DBSTalk Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
2,353 Posts
ssm06 said:
Interesting article. If Apple finds a way to offer programing a la cart via ITV, it will change the TV landscape.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/story/2012-01-03/apple-tv-CES/52364952/1
It's not a question of "if", only when. By the end of this year, you will really start to see the battles heat up between the traditional MSOs and the content owners/providers. Over the next several years, you will see them struggle to re-align themselves to compete against the transition to "life in the cloud", but it is a futile fight. We want what we want and they can't hold both sides hostage forever. The days of the middle man are numbered...
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
1,711 Posts
In many cases the middle-men are the content owners. As an example Comcast owns NBC, Syfy, USA and a whole host of other networks.

There are just a few companies that own our 200+ channels and there is little incentive for them to give up the bundled cable model for an a la carte or streaming/on demand model. Disney doesn't want you to just buy ESPN, they want you to buy Disney, Disney Jr, ABC Family, etc, etc.
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
5,458 Posts
mreposter said:
In many cases the middle-men are the content owners. As an example Comcast owns NBC, Syfy, USA and a whole host of other networks.

There are just a few companies that own our 200+ channels and there is little incentive for them to give up the bundled cable model for an a la carte or streaming/on demand model. Disney doesn't want you to just buy ESPN, they want you to buy Disney, Disney Jr, ABC Family, etc, etc.
also apple will need to find away around download caps.
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
2,353 Posts
mreposter said:
In many cases the middle-men are the content owners. As an example Comcast owns NBC, Syfy, USA and a whole host of other networks.

There are just a few companies that own our 200+ channels and there is little incentive for them to give up the bundled cable model for an a la carte or streaming/on demand model. Disney doesn't want you to just buy ESPN, they want you to buy Disney, Disney Jr, ABC Family, etc, etc.
The other side of the coin is that there is less and less incentive for people to continue to pay more and more for the 200+ channels. 200 channels of 50% crap is only worthwhile when the cost still beats paying for only the desired 50%. We are close to that point now and the next 5 years will see that reversed and that will end the MSOs run as the dominant players in media distribution. It think the first shot will come in the next 2 years in the form of a partnership between Disney and Apple that will allow access to all Disney content but the "first run" ABC network shows via iDevice, including the iTV.

Obviously, the MSOs are going to fight like hell to protect their monopolies, but eventually they will lose. Those that learn to re-work and take advantage of the broadband delivery markets will survive as that, those that attempt to stop the progression and maintain their stranglehold will go by the wayside.
 

·
Hall Of Fame
Joined
·
2,014 Posts
BattleScott said:
Obviously, the MSOs are going to fight like hell to protect their monopolies, but eventually they will lose.
And why is that a given? The majority of MSOs control the pipeline. Do you really think Apple, Google, Netflix, etc. are prepared to roll out broadband in every location they wish to compete?
 

·
DaBears
Joined
·
6,085 Posts
Different year same old "they will have to" arguments. Go back the last 5 years and read the price increase threads and people have said the same thing. 5 years later still no ala carte and there won't be for the foreseeable future either. Disney won't break up their channels and if they did it would be too expensive. Apple thinks it can do with the TV industry it did with the music industry. The difference is the music industry was ravaged by piracy for so long that the music lables had to make distribution deals to try to get sales somewhere as music stores were closing at record rates. The TV content creators are in the position of power because people will flee a company if they let the channel drop.

Eventually people won't be able to afford pay TV at a level they want. The difference is that companies will still make money without them and unless the content providers get forced to do something no one will care about the bottom percent just like they don't today.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top