Telcos Stealing VOD Market Share From Cable
AT&T and Verizon's VOD Market Share Climbs
AT&T and Verizon have expended their share of the video on demand market, stealing that market share from companies like Comcast and Time Warner Cable. Todd Spangler at Multichannel News
notes that cable operators saw their VOD total market share drop to 56% in 2012 from 60% in 2013. For some context however, keep in mind that video on demand comprises about 1% of all video viewing
according to a study released last year. That study blamed "inadequate advertising support and awkward program guides" for cable's recent stumbles in the VOD market, something telcos -- who are hungrier upstarts in the pay TV sector -- are clearly doing a better job with. What's your primary reason for not renting VOD titles? Quality? Selection? Price?
Royal Oak, MI
Re: Price prevents most rentals
said by MovieLover76:I sub to both Netflix and Amazon Prime but I use Redbox for new releases. Unless you're housebound, you'll always run into a Redbox while doing something else. At less than 1/3 the price of a VOD release, it's well worth the little extra trouble to pick one up and return it. The only times I use VOD is when Vudu has a 99 cent "Deal of the Day" that I want to watch.
You already answered your question, new releases.
While it may not sell a huge amount cable and telco VOD is still the easiest for most people, my parents still rent new releases from Comcast.
When it comes to new releases it costs about the same amount for any VOD no matter where you go and cable and telco VOD doesn't require extra hardware you may not already have.
Re: "Stealing" ??
said by uwotm8 :I am sure the ISP's don't mind when they steal any and all ability to compete with them in local and state jurisdictions by writing their own laws
Stealing has such a negative connotation.
Re: Stand alone VOD market? The problem with me is that I use W7MC, so I don't have any VZW boxes. So although flexview will allow me to watch on a mobile device, it's not as easy on a TV.
I can see the same problem w/ others who use CC or tivo for instance.
Their prices are high anyways, and I'd rather give my money to amazon or Redbox IF I'm going to get a new movie. My roku or Xbox organizes the movies WAY better than when I had a HD box.
I think it's a crime to ask $5 and put a 48 hour window on watching. What's the big deal to give a week, especially if I can go to Redbox and get the movie for $1.25. The 2 times I bought streaming we started to movie on Fri eve, wifey tired, and then we sit down on Sun to finish, and guess what you timed out. Bulls**t.
So ever since then, I make it a point NOT to give one penny to VOD/Streaming until they rectify this 48 hour BS.
I don't think $5 is expensive, but compared to Redbox it is, and the viewing windows are downright obnoxious.
So they took 5% of 1%, big whoopie, that's probably 10 movies.
·Pacific Bell - SBC
Cost, inferior quality, and buffering of streaming video The primary reason why I don't rent VOD is that my 30Mbps cable internet service from Charter Communications in Riverside, California is apparently unable to adequately handle streaming video without overly frequent buffering, and service outages which last from a few seconds, to several hours at a time.
I'm told by the Charter technicians who have repeatedly come to my house to test my connection to their service that there is nothing wrong with my wiring or the service at my home, but with Charter's infrastructure, and provisioning providing their service to my area of Southern California.
Charter is the ONLY cable television and broadband internet service available in my area. AT&T won't upgrade their buried copper wire, which currently can provide no more that 768Kbps uVerse internet service, to fiber optics.
I blame the the US Congress for taking away my City's oversight of the cable industry by my city. After that change took effect, Charter quickly became a monopoly in my area, and the level of their service has deteriorated. My only recourse is to cancel their services and live without cable television and broadband internet, or accept.
much ado about nothing The only times I buy PPV movies is when the release is new but not available on redbox yet. It cost $5 to rent movie in SD and $6 in HD through U-Verse.
I find similar VOD services like Xbox Live Marketplace, Sony Entertainment, run equally expensive. iTunes and Amazon Instant Video are $1 cheaper. I never rent movies from iTunes, because they prevent from displaying HD movie on my large TV screen with stupid HDCP restrictions.
If you subscribe to premium movie channels or get $5 a month screen-pack you can have unlimited access to some older titles like with Netflix. In case of premium movie packages, the titles are actually little newer and more recent but of course you won't find as recent as on VOD or redbox.
The point of VOD is not price but convenience. I live in Chicago area and its been snowing outside all day. Why bother with snow to go to a nearest redbox half mile away from you 2 times, when you can have a convenience to rent movie straight from your couch.
In addition, in practice you are more likely to spend money if you go to a redbox location which is often in Walgreens, supermarkets or gas stations. You have movie for $1.50 for 24 h great, but while there why not get beer case for $10 or pizza for $6. You do not travel all that way from home just to get a movie, do you?