[opendtv] Re: TV Technology: The Times They Are ‘A-Changin’
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2017 09:55:56 -0400
On Oct 31, 2017, at 6:39 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
More examples of what eliminating net neutrality would put in jeopardy. This
is only about winning awards, not so much about viewership, so can't make too
much of it. Still, this stating the obvious is only obvious because of a
neutral and two-way Internet medium, and neutral access to it:
Here we go again. Exactly WHAT would b e put in jeopardy Bert?
Get over it. Net Neutrality is NOT going away.
What is going away is a an outdated TV entertainment business model that the
public is rejecting.
The Internet is here and established as a distribution medium for entertainment
content. Nobody is going to start blocking OTT content - as this article
clearly points out...
IT’S THE FUTURE STUPID!
What is fascinating here is that Bert has absolutely NO UNDERSTANDING why
People are tuning out the content he watches in favor of subscription services.
But let’s be fair. Since Bert refuses to pay for TV entertainment, how could he
possibly know what he is missing?
Does he attempt to explain what is happening?
Hell no!
But he is quick to warn us that the sky is falling, and almost everything
presented in this article is about to disappear right in front of our eyes...
What is Bert missing here?
1. While the broadcast networks still spend a small fortune on content,
consumers are tuning it out. Why?
a. The shows are filled with the ads that broadcasters depend on to fund
them.
b. These shows cannot include content prohibited by the FCC - sex, nudity,
and some forms of speech.
c. Many of these shows have become vehicles for political and social
engineering.
d. If the Emmy awards actually represent a measure of program quality, the
broadcast network shows are no longer competitive.
2. The new guys in town are spreading money around to attract the limited
Hollywood talent pool. There appears to be virtually unlimited financial
resources in play here, at a time when the traditional funding mechanism
for broadcast networks shows is DECLINING.
3. Consumers are willing to pay for convenience, as another recent thread
pointed out. This is strongly related to the ability to stream programs on
demand and to avoid having to watch commercials.
Bert has been telling us for years that these factors will ultimately lead to
entirely new programming paradigms, even as he refuses to pay for them.
Instead, he is isolated in a world of inferior propaganda...
.
The this about the legacy bundles:
"There are some trends that could rescue the TV bundle, ... Welcome to the
new world."
A bit of self-soothing going on there. TV Everywhere was an attempt to
artificially retain the garden walls, even when walled-in content was being
sneaked out of the walls and over the Internet, but only for those walled-up
subscribers. Sooner rather than later, the artificiality of restricting who
can subscribe to Internet-distributed content is giving way to a more real,
neutral Internet distribution model. And if "VMVPD" is defined as including
"live" channels, then best leave that term out. Netflix doesn't need "live"
to be a huge success. Then there are these two quotes:
Sooner or later Bert is going to wake up to the new reality...
“Welcome to the new world Bert.”
For years I have been talking about the growth of rerun channels in MVPD
bundles. This was a viable way to milk the value of the large content libraries
owned by the media conglomerates. It was also an easy way to get around the
1992 Cable re-regulation legislation, intended to stop the annual rate
increases for MVPD bundles.
Then the Internet provided a better way to access these content libraries AND a
very lucrative additional revenue stream for the content congloms.
Unfortunately for them, greed prevailed over common sense. They failed to see
that the new guys in town were using this legacy content to launch their own
COMPETING TV content platforms.
HBO did much the same, leveraging recent motion pictures to build the
subscriber base needed to fund original content.
Now the congloms understand that they need these libraries to make new
platforms like Hulu Live viable. The article addresses this as well.
Bert still does not understand that TV Everywhere was a carefully thought out
effort to help MVPD services evolve into the VMVPD services that are starting
to replace facilities based live streaming bundles. He mistakenly believes that
this is a step towards disaggregation of content - i.e. that the most valuable
live networks would be forced to offer stand alone apps like CBS All Access.
Just the opposite is true. TV Everywhere significantly enhances the value of
(V)MVPD bundles. It extends the service to mobile devices and allows
subscribers to access the content they are paying for anytime, anywhere.
Equally important, it allows VMVPD bundles to offer the same ON DEMAND
convenience as services like Netflix, and the SVOD bundles from Hulu.
Netflix may not need LIVE to attract subscribers, but they still need fresh new
content, which was the goal all along. When a new Netflix series is placed onto
the Netflix servers, millions of subscribers watch them IMMEDIATELY...
It’s called “appointment TV,” with a little wiggle room for your appointment
time.
Live TV is not going away. It is becoming PART of the product mix for VMVPD
bundles. Even more interesting is that we are now creating a hybrid programming
model.
In the old days, the cable program guide let you select among the live streams
- you joined the streams in progress. My DirecTV Now subscription still has a
program guide. But when i select a program it starts from the beginning, not
“in progress.”
The reality is that everyone is still learning how to maximize the benefits of
Internet distribution. There is still much to learn.
"The major television networks are not currently able...\
That's just annoying. The TV networks have been streaming now for almost 12
years, for heaven's sake.
Streaming WHAT Bert?
Mostly programs that are no longer worthy of Emmys.
And WHY did they start streaming these programs?
Because the traditional audience for these programs was evaporating. They
needed to use every possible form of distribution to maintain a third of their
former audience. And they needed the convenience of watching these programs on
demand, rather than by appointment.
Where have "we" been? We're supposed to wait for ATSC 3.0? If the TV networks
aren't tracking ad viewership, in their streaming services, it's hardly
because "these behemoth corporations and their vested engineering
infrastructure slow the pace." It's only because they aren't making use of
the tools they should already have available to them now.
It’s called Hulu Live Bert. The ultimate VMVPD bundle.
Instead of rerun channels you can access library programs on demand - in time
they will even personalize the commercials, if they are not doing so now. Or
you can pay a bit more and avoid the commercials entirely.
ATSC 3.0 is the modern version of “Fantasy Island.” The congloms do not need to
abandon ATSC 1.0 - they can continue to milk it for the retrans consent
dollars, even as they use the Internet to offer their best content via HBO, and
other subscription services.
There are some folks out there, like Sinclair/Tribune who believe that ATSC 3.0
could allow them to offer viable new services in the broadcast spectrum. But
the challenge facing Sinclair is significantly more daunting than what Reed
Hastings faced when he started the modern version of Netflix. They need high
quality content to pull this off - right now they DEPEND on the content from
the congloms to sell commercials. The congloms can easily let affiliation
agreements expire, just as they are allowing the licensing contracts for
library content to expire with Netflix, Amazon et al.
Perhaps it's time for the TV networks to get their FOTI content in formats
used by those little streaming boxes, designed to promoting collusion. Maybe
then the trade scribes will take notice.
They did this a long time ago Bert. How the hell do you think people watch
Hulu?
Clue...when you watch the Yahoo version of Hulu you are not using ATSC
technology...
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:
