The TV Business May Be Starting To Collapse

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
That not all viewers want to see that. But, viewers which are not within some low percentile will be ignored, since attempting to please them is a riskier proposition, if the show bombing means little to no revenue was made from it. Since such a show may also need time to get word of mouth, and decent promotion, the risk is more than just the appeal of the show itself.

To put it another way, if we had per-show a la cart, Joss Whedon would probably be stuck doing slasher movies, today.

So, how is that different from any other industry? Cars? Clothes? Movies? Records? The cable companies always tell us that a-la-carte would be the death of everything, but I haven't seen any reason why bundling is critical for cable tv but not for every other business. I think tv would be just fine either way, it's just that the cable companies have a tougher time convincing you to pay a bunch of money for junk when you can specifically pick what you want to pay for.
 

Ninjahedge

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2005
4,149
1
91
Isn't that exactly the same as with movies? It seems to work just fine with movies, companies take big dollar risks on movies. Some work out, others flop. The public decides what they want to spend money on. I would much prefer to be able to specifically pick what I want to pay for than to pay a lot of money each month to get a grab bag of 99% junk.

Actually, that is one of the best arguments AGAINST this that I have heard.

We go from Casablanca to Porky's 3 to Encino Man to Cranked (3).

We lose out on the cult shows that only develop followings after several seasons. Again, Firefly is a great example.
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
So, how is that different from any other industry? Cars? Clothes? Movies? Records? The cable companies always tell us that a-la-carte would be the death of everything, but I haven't seen any reason why bundling is critical for cable tv but not for every other business. I think tv would be just fine either way, it's just that the cable companies have a tougher time convincing you to pay a bunch of money for junk when you can specifically pick what you want to pay for.
I think you replied to the wrong poster :p. I wasn't arguing for the cable bundling v. a la carte. I'd take a la carte channels all day long.

I was arguing that funding content creation and distribution of television shows, many of which can get quite expensive, on a per-episode or per-season basis, would make a novel idea even more risky than it is today, and that funding per channel, content publisher, or content creator, rather than per work, can provide a buffer against that risk, not unlike a regulated futures market.

Now, as networks continue to devolve into reality shows and bad sitcoms, it won't matter either way. Chasing cheap profits over interested viewership is as much of the problem with cable cancellations as new distribution methods are. For all the cheap ratings Survivor provides, as much is lost, much more quietly, as we don't watch Discovery, TLC, A&E, History, etc., nearly as much. In following the same path, they may have created single shows with high short-term value each, but the total library is not being improved overall nearly as much as it used to be, year over year, and the costs don't reflect that quality.

And yes, they are not like cars. Cars are an economic necessity, in much of the U.S.. That's a fundamental difference. They are not like clothes. Public nudity is not legal everywhere, and most private businesses won't have it, either. They are not like records, because those are relatively cheap to make (people who perform on the side can often pool enough money together to make a decently recorded and mastered album). The expense is largely promotional (if a well-known producer is used, FI, that may cost, but that's not going to happen unless the artist has made plenty of money already, and/or the label plans it to be very popular).

Movies they are fairly like. I would even point to all the bad and so-so remakes we've had over the last ~15 years as an example of what I was talking about with risk-aversion. Unlike movies, a big budget TV show will not have theater sales and promotion. There may be alternatives, but I don't know what they'd be. A good bit of big budget movie promotion involves the novelty of the movie, especially movies heavy on action, CG, made in 3D, etc., which for a TV show, will be lost after a couple episodes.
 
Last edited:

Ninjahedge

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2005
4,149
1
91
The only solution to the ala-carte implosion of diversity would be a bundling of programs at a discount with a few "freebies" to get you interested in something new.

Some, like Walking Dead, GoT, and Arrested Development would be enough, if you liked them, to purchase the next season ahead of time at a discount....

But if they do not bundle, you do not get any clue on what shows MIGHT be similar and interesting without going out of your way. That has been shown to NOT be the way with most people. Even today they will watch the same channel/shows when something better may have come up elsewhere (news is a great example) just because they are used to it and don't know any better.