baineschile
2600
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | Stinky words...
But he is right. So much of programming is subsidized by advertising. If that revenue stream is lost, its going to have to be made up somewhere else; and I'd hate to think where (ahem, consumers) |
|
raptor1418
Premium
join:2002-12-03
Denver, CO
 ·magicjack.com
 ·Mesa Networks
1 edit | Sounds like another industry stance
Is it me or are these industries just not thinking outside the box these days. All they can think about is how to increase their profit margins to make their investors happy and buy more stock.
They need to start thinking of how to make money in the new age instead of trying to keep the old way of doing things around. The old ways are just going to put them right in the same position MAFIAA's are in by not embracing technology to make things better, faster, cheaper.
They need to keep in mind that the only people really giving them the profits is the consumers. If the internet is how they want it or al carte is how they want it they are going to find a way to get it legal or illegal. These companies need to start thinking about new business models or end up dieing off a slow painful death. |
|
Simba7
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | Hmm.. I wonder..
..is this the same reason they want to kill off White Spaces? |
|
b10010011
Whats a Posting tag?
join:2004-09-07
Bellingham, WA | Emmy Award-winning drama Mad Men ?
Never heard of it. |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to raptor1418
Re: Sounds like another industry stance
said by raptor1418  :Is it me or are these industries just not thinking outside the box these days. All they can think about is how to increase their profit margins to make their investors happy and buy more stock. They need to start thinking of how to make money in the new age instead of trying to keep the old way of doing things around. How do they do that? People want their content for FREE and don't even want to view ads. So where does the money come from? Sure some people still buy DVDs but as time goes on people will pretty much expect to get it online.
This isn't like music where the band can go on tour and make money that way. Are they supposed to give it all for free with no ads and hope enough people buy a "Mad Men" t-shit or coffee mug?
No such thing as a free lunch people. Sure the content providers and makers need to learn to expect less income from all sources and make content cheaper for people. $2 for an hour episode let alone a 30 minute episode is to much. Especially when it's full of DRM. At least when I pay 99 cents for a MP3 I can put that song on any devices as I wish. By the way just because I can own the episode for $2 doesn't mean it's worth it. Maybe I'd rather rent it.
Anyways I think southparkstudios.com does it about as good as one can expect. I have access to every episode ever made adn the commercials are much less than what you get on TV. I'm actually MORE likely to pay attention to the ONE product in the ONE commercial during the commercial break than to remember it amongst the 7-8 commercials I see per break during a normal TV broadcast. |
|
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| said by BF69 :said by raptor1418 :Is it me or are these industries just not thinking outside the box these days. All they can think about is how to increase their profit margins to make their investors happy and buy more stock. They need to start thinking of how to make money in the new age instead of trying to keep the old way of doing things around. How do they do that? People want their content for FREE and don't even want to view ads. So where does the money come from? Sure some people still buy DVDs but as time goes on people will pretty much expect to get it online. Let me state the obvious, people have always wanted free content without ads. This isn't something that just happened recently. It's just gone from using cassettes to record radio stations music, then remove the commercials, give a copy to your friend (same with VHS) to the digital age where one person can do the exact same thing, only instead of copying it to his/her friends, it can be copied on a scale millions of times broader.
--
Fight NebuAD and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
|  reply to baineschile
Re: Stinky words...
Ironically though, clinging to the old model and grumbling instead of adapting is precisely why many newspapers went under. But those newspaper groups who are trying out NEW models aren't doing any better. Those who are trying to stay alive by adopting new models are dying just as quickly. More and more people get their news from Google News or FoxNews or CNN and not using newspapers at all. Adapting isn't working.
And broadcasters, without a steady stream of ad revenue and income from cable networks will be unable to produce new shows for consumption(online or not). So, I don't think adapting their business plan will save them - we are eventually going to get even worse shows than they put out now due to lack of income.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | reply to Simba7
Re: Hmm.. I wonder..
Most likely. |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs: | reply to baineschile
Re: Stinky words...
whoosh! |
|
xenophon
join:2007-09-17
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| Netflix/Hulu-esque streaming is the future
Selecting what you want to watch when you want is the future. Broadcasters will survive for a while, but they are not the future.
BTW, Chicago Sun-Times just filed Chapt 11 and LA Times did last Dec. It's just a matter of time for broadcasters to head towards bankruptcy, but it might be 10 years or so, when 10Mbps+ is widely/cheaply available to all - and probably wireless by then. |
|
jtudor
Xm 60's On 6 Freak
Premium,MVM
join:2002-12-07
Morganton, NC
| reply to TKJunkMail
But if all newspapers die....
said by TKJunkMail :But those newspaper groups who are trying out NEW models aren't doing any better. Those who are trying to stay alive by adopting new models are dying just as quickly. More and more people get their news from Google News or FoxNews or CNN and not using newspapers at all. Adapting isn't working. Just one problem with that: Where to Google, yahoo, the AP and many other online sources get their news from? Local newspapers that is who.
AP has reporters in some major cities, but not in every town. Yahoo has no reporters, neither does google.
If all the newspapers cease to exist, where will the news for the online sources come from? They will not have any sources, to the amount of news reported will diminish drastically.
I work from a newspaper group, and this has been a hot topic of discussion lately.
