> TV money is absolutely going away -- the future of TV is commercial-free subscription VOD (like Netflix)
No, the future of TV is like cable TV, but on the Internet (Subscription Fee + Ads)... like Hulu.
No, the future of TV is like cable TV, but on the Internet (Subscription Fee + Ads)... like Hulu.
Hulu isn't the future of TV; Hulu is the future of TV as envisioned by a bunch of major TV networks. I think HBO and Netflix are closer to the future of TV than Hulu is.
Wasn't that the promise of the early cable TV? How long did that last?
No, early cable TV was a way to provide signals from broadcast (and, thus, ad supported) channels to areas where, for geographic reasons, there was poor reception.
(The CATV acronym frequently used for cable TV originated as an acronym for its earlier name, "Community Antenna Television" -- reflecting it as a model of consumers sharing an antenna to receive broadcast signal.)
Premium, ad-free content, cable-specific programming didn't turn up until decades later. So, you've basically got it backward: instead of being something that originally promised subscription fees for no ads content but fell away from that, cable is something that initially offered subscription fees for access to ad-supported broadcast content but later evolved to include subscription-based (and pay-per-view) ad-free content available on top of the basic ad-supported content.
I'm not sure what Netflix's endgame is, but they're leaving a LOT of money on the table by going subscription-only.
Ads should only exist in free/no subscription fee content.
Consumers are very sensitive to pricing, especially for entertainment.
> Ads should only exist in free/no subscription fee content.
Why? It's a spectrum, not binary.
Amazon and HBO are already basically forcing ads in front of the shows now though it remains self-promotional. There is a substantial amount of value that could be unlocked if TV ad budgets moved to Amazon and Netflix. Irregardless of current claims I wouldn't be surprised to see some form of sponsorship appear on Netflix if subscriber growth starts reaching its limits. Quite honestly strongly merchandised brands like Disney should be paying for video distribution rather than licensing it out.
If I'm paying for content, but that content also has tons of ads I feel like the provider is double dipping. Charging me to access the content and making money from advertising.
If the content is distributed for free (as over the air TV originally was) then I understand the advertising supported model.
If I'm being charged for it then I think ads are not acceptable under any circumstance.
Consumers are sensitive to pricing relative to free, but when you're charging for both I suspect most would pay extra for no advertising.
No, the future of TV is like cable TV, but on the internet -- a mix of subscription + ads services, subscription ad-free services, and ad-free pay-per-item services. The difference is that, in the internet form, these services are more likely to be separately purchased rather than bundled on top of each other.