[opendtv] Re: Pete Deutschman: Linear TV dips below half of US viewers
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 08:10:37 -0400
On Aug 26, 2015, at 8:01 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
No doubt many, if not most of the ten million people who watched
the premiere of this series know/knew that they could watch it
later. But they decided to watch it live.
So? And if they were given the option to watch this show starting from time
0, but also starting any amount of time past time 0, rather than strictly by
appointment, do you really think the show would have been LESS successful?
They are already given catch-up options, although not as convenient as the VOD
option used by Netflix, et al. But that completely misses the point.
People will still watch the linear stream of a premiere, and many other
programs. The percentages are irrelevant when you can get 10 million people to
view the live stream.
Why do they watch? Any are home in the evening and looking for something to
watch. Many are fans, in this case of the previous series The Walking Dead, and
are anxious to watch, and in many cases get on social media to tell their
friends. It is a tradition that is as old as talking about Archie Bunker around
the water cooler.
As for success, the interactions around viewing of the live stream now lead to
a much larger audience accumulated via rebroadcasts, Delayed DVR views, and
catch-up views. So the OTT options you prefer are now part of the overall mix.
My bet is, the show would have been even more successful. There were probably
many thousands of people, if not millions, who had to give up on watching the
show the first day, because they got delayed by one thing or another.
And they have multiple options to catch-up.
You are pushing an agenda that few people care about.
ROTFL. If few people cared, more than half of viewers would not have dropped
the old way of watching, Craig.
Let's say it is half, although I believe that is an overstatement. My response
is the same as yours...
So what?
What's wrong with options, especially when they help the industry make money?
We still have a large population of people in this country, many undocumented
and from lower socio/economic groups, who only watch free broadcast TV. And we
have many people from all demographic groups who still watch linear live
streams, as well as the new VOD services. The percentage mix will continue to
change, particularly for pre-produced shows that are not live events. And there
will continue to be large audiences for live events and news.
Why do you want to kill live TV,
Don't be obtuse, Craig. Linear TV is dying on its own, simply because it
imposes an inconvenience that is no longer technologically mandatory. Why do
you insist on denying this?
I do not deny that we have more options thanks to technological change. That's
a big part of what this list has discussed for two decades.
But linear TV is not dying. It is finding a new balance with other options.
and over-the-air broadcasting by extension?
Actually, I've said this before: OTA has a better chance of soldiering on,
for some time, than other linear MVPD fare. Because it offers something
unique. It is free, and it offers the highest value TV content, much of it in
HD. Despite its linear limitation, cord cutters are embracing it, to have
access to the main TV network content.
This has always been the big advantage for the broadcast TV networks -
guaranteed access to nearly 100% of U.S. homes. Anything less than 100% is
because these people are just saying NO to TV.
But it is not FREE. If it were we would not be talking about 129 Sinclair
Stations going dark on Dish.
More people watch MVPD programming than the broadcast networks - that's a fact.
The broadcast audience is now only about 30% during prime time, less in other
day parts. This was true before the OTT options existed, and is not improving
as new VOD options proliferate. I believe that this is primarily because of the
quality of their programming.
Which is why I think broadcasters can continue to have a role, for local
Internet distribution of this content. People who cut out all the rest of
cable do seem to want access to the main TV networks.
They want more than just the networks. My daughter and her husband cut the
cord. But they still get the free broadcast feeds and a few other channels
along with their broadband service - they rarely watch the broadcast channels.
They got an Apple TV, and are now buying content, mostly movies, with the money
they save by not having "the bundle." And I could be next.
You are correct that there is a growing perception that "the bundle" is bloated
and overpriced. As one of the article I posted this week stated, if someone,
perhaps Apple, can offer the right skinny bundle, the traditional MVPD bundles
could take a big hit.
To date this has not happened, but it could in the next year or two. I would
just remind you that this would help linear TV survive, just at a more
realistic price.
FOTA could easily become FOTI, the ad revenues increase when online (I hope
Craig didn't forget those stats), and people would not be limited to by
appointment. Sounds like a winner to me!
The option exists today, but broadcasters are not embracing it yet. And I have
not seen anything that suggests the revenues increase. There is much evidence
that the effectiveness increases, but the revenues decrease.
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:
