Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by ssm06, Jan 2, 2013.
No it did not. Haha...it failed and helped give birth to the current system.
Every industry goes through times where companies need to innovate and become more efficient. Even their suppliers will innovate to try to sell more products to the content producers. So less capital might be required in the future. TV is no different. I guess I just have more faith that capitalism will continue to work the same way that it has in the past.
Unless the seller gets into antitrust territory. It's collusion to maintain a de facto monopoly which exercises rampant tying. It's just as illegal here as it was for Microsoft.
I just don't agree that sports feeds money to other content. By that reasoning movie channels contribute to sports content and everyone would have bundled movie channels. Why is a la cart ok for some channels and not others?
If sports are a big $ chunk then yes, put all the sports in a mini-bundle.
It isn't far off at these prices.
Hulu/Netflix and most others don't meet my requirements as they are not full HD quality. The only one I've seen that is full HD is Vudu. There is no good OTA/Vudu DVR available yet.
I'm probably going to eventually go to OTA and Vudu only.
It would like to keep some of the other stuff we watch but it's a question of value. That garbage doesn't add up to the high costs of sat or cable.
What is the benefit of a la carte to consumers again?
True, but there are other factors as well. For example, you could produce a show iwth the same production values as, say, "The Donna Reed Show" for peanuts today. But there is insufficient demand for programming shot with one camera, on a sound stage, with 3 sets. Production values are higher, which costs more money. We live in a world where even a movie version of a Broadway musical has a multi-million dollar digital special effects budget. The most popular shows on TV are also the most expensive to produce, and the costs keep rising. There is already massive pressure in place to find more economical means to deliver the programming. There just isn't as much fat to trim as you may think.
BTW, I just wanted to say I appreciate that this debate hasn't devolved into personal attacks like some other threads I've seen on other message boards.
There is collusion between the content distributors and the service providers.
There are only a few service providers in a given area. They package and price similarly. Which is driven by similar demands of the content distributors.
That's why they haven't had their arse kicked yet. Smoke and mirrors of multiple entities colluding to exercise an overall effective monopoly.
It's a business persons paradise.
I can buy HBO (or any movie channel) to add to an existing package but there is absolutely ZERO service providers that will sell me nothing but HBO on their pipe. It makes absolutely NO DIFFERENCE to HBO. I can't even buy it and stream it directly from HBO (because their carriers won't allow it). HBO will sell some content that is a few years old via DVD/BluRay.
And what happened with Microsoft? They still bundle Internet Explorer, which is used as the standard browser by over 80% of all PC users. Virtually no other options exist for word processing, spreadsheet and presentation graphics. Yeah, those lawsuits did a lot of good.
Excuse me, but movie channels ARE bundled. You can't buy JUST HBO East from DirecTV, you have to take the whole HBO bundle. If you're a sports fan, you can't just buy ESPN, you have to pay for AMC, TMC and FXM as well. You may not believe it, but there ARE lots of people who would be quite happy buying ONLY sports specific channels...all of them are providing additional revenue to AMC, TNT, and all the other channels in the respective tiers.
Trust me, MTV Networks doesn't care if AMC Networks' channels are in the same bundle they are...they just care about getting to as many households as possible. They want to be in the most POPULAR tier...period.
You are more discerning than most. The PQ of Hulu and Netflix with a sufficiently high bandwidth connection is quite good. True, it is not "full HD" but they have CHOSEN to sell their product that way...just like AMC Networks (to give one example) has chosen to sell their channels as a group, rather than one at a time.
The only "demand" of the content providers is that, in most cases, they want to be in the most homes possible. Yes, that makes the offerings of most providers all pretty much the same. But that's not because they are "colluding" any more than Samsung, HTC and Nokia are colluding when they all offer pretty much the same phones through multiple carriers. They all want the widest market possible. What is so odd about that? It's just good business.
Who says it is the carriers that prevent it? Remember that right now, streaming access to the premium movie channels is at no additional cost...HBO is simply absorbing the (substantial) cost of maintaining streaming servers. Therefore, they want to insure that you are already paying them for access to their catalog. As soon as HBO thinks they could make as much money selling direct streaming only subscriptions via the internet they will do so.
Actually, I think Microsoft, with the Xbox and their ecosystem (windows live, Xbox Live/Music sky drive, Skype, office 365, etc) is probably the furthest along in making this happen.
Cable/Sat only expanded the OTA model. Most of us older folk are well trained to use that model. If something a la carte is to take over, its going to be disruptive change. Basically, the channel paradigm from OTA/cable is going to have to be replaced. This won't happen easily, at least for produced programming.
IP streamed sports, news/current events, instructional videos (food network recipes, DIY), seem to work now.
We are also seeing DVR/video on demand effecting linear channels.
Not sure how this will play out, but I do believe it will play out.
Which is false and would be prohibited.
Not quite. It is pointless to talk about a system that can't get started. Part of working is starting.
But you get to assume that things magically switch over to a new system? I think some of us are discussing the real world not some world were we assume a la carte magically happens.
The only league that has anti trust exemption is baseball.
Real world. Real facts.
The NFL actually LOST a major anti trust case to the USFL but the jury messed up the award so it wound up being only $3.
Every time football, basketball or hockey goes into a work stoppage, the unions decertify so they can file anti trust against the league.
Anti trust is NOT the problem.
This reminds me of the manager of a friend who one time asked her to schedule her innovations and breakthroughs.
Yes. Cheapen art. Because it is a widget.
No. It failed. You keep maintaining it succeeded but everything went bundled.
I'm sure many will point out how different the following comparison is. Look at it with an open mind and at a macro level and you will see MANY similarities.
If large bundles were the obvious way to do business then most business today would be that way. It's not. TV is not a lot different than a supermarket.
We have 3 supermarkets within a block of each other
They are all part of huge chains that have massive fixed costs in real estate, transportation, and people
They carry nearly identical selection of products
They all price similarly
They, and all their suppliers and product creators, are still in business so there is profit to be made
There are premium quality products available at higher cost (organic)
Not perfect (some producers don't make enough money; some products are unhealthy; etc) but overall probably the best system in the world.
Broadly speaking it's no different than TV. The supermarkets are cable, sat a/b, telco. The product are shows or a bundle of shows (channel) [a box of eggs].
Unlike TV today, everything is a la cart (small bundles of multiple units is still considered an item) and prices reflect real competition not only between stores but within stores.
One doesn't have to buy products at the supermarket. It is possible to grow your own and live completely independent of them.
Entering the store requires one buy bread, milk, eggs, etc. Because everybody needs them.
Buying one Nestle product requires buying every Nestle product
Can't buy a steak if you haven't purchased apples, oranges, ice cream, and pizza
Once you've picked a store you can't go to the other stores until you pay a fee or wait a period of time; and then after you switch you can't come back without a fee and wait period
Could go on and on.
Prove to me that there is anything fundamentally different about TV. At the root of all of it is the cost of labor.
Entertainment is a product that is consumed.
Ala carte failed on C-band. I had it, then bundles, then nearly single provider bundle. It was so much easier and generally cheaper.
Then I moved and picked up DIRECTV. (They finally had NFL Sunday Ticket.)
Ala carte failed, it was way too big of a hassle.