• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The TV Business May Be Starting To Collapse

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I just convinced my GF to cancel our DirecTV that cost us $100 a month so she could watch CSI:Miami all day. Now she ia asking me when are we getting Dish. 🙁

Just get the seasons from Netflix (if they have them).
 
IGBT said:
cable and sat cancellations are thru the roof. It's only TV. You don't need it.
Click to expand...

I wish I could convince my wife to cancel cable and just watch shows online and use OTA for sports, but she won't budge. At least she did call Brighthouse about the high monthly bill and they did give us a ton of upgrades for free.
 
K1052 said:
As soon as agnostic devices start showing up that can stream live channels on an a la carte basis from any network connection the jig is up for traditional Cable/Sat programming as a profitable business. Content creators will beat the delivery pricing down to maximize profit and everyone else will just be in the internet access business. Comcast most definitely sees the writing on the wall which is why they bought NBC/Universal to get at the content end.

Assuming Apple releases such a device in the next couple years and the ensuing war between them, Google, and Samsung explodes like it has in other tech markets I think it is entirely likely that packaged TV as we know it now will be all but extinct before the end of the decade.
Click to expand...

The problem with that is the same people that profit a ton from cable subscriptions also control a TON of the countries broadband access. Bandwidth caps will easily put a stop to the above or force you to pay relatively the same amount as your cable subscription + internet anyway.

And honestly, someone has to pay for the vast increase in infrastructure improvements that would be required if most people were to get there TV over the net. You are already seeing this to some degree due to Netflix.
 
michal1980 said:
problem with TV business dieing is that alot of programing will die with it.

If no one watches commericals, and that ad revenue dies you either have to pay alot more per episode/show to support its production, or the show will never get made.
Click to expand...

Worthy shows will still get made, and people will pay for them on demand. Crap will not continue to get made, that's true.
 
TV is easily the worst cultural influence and creator of apathy/mindless consumerism in the USA.

It's a freudian mindfuck box since corporations combined psychoanalysis with government propaganda around WW1.

A damning account of how US consumerism = Freudian quakery + straight up propaganda that preys/creates its own inadequacies so you buy their useless stuff (saving capitalism from overproduction)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9167657690296627941
 
Last edited:
CPA said:
Do you even understand the business cycle of tv?

Cable charges a rate.
From that rate, they pay the networks their rate, their costs and make a profit.
From the networks rate, they pay the productions companies their rate, their costs and make a profit.
From the production companies, they pay the shows cast a crew their union rate, their costs and make a profit.

So, out of the charge you receive, Cable company makes money, network makes money, production company makes money, and the union members (actor's guild, screen writing guild and various crew unions) make money.
Click to expand...

Sorry but that is not correct, you are leaving out the advertising revenue. So it should be:


Cable charges a rate
From that rate + advertising revenue, they pay the networks their rate, they pay their costs and make a profit.

Also the original article is funny. Newspapers may have been growing revenue but they have been going out of business for decades, since what the 1930's? It has been a long slow death and the constant layoffs over the decades have been proof of that. There are success stories, USA Today launch after the advent of TV and has been strong.
 
Darwin333 said:
The problem with that is the same people that profit a ton from cable subscriptions also control a TON of the countries broadband access. Bandwidth caps will easily put a stop to the above or force you to pay relatively the same amount as your cable subscription + internet anyway.

And honestly, someone has to pay for the vast increase in infrastructure improvements that would be required if most people were to get there TV over the net. You are already seeing this to some degree due to Netflix.
Click to expand...

If broadband access pricing rises to the level of current cable packaging there will be lots of competitors. I can see the revenge of the phone companies in the not too distant future since they've been investing heavily in fiber and also need major infrastructure build outs to handle their mobile traffic.
 
CPA said:
Do you even understand the business cycle of tv?

Cable charges a rate.
From that rate, they pay the networks their rate, their costs and make a profit.
From the networks rate, they pay the productions companies their rate, their costs and make a profit.
From the production companies, they pay the shows cast a crew their union rate, their costs and make a profit.

So, out of the charge you receive, Cable company makes money, network makes money, production company makes money, and the union members (actor's guild, screen writing guild and various crew unions) make money.
Click to expand...

a good deal of a cable bill is consumers paying for the loans monopolies used to become monopolies.
 
Tom said:
a good deal of a cable bill is consumers paying for the loans monopolies used to become monopolies.
Click to expand...

Cable is a monopoly because government chooses to have them be a monopoly. Most cable TV infrastructure was built at a time when multiple cable companies would have to come to local jurisdictions hat in hand begging to be awarded a franchise to provide cable. The local governments would pick a company to reward after extorting any number of "public access" and "local government" channels must carries as part of the deal.
 
The problem is money.

Some stations cost more than others, and some (QVC) pay for themselves (and may even make your subscription cheaper).

I don't LIKE it, but I can see it.

What they should do, and should have done a LONG time ago is allow you to pick every single channel you want. These packages are insane. I do not WANT Telemundo, or the Thai Network, or the Chinese channel. Why do you waste my money on them? I want my Funimation channel back (screw getting 7 nickelodeon channels on both standard AND HD). I want the networks, I want the science channel and the Discovery channel and some others, but I really do not need ESPN 1-12.

They should offer a few things:
Monthly ala-carte subscriptions
Pay (no commercials) vs No Pay (commercials) broadcasts
Option to pay (at a premium) for events you are not subscribed for (US Open, for instance).

Add to it the ludicrous price you pay for a package deal. Why the hell do I have to pay $30 per month for phone service? I really do not NEED to call Alaska or Puerto Rico! You telling me that internet streaming for phone traffic is that expensive, or are you just afraid to tell me that you could make a profit on it if you only charged $10/mo?



Bottom line is this. Once they develop a few more idiot-friendly streamers that can pick what you want and watch it (and still have a bit of extra "new" stuff so you can try a new sitcom or series) you will see "cable" TV subscriptions drop like a stone.

They are not there yet, but there is only so much "Triple Play" will fend that off.

I am close to dropping my number myself... I just like the number and do not want to give it up! 😉
 
BoberFett said:
Worthy shows will still get made, and people will pay for them on demand. Crap will not continue to get made, that's true.
Click to expand...

1) Crap is always subjective


2) I have strong doubts over that [worthy shows] being made. There would be too many free loaders that would complain that greedy company XYZ wants 5 dollars an episode.
 
Ninjahedge said:
The problem is money.

Some stations cost more than others, and some (QVC) pay for themselves (and may even make your subscription cheaper).

I don't LIKE it, but I can see it.

What they should do, and should have done a LONG time ago is allow you to pick every single channel you want. These packages are insane. I do not WANT Telemundo, or the Thai Network, or the Chinese channel. Why do you waste my money on them? I want my Funimation channel back (screw getting 7 nickelodeon channels on both standard AND HD). I want the networks, I want the science channel and the Discovery channel and some others, but I really do not need ESPN 1-12.

They should offer a few things:
Monthly ala-carte subscriptions
Pay (no commercials) vs No Pay (commercials) broadcasts
Option to pay (at a premium) for events you are not subscribed for (US Open, for instance).

Add to it the ludicrous price you pay for a package deal. Why the hell do I have to pay $30 per month for phone service? I really do not NEED to call Alaska or Puerto Rico! You telling me that internet streaming for phone traffic is that expensive, or are you just afraid to tell me that you could make a profit on it if you only charged $10/mo?



Bottom line is this. Once they develop a few more idiot-friendly streamers that can pick what you want and watch it (and still have a bit of extra "new" stuff so you can try a new sitcom or series) you will see "cable" TV subscriptions drop like a stone.

They are not there yet, but there is only so much "Triple Play" will fend that off.

I am close to dropping my number myself... I just like the number and do not want to give it up! 😉
Click to expand...


I wounder how much all the fluff channels actually cost.

http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/files/2010/03/cable-sub-fees.png

Thats an old list.
 
The article and most posters approach this from a geek's standpoint. I share my house with my wife and mother in law. There is no way either is going to get their TV fix from anything more complicated than a very simple remote. I'd love to drop Comcast but until some "magic box" comes along I don't see that happening. Instead I monthly gag at our $160 monthly bill for basic cable and internet. (no premium channels, only one DVR).
 
Thump553 said:
The article and most posters approach this from a geek's standpoint. I share my house with my wife and mother in law. There is no way either is going to get their TV fix from anything more complicated than a very simple remote. I'd love to drop Comcast but until some "magic box" comes along I don't see that happening. Instead I monthly gag at our $160 monthly bill for basic cable and internet. (no premium channels, only one DVR).
Click to expand...

My mother in law uses abc.com to watch her shows online at times when missed. She still prefers on a TV but times are changing and as younger kids grow up with mobile devices then the real change will occur.

Also it is not like the cable companies do not foresee this, why do you think Comcast keeps diversifying with on demand and the NBC acquisition.
 
