| mhall119 | http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/12/why-pay-for-channels-you-dont-watch-ctd-2.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+andrewsullivan%2FrApM+%28The+Daily+Dish%29 an interesting read | 00:37 |
|---|---|---|
| mhall119 | especially the last two paragraphs | 00:37 |
| MrChrisDruif | Is that so mhall119 ? | 00:39 |
| MrChrisDruif | It's about the death of cable? | 00:40 |
| mhall119 | MrChrisDruif: most of it is about why we can't pick just the channels we want | 01:39 |
| mhall119 | the last part is about why that might be changing in the near future | 01:39 |
| MrChrisDruif | Yeah, it's because cable companies have forced us in a certain direction | 01:40 |
| MrChrisDruif | /model | 01:40 |
| mhall119 | I can see a future where "channels" are nothing more than RSS feeds that anybody can make. You subscribe to the ones that pick the best lineups for you | 01:41 |
| mhall119 | so if MrCrhisDruif has the best selection of SciFi shows, I'll subscribe to his channel | 01:41 |
| mhall119 | he doesn't have to produce content, or even distribute content, just distribute a list of content | 01:41 |
| mhall119 | the trick is going to be finding an economic model for that | 01:42 |
| MrChrisDruif | I think it'll be similar to Youtube subscriptions to channels | 01:42 |
| mhall119 | can you add other people's videos to your list that other people subscribe to? | 01:43 |
| MrChrisDruif | Well, it's like youtube actually. A lot of uploaders get paid by Youtube and are "partners" of youtube | 01:43 |
| mhall119 | right, but that's a walled garden | 01:43 |
| MrChrisDruif | Well, "we" could have a slightly different model. I use AdBlock, but otherwise you get really annoyed by all the ad's on Youtube | 01:44 |
| mhall119 | what if TV shows produced episodes with embedded commercials, and split apart at commercial breaks in a way that lets you add your own commercials to the feed, without removing theirs, but also without having to give them a cut of your ad revenue | 01:44 |
| mhall119 | that's almost what major networks do now | 01:45 |
| MrChrisDruif | If we get a model in which a channel get paid per users, just a small amount every month or year, then those ad's could be removed right? | 01:45 |
| mhall119 | sure, but if the content is already free and includes ads, that wouldn't be an option | 01:45 |
| mhall119 | if "Lost" is available with ads in it already, I'm not going to pay you to watch it just because you didn't add any more | 01:46 |
| MrChrisDruif | I don't understand what you mean? | 01:46 |
| mhall119 | basically, I'd be watching your ads (ads for your customers) in addition to the show's ads (ads from their customers) | 01:46 |
| MrChrisDruif | I think the two of us have different ideas =') | 01:47 |
| mhall119 | I put up with the show's ads because i like the show, I put up with your ads because I like the collection of shows you've assembled for me | 01:47 |
| MrChrisDruif | You think about static commercials, whereas I'm thinking more in the way of youtube.. | 01:47 |
| mhall119 | I hate those even more than regular commercials | 01:47 |
| mhall119 | but yeah, that would work too | 01:48 |
| MrChrisDruif | And if you paid a small amount, then they get removed. | 01:48 |
| mhall119 | but the decentralized economic models means that both you and the show have to get revenue independently of eachother | 01:48 |
| MrChrisDruif | And those dynamics adds can contain what ever is required. Either of the uploader or from a sponsor.... | 01:49 |
| mhall119 | so I can pay you to avoid your ads, but that doesn't mean I'd be able to avoid the show's ads | 01:49 |
| MrChrisDruif | What if the show if a privately organized show, e.g. Equals Three or Annoying Orange, two very popular shows on Youtube | 01:50 |
| mhall119 | what do you mean privately organized? | 01:50 |
| MrChrisDruif | They aren't tied to broadcasting studios, so those shows don't have ad's tied to that show | 01:51 |
| mhall119 | ok, so those shows go to a commercial company and say "Hey, X number of people are going to be watching this video, I'll give you a 30 second ad space on it for $Y" | 01:52 |
| mhall119 | then MrChrisDruif | 01:52 |
| mhall119 | then MrChrisDruif's channel picks it up, because it's an awesome show and awesome shows build his subscribers, then he goes to another commercial company and says "Hey, W number of people are going to watch my channel, I'll give you a 30 second ad space on it for $Z" | 01:53 |
| mhall119 | the creators of the show like this, because the more people MrChrisDruif shows their video to, the larger their viewer count (X), which means they can make $Y bigger | 01:54 |
