 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to pnh102
Re: Classic Arms Race said by pnh102:said by JigglyWiggly:so bascially just torrent it
seriously fawk off comcast That's really what it is going to come to. Yes that's it because people that make the TV shows you love( and you love them or you wouldn't bother to DVR them ) are supposed to work for free. This is the attitude people have. TV should be free and have no commercials. And this actually only work in fantasyland. TV isn't a right people. |
|
|
|
| said by BF69:said by pnh102:said by JigglyWiggly:so bascially just torrent it
seriously fawk off comcast That's really what it is going to come to. Yes that's it because people that make the TV shows you love( and you love them or you wouldn't bother to DVR them ) are supposed to work for free. This is the attitude people have. TV should be free and have no commercials. And this actually only work in fantasyland. TV isn't a right people. Yes they should work for free. Welcome to the 21century. |
|
mogamer
join:2011-04-20
Royal Oak, MI
1 edit | reply to BF69
said by BF69:said by pnh102:said by JigglyWiggly:so bascially just torrent it
seriously fawk off comcast That's really what it is going to come to. Yes that's it because people that make the TV shows you love( and you love them or you wouldn't bother to DVR them ) are supposed to work for free. This is the attitude people have. TV should be free and have no commercials. And this actually only work in fantasyland. TV isn't a right people. You act as if commercials are the only way these companies make money. Throw in product placement, rentals, dvd sales, streaming (often with unskipable ads), on demand and transmission fees, and there is plenty of money being brought in. And networks are even getting a cut of the action from network affilates re-trans fees (which is pretty poor). Networks and studios aren't in the red (well except for that pathetic OWN), so how is skipping commercials (which everyone who dvrs currently does) hurting their bottom line?
Actually this will help the economy. Tivo and WMC tuners makers will certainly do better! |
|
 BarmatUhmmm Floor Pie
join:2000-11-01
Livermore, CA
 ·Comcast
| Nail on head. 
Just look back through history and new technologies always threaten existing business models. What the above posters intend is to prevent innovation to protect outdated business models. Should Henry Ford have been prevented from producing the model T thus keeping the horse and buggy businesses going?
Either change and adapt to new tech or become obsolete. |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | reply to BF69
said by BF69:Yes that's it because people that make the TV shows you love( and you love them or you wouldn't bother to DVR them ) are supposed to work for free. And yet, it works just fine for off-air TV and shows that cable content providers stream directly off their websites.
--
Romney 2012 - Put an adult in charge. |
|
 jslikThat just happenedPremium
join:2006-03-17 | reply to mogamer
said by mogamer:Throw in product placement, rentals, dvd sales, streaming (often with unskipable ads), on demand and transmission fees, and there is plenty of money being brought in. You bring up a good point. I am wondering when Comcast (and others) starts disabling fast forward/skipping on more on-demand content, and then including recorded programming. It seems like the next logical step.
--
If they told you wolverines make good house pets, would you believe them? |
|
 RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | reply to BF69
said by BF69:said by pnh102:said by JigglyWiggly:so bascially just torrent it
seriously fawk off comcast That's really what it is going to come to. Yes that's it because people that make the TV shows you love( and you love them or you wouldn't bother to DVR them ) are supposed to work for free. This is the attitude people have. TV should be free and have no commercials. And this actually only work in fantasyland. TV isn't a right people. You are confusing two separate issues.
The advertisers pay for the right to offer their ads to the viewers. That pays for the cost of making and airing the show.
OTOH: Once it is aired, the viewer has the right to NOT watch the commercial (by DVR'ing and skipping past it when viewing) or getting up and leaving the room until the show resumes (like in the era before being able to record and needing to watch "in real time").
The Commercials pay for the show and for the show offering them for my viewing. That payment does NOT pay me to actually watch them (especially when the same ad runs more than once during the same "commercial break" and/or more than once in the show (ie: airs again in a subsequent commercial break). Once the commercial has aired, the advertiser has gotten what they paid for - the right to allow me to see their ad. They have NOT paid for forcing me to actually watch it. If they want to force me to actually watch it, they need to come up with some way to pay me for that right.
The closest to that method would be running ads in movie theaters where they first fill up the auditorium and then refuse admission once the ads start (or run the ads over the movie screens/monitors on a airplane). In either case you have a captive audience. |
|
| reply to mogamer
said by mogamer:You act as if commercials are the only way these companies make money. Throw in product placement, rentals, dvd sales, streaming (often with unskipable ads), on demand and transmission fees, and there is plenty of money being brought in. And networks are even getting a cut of the action from network affilates re-trans fees (which is pretty poor). Networks and studios aren't in the red (well except for that pathetic OWN), so how is skipping commercials (which everyone who dvrs currently does) hurting their bottom line?
Actually this will help the economy. Tivo and WMC tuners makers will certainly do better!
Tivo has ads too. |
|
Reviews:
 ·ooma
·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to BF69
Actually, broadcast (OTA) tv networks such as CBS, NBC, ABC, UPN/WPIX have granted FCC spectrum purposed so these companies act in the PUBLIC INTEREST.. several of these companies have since merged with cable-tv providers and have had their mission blurred with profit motive. If you actually go back and read the 1934 fcc telecom act and ammendments that enabled radio & tv to flourish you'd see they have a mandate to offer these services FREE to the public. The contract tends to break down in the 21st century because of the internet and peer to peer distribution so that advertisements which pay for the content get peeled (scene term: RIP[PED] from the commercials). Comcast has drawn a line in the sand with their pay for usage based billing on internet access which will likely end up in court because it supports a drastic change in the terms of service offered by the nearest & biggest competitor AT&T. Telecom services which were expensive and costly have come down only to be brought right back up with usage based billing.. consumers wont' stand for it and the tension is already building for years.. one day will hit in a massive wave of congresional action and/or class action lawsuits to bring about reforms. Where does that leave these networks who will be wholly owned by cable-tv companies or content providers such as Comcast, Disney and others? On a collision course with the original intent of the law which could & should get those fcc OTA frequencies yanked if not held up to it's part of the bargain which in all fairness tends to be a raw deal these days, but in part is their fault for not evolving the business model to begin with. |
|
 TamaraBQuestion The Current ParadigmPremium
join:2000-11-08
Da Bronx
·Optimum Online
 ·Clearwire Wireless
| reply to BF69
said by BF69: .... TV should be free and have no commercials. And this actually only work in fantasyland. TV isn't a right people.
Excuse me, but what's "free" about constantly escalating cable bills? "Pay TV" should not be allowed to show commercials. It's why I refuse to have cable TV at home. If I want to pay for content; like Netflix, or Hulu, I don't ever want to see commercials. Why is it OK to pay for cable TV twice? Once by the bill, and again by commercials? That's a ripoff I won't subscribe to.
Bob
--
"Remember, remember the fifth of November.
Gunpowder, Treason and Plot.
I see no reason why Gunpowder Treason
Should ever be forgot."
"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people"
|
|
 VanPremium
join:2009-07-08
New Orleans, LA | reply to BF69
said by BF69:TV should be free and have no commercials.
Oh well, let them starve while I save money. |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | reply to BF69
Once again, watching pay networks on your dime that have already been paid for and are paid for by your subscriber fees being watched later at some other time by you does NOT mean "Free" nor does it mean that they should be allowed to order you to watch their commercials.
Next thing you'll see is DVR's that unless you pay an extra fee won't allow you to FF or skip commercials!
The answer will be to build standalone recorders that YOU control instead of the Cable company.... but of course they'll probably ban cablecards and decoders to make that impossible.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
|
|