Thump553 said:
The article and most posters approach this from a geek's standpoint. I share my house with my wife and mother in law. There is no way either is going to get their TV fix from anything more complicated than a very simple remote. I'd love to drop Comcast but until some "magic box" comes along I don't see that happening. Instead I monthly gag at our $160 monthly bill for basic cable and internet. (no premium channels, only one DVR).
Click to expand...

These 'magic boxes' are already here. A well set up XBMC build is as easy to use as any cable box, and netflix is not difficult to use either. Both can be controlled with a simple remote. For basic operation my XBMC only uses 6 buttons, counting the power button.


Ninjahedge said:
They should offer a few things:
Monthly ala-carte subscriptions
Pay (no commercials) vs No Pay (commercials) broadcasts
Option to pay (at a premium) for events you are not subscribed for (US Open, for instance).

Add to it the ludicrous price you pay for a package deal. Why the hell do I have to pay $30 per month for phone service? I really do not NEED to call Alaska or Puerto Rico! You telling me that internet streaming for phone traffic is that expensive, or are you just afraid to tell me that you could make a profit on it if you only charged $10/mo?
Click to expand...

The reason they don't want this is that TV is an addiction. And they know very well that if you get away from your addiction for a little while the craving goes away, and then you find you don't need it at all.


Bottom line is this. Once they develop a few more idiot-friendly streamers that can pick what you want and watch it (and still have a bit of extra "new" stuff so you can try a new sitcom or series) you will see "cable" TV subscriptions drop like a stone.
Click to expand...

As others have stated, the major content providers are going to fight this to the bitter end, and they have seen the fight coming and are preparing for it already. Content providers have been becoming ISP's for a decade now, and they are locking up monopolies so that they have complete control of both content and data for large population areas. They are fighting against, and winning, the fight for net neutrality, which will give them the power to determine what you can stream. They are using their power to control the national dialog in order to convince people that data caps are in the public's best interest. The are slowly getting us used to the idea that we have no control over our own data, and that having our data consumption trends spied on and reported to content providers is a necessary and right.

while we see all this as a lot of small issues being fought over, they are doing a massive multifront campaign intended to lock up all content for their exclusive use forever.
 
Thump553 said:
The article and most posters approach this from a geek's standpoint. I share my house with my wife and mother in law. There is no way either is going to get their TV fix from anything more complicated than a very simple remote. I'd love to drop Comcast but until some "magic box" comes along I don't see that happening. Instead I monthly gag at our $160 monthly bill for basic cable and internet. (no premium channels, only one DVR).
Click to expand...

You need to explore your options. My FIOS is $128.00 for phone, TV, and internet. This is not for basic TV, pretty much everything but the premium channels with whole house DVR and the phone allows unlimited calling to Canada.
 
Last edited:
Maybe one day these cable companies will design a system where the customer picks the channels. I dropped my directTV Service. No cable for me. I just decided I was not getting enough value for what I was paying them.
 
piasabird said:
Maybe one day these cable companies will design a system where the customer picks the channels. I dropped my directTV Service. No cable for me. I just decided I was not getting enough value for what I was paying them.
Click to expand...

That would be great but even then, I'd have a hard time picking anything except maybe HBO and possibly Showtime given the current state of cable TV. A few years ago, TLC, Discovery, and History were great; TLC circled the drain first and now Discovery and History are catering to the redneck crowd as well. Even Animal Planet is starting to air crap; maybe they have for a long time and I just noticed (see: The Mermaid "documentary").
 
Last edited:
Ya, the "science" channels are getting more and more idiotically speculative.

Their production values have gone WAY up, but the subject matter has gone from Cosmos to Cosmo.

As for the XBMC? Both software and tricked out box are interesting, but they still require you to go somewhere to get it. This is not in Best Buy, or Sears next to the flat screens, and you have to become comfortable with the format to be able to do things.

Hell, TiVo was great (not my experience), especially when you cracked it, but people did not flock to that either.

Changing formats is like removing a sharp pointed stick from a persons arse. It may be better to remove it (even replacing it with something less pointy), but the removal causes discomfort and is resisted.

Until you can pretty much get the consumer "drunk" off their, well, ass and do the removal while they are paying attention to something else, all we will get in brand new packages of channels that only "key target demographics" (certain pointy stick lovers) prefer.


I am still amazed that we cannot choose channels a bit more freely.
 
michal1980 said:
1) Crap is always subjective


2) I have strong doubts over that [worthy shows] being made. There would be too many free loaders that would complain that greedy company XYZ wants 5 dollars an episode.
Click to expand...

If that was the case there would be no market for DVD releases of seasons of television shows, and that area has exploded. There are DVD sets for even obscure shows now.

People will pay for what they value.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top