvantage because for the Apple service to work, a separate piece of dedicated hardware would need to be purchased, as contrasted to something like the Cox or Comcast app, which runs right on an iPad that many people already own.
said by skeechan:

If it is direct producer deals, MSOs can cry exclusivity all they want, like Dish Network did over AMC, but what are they going to do? They can get away with telling AMC no. But they can't get away with telling AMC, USA, TNT, HBO, ESPN, HGTV, FX, and everyone else no. Once one domino falls, like Disney, the MSOs have lost this war.

This could also go the other way. People who have Dish but who want to watch AMC content are more likely to simply switch to a provider which shows AMC.
said by skeechan:

Meanwhile for the content creators this other model would simply be a NEW revenue stream. They don't have to make more than they get from the MSOs because that revenue would be in addition to what they get from the MSOs.

The problem here again is that the cord cutter market is still very small. Even if every cord-cutter were to subscribe to these kinds of services, the total money gained would be tiny compared to what the content providers get from the pay tv providers. Also look at it from this way:

What if a network like AMC decided to offer a $10 or $15 a month streaming service that allowed for people with no cable service to watch current AMC content? I doubt that the pay tv providers to which AMC is currently joined at the hip would like that very much, as this gives pay tv subscribers a nice incentive to drop pay tv service.
--
Romney/Ryan 2012 - Put a couple of mature adults in charge.