[opendtv] Re: How the dollars flow
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2015 08:07:00 -0400
On Sep 27, 2015, at 9:13 PM, Manfredi, Albert E
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
But again, why congloms use MVPDs was never the issue. It's obvious why. The
issue here is why the congloms use the OTA broadcaster as an extra middleman,
to deal with the MVPDs (at least for conglom content that also airs OTA).
One more time...
LEVERAGE
They gain negotiating leverage with retrans consent. Leverage they used to
create new MVPD networks; leverage they are using now to negotiate higher
subscriber fees for ALL of their networks. And political leverage.
You saw the articles Monty posted. While other media industries like newspapers
and music have been severely impacted, becoming a shadow of the businesses that
existed before the Internet, the TV congloms have GROWN, finding new ways to
monetize their content via the Internet, while their legacy businesses keep
printing money.
I'm not changing it, and it's not obviously working.
Sorry, but the little paper cuts on their fingers Fro the cord cutters are
noise level stuff. And the shift from viewing programs live to time shifted
(DVR) and VOD is evolutionary. They are still reaching huge audiences that
advertisers covet.
When it comes to bottom line profits, this is the REAL golden age of TV
entertainment.
The congloms have already changed this model, for online delivery. That's how
this long thread started. For OTT delivery, any mention of "retrans consent"
(from a local OTA broadcaster) is totally irrelevant today. The conglom deals
only with some CDN or other. Only CBS, for CBS All Access, has given the OTA
broadcaster a partial role, to provide the linear stream. (And I think the
broadcasters need to take on a more critical, value added role, but we
already went over that.)
And once again, this is just evolutionary, a new business segment to be
exploited. It is not killing the other business segments...
It is complementary.
For now, retrans consent is meaningless as it relates to OTT services. But it.
Is very likely that this will change when the FCC defines Virtual MVPDs and
requires them to offer local broadcasts.
You just said "it's obviously working," and I gave you an example of where
it's not working to the conglom's advantage. Why should the congloms fight
this extra battle Craig? When the conglom could just set a price and deal
direct with the MVPDs (or CDNs). And keep all the ad revenues.
Because they would lose leverage. The current system IS working to the congloms
advantage.
Okay Craig, let's postulate "retrans consent 2.0." The congloms continue to
force bundling of a lot of other conglom stuff along with the main network
content, without any OTA station in the picture. The congloms continue to
rake in the big bucks for any distribution of national political ads and
national political debates.
Retrans 2.0 is focused on cash for content, across every infrastructure that
wants to offer content currently controlled by the broadcast networks and their
affiliates. You can keep trying to convince Moonves and company that they are
leaving money on the table by allowing local affiliates to exist.
They know what they are doing, and why it is in their best interest to protect
the existing broadcast infrastructure.
This does not abolish OTA TV. The reasons for keeping OTA are exactly the
same as the reasons for using the other distribution options (MVPD, Internet).
This is where you have no grasp of reality. The OTA infrastructure and the
perks that accompany it ARE the reason they have had leverage over the MVPDs,
and now the Internet.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
