 
Anon645
@rogers.com
 from:
GOLFnSUN 
| Any other solution? I'm wondering how they will make tv shows profitable in the near future, with everyone wanting them for free online without commercial breaks. Not sure if there is a viable Business model aside from more product placement, more expensive Internet connection or cable bill. Bottom banner ads maybe while the
shows is playing? | |
|  | 
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| Re: Any other solution? said by Anon645 :
I'm wondering how they will make tv shows profitable in the near future, with everyone wanting them for free online without commercial breaks.
Note EVERYONE watches TV on their system.
I cant stand watching TV on my PC. Must have couch 
--
My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it. He said, If I have a chance to invade if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it.I'm going to get everything passed that I want.
G W BUSH | |
| | | 
baineschile
2600
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | Re: Any other solution? Solution: put a couch in front of your computer. | |
| | | |
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| Re: Any other solution? said by baineschile :Solution: put a couch in front of your computer.  too much work
Id rather just burn it to CD and watch it on my big screen | |
| | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | Re: Any other solution? And how do you get the content to burn to a "CD"? Whether you watch the content on your computer, or transport it to your TV via whatever mechanism you choose, the method to obtain the content is the same. | |
| | | | | |
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| Re: Any other solution? said by openbox9 :And how do you get the content to burn to a "CD"? Whether you watch the content on your computer, or transport it to your TV via whatever mechanism you choose, the method to obtain the content is the same. I simply download it and burn it to CD. Let's not beat around the bush, here. It's that simple.
I like to watch TV from the comfort of my couch and not from the computer chair in my office.
--
My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it. He said, If I have a chance to invade if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it.I'm going to get everything passed that I want.
G W BUSH | |
| | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
 ·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Any other solution? The original question still remains. How will content continue to be developed if nobody is willing to pay for it, either directly, or indirectly via advertisements? Where you watch the content is irrelative. I happen to watch mine on my HTPC that's connected to my main TV, but that doesn't change the economics. | |
| | | | | | | |
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| Re: Any other solution? said by openbox9 :The original question still remains. How will content continue to be developed if nobody is willing to pay for it, either directly, or indirectly via advertisements? Where you watch the content is irrelative. I happen to watch mine on my HTPC that's connected to my main TV, but that doesn't change the economics. Im not here to argue how programmers are going to make money. I simply stated that i prefer to watch my TV from a couch either via STB, burned CD, or any other method. The big issue in this thread is that people dont like to watch ads, and you know what, it's not my problem when when programmers scramble to figure out how to deliver content while making money. I understand they have to show ads, but i dont find one fucking difference in me burning a CD of a show or fast forwarding through my recorded DVR stuff. Either way, Im gonna try be aviod watching Ads.
Tell me, when the advertisements come on your TV, do you get up and leave the room? if so, then i see no difference in what you and I do.
like the RIAA, the producers of TV shows need to find other means of making money, even if it's product placement in shows.
--
My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it. He said, If I have a chance to invade if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it.I'm going to get everything passed that I want.
G W BUSH | |
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Any other solution? said by hopeflicker :I simply stated that i prefer to watch my TV from a couch I believe that's a given for just about anyone.said by hopeflicker :I understand they have to show ads, but i dont find one fucking difference in me burning a CD of a show or fast forwarding through my recorded DVR stuff. And I never said there was a difference. I was merely trying to follow the OP's post.said by hopeflicker :Tell me, when the advertisements come on your TV, do you get up and leave the room? Nope, I don't watch advertisements  said by hopeflicker :like the RIAA, the producers of TV shows need to find other means of making money, even if it's product placement in shows. I won't dispute that. The obvious method is to charge for the content, but we already know how well that will work. A big swath of consumers have become accustomed to free, and it will be next to impossible to change that short of ramming it down their throats, e.g. forced ads via IPTV streams. | |
| | | | | | | | | | 
TheHelpful1
Premium
join:2002-01-11
Upper Marlboro, MD
| Re: Any other solution? said by openbox9 :Nope, I don't watch advertisements Me neither - My HTPC has beyond TV and it auto-bookmarks before and after recordings and can even burn them to DVD that way
Off-topic, but I just wanted to add that.
--
"My weakness is that I care too much" | |
| | | | | | | | Desdinova
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD
| "How will content continue to be developed if nobody is willing to pay for it"
Product placement. Many companies are happy to pay productions to put their products in the shows and the economics are pretty sound. The content creators get the money they need to create and the advertisers get their products featured.
A company COULD pay up to $250,000 for a single 30 second spot (commercials are on a frame-by-frame basis the most expensive filmmaking process out there) plus the cost of placing the ad and it might run sporadically for a few weeks. OR they could pay between $20,000 and $200,000 (with no placement costs) to have their product placed in a film, TV show, video game and the product is there forever. They might not even have to pay in cash; they simply provide their products free to the production (Apple LOVES doing this which is why so many films feature Apple computers and iPhones).
This works out well for the production company (in providing much needed financial resources) as well as the advertiser. The only potential loser is the delivery agent who is no longer getting paid to air the ads.
Smaller, local companies probably can't afford to pay for product placement and they're the folks that have a greater need for the traditional delivery methods. My guess is cable, broadcast, and satellite will need to seriously scale back the cost of buying airtime and create a better value for placing ad content on them. | |
| | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Any other solution? Product placement is one means of generating the capital necessary for production. It may work for low budget sitcoms or some of the crappy reality shows, but for more of the high budget productions, I'd be curious if product placement revenue is sufficient. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Desdinova
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD
| Re: Any other solution? It should still work well, once more companies embrace the advantages of the model. A high-budget show typically means a highly watched show and the cost for product placement rises appropriately. There are also tiers for participation: $250,000 gets you ninety seconds of background time, $500,000 gets you background time and use by a supporting character, $750,000 gets you close-ups of Johnny Depp eating your potato ships throughout the entire episode, etc. Sell ten of the $750,000 packages and you can easily finance several episodes of even the biggest budget show.
E.T. probably did more for Reese's Pieces than all of their broadcast spots combined. | |
| | | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Any other solution? Then at what point does product placement become more annoying and burdensome than 18 minutes of advertisements per 60 minute episode? Personally, I'd rather see advertisements every 15 minutes than products blatantly strewn around the set of a show. At least I can do something about the ads... | |
| | | | | | | | | | Desdinova
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD
| Re: Any other solution? That's easy to answer. The eighteen commercials you suggest completely break the action and halt the story being watched. I suspect you're more concerned about framing the action more on the product than the story itself, and I agree with you that if such a thing were to happen (say a close-up of a Lays bag filling the screen while we only hear dialogue from offscreen) then that would be annoying and distracting.
But if the content creators use a little creative judgment, I don't see how it would be any more annoying or burdensome than just living in the civilized world. When you walk into a 7-11 and see all the products around you, does their presence strike you as distracting? If you have a friend who's eating from a bag of Lay's potato chips, would you insist they turn the package away from you so you don't see the label? We're constantly surrounded by products and it strikes me as unrealistic for any show to NOT have these products lying around.
When Castaway came out, a friend of mine was foaming at the mouth at the presence of Fed Ex in the film. So I asked him if it would have been somehow better if the film had contained the same level of saturation with a completely fictional company (like UBS or Federal Couriers). To me that would have been MORE distracting as it would clearly put the action Somewhere Else and not in my world. I'm willing to bet that if you glance around the room you're sitting in, you'll see quite a few commercial products. Why should it be any more distracting or disturbing if a fictional depiction of you glancing around the same room in a film or TV show ALSO contains these products? | |
| | | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: Any other solution? said by Desdinova :But if the content creators use a little creative judgment, I don't see how it would be any more annoying or burdensome than just living in the civilized world. I like to watch TV for entertainment and a short break from reality. Your suggestions start removing that separation.said by Desdinova :I'm willing to bet that if you glance around the room you're sitting in, you'll see quite a few commercial products. Why should it be any more distracting or disturbing if a fictional depiction of you glancing around the same room in a film or TV show ALSO contains these products? I conducted a quick test from my couch in my living room where I'm currently sitting. I currently see two "commercial labels"; my Sony TV and my 2-year old son's inflatable Publix soccer ball. If product placement isn't any more intrusive than that, then I won't have a problem. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Desdinova
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD | Re: Any other solution? Fair enough! | |
| | | | | | | | | techygeek
join:2008-04-30
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Optimum Online
1 edit | said by Desdinova :"How will content continue to be developed if nobody is willing to pay for it" Product placement. Many companies are happy to pay productions to put their products in the shows and the economics are pretty sound. The content creators get the money they need to create and the advertisers get their products featured. I'm no expert, I would have to have watched every show to be one but I think they already use this in bulk.. when a show is filmed in front of a Starbucks, do you think there's no kickbacks or someone's eating Ben & Jerry's ice cream. I think that if I had a 10 million dollar cost to satisfy on the creation of a film, I would look thru the footage and get every dollar I can or consider editing in other places, companies, etc. who would be willing to pay but I think this is the cost of production of the show itself.
