 | | Oes Noes Now how will we justify our high prices for Ad placement. BooHoo.
Stop squeezing, there's no more blood in that stone.
Also, consumers are catching on the to double dipping of paying for TV and Watching Ads. | |
|
 | | | Re: Oes Noes So you're paying the cable company who doesn't want to pay for programming "because it's free over the air," and now the TV stations run ads and you don't like that either.
And you guys wonder why good programming is being sacrificed for crappy reality shows.
What's going to happen is that the retrans disputes will get more hard fought. TV programming and TV stations cost a lot of money to run. | |
|
| | | | Re: Oes Noes No. Absolutely no.
you have a choice, and it's not "cable company selected programming + all that entails" or nothing. It's not 1990 anymore. | |
|
| | | | What good programming? It's all going down the tube anyway (*rimshot*). I have cut down to basic programming (somehow without ESPN :P), there is hardly anything I want to watch on TV any more. | |
|
| | | Reviews:
 ·Charter
| Re: Oes Noes I shut my cable TV off because there was only 3 channels, with only a few shows out of the 150 or so that we got, and to get those channels, you need to get everything before them too, which was costing me $150 per month. thats $50 per channel, or about $35 per show we watched. It was not worth it anymore, since all TV has gone to shitty reality because the masses watch it, and its cheap to produce. I could not be happier. Thats $150 more per month that I can spend elsewhere on more quality entertainment. | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·Pioneer Wireless
| I understand the economics of the situation. But several somebodies are just being greedy.
Pay TV prices are rising much faster than inflation. Is it because the programs are getting more expensive as a whole, no, there is more reality crap than ever, scripted shows are few and far between and usually end up getting cancelled early on before they can gain any followers.
Networks are far too eager to pull the plug if a show doesn't have a big enough following.
But somehow Reality shows are everywhere, it's not cause they are any good. It's all just dramatized BS.
You can't even watch most of the networks now cause of this trash.
I've been voting with my wallet for years but it makes no difference.
I've got an antenna, XBMC and a DVD drive. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Oes Noes Why do you think Reality TV shows are on the rise? They are cheap. I've seen better production quality in YouTube videos than in most Reality TV shows.
The Internet isn't killing Cable TV, it's the content owners and they don't even know it. | |
|
| |  batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ | said by fifty nine:And you guys wonder why good programming is being sacrificed for crappy reality shows.
What happened was "stars" wanting a million dollars an episode; think way back to Susan Summers on "Three's Company". | |
|
| WHT
join:2010-03-26
Rosston, TX
kudos:5 | said by buzz_4_20:Stop squeezing, there's no more blood in that stone. Yeah...but the more you run over a dead cat in the road, the flatter it gets. | |
|
|  Anonymous_AnonymousPremium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
·Time Warner Cable
| said by buzz_4_20:Now how will we justify our high prices for Ad placement. BooHoo.
Stop squeezing, there's no more blood in that stone.
Also, consumers are catching on the to double dipping of paying for TV and Watching Ads.
not only that CBS ABC and fox are getting fees from cable and satellite users
--
Live Free or Die Hard... | |
|
|  SarickIt's Only LogicalPremium
join:2003-06-03
USA
3 edits | You're right, their next step is splitting the screen so adds are constantly displayed in banners the move around. What they need to do is stop double dipping or advertise by well placed promotions inside the content.
Example in a resent episode of Teenwolf a few well placed advertisements where placed in the show for icebreakers candy/mints.
These where incorporated into the story when one of the actors pulled them out and ate one in a stressful meeting. The camera zoomed in close at the package and made the product identification perfectly clear. There are other fine examples of this like the movie E.T. (REESE'S Pieces). The Show Knight Rider and even the cartoons we watch. The market promoted candy in cartoons like Gummie Bears. Doctor Who at one point created a craze for jelly babies! Willy and Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, The Coka Cola Kid are a few more examples of well placed advertisements into the plot.
This is how advertising should be done! Not in your face but incorporated into the plot as compulsive representation of the characters attitudes and desires.
Look at it from this perspective if a show has a hot car used in the plot people who are fans associate themselves with that product and the popularity of the show. It'll induce product interest from the fans.
WE DON'T NEED ADVERTISEMENT BREAKS WE JUST NEED BETTER WRITERS!
--
Sarick's Dungeon Clipart | |
|
| | batterupI Can Not Tell A Lie.Premium
join:2003-02-06
Netcong, NJ | Re: Oes Noes said by Sarick:Example in a resent episode of Teenwolf a few well placed advertisements where placed in the show for icebreakers candy/mints.
How about reality TV with ad placement?
| |
|
 FFHPremium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5 | Place shifting has been found legal before; Fox losing this This lawsuit tries to claim place shifting is illegal. That lawsuit was lost before over the Slingbox issue. Fox chances on winning this are extremely low. | |
|
|  DavidPremium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
kudos:84 | Re: Place shifting has been found legal before; Fox losing this I still have the sony LBF-10 unit that can allow me to watch tv on any desktop or laptop (or sony PSP) I choose. | |
|
 BoricuaPremium
join:2002-01-26
Sacto Sh*tty | What we want "We will continue to vigorously defend consumers’ right to choice and control over their viewing experience," Dish said in a statement.
And my "consumer's choice" is to NOT have to deal with stupid commercials, especially when (in an hour program) they are a total of about 20 minutes. That is WAY TOO MUCH selling for my taste.
--
Illegal aliens have always been a problem in the United States. Ask any Indian. Robert Orben
| |
|
| | | Re: What we want Are you willing to pay $20 per channel? That's what it will come down to. HBO has commercial free programming and that's what it costs ($17 on my provider). | |
|
| | | | Re: What we want Probably more like $5 for a network channel, but they get to force everyone to have it if they want service. Still, your point stands. All Dish is doing is forcing the networks to move to a carriage fee model vs a advertising funded model, and leaves us all paying the carriage fee even if we don't care for prime time network programming. | |
|
| | | | Really? People have been skipping commercials since the VCR days and the sky has not fallen. The ads are still watch when the program is aired so I don't see the big deal with skipping it after the fact. | |
|
| | | | Or, the economies that drive entertainment production just might need a readjustment to a shifting market. Maybe it's time for the entrainment production bubble to pop. | |
|
| |  firephotoFacts hurtPremium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA | said by fifty nine:Are you willing to pay $20 per channel? That's what it will come down to. HBO has commercial free programming and that's what it costs ($17 on my provider).
I guess I'll just have to point my antenna dish at the television channel's satellite they built and launched and put into orbit to broadcast their channel(s) to all their viewers. Oh wait, they don't have one of those..
Yes, it's quite obvious who the freeloaders are here.
--
Say no to astroturfing. go to their profile, start ignoring posts and ignoring what's not true. | |
|
| | | its about 29 minutes per hour of commercials on a popular show during primetime, and about 25 minutes elsewhere in an hour long timeslot. | |
|
| | SarickIt's Only LogicalPremium
join:2003-06-03
USA | Re: What we want They've even started cutting into the start and end of the shows to create more advertising space. Sometimes at the end of a show instead of doing a full screen credits it'll be split into two separate instances and start the intro of the next show or advertise while the credits roll at high rate.
It's all about greed and time management. Like I said in a previous post just incorporate product placement into the story. You can't cheat skip it with the DVR or overwrite it ever. It also has a higher attach rate!
