-
tv?
-
[Walter Soyka] “Or more reach.”
Yes, absolutely. But will they be able to maintain that reach with the money they’d want to pull in from doing that?
Probably not at first.
-
I didn’t see this linked in the article Walter posted but I just did a quick scan of it:
There are a ton of people that would pay for a standalone service, but if HBO does it the cable providers might just not renew contracts (or it might violate contracts), they would drop HBO, thereby losing HBO 100% of those cable customers immediately (or at least for a little while – some would access it through the new HBO standalone service, but not all of them). Are there sufficient numbers of standalone subscribers to cover that loss?
It’s a numbers game, and unfortunately the cable/satellite providers seem to have the numbers on their side. I would personally rather pay $10-$15 bucks/month directly to HBO and Showtime for their original content than pay a cable subscription + $10-$20 for it.
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
[Walter Soyka] “There’s apparently a huge audience that wants the content, but HBO is doggedly pursuing their old distribution model:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/05/09/hbo-has-only-itself-to-blam...
Didn’t Apple win in music by making it easier to buy a song at a reasonable price and in a format people wanted than to steal it?
“Did you see the follow up article the author wrote?
Basically, he back tracks all the way home with the realization that HBO makes a metric ton of money from being on cable TV and they probably aren’t ready to kick that cable $$$ to the curb and go it alone. At least not yet.
There’s a huge difference between being a middle man (Apple & iTMS) and being the one footing the bill to produce the content itself. The iTMS was designed as a loss leader to sell iPods. If Apple went all music label and started funding bands we’d see a whole different business model. Same thing with Netflix and Hulu. Sure, they are successful, but they are successful selling content other people paid to make. Neither companies’ current business model could survive if they had to fund all the content they distributed.
-
[Walter Soyka] (I’m Mr. High Res at work, but I was still rocking a standard definition CRT at home. This brought my family endless amusement… and frustration.)”
I still have an early CRT HDTV with a 32-inch screen. It is as big & heavy as a fridge and takes up half of my apartment livingroom. It generates enough heat to warp the paint.
-
[Walter Soyka] “There’s apparently a huge audience that wants the content, but HBO is doggedly pursuing their old distribution model:”
Fair enough… but I wonder if these audiences are big enough to pay for big shows like Game of Thrones and Trueblood. Would a subscription or PPV model for individual shows or premium content channels be any cheaper than what we currently have?
Shawn
-
[Gary Huff] “Yes, absolutely. But will they be able to maintain that reach with the money they’d want to pull in from doing that? Probably not at first.”
Why should HBO care whether their content is delivered to their viewer’s eyeballs by Time Warner/Verizon/Comcast’s TV service or Time Warner/Verizon/Comcast’s data service plus an Apple interface, so long as they get paid?
How is making it harder for their customers to buy and enjoy the content good for business?
AMC expects Mad Men to make $100 million from home video and iTunes sales [link]. Game of Thrones is delayed a full season to iTunes (ostensibly to protect HBO subscriptions), and it’s the most pirated show ever.
The market is speaking. They want their content a la carte, on the screen and at the time of their choosing. Distribution should change to give the market what they’re looking for in exchange for money, so everyone can win.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Andrew Kimery] “Basically, he back tracks all the way home with the realization that HBO makes a metric ton of money from being on cable TV and they probably aren’t ready to kick that cable $$$ to the curb and go it alone. At least not yet.”
I don’t see how it’s in HBO’s best interest to build their own online store, either, any more than they should run their own wires to people’s homes.
Exploiting other existing venues for distribution is another question entirely.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Shawn Miller] “Fair enough… but I wonder if these audiences are big enough to pay for big shows like Game of Thrones and Trueblood. Would a subscription or PPV model for individual shows or premium content channels be any cheaper than what we currently have? “
There are 10 episodes of Game of Thrones in a season. At $3 per episode, that’s $30 for the season. HBO costs what, $17/mo? The 2.5 months to cover GoT would then be $42, but that fee also covers everything else that airs on HBO (and neither fee accounts for revenue sharing).
I do absolutely agree with you that it’s easier for a producer/distributor to take risks on specific shows when you force bundling of other content to spread the money and risk around, but there’s a lot of customer resistance to the status quo.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “I don’t see how it’s in HBO’s best interest to build their own online store, either, any more than they should run their own wires to people’s homes.
Exploiting other existing venues for distribution is another question entirely.”
I wonder how much liberty they have to do that though given their current contracts? Releasing on DVD/BR is one thing but cable companies might have exclusivity windows that bar HBO from putting their content on iTunes and Amazon streaming until the new season comes around.
Also, down the line, maybe HBO has plans to break out on its own and be a streaming rival to Netflix. If that’s the case it is in their best interests to keep their original programing close to their vests as a way to differentiate themselves from their competition (even if it’s only possible future competition at this point). For the same reason I doubt Netflix, Hulu and YouTube are going to be farming out their new original IPs out to other distributors.
-
[Gary Huff] “What is the market for a 42” $1200 TV that has the $99 Apple TV interface built-in?
“It would have to do more than that.
It would have to be seamless with my computer. Like I’m working on FCP X and I get up and walk into the other room and it’s on that TV also. All my files interconnected. Then I hit mission control and watch the ballgame or the Wire.
Also the only TV you can buy is 1080
This TV would have a higher res than that.
If it’s just a 1080 tv like the rest yeah, people won’t see it as different enough.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up