The impending death of traditional TV?

Comments

• Options

  ohglobbits Posts: 4,482

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  04/05/16 - 11:25 #2

  Basic subscription packages are still affordable and Freeview is of course free so we're going to have far fewer cord cutters than in the States where people are being forced to abadon traditional television for internet TV over price.

  0
• Options

  moox Posts: 18,880

  Forum Member

  ✭✭

  04/05/16 - 11:28 #3

  In the US, cable was king and people are beginning to resent paying over the odds for that service. I believe the biggest issue is that Disney, which owns ESPN, demands that ESPN is available to everyone (and thus is paid for by every cable customer whether they want it or not). If the cable co doesn't agree, they won't get the Disney Channel, ABC and all the rest of it.
  
  It was so important that a lot of people don't have antennas anymore, and broadcasters aren't too bothered about transmitter coverage because most people are on cable. The US doesn't have a Freesat-like system for people who are out of coverage. You have to pay the American versions of Sky for even the most basic service.
  
  Obviously here in the UK we have broadcaster-supported free to air platforms on terrestrial and satellite, so cancelling Sky or Virgin is very easy and practical, and services like iPlayer really only need to do catch up, not live broadcasting
  
  It probably also helps that big ISPs like Talktalk and BT basically throw Freeview boxes at you for joining their internet service, so people may be more likely to use those boxes for live TV too

  0
• Options

  mike65 Posts: 11,386

  Forum Member

  ✭✭

  04/05/16 - 11:42 #4

  The death of traditional and linear television was always Hipster media chat nonsense - "wishcasting" (of which there is no shortage on this forum) sure it'll happen one day but there are far too many excitable voices of little wit or insight into the human condition and the actual infrastructure of the market.

  0
• Options

  i4u Posts: 55,016

  Forum Member

  ✭

  04/05/16 - 11:59 #5

  Recently there was an expert in these matters on The Media Show ….
  
  He said in the UK only 54% have subscription services while in the States it’s 83%
  
  He claims only 20% (5m) of homes have Netflix of those two thirds are TV subscribers, the least likely to take Netflix are those with just Freeview or have no TV.
  
  Netflix has transferred the lives of those who have it but they average only 36 minutes a day on Netflix compared to over 3 hours watching conventional television.
  
  On content he said UK Netflix subscribers pay more for less than those in America because he claims much of its American content is restricted in the UK.

  0
• Options

  WillButcher Posts: 923

  Forum Member

  ✭✭

  04/05/16 - 12:25 #6

  Is anyone really surprised? Anyone with an ounce of common sense could tell you that on demand content was not replacing broadcast TV in most cases, but rather that people are embracing on demand viewing to complement their live and timeshifted viewing.
  
  Of course there are people that will have largely replaced linear viewing with on demand viewing, but those people are in the minority and certainly are indicative of the viewing habits of the general public.
  
  As mike65 alluded to above,it is more a case of people that watch more on demand content wishing it were true, rather than it being an actuality.

  0
• Options

  spiney2 Posts: 27,058

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  04/05/16 - 12:48 #7

  traditional broadcasting is far more cost efficient, obviously. Just the tv license needed to receive. But, not so lucrative as internet connections making BIG BUCKS ("as much as the market will bear") for huge American owned companies .........

  0