| mhall119 | MrChrisDruif has incentives to find quality shows without too many ads in them already, because that increase his subscriber count (W) which lets him make $Z bigger | 01:56 |
| mhall119 | if either one puts in too many ads, they lose subscribers to people who put in less, to the incentive is the minimal number of ads to get a good profit | 01:56 |
| mhall119 | in the first case, if the show puts in too many, MrChrisDruif finds a different show for his lineup | 01:56 |
| mhall119 | in the second, if MrChrisDruif puts in too many, people switch to mhall119's feed which has a similar lineup but fewer commercials | 01:57 |
| MrChrisDruif | On the one hand this looks correct, however, what if the creators of the show are the only ones able to upload it? That way everyone views it straight from their feed, and people get to know about their feed through likes? | 01:57 |
| mhall119 | because part of what people like about the current TV situation is the variety that is given to them | 01:58 |
| MrChrisDruif | If you want you can save it on your TV/Server, but with some kind of unique id attached to it, so it can't be uploaded again? | 01:58 |
| mhall119 | we don't have to go out and find good new shows, we don't have to manage a huge lineup of programs | 01:58 |
| mhall119 | most people don't even build up an RSS subscription list of more than a dozen sources | 01:59 |
| mhall119 | that's work, and people don't want work when they turn on their TV | 01:59 |
| mhall119 | if you do that work for them, they'll be willing to either pay you or watch your ads | 01:59 |
| MrChrisDruif | Remember our social media feature in the list? | 01:59 |
| mhall119 | yeah but most of my friends have horrible taste in TV | 02:00 |
| MrChrisDruif | Haha =) | 02:00 |
| mhall119 | it's be nothing but ghost hunters, singing competitions and whatever that vampire show is that everybody's watching now | 02:00 |
| MrChrisDruif | Yeah, maybe we should be become friend. Then you'll have some awesome suggestions waiting =P | 02:01 |
| mhall119 | heh | 02:01 |
| mhall119 | there's also just plain "I'm bored, show me something I haven't seen or heard of before" | 02:01 |
| mhall119 | like Pandora even | 02:02 |
| mhall119 | or Netflix's suggestion system (which sucks, btw) | 02:02 |
| MrChrisDruif | Youtube also has that. It analyzes what you've watched before and suggests things you might like | 02:02 |
| mhall119 | yeah | 02:02 |
| MrChrisDruif | You get my drift? | 02:02 |
| mhall119 | algorithms are fine and dandy sometimes, but other times I want someone else's pick | 02:03 |
| mhall119 | not more of what I've already seen | 02:03 |
| mhall119 | maybe a mix of algorithms and social inputs would work | 02:03 |
| MrChrisDruif | That's what I'm suggesting =) | 02:03 |
| mhall119 | but I still like the idea of someone aggregating shows into a cohesive, thematic feed | 02:03 |
| mhall119 | and I'd give up a few minutes here and there to watch ads in order to get that | 02:04 |
| JackyAlcine | That sounds glorious. | 02:04 |
| MrChrisDruif | Most feeds on Youtube are that, they all have a certain theme | 02:04 |
| mhall119 | right, and if YouTube 1) weren't a walled garden and 2) had better quality stuff that wasn't always under threat of a takedown notice, that would work | 02:05 |
| mhall119 | they can fix #2 | 02:05 |
| mhall119 | with enough clout | 02:05 |
| MrChrisDruif | I'm not saying we should use Youtube, I was just taking it as an example =) | 02:05 |
| mhall119 | and a good example | 02:06 |
| MrChrisDruif | Thank you | 02:06 |
| mhall119 | maybe Ubuntu TV could become the market place where people sell their feeds | 02:06 |
| MrChrisDruif | Finally he seems to get what I'm going at =|)) | 02:07 |
| mhall119 | heh | 02:07 |
| mhall119 | it's been a long, long day, I'm a bit slow | 02:07 |
| MrChrisDruif | .....it's 3 AM over here | 02:07 |
| MrChrisDruif | Alright, now I'm really going | 02:09 |
| MrChrisDruif | I wanted to set my alarm at 9 AM... | 02:09 |
| MrChrisDruif | So yeah...off I go =) Good night JackyAlcine & mhall119 | 02:09 |
| JackyAlcine | o/ | 02:11 |
| JackyAlcine | oy. | 02:11 |
| JackyAlcine | lol | 02:11 |
| dmj726 | I'm actually not sure ads are really the only or the right way to go | 02:11 |
| dmj726 | It's one business model, yes. But they can quickly become overwhelmingly annoying if handled poorly | 02:12 |
| mhall119 | dmj726: it was an example, but you're gonna have to fund the content somehow | 02:12 |
| dmj726 | mhall119: totally agreed on funding content. | 02:12 |