I mean, this may or may not be so with something like, the news but probably all the time with creation of shows, movies, etc. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Desdinova
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD
| Re: Any other solution? They almost certainly paid to have their item / brand used in the content. Once more companies realize the long term benefits in such placement, they'll start participating in greater frequency and that should bring more money in for the production company.
Ironically, the amount allocated by the company for marketing should roughly stay the same as they roll money normally spent on less efficient advertising models into the more efficient product placement model. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
rjdriver
@cox.net
| Don't worry, you'll have ads on the TV shows that play over the Internet. That's inevitable. Whether you'll be able to DVR them and play later without commercials will be a matter of the technology available to beat or defeat that. I suspect that will be a moving target.
But the bigger issue here is whether the TV networks and their comglomerate owners will be happy with JUST the ad revenue. For the past 25 years or so(except for the 20 million or so gettting their TV over the air) they have been getting paid at both ends: advertisers (directly) and viewers (through the cable, FIOS, and satellite rebroadcasters). They won't be happy with only half that pie.
Eventually you will see similar deals cut for TV on the Net. Whether it will take the form of subscriptons to Hulu, TV.com, etc, or download caps with fees per MB or GB for over the cap usage, or some other novel billing plan, they will find a way to get us to pay to watch commercially supported TV.
| |
| | | | | | | techygeek
join:2008-04-30
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
3 edits | said by hopeflicker :said by openbox9 :And how do you get the content to burn to a "CD"? Whether you watch the content on your computer, or transport it to your TV via whatever mechanism you choose, the method to obtain the content is the same. I simply download it and burn it to CD. Let's not beat around the bush, here. It's that simple. I like to watch TV from the comfort of my couch and not from the computer chair in my office. But you have to give up your computer so it can play on the TV. BTW, I have a PC hooked up to my TV via S-Video, have had it for years.. great for games like Tomb Raider where the big screen does it justice even if reg TV is only about 640x480 but it does waste a PC.
Also a standalone player doesn't use the power a PC uses, who wants to burn up 400w to play a dvd on their TV. | |
| | | | | | |
Master19536
@pldt.net | You can try using HDMI cables, ethernet cables (if your tv and pc support these connections) or RCA cables (if your pc have a tv tuner adapter.
It's always better to watch the TV "from the comfort of your couch"! | |
| | | | | 
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN | Why isn't the tv hooked up to the computer? | |
| | | | | | | | | | | |
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| said by insomniac84 :Why isn't the tv hooked up to the computer? computer is on the other side of the house. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| Re: Any other solution? yeah, im aware of these. If i was to ever go this route i'd go hard wired.
--
My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it. He said, If I have a chance to invade if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it.I'm going to get everything passed that I want.
G W BUSH | |
| | | | | | | | | 
Vertickle
join:2003-08-05
Madison, AL
·Knology
1 edit | Re: Any other solution? said by hopeflicker :yeah, im aware of these. If i was to ever go this route i'd go hard wired. That would be the preferred method. What are you using at the TV to play the "videos" you burned to a "CD?"
Edit* Fat fingers... | |
| | | | | | | | | |
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
2 edits | Re: Any other solution? said by Vertickle :said by hopeflicker :yeah, im aware of these. If i was to ever go this route i'd go hard wired. That would be the preferred method. What are you using at the TV to play the "videos" you burned to a "CD?" Edit* Fat fingers... Preferred? I prefer to watch them on my big screen. When i bought my plasma i really didnt research them and kinda burned myself. I ended up getting a EDTV »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced-d···levision and not a true HDTV. Anyway, i have a stand alone DVD player that plays many different formats (i.e. DIVX, MPEG, etc). This makes it easy so that i dont have to do any time consuming conversions.
