dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
26
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

1 recommendation

88615298 (banned) to jfleni

Member

to jfleni

Re: TV Brick wall

said by jfleni :

Basically the situation will never change until the political climate changes, possibly in 2014, probably in 2016. The mouth-breathers in the House are receiving carloads of graft from the TV/media kings, who, along with commercial-loving local plutocrats everywhere definitely want no change, so the outlook will stay poor for a while, unless some "killer app" appears on line and captivates everybody, which is quite unlikely.

The republicans would never pass any kind of regulation that would help thing and they don't need any payola from the big media companies to do it. It's in their nature to shun regulation. Add in enough Dems that will gladly take cash for votes from big media and nothing will change.

The only thing that will work is people cutting the cord. That requires sacrifice which people these days refuse to do. So nothing changes and the same lazy fucks that refuse to sacrifice for change complain away. I'm starting to not feel sorry for their $100+ cable bills they can blame themselves.
millerja01a
join:2005-10-03
Durham, NC

millerja01a

Member

There is a political and user component to this. We see it in the wireless space as the big 4 have now seen that voice/SMS is legacy and all ppl need now is data on their mobile tech.

They've set the market at $10/1GB and they're spending huge amts to convince ppl they need buckets of it delivered at "4G" speeds.

We all know how that works.

The same will happen to pay TV. As the viewer base becomes more tech savvy, they will find low cost methods to watch the content they want.

An upstart can find many ways to provide "just enough" desirable content. That's Amazon/Netflix/Hulu/Apple's model. "Just enough" content so that ppl will find it a value to pay for it.

The Google fiber project is a clear sign of what Mountain View, CA is up to. Start small and learn your lessons, execute well and grow.

Build your own infrastructure, then you can do whatever you want.
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

elray

Member

said by millerja01a:

...

The same will happen to pay TV. As the viewer base becomes more tech savvy, they will find low cost methods to watch the content they want.

An upstart can find many ways to provide "just enough" desirable content. That's Amazon/Netflix/Hulu/Apple's model. "Just enough" content so that ppl will find it a value to pay for it.

The Google fiber project is a clear sign of what Mountain View, CA is up to. Start small and learn your lessons, execute well and grow.

Build your own infrastructure, then you can do whatever you want.

Google Fiberhood is already deployed in KC. Pay-TV costs $125/month.
Nothing to see there.

The 3rd-rate content owners originally sold to Netflix for cheap. The 2nd and 1st-rate took notice. That ain't happening again.

Those comfortable with the existing distribution model aren't going to bite the hands that feed them by starting a race to the bottom, and most are smart enough not to attempt to do distribution themselves.
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned)

Member

said by elray:

Those comfortable with the existing distribution model aren't going to bite the hands that feed them by starting a race to the bottom, and most are smart enough not to attempt to do distribution themselves.

The same stupid mindset thought it was genus idea to kill off the VCR. How would their businesses be today if they had actually won their case?
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

elray

Member

said by 88615298:

said by elray:

Those comfortable with the existing distribution model aren't going to bite the hands that feed them by starting a race to the bottom, and most are smart enough not to attempt to do distribution themselves.

The same stupid mindset thought it was genus idea to kill off the VCR. How would their businesses be today if they had actually won their case?

I wasn't complimenting their business acumen, only explaining it.

Companies are willing to take risks, but they do so with the intent of making greater profits, not exposing themselves to headaches for less money, which is the outlook for anything that resembles the ala-carte fantasy model that forum members pine for.

There are a few ways to do new distribution that are win-win for all the players and the consumer, but that would require a buy-in from all stakeholders, and that's like herding cats to take a swim. Ain't gonna happen.
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned)

Member

They thought home video wasn't going to make money either. Now they wouldn't even exist without it. It took then over a decade to embrace it. I remember even into the mid 80's you could really only rent VHS tapes as buying them cost $100 or more. That was to prevent people from buying. And people complain about a $25 blu-ray. As soon as they lowered the price to where people would buy these companies made BILLIONS. They could have made BILLION for over the previous decade if they hadn't been so bull headed. Now surely those guys are dead or retired and you'd think this next generation of media CEOs would get it. I guess we'll have to wait until these media companies are run by guys who are currently in their teens or 20's.
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

elray

Member

said by 88615298:

They thought home video wasn't going to make money either. Now they wouldn't even exist without it. It took then over a decade to embrace it. I remember even into the mid 80's you could really only rent VHS tapes as buying them cost $100 or more. That was to prevent people from buying. And people complain about a $25 blu-ray. As soon as they lowered the price to where people would buy these companies made BILLIONS. They could have made BILLION for over the previous decade if they hadn't been so bull headed. Now surely those guys are dead or retired and you'd think this next generation of media CEOs would get it. I guess we'll have to wait until these media companies are run by guys who are currently in their teens or 20's.

Again, I concur. There are a couple ways to change the model, such that all parties concerned win - consumers get what they want, and all the players make more money.

But neither the customers, nor the industry are going to agree to such a move, as each has their own exclusive vision of the future.

It isn't a question of the age of the management.