| mhall119 | dmj726: hence my example of why the annoyance would be self-limiting by offering more choice | 02:12 |
| dmj726 | Ads can be one model, but I'm not sure they're as good a model as some think | 02:13 |
| tgm4883 | ads? | 02:52 |
| tgm4883 | skimming the backlog, I recall rhpot1991 having an argument about why it's needed to bundle channels | 02:54 |
| rhpot1991 | the argument goes that if you had ala cart cable any cable channels would not be able to survive as is | 04:51 |
| rhpot1991 | they get their funding because of package deals | 04:52 |
| rhpot1991 | fox sells fox with fx and all their other channels, etc | 04:52 |
| rhpot1991 | so once you ax that funding we get rid of all of fx's original shows and are left with 24 hours of 2.5 men reruns, no thanks | 04:53 |
| dmj726 | rhpot1991: But why wouldn't fx get subscribers if their shows were really wanted | 05:08 |
| rhpot1991 | dmj726: in a perfect world sure | 06:13 |
| rhpot1991 | but in today's television mindless reality tv rules | 06:14 |
| rhpot1991 | with its lack of writers and low "actor" pay | 06:14 |
| dmj726 | rhpot1991: so are you suggesting that this status quo is a good thing? | 06:24 |
| dmj726 | rhpot1991: not accusing you, just wondering if letting some crap disappear is all that bad | 06:24 |
| rhpot1991 | dmj726: absolutely not, all the good shows get canceled without a chance and instead we get another american idol reboot | 06:26 |
| rhpot1991 | its a sad sad world we live in where whitney is somehow still on the air but community is on infinite hiatus | 06:27 |
| dmj726 | rhpot1991: so you're saying if people had a choice, they'd go for the crap? | 06:27 |
| rhpot1991 | isn't that what happens now? | 06:28 |
| dmj726 | rhpot1991: yeah, I wish there was more good scifi on the air | 06:28 |
| rhpot1991 | people don't want things that make them think | 06:28 |
| rhpot1991 | they want mindless tv | 06:28 |
| rhpot1991 | so generic laugh track comedies, the same old reality tv show, or a 1 hour crime/drama procedural | 06:28 |
| rhpot1991 | rinse and repeat | 06:28 |
| dmj726 | right now if you subscribe to cable, you're stuck financing ghost hunters and co regardless | 06:28 |
| rhpot1991 | at least with cable I get fx and amc | 06:29 |
| rhpot1991 | both with excellent original programming | 06:29 |
| rhpot1991 | so any model that threatens them I don't agree with | 06:29 |
| dmj726 | I'm just suggesting that said original programming might distinguish them from the crowd and actually get them above average subscribers ala carte | 06:30 |
| rhpot1991 | that said show me a model that doesn't kill arrested development at its young age and I'll follow you blindly | 06:30 |
| dmj726 | Honestly, I'm trying for a model where the show can't get screwed by the network if it can sustain itself | 06:31 |
| rhpot1991 | the only way I see it is if you skip tv | 06:31 |
| rhpot1991 | and go right to digital VoD | 06:31 |
| rhpot1991 | amazon/netflix/etc | 06:31 |
| rhpot1991 | let me pay for my shows I like and I'll be happy and give you a lot more money that way | 06:31 |
| rhpot1991 | that doesn't work for new shows though | 06:32 |
| dmj726 | I'd be happy with that scenario. | 06:32 |
| dmj726 | Well, it depends on being able to capture an audience | 06:32 |
| rhpot1991 | think of kickstarter | 06:32 |
| dmj726 | I'm not sure that problem has been reliably solved, but I don't think it's impossible | 06:32 |
| rhpot1991 | if you let me pledge $ towards a new season of my favorite show | 06:33 |
| rhpot1991 | I'd be all over that | 06:33 |
| rhpot1991 | but I'm not going to blindly pledge towards shows I don't know | 06:33 |
| rhpot1991 | maybe a combination of the both would work | 06:33 |
| dmj726 | True, and I suspect people who have made one good show, could find supporters for future projects | 06:34 |
| rhpot1991 | anything that lest good shows with bad ratings live on I'd be all for | 06:34 |
| dmj726 | rhpot1991: or even just good shows with mediocre ratings | 06:34 |
| dmj726 | the ones with a dedicated but niche audience | 06:35 |
| rhpot1991 | yep | 06:35 |
| dmj726 | If it had been allowed say Firefly likely could have funded several seasons if not subject to network whims | 06:36 |
| dmj726 | (basing purely on DVD sales and fan reaction here) | 06:36 |
| dmj726 | I'm not sure TV and cable packages as they exist now are likely to exist as they are now indefinitely | 06:40 |
| === dduffey is now known as dduffey_afk | ||
| === dduffey_afk is now known as dduffey | ||
| === dduffey is now known as dduffey_test | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!