--
Sarick's Dungeon Clipart | |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
1 recommendation | Can't wait for the day when broadcaster just have banners ads scrolling on the bottom of the content like they have those permanent logos they have now. MUCH more annoying than commercials, but stuff like this won't leave them a choice. Of course it won't be nothing but reality shows anyway since scripted shows won't be worth producing since there will be very little profit in them. Also kiss those 24 episode seasons good bye. Say hello to 16 episode seasons, so more reruns. Which is ok since they already paid for that content that would make them more ad money than having a new episode even if the ratings are lower. | |
|
| FFHPremium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5 | Re: Can't wait for the day said by BF69:when broadcaster just have banners ads scrolling on the bottom of the content like they have those permanent logos they have now. MUCH more annoying than commercials, but stuff like this won't leave them a choice.
I think you are right. The ads will be embedded in the content. And then no amount of pirating, torrenting, DVR'ing, fast forwarding will skip the ads.
--
The Nobama Clock
»goo.gl/DlUXaJ
| |
|
| |  dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Re: Can't wait for the day never see network bugs removed from even pir8 content.
--
Despises any post with strings. | |
|
| Reviews:
·Comcast
| Bring it!
I would love the motion picture and television industry to go belly up.
America spends way too much time watching instead of doing.
Besides, there is content galore on the Internet to keep me busy until I'm toes up on a slab.
Blob
--
I may have been born yesterday. But it wasn't at night. | |
|
| | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness | Re: Can't wait for the day said by workablob:Bring it!
I would love the motion picture and television industry to go belly up.
America spends way too much time watching instead of doing.
Besides, there is content galore on the Internet to keep me busy until I'm toes up on a slab.
Blob
You really need to think about what you said. Also if you think people are just going to make content for free without expecting some compensation you're dreaming. If the movie and TV industry went belly up the economy would collapse. Do you know how many people are employed directly or indirectly by the movie and TV industry? | |
|
| | | Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Can't wait for the day I'm not really talking about an overnight event. That would never happen.
But gradually over time it could happen without an economy ruining effect.
Back in ancient times entertainers were not worshiped like today.
There is so much talent out there in peope that are satisfied to do it for free or next to free.
Most of the real talent would do it for free if it came to that.
Creativity is not driven by money.
$.02
Blob
--
I may have been born yesterday. But it wasn't at night. | |
|
| | | | SarickIt's Only LogicalPremium
join:2003-06-03
USA | Re: Can't wait for the day The only time this would happen in the future is when gaming becomes so interactive and virtual that to succeed one becomes part of the entertainment. A fair example of future entertainment is the first Total Recall movie. Then the world itself would contain the advertisements injected into the private plot.
--
Sarick's Dungeon Clipart | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Can't wait for the day I'm not sure I can agree with that. Maybe, but I dunno.
Good hypothesis though for sure.
Thanks for your input.
Blob
--
I may have been born yesterday. But it wasn't at night. | |
|
|  ShadowMastrMaster Of All Shadows
join:2001-09-01
Fort Pierce, FL
1 recommendation | said by BF69:Also kiss those 24 episode seasons good bye. Say hello to 16 episode seasons, so more reruns.
24 episode seasons??? Where the hell you been? That died off YEARS ago. 13 episode seasons are the norm now. We get 4 shows, then a mid season break of 2-3 months, then 4 more, then another 2 months off, then the rest. THEN a year before the next 'season'. It's totally offensive to me. I've forgotten about more shows that I would like to watch because I can't be bothered to watch tv by my calendar.
TV always has been marginally stupid, but even if you find a good show, it's 55-60% content, and 45% advertising the same 3-4 commercials endlessly that get tuned out after the first viewing.
Yay short attention spans???
--
Follow Your Bliss -- Joseph Cambell
I reject your Reality and substitute my own! -- Adam Savage, Mythbuster | |
|
| | Product placement Ads are already embedded in all the programming and movies. Iron Man drives and Audi and S.H.I.L.D. | |
|
| BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness | Re: Product placement Expect A LOT more of that. | |
|
| | SarickIt's Only LogicalPremium
join:2003-06-03
USA | Re: Product placement Great that's how it should be done. | |
|
 plkPremium
join:2002-04-20
united state | To many ad's I wouldn't 2 or 3 ad's but sometimes you have a dozen or 6 every 5 minutes. I think they need to modify that model before we all skip the ad's | |
|
|
•••••••• |
| | FOX are idiots How is watching LIVE FOX programming using sling to my phone/tablet bad for FOX. Can some moron inside FOX explain this. Heck....FOX is getting my money from DISH. So why I cant sling the same to my phone & what FOX programms.
