| |EdrickI aspire to tell the story of a lifetimePremium
Re: Let Canada do it first
said by desarollo:The unfortunate reality from someone who works in Network Television is that people want those shows. There's definitely a strong populus online that doesn't. However the people who are on sites like this to voice their opinion are usually of higher caliber and unfortunately in lower numbers. I run into this all the time when we try to pitch or create a show, people want mind numbing television. If we pitch a show it better me stupid, mind numbing and it's about the bizarre screwed up people as opposed to the content.
Imagine how good it would feel to tell TruTV to shove their scripted horse chip reality shows by removing it from what you pay.
Duck Dynasty anyone?
Independent Film & Broadcast Producer
| |DaMaGeINCThe Lan ManPremium
Re: Let Canada do it first
said by Edrick:If I could download whatever I wanted when I wanted it with no AD's and was cheap, I would pay for it. Unfortunately nothing like that exist. So I do it my way.
Except when we stop making content or funding content because no ones paying for advertising revenue or even for the content period. Unless you want your shows full of paid sponsor product placement.
I can explain it to you, but I cant understand it for you.
Santa Monica, CA
·Time Warner Cable
Re: Let Canada do it first Yes, they do.
Most sought-after content is discrete, unique and proprietary; it is not a commodity, you can't buy/rent/license the content from multiple sources, so the studio and network owners of said content may, I say *may* enjoy pricing power, given that the distributors get the blame in the court of public opinion, and the majority of households just shrug and auto-pay.
Inconsequential, duplicative, ephemeral content, i.e. "News" and "Weather", (emphasis on quotes) is slightly more subject to market forces, which is why you can point to the former exception of The Weather Channel.
Not going to happen They would have to have all the networks agree to it, each package for example, Disney owns 15-20 channels, they pay Disney so much $$ for their channels, Disney would have to break it down by channel and the most expensive would be ESPN then Disney Chn. and so on, your bill would get larger for less channels, You all forget Cable, Dish, do not control the Channels, of Price & Placement on the Line-up, the Networks do.
looking forward to it I hardly watch the damn thing anyway. If we only had to pay for the few channels we watch I'm betting we save money, and if they decided to charge more for less, that would be enough to get me to just cancel it.