However, most of the time, and dont get me wrong, i record all of my shows via my providers DVR. It's just i'll get what i missed via online.
edit: EDTV's are equivalent to DVD quality. And yes, im kicking myself for this subpar purchase. oh well, this was 4-5 years ago.
--
My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it. He said, If I have a chance to invade if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it.I'm going to get everything passed that I want.
G W BUSH | |
| | | | | | | | | |
Vertickle
join:2003-08-05
Madison, AL
·Knology
| Re: Any other solution? I meant to say that hard wiring the connection between the Pc and TV would be the preferred or recommended method.
You might want to try burning the files to DVD instead of CDs. You wouldn't have to compress everything as much. Unless you're downloading 600m files that is.
EDTV huh? Poor guy. :P | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | compton
join:2002-02-08
Brooklyn, NY
| said by hopeflicker
Anyway, i have a stand alone DVD player that plays many different formats (i.e. DIVX, MPEG, etc). This makes it easy so that i dont have to do any time consuming conversions.
[/BQUOTE :What model DVD player do you have? I have been looking for a DVD player that can play diffrent formats like divx, mpeg and avi, and I haven't found one. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
1 edit | Re: Any other solution? This one is similar to mine:
Playback Formats: DVD, DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD+R, DVD+RW, CD, CD-R, CD-RW, MP3, WMA, JPEG, DivX
»www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a···82676105
This one almost plays every fromat:
»www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a···82117304
-----------------------------------
in fact, just look through this list of DVDs players and look at the playback formats:
»www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi···&x=0&y=0
--
My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it. He said, If I have a chance to invade if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it.I'm going to get everything passed that I want.
G W BUSH | |
| | | | | | | | 
antdude
A Ninja Ant
Premium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
| Or use a notebook/laptop? | |
| | | | | | | | | Mark F
join:2007-08-01
Fort Wayne, IN
| Do most people have room for a couch in front of their computer? Or, a recliner? And, how do you reach the mouse and keyboard or watch something lying down?
I watch TV on my PC, but only if it's something I can't watch on a cable channel- like a show I miss, forget to record, and is not On Demand. Or, most classic TV programing and some hard-to-find movies.
Mark F. | |
| | | zod5000
join:2003-10-21
Edmonton, AB
·TELUS
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by hopeflicker :said by Anon645 :
I'm wondering how they will make tv shows profitable in the near future, with everyone wanting them for free online without commercial breaks.
Note EVERYONE watches TV on their system. I cant stand watching TV on my PC. Must have couch most computers come with dual video outputs now. so you can plug your computer into your tv. the more people that figure that out, the worse cable companies are going to be.
You watch older shows from the 60s-90s and the commericals per actually gradually increase every decade, to the point where almost 1/3 of a show is now commericals. The tv channels keep making their problem worse, because they're pushing people past acceptable commerical tolerance.
It's really wierd too. Cable companies used to relay signals, but now tv channels charge cable companies to air their signals.
With the internet, isn't it leading to cutting out the middle man. They've done it on phones, with alot of companies offering digital phones. Internet gets faster and better, tv companies will be able to stream their tv channels in high quality to consumers.
you'd have a wider audience, since there would be no additional costs to the consumer.
tv stations aren't going to learn though.. oh we down on advertising revenue, lets stick in more commericials! | |
| | | | puck0114
join:2005-12-24
Washington, DC | Re: Any other solution? My laptop came HDMI enabled. I downloaded ZV's Zinc and get all my VOD from there. Heck, I'm looking forward to being able to get rid of my cable TV entirely here in a couple of years. | |
| | | |
Funnyppl
@comcast.net
| So the one guy who does not want to hook PC to TV is the minority in this forum, but overall the majority via consumers.
For Internet TV to really take off the experience needs to be as easy or easier then grabbing TV remote, turning power on and flipping the channels for it to be mass adopted. Hulu does keep killing things like PS3 and Boxee access because they somewhat replicate the ease of use like a TV set.
For me I am with the majority here as I bought a Mac Mini, sat it in my entertainment system, took a VGA wire and connected Mac Mini to LCD TV; audio out of Mini into stereo system. Use a wireless hand held mouse as a remote. That's my solution, but everyone has their own, yet most do not and will not until it's TV easy! | |
| | | | |
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA | Re: Any other solution? you cant say Im the minority and you're the majority.
