Adding Value
-
Now this is a good example of a media company in the digital age using their noggins to come up with a way to grow revenue. Fox will sell advance viewings of shows to DirecTV customers, 24-48 hours in advance of the regular screening, for a fee. It's set now for $2.99, and it allows that hard core audience, those that just can't wait, to get a look at the next episode of some of their serial shows like "24" and others. It would also allow people that might be busy that night, say with a kid's sports event or something, to see the show the night before.
I'm not the target audience, since I like the delay and watch it 2 weeks later when I have time, but I have some friends that love 24 and would probably pay for this, at least periodically.
Of course, it's also a great example of someone else, this time at DirecTV, screwing up the system by not allowing it to work with their TiVo DVRs (of which I have 2) and only with the new DirecTV DVRs. To me, that need for control is a mistake. It undercuts the idea of getting more people to pay for your service. Especially a service that many people will find valuable.
This is like the sports programming on satellite radio. MLB on XM and the NFL on Sirus (or the other way around), forcing you to choose one of them if you purchase a subscription. I saw an interview with one of the CEOs and he defended the practice saying that satellite TV and cable have different channels.
Yeah, I'm sure that's true for the Gardeners-who-grow-blue-violets-in-the-dark channel, which is only on satellite TV and the Midget-naked-mud-wrestling channel on cable, but the vast majority of channels, and all of the very popular ones like THE MLB AND NFL, are on both. It's ridiculous for those sports leagues to even limit their audiences. I'm a fan of both and it means that I won't buy either service until it meets my needs. Those two guys really don't get it. They're not really in competition with each other.
They're in competition with free radio and they need to convert more people. Period.
Steve Jones
-
The BBC has been experimenting with on-demand podcasting and their view is that as a public service broadcaster their material should be free.
I've had BSkyB for 4 years but it has occurred to me that with the exception of 24 virtually everything I watch is on terrestrial channels. So I can either spend £44 per month, + TV licence fee for channels I don't want or I can save £528 per year and wait until the entire series of 24 comes out on DVD and still have change for a decent holiday/bike/computer etc.
-
>>Midget-naked-mud-wrestling channel<<
That probably exists!>>I've had BSkyB for 4 years but it has occurred to me that with the exception of 24 virtually everything I watch is on terrestrial channels.<<
Same here. When I went for Sky, I wanted all the sports channels to watch (primarily) football and pool. With what they were offering at the time, if I was getting all the sports channels, I was paying £42 a month, but for all channels I pay £44 so went the extra couple of quid and got all the movie channels too.
I've found I get much more value from Sky now that I've upgraded to Sky+ (for those not in the know, digital satellite receiver with two tuners and PVR built in), which I've had for about a year. I just hit Record + Series Link on anything new, then when I have the time to watch TV, just sit down and watch what's on my box. I also flick through the week's movies and set any I want to see on record, so I get more value from the movie channels (when I previously was never in when the good movies were on, on Friday/Saturday night primetime).
Because of this (the fact I watch TV "in arrears"), I don't know if I'd pay to see anything in advance, but I can see the value for fans who can't wait. I imagine Sky have got it in the pipeline, because the current software will certainly handle it.
The true gem (for me) would be complete TV-on-demand, which is on its way (and I think Telewest (or NTL?) are offering a limited version via cable in the UK at the moment). I still sometimes forget to record so being able to just sit down on (say) a Sunday afternoon and flick through what is available to watch from a week's worth of programmes would be great.
-
Hi,
I listen to XM at home, while working out and while driving. I really don't care that XM doesn't offer NFL games(or Howard Stern), that's not why I subscribe.
Since I don't have cable( by choice), I like the options XM gives me for audio feeds. i.e. CNBC, MSNBC, Bloomberg, BBC and the many varieties of music channels offered. Especially while stuck in traffic.
Greg H -
What drives me bonkers is that I can't listen to Sirius (that I subscribe to) online for anything besides music channels. If they can simulcast music, they sure as hell can broadcast any of the other channels too - but they are hamstrung by contracts and paperwork. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
Don't get your knickers in a knot though about what these companies are doing now. Media all around is in a tremendous period of change right now. You're going to see literally hundreds of new marketing models over the next two years as everyone tries to figure out what the heck to do with all of this broadband and how to repackage their content. Some new content types will appear (5 minute shorts and amateur video) - some old ones will pretty much die out (local newspapers for all but the largest markets) and others will be completely different (ala carte IP TV with 75% of the programming on demand). Point being, if you live on the edge, your media intake will be completely different than it is now. I can already see it in my own habits, listening more to podcasts than I do music or watch TV, and watching more IP Video on line.
The "sit down and watch a show after dinner" era is over. Welcome to the "watch anything you want at any time anywhere for as long as you care to" era.
-
Paying to see it in advance: what a concept. This is simply a further move towards pay-per-view TV for all our favourite shows. We'll end up paying to subscribe to the service and then paying-per-view too. I can hardly wait. Of course, I'll just exercise my right as a consumer not to consume, but not enough other people will be with me, so...
Personally, a DVD boxset is my preferred choice, 'cos then I don't have to wait a week for those cliffhangers to be resolved!
-
It seems to me that this sort of thing could eventually lead to the downfall of time shifting. (Tivo, et al) If the networks can show that time-shifting by the end user is costing them money, it may very well upset the balance away from what is now considered "fair use".
Enjoy the MNMW channel.
jg
-
I enjoy both an occasional use of my Tivo/DVR as well as the afternoon forays of traffic complimented by my free 30 day XM satellite subscription. I watch very little tv to begin with, I'd rather spend time outside with the wife and dog but that's just me.
Direct TV will get my money when they can show me a game on Monday that will be played the following Sunday. Now there's a value add! By the way, I'll be taking bets on all NHL and UK football when this comes out.
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply