[opendtv] Re: TV Programmers Put Subscriber Caps on Skinny Bundles | Media - Advertising Age

  • From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 01:00:31 +0000

Craig Birkmaier wrote:

Many of you 52 channels are duplicated as you can access neighboring
markets. But this is irrelevant. Those 52 channels are now a small
fraction of what is available,

Uuuh, no, Craig. We were talking about your repeated refrain that the content
owners operate as an oligopoly. They only do so on your walled garden favorite
media, they do not do so either OTA or online. They collude when they can, i.e.
when using a medium on which said collusion helps them (as I've said countless
times).

This all goes to my (should be) obvious argument that when TV is distributed
via an unwalled medium, competition improves.

There is a strong reason why so much high value content has moved
behind the pay walls.

Not relevant. I have addressed this point countless times too. The situation is
entirely different, when consumers have any number of "pay walls" available to
them online, as opposed to only one that they would realistically be subscribed
to (the pre-Internet, and still hanging in there, old school MVPD model).

ESPN is not striking out on their own.

ESPN, HBO, and CBS are often mentioned together, by any number of articles,
Craig. In spite of your claims, ESPN moved outside of your "the bundle." On
Sling, it may not be entirely on its own, but it, and live sports in general,
are Sling's raison d'être. So, no sense continuing with your pretense. This is
entirely different from what it used to be, even much less than one year ago,
when you had to have a "the bundle" MVPD subscription to get ESPN. It is far
less expensive to get live sports on Sling than it used to be, Craig. Simple
fact.

HBO did not fall behind Netflix because of their association with
the MVPDs. They have always been an expensive premium service

HBO was expensive BECAUSE it was only available over monopolistic MVPD media
only. Netflix had to be price competitive to succeed, because it never was a
take-it-or-leave-it walled in movie channel. HBO Now became far more
competitive, as a direct result of getting out of those garden walls. This is
the trend, Craig, see? HBO and ESPN, same thing.

with limited appeal because of the linear nature of the live
channels.

Aaargh! HBO has been available on demand since 2001! And no, not on just one
MVPD. It might have started on one, but it was available on demand for years
and years Craig, to any number of MVPD subscribers, prior to HBO Go. Will you
get off that "live" excuse?

On the subject of how "rare" online streaming is. In spite of Craig's
insistence, online streaming is hardly rare. The only thing that might be
considered rare is people who EXCLUSIVELY watch TV online.

These two sources make the point. It's not always easy to dig out the answers,
because too often, the different content is listed separately, or the screens
are listed separately. Anyway, here's what I came up with, concerning how TV is
being watched:

http://www.worldtvpc.com/blog/cable-vs-streaming-showdown/

The above article, using 2011 stats, claims:

"Streaming Stats
The following figures are taken from a 2011 Retrevo Survey of 1,000 U.S
consumers:
83% of surveyed consumers watched most/all of their TV programs online.
64% of Americans get some of their TV content online.
80% said they watched most of their TV shows online
5% said they only watched television programs on the Internet."
Read more internet tv news: Cable vs. Streaming Showdown
http://www.worldtvpc.com/blog/cable-vs-streaming-showdown/#ixzz3X8t8aHOy

The there's this one.

http://www.frankwbaker.com/mediause.htm

As of 2012, this site claims that 72% watch TV on TV only, while 28% watch TV
on a combination of devices including mobile devices. It claims that in 2012,
weekly hours watching not-online TV were 12.6, while weekly hours using the
Internet (including watching TV online) were 19.6. And also from 2012:

"70% Of Consumers Now Watch TV On Non-TV Devices; PCs Reign Supreme
The researchers say that TV consumption on tablets has more than doubled in the
last year in the 14 markets that it surveys, and 70 percent of consumers now
say they watch video on devices other than TVs. The device leading the charge -
or change, as the case may be? PCs; tablets still accounting for less than 15
percent of TV consumption. TV, meanwhile, still ranks as the single most-used
device for watching television, accounting for the other 30 percent of TV
viewing."

So what does all of this prove? It proves that what Craig continues to call a
"massive shift" to online TV has already "massively" occurred. That's why Craig
has been unable to find sources which corroborate his claim that we're 10 years
away from making this possible.

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:

  1. Home
  2. opendtv
  3. Archive
  4. 04-2015