You would need a poll to determine who prefers to watch TV shows on their PC or TV. | |
| | | | | |
Funnyppl
@comcast.net
| Re: Any other solution? Based on the comments amongst this thread it seems you are, but only in this thread.
That is your preference and everyone here seems to want to change such for you. Which is a bit silly ... that's what you prefer!
For me it's a matter of cost(just pay $50 for Internet) and principle(hated paying for things I did not watch) that I have not subscribe to cable TV in years (not a sports fan so, Hulu and it's ilk are great for). | |
| | | | techygeek
join:2008-04-30
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
| I could see broadcasters offering this option as long as they are also making a profit to stream their content to cable operators but why would they just send their stream out on the internet for nothing when cable companies will pay them for it.
Maybe im wrong but I think it's economics 101, I may not know why and how and please feel free to tell me if you think i'm wrong but some how, some way, the bill will land in someones lap and if no one else is paying for it; the customers.. probably in the form of a higher cost for internet access. | |
| | | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD | a couch AND a big screen.
I have no desire to watch hi-res TV on a 20 something inch screen. | |
| | | 
maartena
Stacked.
Premium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
| said by hopeflicker :said by Anon645 :
I'm wondering how they will make tv shows profitable in the near future, with everyone wanting them for free online without commercial breaks.
Note EVERYONE watches TV on their system. I cant stand watching TV on my PC. Must have couch Yeah... and I just bought a DVD player which plays video from USB sticks. Technology is moving forward as well, and is making it more and more easier to play content on your TV.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" | |
| |
NoGustoTVAds
@holdenandrew.com
| Here's a thought. Put the ads as a scrolling text underneath the show (not in the show, but under) like one of those stock tickers. Since it is flash based, the user can click it to see what it is. I think this is good since the cable co and Hollywood will still get paid, and the viewers won't have their TV programs stopped or paused because of some commercial. Of course this commercial ticker should not be too big that the TV show looks over stretched and ugly. Also it should not cover subtitles like Veoh.com does with some of the fansubs. | |
| | |
hopeflicker
Capitalism breeds greed
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
| Re: Any other solution? said by NoGustoTVAds :
Here's a thought. Put the ads as a scrolling text underneath the show (not in the show, but under) like one of those stock tickers. Since it is flash based, the user can click it to see what it is. I think this is good since the cable co and Hollywood will still get paid, and the viewers won't have their TV programs stopped or paused because of some commercial. Of course this commercial ticker should not be too big that the TV show looks over stretched and ugly. Also it should not cover subtitles like Veoh.com does with some of the fansubs.
that would be quite a distraction. The ads that they have already on some shows advertising other TV shows bug the crap out of me.
--
My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it. He said, If I have a chance to invade if I had that much capital, I'm not going to waste it.I'm going to get everything passed that I want.
G W BUSH | |
| | 
CalMark
join:2002-12-11
Fishers, IN
| Yeah, how about providing them "commercial free" to paid subscibers, and "with commercials" to the the freeby viewers. Then the subscription fees will pay for the lack of commercials. Er... uh, wait a sec, oh yeah, that is how "cable tv" started to begin with and look how that ended up. Ahh, nevermind.... forget that idea.... | |
| | SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| said by Anon645 :
I'm wondering how they will make tv shows profitable in the near future, with everyone wanting them for free online without commercial breaks. Not sure if there is a viable Business model aside from more product placement, more expensive Internet connection or cable bill. Bottom banner ads maybe while the
shows is playing?
Not "everyone" wants free content without ads. There are still people who prefer to be bent over/ass raped by paying cable outrageous fees that get jacked up every 6 months for 800 useless channels. | |
| delusion ftl
join:2009-07-09 | Balance Need to balance:
Consumers will accept easy, and legit with not too annoying of ads.
If you make it harder, or too many or too annoying ads, you make the non-legit competition look much more attractive.
Find the balance. | |
| | 
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ | Re: Balance Strategy:
Check Hulu 1st
Check network's web site next
Check Comcast last
Whichever, over time, delivers the least ads, gets the business. | |
| 
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
1 edit | Come on, what did you expect? TV production and delivery costs money, and TV shows (apart from PBS and the like) are not a non-profit public service.