Or take the same FOX program that I have already paid FOX via DISH to watch it when ever I want.
Unless FOX comes out & say that you can watch all teh FOX programming without commercial...for this $$ directly paid to FOX bypassing all providers...FOX & All other should just STFU and enjoy my $$$ for what little programs I watch of theirs. HECK...I am also forced to pay their diluted FX channel & not watched FXX channel now.
Apparently FOX & such companies are also checking pirate sites like NETFIX...& since the piracy is down....probably is bugging them | |
|
| Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
 ·voip.ms
| Re: FOX are idiots The business term is "monetize", and what they are trying to do is:
1. Charge you a carriage fee passed along w/ a cable sub
2. Count the $$$ in advertising
3. Charge you yet again to watch that on your istuff or phone
4. Charge you to watch remotely
So you see they have 1/2 locked as long as you are a traditional cable sub and don't record. While that is where most people sit today, 3 and 4 are going to become the way we consume in the future so they are simply peeing on the new fire hydrants as to continue their revenue stream. In fact most 20 somethings have no plan on doing 1 or 2 ever, so in essence their business model is failing, the only question is how they convert and still not die because they all hold billion dollar sports commitments...
The bad news is the implementation which needs to protect 1/2 and "monetize" 3/4 neither of which is particularly clean or user-friendly. So people throw up their hands and say "I'm out". | |
|
BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness | You think retrans fees are high now Just wait until all the ad skippers kill of advertising revenue. HBO doesn't have ads. They also get $20 a month. You want ad free TV, well be prepared to pay A LOT for it. | |
|
| Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
·voip.ms
1 recommendation | Re: You think retrans fees are high now You are polling one datapoint, consider the following:
1. The average star makes 10x more per episode than 1980 with only a 3x inflation factor. So say that Don Johnson made $100k/episode doing Miami Vice, Charlie Sheen was making almost $2m/episode w/ syndication (which say Don Johnson never had in those days).
2. The kindle for a while came in ad-supported version which was 20% less than the ad-free version. So you could theorize that using say your datapoint, that ad-free TV should cost on average 20% more.
3, The current model is a socialist model, all or none. Cable companies argue this is most efficient, and this is most certainly 100% wrong, because given a basket the average person watches no less than 10 channels and as probably as many shows. Unbundling would quickly:
1. Destroy sports contracts which proobably cost you at least 30% of your cable bill and growing
2. Provide supply and demand for actors salaries (meaning they are paid way too much)
3. Eliminate unprofitable shows and channels. One would think they would just go belly up, but you would be wrong because most of them would simply move to an OTT model (stream directly).
4. Provide MORE choice, not less. Once you get to an OTT model, the distributors are cut out and can't control who gets seen.
5. Ads could come back as relevant. Once a niche player understands the clientele, they can target ads. No say put an advertisement for Purina Dog Chow on the Cat channel.
Case in point: Glenn Beck. I keep coming back to him as the wave of the future. Blaze TV is a channel on Roku, and even on some regular cable. Since GB left, he has made many times more $$$ going independent and since he has no corporate watchdogs he can basically behave as he wishes.
6. Freedom goes up, not down.
In any case cable is a failed model, it just has to unwind and that will mean sports empires will get dragged down or try to halt the change.
Eventually sports teams will smarten up and do away w/ windows and blackouts and determine it is more profitable to increase exposure rather than get Dallas to drop $1billion on a stadium, and charge for it. Live sports will continue to be targets for ads because they can put their breaks in there.... | |
|
|
|