--
Best of luck
"Do, or Do not, there is no try!" Yoda
|
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| said by jtudor :Just one problem with that: Where to Google, yahoo, the AP and many other online sources get their news from? Local newspapers that is who. AP has reporters in some major cities, but not in every town. Yahoo has no reporters, neither does google. If all the newspapers cease to exist, where will the news for the online sources come from? They will not have any sources, to the amount of news reported will diminish drastically. I work from a newspaper group, and this has been a hot topic of discussion lately. Unfortunately, local coverage(except in major cities like you say) is going to suffer drastically. The major newswires(AP, Reuters, etc) are going to be the only sources of news and they won't cover all communities. I guess truly local news will have to depend on those free weekly ad newspapers they throw on your lawn and that have 20 or 30 stories a week.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | reply to baineschile
Re: Stinky words...
Google doesnt even provide news, it just uses a bot that brings in links, so people who want the whole thing still have to visit the offical website.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to knightmb
Re: Sounds like another industry stance
said by knightmb :said by BF69 :said by raptor1418 :Is it me or are these industries just not thinking outside the box these days. All they can think about is how to increase their profit margins to make their investors happy and buy more stock. They need to start thinking of how to make money in the new age instead of trying to keep the old way of doing things around. How do they do that? People want their content for FREE and don't even want to view ads. So where does the money come from? Sure some people still buy DVDs but as time goes on people will pretty much expect to get it online. Let me state the obvious, people have always wanted free content without ads. This isn't something that just happened recently. let me state the obvious. the only reason why TV existed in the first place was to get people to pay attention to advertising. Not to provide people with FREE entertainment. The entertainment was used as a vehicle to get people to keeping watching TV and thus the advertisements. Not the other way around.
It's just gone from using cassettes to record radio stations music, then remove the commercials, give a copy to your friend (same with VHS) to the digital age where one person can do the exact same thing, only instead of copying it to his/her friends, it can be copied on a scale millions of times broader. and that has always been illegal whether you knew it or not. what you suggest since we can't stop people from doing soemthing illegal make it legal basically. That's like making bank robbery legal will stop bank robberies.
what I suggest is that if you really like new content to be made then you better support somehow. No one is going to invest millions of $ into a show and have no chance to even recoup his costs let alone make a profit. I wouldn't do it neither would you. Why expect a studio to? |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to xenophon
Re: Netflix/Hulu-esque streaming is the future
said by xenophon :when 10Mbps+ is widely/cheaply available to all - So that will be NEVER then. |
|
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| reply to raptor1418
Re: Sounds like another industry stance
TV ads work because they cannot be blocked and you know someone will see them. they also are not intrusive and some are quite enjoyable and make you laugh so you stay and watch.
internet ads have a different image, they are never funny and are always intrusive.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
 ·Hollis Hosting
·Verizon Online DSL
·Fairpoint Communic..
| reply to jtudor
Re: But if all newspapers die....
said by jtudor :Where to Google, yahoo, the AP and many other online sources get their news from? Local newspapers that is who. That is the crux of the problem. Everyone wants to be s content agitator but nobody one wants to do journalism.
I don't mind paying subscription fee to newspapers I have a relationship with and trust. On the other hand I refuse to use sites that require me to login, or even enter my email in order to read article.
A healthy society needs viable journalism at international, national and local level. I'm confident someone will eventually figure out an Internet central business model that works.
/tom |
|
goinglike60
join:2009-02-10 | reply to TKJunkMail
How many is "many?"
How many newspapers have "gone under?" Six? out of 1400 daily newspapers? Hardly could be called "many" |
|
tschmidt
Premium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
·Hollis Hosting
·Verizon Online DSL
·Fairpoint Communic..
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: Stinky words...
said by TKJunkMail :But those newspaper groups who are trying out NEW models aren't doing any better. Those who are trying to stay alive by adopting new models are dying just as quickly. I think there are many intertwined causes.
1) Media consolidation has caused newspapers to take on extraordinary amounts of debt and public ownership demands higher returns then papers have historically provided.
2) For reasons I don't understand Internet ad rates command much lower fees then print. I would think properly done Internet ad would be the opposite. Perhaps this is just a teething problem with new media.
3) Internet has spawned content-is-free mentality. As a delivery mechanism Internet has drastically reduced cost of delivery. It does not reduce journalism and content creation cost. I think much of the fault lies with RIAA and MPAA. Rather than embracing the Internet by using it to lower selling price resulting in win-win situation, lower prices for consumers more customers for providers, they have attempted to thwart electronic distribution thus breeding cynicism and contempt by public at large.
/tom
|
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
4 edits | reply to goinglike60
Re: How many is "many?"
said by goinglike60 :How many newspapers have "gone under?" Six? out of 1400 daily newspapers? Hardly could be called "many" You can check that out here for 2009 closings. Much more than 6:
»graphicdesignr.net/papercuts/?page_id=1441
Check the boxes under the map for 2009, 2008, 2007 to get all the closings for 3 yrs.
A pull down list of closings will be below the map.
And 2009 layoffs here:
»graphicdesignr.net/papercuts
And 2008 layoffs here:
»graphicdesignr.net/papercuts/?page_id=1088
Click on the pins on the maps to get more details.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