Did you really think that they'd deliver "TV everywhere" with no ads? | |
| |
See 26 replies to this post | |
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY | torrent Only more reason to torrent. | |
| | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | Re: torrent Or watch traditional broadcast TV with a P/DVR. | |
| ak3883
join:2005-08-20
Bensalem, PA
| just hit mute! So... just hit the mute button(I have one conviently right on my keyboard) and minimize the screen and check email or do something else for 30 seconds.
With video on ABC/FOX's websites, you can manually go to the commercial breaks, and once you watch one, if you go back to before the transition, it will not play a commercial there, since you already watched it. Well do this a few times and watch all the commercials, then go to the beginning, bring up full screen and enjoy without any commercials. | |
| | | 
ph03n1x
join:2003-02-15
Sanford, FL | What a shock! Well, look at that.. as expected, a stupid backwards decision. I'm certain that nobody is surprised by this. | |
| 
mod_wastrel
join:2008-03-28
 ·magicjack.com
| In theory... the problem isn't that there are ads but that there are ads and you're still paying for the service (as in, it's only "free" if you already subscribe to their cable TV offerings). I'll accept one or the other, but not both (and since the cable TV shows themselves already have both--you have to pay for them plus watch commercials--I already don't subscribe to cable TV. Of course, there are only so many (as in, number of) ads that I'll put up with, and I never--ever--watch shows with overlays and/or banners--not even for free. See it for what it is: TV shows as little more than filler for that "lost" time between commercials. | |
| JSRoman
Premium
join:2005-03-10
Callahan, FL
| Can you skip ads on HULU? The couple of times I have used it, I don't belive it let me skip ads. Every 10 minutes there was CISCO ad. Maybe 5 per hour episode. Is this that much different?
--
»www.seabee.navy.mil | |
| | 
bigunk
Gort, Klattu Birada Nikto
join:2001-02-10
Santa Clarita, CA
·AT&T Yahoo
| Re: Can you skip ads on HULU? I have the DirecTV DVR. My old TIVO would do a 30 second skip, no problem. The DirecTV unit does a fast forward instead. OK, I hated that at first, but sometimes I see an ad flash by that I want to have a look at, so I skip back a bit and play it. I've gone out and bought products from some of these ads. It's actually the best of all worlds for me. Some of you will agree and some won't. I just happen to like this approach. But the second they make those ads non-skippable, I build a linux DVR and we're done. I want what I want. I'm the consumer and I pay the bills. Advertisers do too, but I won't be forced into watching ads in full. When they do that...oh well...piss break. Get more beer. Mute the TV. Let's watch what happens to my purchases then.
--
There is not a man in the country that can't make a living for himself and family. But he can't make a living for them AND his government, the way his government is living. What the government has got to do is live as cheap as the people.
- Will Rogers | |
| | 
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| said by JSRoman :The couple of times I have used it, I don't belive it let me skip ads. Every 10 minutes there was CISCO ad. Maybe 5 per hour episode. Is this that much different? Yes it is. With Hulu, you are seeing the show for free (ie: Anyone in the US can connect to their site to view the show without regard to if they have Cable TV - You just need Internet Connectivity). Thus the forced ad viewing "payment" for the ability to watch is the commercials. With the IPTV system, you only have access if you have paid for your Cable TV feed. Thus FORCING you to view the ads is double-dipping (ie: Feeding you ads that you must view when you are not forced to do so with your Cable TV feed). | |
| | watice
join:2008-11-01
East Elmhurst, NY
1 edit | said by JSRoman :The couple of times I have used it, I don't belive it let me skip ads. Every 10 minutes there was CISCO ad. Maybe 5 per hour episode. Is this that much different? absolutely you can skip ads on Hulu. I've been doing it for a while, probably since I've started watching Hulu. Although I won't go into technical detail, what I did was have my router automagically download the list of hosts at »www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.txt which are all advertising IPs, and resolve them to localhost at startup. Hulu, colbertnation.com, thedailyshow.com all play video continuously and skip over all the commercials now. I'm sure time warner will be smarter than this though and simply include the commercials in the same stream as the programming. | |
| 
Wizeguy
join:2008-08-23
Safety Harbor, FL
| Now You Know Why...... This isn't the greatest thing since sliced bread as all the press has been telling you. These shows will be day old video of programs already broadcast and have the "Power Ads" inserted into the content. There is no way you are going to be able to watch IPTV without ads but do you want them doubled down. Live wireless as broadcast TV is coming to your computer from one website. It is a low cost alternitive to cable but with all the Cable channels (USA,A&E,TNT,etc) and standard networks also.
Being BETA tested right now (only 4 channlels) but the public launch will be 50 to 100 with,VOD,PiP,Tweet, & more.
www.zapmytv.com | |
| sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
2 edits | In Japan... If you ever watched a fully recorded segment of Japanese TV, you'll quickly notice that Japanese commercials are *extremely short*. They never go beyond 15 seconds, and you never have more than 2 or 3 in a row. In a half hour time slot, you only have one commercial period interruption, in the middle of the TV show. 1 hour shows have 2 commercial interruptions, once every 20 minutes.
The problem with TV in America is that commercials have become *so obnoxiously long* and so frequent that more driven consumers are looking for alternatives. If you download a CW episode off of bittorrent, like say Supernatural or The Reaper, you'll be shocked to see the episode clocks in at 38-39 minutes. That means more than 1/3 of the 1 hour time block is devoted to commercials on a *cable channel*. Do you comprehend how ridiculous that is?
This is why places like Hulu became so popular for savvy internet users. | |
| | 
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
·VOIPo
| Re: In Japan... I would venture to guess that's part of the reason why DVRs are also so popular.
I rarely watch any program live these days-- there are just too many damn annoying obnoxious commercials to sit through. I'm already paying for the TV service; I shouldn't also have to pay with my electricity, television usage, and time to sit through a pitch for something that I have no intention of purchasing to begin with.
--
It took Abraham Lincoln to free the slaves. And it's taking Barack Obama to enslave the free.
The Obama Administration: as transparent as my grandmother's flannel nightgown. | |
| | | | | | |
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
·VOIPo
| Re: In Japan... That may be the case, but it still doesn't give broadcasters the right to expect that I will find their interruptions acceptable.
Or would you agree with a statement that one of the broadcasting network big-wigs made a few years back that likened watching television and skipping through the commercials as "stealing" TV? (IIRC, this was said some time around when the ReplayTV 4000 series-- the ones with auto commercial skip-- were popular.)
--
It took Abraham Lincoln to free the slaves. And it's taking Barack Obama to enslave the free.
The Obama Administration: as transparent as my grandmother's flannel nightgown. | |
|
astroboi
@rr.com
| Who will pay??? Back to the dawn of tv.....shows ran 52 min and 26 min, sometimes longer. 8 min of commercial time paid for all the network shows. Now they can't make a buck even with 40 min "one hour" shows.
Back to the dawn of cable....the idea was if you just paid for the content ads would not be necessary. It worked for a few years. Now we have more ads than ever, shorter shows and cable bills that rival house payments. And they insist they can't make money.
Of course its the fault of evil pirates.
tv in all its forms, cable, air, sat, internet, whatever...its on its way to the same pit as AM radio. | |
| |
NOVA_Guy
Obama- Commander in Thief
Premium
join:2002-03-05
·VOIPo
| Re: Who will pay??? said by astroboi :
Of course its the fault of evil pirates.
Cable and satellite companies may want people to think this way, but it's really the fault of greed-- starting with the show's actors/actresses and ending all the way down the line with your happy cable monopoly.
I unfortunately don't know what can be done to solve this problem entirely, but suspect that part of the solution lies in towns and counties encouraging competition and forcing more reasonable prices when it comes time to renegotiate cable franchise agreements.
--
It took Abraham Lincoln to free the slaves. And it's taking Barack Obama to enslave the free.
The Obama Administration: as transparent as my grandmother's flannel nightgown. | |
| | |
Wizeguy
join:2008-08-23
Safety Harbor, FL
| Re: Who will pay??? "starting with the show's actors/actresses and ending all the way down the line with your happy cable monopoly."
