Could something like MLB.tv work over here?
soapfan_1973
Posts: 3,624 Forum Member
✭✭✭
For example with Premiership football. The ability to watch live any game out of those being played on the day with the option of home or away commentary. I think it could as it would be great to follow your own team in every match especially if you were unable to get to the actual games themselves.
I think it would work over here but what do you all think?
I think it would work over here but what do you all think?
0
Comments
I'm surprised the Premier League hasn't got an NFL Rewind type service in place where all the games can be watched for a fee 24/48 hours after completion all season long with a year-by-year archive building up over time. Wouldn't be shocked if that was in the pipeline either as a separate subscription or as a more complete service than Football First sometime soon.
I think your first paragraph hits the nail on the head- there's not much need for one. Although maybe if the local channels pick up some other league between them we'd see one? The BBL are trying to do something in a similar vein.
In the case of the latter, there are a few matches on Sky Go for catch-up, although that's hardly the same as you're suggesting.
How has it basically failed? I cannot see any evidence of it failing considering nearly all major broadcasters have online streaming services for their content, Now TV exists, Sky Go exists, Virgin TV Anywhere exists and BT/Talk Talk YouView sell quite well...
It has failed financially. The way many internet TV and online social media are funded is by selling worthless shares to people who buy them in the hope they will sell to companies who will pay outrageously high prices for those companies. Google is said to loose billions of dollars a year in bandwidth costs which advertising doesn't cover. ITV had an online only internet TV series but it didn't last long as with their ownership of friends reunited and Enable Media which they lost millions of pounds in the sales. Talk talk's TV service started as Video networks it has since been HomeChoice, Tiscali TV and Talk Talk TV and now You view all in about 15 years.
1) Google makes $3.4Bn in profit year on year.
2) Friends Reunited was not internet TV
3) VideoNetworks becoming Talk Talk has come about through a series of mergers and buyouts.
Please can you provide evidence of internet tv being a flop?
Eh? Gamepass was £129.99 for 1st August 13 to 31st July 14. Unless I'm being cheated.
Yeah, MLB.tv, Netflix, BBC iPlayer, Sky Now TV, YouTube, Slingbox, Amazon Prime, Flixter, Spotify, these are all high-profile iTV failures that I can in no way access from my £50 WDTV Live box while simultaneously surfing the net and scratching me arse.....
Can't remember how much it was but there is a cheaper option that ends after the after week 17.
1. I am referring to Youtube losing money, not google.
2. When referring to Friends reunited I was referring to internet companies in general
3. The fact that in the early 00s there were so many buyouts and mergers of phone companies and ISPs shows that they made no money. HomeChoice was loosing money like with many other websites. There was a similar service called KIT which closed in 2006 because it was loosing too much money.
In the early 00s there were many phone services and ISPs but they have all merged to companies like Talk Talk. According to their 2012 accounts Talktalk Telecom Limited has a net worth of -£268,361,000. Youview TV Limited has a net worth of £2,201,000 and Lovefilm UK Limited has a net worth of -£96,274,000.
Just because Talk Talk have bought and merged with other companies doesn't mean they are making money. Amazon owns many companies like Audible and Lovefilm, they can afford to buy them because investors are willing to pay more because it makes Amazon a bigger company and more appealing for other companies to pay over the top prices to buy it. It is like when Rupert Murdoch bought Myspace, ITV bought friends reunited and Microsoft bought Skype. Before those services were bought they had investors who were bankrolling them in exchange for shares and they sold their shares for a much higher amount. Rupert Murdoch and ITV sold those companies on at a loss.
Netflix, Youview, Blinkbox and Amazon Prime are basically the same service so you aren't likely to have individuals who are members of Netflix and Amazon Prime because most of the programmes and movies are both available on both services. Users of the services would find them good but they have to compete with each other. If one was to reduce their service by £1 the others would follow.
The way IPTV works is the data is sent to each person's device via an internet connection, you might be able to do all of those things but if you take in to account Millions of people simultaneously watching a football match in high definition it will be a heavy load on the phone network. If you take for example when there were things like the 9/11 attacks and the 7/7 bombings the phone networks got overloaded and that was just with voice calls. If you are sending something like 20mb/s (based on a HD sports channel on sky) of data to hundreds of thousands of people that will cause problems not only for the phone network but also the IPTV company.
Over here in the US there are even rumors and talk of companies acquiring rights for and creating an "un-cable" cable company, one which just transmits pay television content over IP without laying cable or fiber, relying on the already existing broadband lines. The US has a pretty lackluster broadband infrastructure I can't imagine the UK is anything less, if it works here why would it not work over there? Not to mention that every channel here is now launching apps in which to watch their content on.
"Internet TV" is anything but a failure, did you miss the headlines regarding HBOGO not being able to meet the online demand its subscribers were pulling during the Game of Thrones season premiere? If anything it's growing much faster than the media companies want it to and they're having to try to force their customers to slow down.
You seem to be labouring under a few misapprehensions.
1) I know how IPTV works, having been an early and frequent adopter.
2) It's been 13 years since 9/11 - capacity, technology, streaming, compression etc. have all improved since then.
3) Not once in this thread has anyone ever said that IPTV will REPLACE broadcast TV any time soon, merely complement it. Having said that, we already have a high-capacity television on-demand delivery system which operates using fixed cable telecommunications technology. It's called CABLE and it's been around for years.
You are correct - it's actually a double protection as because most baseball games are on cable sports channels it also forces people to go to the ballpark.
Right now the UK has national channels, and those local channels that start up, will never compete with Sky, ITV or anyone else for the rights to football featuring local teams in the higher leagues. In the US however the local NBC, local CBS etc will air their local MLB teams games. As we do not have such a set up, and sport is national, the rights could never be localised, and in the case of most premiership teams, their fanbase is around the UK, so the TV rights to those games are arguably only valuable if they are for the entire UK.
Much like how US TV is localised, so its MLB.TV, so any FA.tv system would be nationalised much like our TV system.
I know where the OP is coming from, sitting from the UK MLB.TV looks brilliant, but if a UK company were to buy the rights to air live games, its possible those games would be blocked to UK mlb.tv viewers.
http://www.deadline.com/2014/04/zero-point-zero-baseballs-worst-team-gets-tvs-worst-rating-again/
Long history of acrimony between the Astros and their TV audience mind, as well as hideous mismanagement at a financial level of CSN Houston and lack of agreement on carriage deals.
Hulu isn't really Internet TV though, its an OnDemand catchup service that uses the Internet as its delivery method. Its a different beast to actual Internet TV. Even then its revenue may be big but its making a loss and the networks who own have repeatedly tried to sell it but even with its attempts to boost its financials with some clever accounting it failed to attract any viable offers last time.
And things like SkyGo and HBOGo are viable as a perk for a bigger subscription service but its debatable if they would financially viable as its own package. Certainly HBONordic doesn't seem to be suggesting it would work.
InternetTV done as InternetTV rather than catchup libraries hasn't really shown itself to be really viable yet as a primary service at this time, certainly not on the larger scale
Oh well, I wanna watch the draft anyway. Always worth seeing if the Jets do something crazy/stupid with their picks. ;-)
It might be something that would be attractive in some way to the Football League but yet again I am not sure it would make the kind of money that would have them jumping at it.
The US market is vastly different to ours so you are really comparing chalk with cheese and whilst such ideas might be great for the consumer whilst top dollar is being obtained through the current vehicles I doubt there will be a great rush by the relevant parties to drastically change the way things are done.