| It's the revenue Let's face it. $7/month internet TV subscriptions aren't going to pay for big dollar content. |
|
|
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by fifty nine:Let's face it. $7/month internet TV subscriptions aren't going to pay for big dollar content.
And doing a deal with Apple is like a supplier doing a deal with WalMart - Walmart gets the profit and the supplier gets the shaft. CBS depending on Apple for a fair deal is ludicrous. |
|
 Subaru1-3-2-4Premium
join:2001-05-31
Greenwich, CT | looks like they (Apple) thought the name would of sealed the deal hah |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO | reply to fifty nine
Do broadcast networks need ANY subscriber revenue to create "big dollar content"? Other than the ridiculous retransmission fees, I thought advertising paid their bills.
How much do MSOs pay per subscriber for broadcast network retransmission fees? Whatever this amount is, add to it something for Apple/Netflix/Service X and you'll have what's fair. |
|
| reply to Linklist
said by Linklist:said by fifty nine:Let's face it. $7/month internet TV subscriptions aren't going to pay for big dollar content.
And doing a deal with Apple is like a supplier doing a deal with WalMart - Walmart gets the profit and the supplier gets the shaft. CBS depending on Apple for a fair deal is ludicrous. It's just like how cable companies pay big bucks to keep ESPN and ESPN2 TV only.
Let's face it. If streaming becomes a reality, content companies would have to deal with piracy even more.
--
Ask me about my sites:
bay area jobs Dogs for adoption coupons NBA: »nbaintelligence.com |
|
Reviews:
 ·Hargray Cable
| reply to fifty nine
said by fifty nine:Let's face it. $7/month internet TV subscriptions aren't going to pay for big dollar content.
Who says these pickle licker's need to make millions a year?? The people involved in TV make huge amounts of money and that wasn't true back a few decades ago, why should an actor work for 5 years and be able to retiree??/ Why should a producer and a director be able to buy a plane for a few years of work.
My 2 cents. |
|
 vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | Because they can. |
|
Reviews:
·Hargray Cable
| reply to rradina
said by rradina:Do broadcast networks need ANY subscriber revenue to create "big dollar content"? Other than the ridiculous retransmission fees, I thought advertising paid their bills.
How much do MSOs pay per subscriber for broadcast network retransmission fees? Whatever this amount is, add to it something for Apple/Netflix/Service X and you'll have what's fair.
More more more pump every last dollar out of where ever they can get it. |
|
| reply to Corehhi
said by Corehhi:Who says these pickle licker's need to make millions a year?? They do.
It's their content. If they want to price it to make millions, it's their choice.
You don't have to watch.
The people involved in TV make huge amounts of money and that wasn't true back a few decades ago, why should an actor work for 5 years and be able to retiree??/ Why should a producer and a director be able to buy a plane for a few years of work.
My 2 cents.
|
|
| reply to rradina
said by rradina:Do broadcast networks need ANY subscriber revenue to create "big dollar content"? Other than the ridiculous retransmission fees, I thought advertising paid their bills. Ad revenue is down, bad economy etc.
How much do MSOs pay per subscriber for broadcast network retransmission fees? Whatever this amount is, add to it something for Apple/Netflix/Service X and you'll have what's fair.
In the end you'll be paying the same amount or more. You think those who work in the TV industry are going to voluntarily take a pay cut so you can watch TV on the cheap? LOL. |
|
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | Innovative? What is "innovative" about streaming or subscriptions?
Bring us 2K, with guaranteed / QoS / capless delivery, with buffering algorithms that the user can tailor, targeted ads with a choice of viewing methods, auction-based, resolution-based pricing, charge options (minute, hour, day, week, month, series, network) and payment options that exclude PayPal. |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Stupid is as stupid does When will these morons see that things like this will actually make them MORE money not less and reduce piracy. Of course these are the same idiots that tried to kill off the VCR. |
|
 aaronwtPremium
join:2004-11-07
Woodbridge, VA
 ·Verizon FiOS
| reply to elray
Re: Innovative? said by elray:What is "innovative" about streaming or subscriptions?
Bring us 2K, with guaranteed / QoS / capless delivery, with buffering algorithms that the user can tailor, targeted ads with a choice of viewing methods, auction-based, resolution-based pricing, charge options (minute, hour, day, week, month, series, network) and payment options that exclude PayPal.
Why exclude Paypal? You would want to include Paypal. The more payment options the better. |
|
| reply to fifty nine
Re: It's the revenue Do you seriously think it is going to be $7/ month?? Get real! Your premium channels are still going to be worth $$$. Once Apple starts talking to Showtime, HBO, Starz then we really need to be interested. Who the crap cares about CBS?? |
|
| reply to Linklist
I'm pretty sure if your statement had any truth at all, then Walmart would be without suppliers.
Simply based on your belief system, why would any company continue business if they can't make money, well the same holds true for Walmart suppliers. If they arent making the money they need, then they will either stop producing the product or they will take their business elsewhere (Im going with option 2 there). |
|
| reply to fifty nine
BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am so sick and tired of people bitching and whining that stuff like TV shows and Movies (and other things too) cost to much.. If it's to much then don't pay the price and move on!
--
Stunod |
|
 CheesePremium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
kudos:1 | reply to Skippy25
Walmart is killing the small stores, who could they possibly take their business too? |
|
 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Vitelity VOIP
| reply to BF69
Re: Stupid is as stupid does Networks make most of their money through their affiliate system. If they de-value the product they are selling to the affiliate networks by delivering content directly to consumers their revenue stream would dry up faster than end-user subscriptions could possibly replace it. |
|
| reply to Skippy25
Re: It's the revenue Walmart is the one that makes out in their stores. The suppliers make SHIT. A simple google search will show you that. Walmart does NOT care about the supplier and tells them how much they will pay for the shelf, how much WM will pay for the product (if at anything- Lay's only gets paid when WM sells a bag) and then yet WM has every right to put those on sale without Lay's approval and can even throw them away if they wish- Lay's takes the hit. NOT WM.
There is a Rolling Stones article from several years ago and it even says WM pays below TEN (10cents) for music CDs and then charges $15+ for them. The same as for anything else.
Not to mention you are REQUIRED to purchase your UPCs FROM Wal-Mart/Kroger's UPC company. |
|
| reply to rradina
9 out of 10 broadcast networks do NOT create the content except for the local "news". They license that content from the actual network who owns it.
The local broadcasters do NOT have to charge retransmission fees; they can force the providers to carry their channel; but yet REFUSE to because they wish to get the $$$$ for their "award winning news". MSOs need to tell those provides to *uck off and walk away. see how well they do then; or do pay them and move their channel up to a digital tier or out of the local broadcast. Due to once they require payment; they're not required to be on a local broadcast tier. |
|