Now you know why there are so many "Reality Shows" the networks don't have to pay high priced actors. They can get a bunch of underpaid idiots to stand in front of the camera. I mean it's really dramatic to see a chef storm off the set or a "Batchlorette" cry because he kissed another woman. Give me a freaking break!! Case in point the final season of Seinfeld Jerry insisted that his co-stars, Elaine, George and Kramer got 1 Million per episode. Nice work of you can get it...huh! | |
| joker5656
join:2006-06-23
Dallas, GA | Bit torrent anyone??? Well lookalike this will be the norm. Just keep putting more retrictions and we will find more ways around. Matter of fact I guess I don't need tv anyway | |
| | | sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
| Re: No suprise Lol, yes, but that's not too different from Hollywood literally using the same guy to narrate all their movie trailers.
I'm not sure which trailers you saw, but while they have extended versions online trailers are never allowed to exceed 15 seconds on TV, unless they purchase 2 15 second segments in a row. | |
| Roop
join:2003-11-15
Ottawa, ON
·Cybersurf Corporat..
| i wonder... ...what my kids will think when i tell them back in the day, years before they were born there were these things called commercials. they interrupted your show and were mind numbing.
...or maybe i won't tell them because i barely remember them myself. | |
| 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ | When will they get it WE DON'T WANT ADS! | |
| techygeek
join:2008-04-30
·Verizon FIOS
·Optimum Online
4 edits | I give it 2 yrs,content will be all over the place for free. What I feel here..
This couldn't be a bigger mistake.. offer it up on PC's and Laptops.. these devices make great media players but their brains are only as good as how well their OS's are written (and the viral programs intended to swipe content are written on them as well).
Before saying this, I want to say, I believe in the pay platform. The reason content is there in bulk is cause it pays to make the content, if there wasn't going to be any money made, who'd want to produce much of anything.
That said.. just think about it, its the Napster of the new millenium.. video screen capture and maybe not even that.. what about a PC that has been specifically engineered just to uncode your signal.
Maybe I might be wrong but what if I am right.. imagine in 2 years.. all the content all over, movies upon movies.. clips, videos, all in full quality hd.. 80% of everything on cable today all out there for free and put on tons of websites and out of control.. envision people dropping cable like flies cause they can get it for free and if cable thinks they can monitor the internet signal then.. what about bulk downloads using another file format and people just play it on another PC.
The point is, I think this venture is actually the beginning of a terrible nightmare cable and content providers will never dig themselves out of. So what to do, instead.. well years back, music distributers didn't know for sure that they would ever get the napster environment under control but we have a controlled environment with music today; most napster like sites are gone and I have read that its possible, media companies themselves are putting files on the remaining sites that when downloaded, rats out the downloader to them so in short, control is restoring there. Its better to go that route for video, my feelings anyway.
So should there be portable video, well only maybe with a custom made media player that is not designed to be tainted with, that if opened, stops working unless a trained technician gets it working again. A player, sold separately, that works wirelessly & has an eithernet jack, this should offer TV everywhere.
Just remember cable companies.. wasn't too long ago you had to bullet out boxes that were passing just about all your channels to certain customers.. do you really want to go back there. The nice thing about cable (including FIOS, U-Verse, Sat TV, etc.) is that it is a 2 way communicative closed system that works only with boxes you specifically put out so control is at a max. Even if you send this signal to custom designed devices, the problem is your sending the signal to --anyone--, all it takes is someone who knows how to decode it and its freebie city. This is part of the reason as well I see caps being a true reality, its a way of pricing usage of the net where those who don't use it that much don't pay that much. I feel sites like hulu raise prices for other cable subscribers, if all services were offered, I could then see it being waived.
I just like to say 1 more thing ... I thought of this before and loved the idea but I had a chance to ponder some of the reasons it could be a nightmare and I just wanted to mention it now before this might possibly end up a disaster in the making. | |
| Heated Man
join:2009-06-18
Cleveland, OH
| Who Cares? Are commercials really that bad. You would think looking at all these responses that the end of the world were coming. Geez people you really want everything for free and never want to pay for anything and be lazy and do nothing all day.
Yeah ok you can come out of the Star Trek world now. Even if that would happen half of you would probably become bums since working would be mandatory to support civilization. You would still come to this negative website and post negative comments. | |
| | | |
|
|
'TV Everywhere' Comes Complete With Unskippable Ads
·
I failed with this purchase. I see a true HDTV coming soon. They are getting so cheap.
·