[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: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 02:33:16 +0000

Craig Birkmaier wrote:

Sorry, but the oligopoly is just as present with OTA and online as
it is with walled gardens.

I don't even know what you define as oligopoly anymore, then. The availability
of more OTA channels, with DTT, spawned a bunch of new content sources, like
GetTV, ThisTV, Movies!, Bounce, and so on. Internet TV spawned the likes of
Netflix and Hulu. Somehow or other, your supposed "oligopoly" allowed this new
competition to happen, Craig. A true oligopoly would not allow this
fragmentation.

But the trend is still toward more content moving behind pay
walls.

That's probably not even true. But even if it were true, if you have many
options of pay walls, each one has to compete. When you only have one option,
they can pretty much set whatever rates they want. That's why the rates are
going up faster than inflation, for old school bundling.

Having any number of pay walls available only aggravates the
situation.

Not if you have lots of options. If you focus on only the channels you want,
open competition says that some clever site out there will create a bundle
that's way more in line with your tastes, for much less money than you're
paying now. And if you insist on a huge assortment, there will be a site that
offers that too. When these sites can be used by anyone throughout the US, they
can all achieve economies of scale.

Not true. Sling's raison d'être is cord cutters, primarily
Millennials.

Sorry Craig. Lots of sites go after cord cutters and cord shavers. Sling's
highest value content is live sports. Just use the numbers, Craig. How much do
all those other channels ask, per sub per month? Sling doesn't even carry the
main networks, which are still viewed individually a lot more hours than any
other channel. Sling's ace in the hole, which no other OTT site has, is live
sports.

But remember, Netflix was competing with HBO with the DVD rental
service - unfortunately, they cannot afford to offer these
current titles via the streaming service,

They are slowly migrating to all streaming. This is an ongoing process, and
that's been the trend. The content owners are aware of this, as they always are
Craig, so you can bet that as the popularity of DVDs declines, Netflix will get
the rights to stream more content. Once again, the content owners aren't about
to lose their audience. And many people no longer feel compelled to jump when a
service provider says so.

HBO Now became far more competitive, ... HBO and ESPN, same thing.

You are making claims you cannot support. You have no idea how
successful HBO Now is or will be

I said far more competitive. Whether they will ultimately be successful is
another matter, although obviously, Netflix sure is, and HBO sure was not.
Losing subscribers is not being successful, Craig. Steady decline is not
success.

This was the history of the service and is still the primary
service. Not surprisingly, HBO On demand became available in
Time Warner markets first, since it is owned by Time Warner.

All I know is that this VOD of all manner of cable channels has been available
here for many years - much longer than HBO Go. I'd be very surprised if Cox
down in Florida hasn't carried it for eons, Craig. So the VOD aspect, as far as
I'm concerned, is not a valid difference. If you have proof that Cox down there
didn't offer HBO on demand for at least 10 years, I'd like to see it.

The point I was trying to make is that it is evolving from a
linear streaming to VOD service, while Netflix has always
been VOD only.

And my point is that there have been any number of VOD options for cable
subscribers, which easily predate Netflix streaming. So sure, VOD is a good
thing. But Netflix online did NOT introduce that feature. People were watching
cable channels VOD when Netflix customers were still watching DVDs only.

Some of these numbers are absurd. I have posted multiple
surveys that say only 5% watch most/all of their programs
online.

Not absurd, but confusing. For example, when a respondent says he watches most
TV from a Roku device, they would call that watching TV on a TV set. So you
need to look this stuff up, Craig. There's a lot more streaming going on than
you think.

This is outdated. PC now account for far less TV consumption
than mobile devices.

Maybe not. You need to verify your claims, Craig. Those numbers were from 2012
and 2013, and tablets, in case you haven't been following this, are not gaining
so much popularity, after the initial hype.

Let me know when less than 70% of U.S. Households subscribe
to an MVPD bundle.

That's funny, right? It went from asking about 85% to 70%, in a matter of very
few months, and it went from "the bundle" to "a bundle," in that amount of
time. It seems that Craig has to keep moving the goal posts!

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