[opendtv] Re: Linear TV reality check
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2015 23:54:29 +0000
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
So Bert is trying to convince us that the days of linear appointment
TV are numbered...
The days of TV distribution networks which can only support live/linear TV are
certainly dwindling, because consumers here and elsewhere have discovered that
only very few programs are best watched by appointment. Mainly luddites
continue to use by appointment TV, as the Deloitte survey shows.
If you watch something when it happens, it is either an appointment
or chance.
Craig's attempt at philosophy? Watching by appointment hardly ever has anything
to do with "when it happens." Instead, it has to do with "when it is
transmitted on the medium." Very few linear streams are actually live. Mainly
sports, a very small fraction of the news shows, and not even game shows.
Certainly not prime time scripted shows, and not even reality TV! So, by
appointment amounts to inconvenient limitations of TV distribution networks, of
a bygone era.
<snipped much irrelevant text>
So does all this add up to the death of linear appointment TV?
Bert thinks so.
The demise of distribution media capable only of one-way-broadcast? Almost
certainly. The demise of offering most programs by appointment? Well, sure,
unless the content demands true "live."
Craig mentioned VCRs. What Craig fails to understand is that VCRs and PVRs are
a transitional technology, which initially liberated the consumer from the
by-appointment constraint of TV content distribution media of the day. Once the
distribution medium is no longer constrained the way one-way broadcast media
are, once the owners of content have come to appreciate that removing that
by-appointment constraint benefits them as much as it benefits the consumer,
the owners of content shift emphasis away from the linear stream and toward the
VOD stream. This has already begun to happen, for the congloms, and it has been
true all along for services like Netflix.
As the viewership of the by-appointment stream falls to the 40%, 30%, and lower
ranges, what's to be gained by retaining that linear stream?
Craig mentions the cost of sports. Any clearly anti-competitive technology can
only exacerbate the cost problem (allowing the net to force consumers into
paying welfare checks for a lot of content). TV distribution technology was
anti-competitive, and the MVPD model benefitted from that limitation. We've
been over this many times. A 2-way, content-neutral distribution network
removes that anti-competitive constraint.
I believe that the percentage of viewing "live TV" will continue
to decline; but most of the bad news is already baked in, as the
financial analysts like to say.
Why does Craig think this is bad news?
But core networks with the financial resources to obtain exclusive
rights to live events will survive, along with those who offer
news and analysis.
Craig thinks that an cable company would gain "by retaining exclusive rights"
to NCIS by appointment? Instead, CBS has realized that it's time to offer NCIS
as VOD.
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: