collapse

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!


Author Topic: Stand alone HBO  (Read 22681 times)

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #100 on: October 22, 2014, 01:44:55 PM »
Glad someone finally wrote what I've been saying for years.  People confuse OTT and a la carte as if that is the start of the show, but those are shows that have already been monetized and created off the incoming dollars to fund the creation.



http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/mad-men-and-other-shows-wouldnt-exist-with-a-la-carte-cable/


Chicago_inferiority_complexes

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 844
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #101 on: October 22, 2014, 02:30:24 PM »
Glad someone finally wrote what I've been saying for years.  People confuse OTT and a la carte as if that is the start of the show, but those are shows that have already been monetized and created off the incoming dollars to fund the creation.



http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/mad-men-and-other-shows-wouldnt-exist-with-a-la-carte-cable/



It's the same clichés over and over and over.

According to Chicos and his Hollywood friends, no innovation should happen anywhere without subsidies from others.you wonder how he thinks we made any progress as a civilization at all.

Canned Goods n Ammo

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
  • Ammo, clean shaven Ammo.
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #102 on: October 22, 2014, 02:42:47 PM »
Glad someone finally wrote what I've been saying for years.  People confuse OTT and a la carte as if that is the start of the show, but those are shows that have already been monetized and created off the incoming dollars to fund the creation.



http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/mad-men-and-other-shows-wouldnt-exist-with-a-la-carte-cable/



Netflix sells used content.

Netflix now sells new content as well.

The question is: Can Netflix figure out how to be profitable?
« Last Edit: October 23, 2014, 07:37:41 AM by Canned Goods n Ammo »

brandx

  • Guest
Re: Stand alone HBO
« Reply #103 on: October 22, 2014, 02:56:52 PM »
Everything will change as far as delivery (3 years, 5 years, who knows).

This is about platform more than anything else. That is the sole reason for HBO's move. And others will follow quickly if they are successful. HBO is NOT competing against cable companies (who will eventually fall into a delivery role rather than be a platform). They are competing against Netflix and Amazon.

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #104 on: October 24, 2014, 03:18:13 PM »
It's the same clichés over and over and over.

According to Chicos and his Hollywood friends, no innovation should happen anywhere without subsidies from others.you wonder how he thinks we made any progress as a civilization at all.

Funny, when you were given 5 separate articles about ESPN at north of $20 after you said I didn't know what I was talking about, you haven't responded to any of them.

I'm curious why?


I'm all for innovation, I currently work in one of the most innovative technology companies in the country.  I'm all about risk, when it is appropriate.  The problem you and so many keep making is you want a grab bag to suggest everything is apples to apples, and it isn't.  The content guys aren't creating widgets, or for that matter songs.  Totally different world, but for some reason you continue not to process it. 

So yes, please get back to me on the ESPN call out, you didn't believe me maybe you will believe the various analysts, or Wall Street Journal, etc.  But hey, whatever.

Hollywood friends...LOL.  That was a good one. 

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #105 on: October 24, 2014, 03:24:59 PM »
Netflix sells used content.

Netflix now sells new content as well.

The question is: Can Netflix figure out how to be profitable?

Actually, Netflix subsidizes new content on the backs of old content, one of the reasons it refuses to release ratings on its new content.  They aren't selling their new content by itself, for a reason.  They are profitable now, but barely....which is probably your point. Volume growth has allowed them to do this, but as volume growth slows, which it is, then things become problematic.  That's why they lost 23% of their value last week.  That $1 increase had that much impact on subscriber growth...ouch.  That much price elasticity for $1.  Now, the stock has grabbed back some of that value as people (Mark Cuban among them) see it as a buying opportunity, but they still have a ton of debt and massive competition coming their way as all these MVPDs enter the OTT space to grab that market share.

Canned Goods n Ammo

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
  • Ammo, clean shaven Ammo.
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #106 on: October 24, 2014, 03:48:40 PM »
The content guys aren't creating widgets, or for that matter songs.  Totally different world, but for some reason you continue not to process it.  

It's this kind of thinking that is going to run some "content guys" right out of business.

They are ABSOLUTELY creating widgets. It's just entertainment. This isn't the space program.

Seinfeld creates a show about driving cars and getting coffee. It's not that hard. There are talented people out there that know how to create content. It's not a mystery.

How it's distributed and monetized is the big challenge.

brandx

  • Guest
Re: Stand alone HBO
« Reply #107 on: October 29, 2014, 05:01:29 PM »
Who woulda thunk it? This is why things have to change!!

Internet Providers Were Throttling Traffic During Netflix Negotiations

Imagine that. If only we had some kind of government agency that was supposed to prevent things like telecom monopolies!

Plenty of Comcast and Verizon customers know just how bad Internet service was on major ISPs during the months-long battle over who should pay to deliver Netflix traffic.

But now we have more numbers on the performance declines, thanks to a new report from the Measurement Lab Consortium (M-Lab). M-Lab hosts measuring equipment at Internet exchange points to analyze connections between network operators and has more than five years' worth of measurements. A report released today examines connections between consumer Internet service providers ("Access ISPs" in M-Lab parlance) and backbone operators ("Transit ISPs"), including the ones that sent traffic from Netflix to ISPs while the money fights were still going on.Netflix eventually agreed to pay Comcast, Verizon, Time Warner Cable, and AT&T for direct connections to their networks, but until that happened there was severe degradation in links carrying traffic from Netflix and many other Web services to consumers.

Connections were particularly bad between ISPs and Cogent, one of the backbone operators that Netflix paid to carry its traffic.

"Using Measurement Lab (M-Lab) data, and constraining our research to the United States, we observed sustained performance degradation experienced by customers of Access ISPs AT&T, Comcast, CenturyLink, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon when their traffic passed over interconnections with Transit ISPs Cogent Communications (Cogent), Level 3 Communications (Level 3), and XO Communications (XO)," researchers wrote.

"In a large number of cases we observed similar patterns of performance degradation whenever and wherever specific pairs of Access/Transit ISPs interconnected. From this we conclude that ISP interconnection has a substantial impact on consumer internet performance—sometimes a severely negative impact—and that business relationships between ISPs, and not major technical problems, are at the root of the problems we observed.

"M-Lab was founded by the New America Foundation's Open Technology Institute, the PlanetLab Consortium, Google, and academic researchers. M-Lab made its full dataset available online and encouraged further research.

New Yorkers suffered most
While M-Lab observed degraded performance across the country, the worst it found was in the New York City connections between Cogent and ISPs. Cogent exchanges traffic with ISPs without payment, but the ISPs demanded money when Cogent was sending more traffic than it received. The dispute continued until Netflix started delivering traffic to ISPs directly, taking the stress off Cogent's connections with ISPs.

Chicago_inferiority_complexes

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 844
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #108 on: October 30, 2014, 08:16:16 AM »
Funny, when you were given 5 separate articles about ESPN at north of $20 after you said I didn't know what I was talking about, you haven't responded to any of them.

I'm curious why?


I'm all for innovation, I currently work in one of the most innovative technology companies in the country.  I'm all about risk, when it is appropriate.  The problem you and so many keep making is you want a grab bag to suggest everything is apples to apples, and it isn't.  The content guys aren't creating widgets, or for that matter songs.  Totally different world, but for some reason you continue not to process it. 

So yes, please get back to me on the ESPN call out, you didn't believe me maybe you will believe the various analysts, or Wall Street Journal, etc.  But hey, whatever.

Hollywood friends...LOL.  That was a good one. 

Seems like you had a math problem this day.

2 T^3 Sweet Sixteens = few

4 articles = 5

All four of your articles quote the exact same industry-sponsored "report," from Needham Insights.

What is the point of posting four stories about the same exact report?

I hope they enjoy trying to get $30. In for a rude awakening.

brandx

  • Guest
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #109 on: October 30, 2014, 11:34:23 AM »
Seems like you had a math problem this day.

2 T^3 Sweet Sixteens = few

4 articles = 5

All four of your articles quote the exact same industry-sponsored "report," from Needham Insights.

What is the point of posting four stories about the same exact report?

I hope they enjoy trying to get $30. In for a rude awakening.

That par for the course for him. Usually it's an opinion from one black guy or one Indian that absolutely proves his point.

With ESPN getting $6+ right now from cable companies, you are absolutely right. The cost will be nowhere near $30.00. That is a number thrown out there to gauge interest.

IMO, it will be in the $15-$18 dollar range including an ESPN Insider subscription.

Chicago_inferiority_complexes

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 844
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #110 on: October 30, 2014, 12:43:15 PM »

With ESPN getting $6+ right now from cable companies, you are absolutely right. The cost will be nowhere near $30.00. That is a number thrown out there to gauge interest.

IMO, it will be in the $15-$18 dollar range including an ESPN Insider subscription.

You're probably about right. It's thrown out there to scare people, and then when it comes in at $14.95 with all sorts of extras, people will breath a sigh of relief.

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #111 on: October 30, 2014, 06:52:27 PM »
Seems like you had a math problem this day.

2 T^3 Sweet Sixteens = few

4 articles = 5

All four of your articles quote the exact same industry-sponsored "report," from Needham Insights.

What is the point of posting four stories about the same exact report?

I hope they enjoy trying to get $30. In for a rude awakening.

Sigh.  You're right, you and your vast experience in this space vs their expertise in this space.  What was I thinking.  No, you're right,....BrandX too.... it will be closer to $15....I mean, of course you guys are right.  For the record, I said north of $20, but presented you with an analysts opinion of $30.

Do the math gents.  Here are the variables

$8 for ESPN by 2016.  
$1 for ESPN 2 by 2016
$.50 for ESPNews & ESPNU by 2016

100M ESPN and ESPN2 paying customers
75M ESPNews & ESPNU customers

About 60% of customers don't watch ESPN today, but are paying for it anyway.  

Now, how many more drop off if the price goes up so that they can hit their nut.  Don't forget, they are committed to billions through the years 2027 on NFL, NCAA, NBA, etc.  They must get the revenues to pay for those liabilities.

Do the math.  

Oh, here are a few more.  John Malone, you might have heard of him...if you haven't, I'd suggest a google search.  He thinks $20.  What does he know, should be $14.95 according to you.  http://ipcarrier.blogspot.com/2013/04/espn-could-cost-20-month-la-carte.html

Another prediction, $20 to $30 a month.  http://www.thewire.com/technology/2013/07/true-cost-la-carte-tv-high/67289/

And another....http://go.bloomberg.com/tech-blog/2013-01-31-your-cable-bills-going-up-again-but-forget-a-la-carte-pricing/

So on and so forth.  What was the language you used....clearly doesn't understand economics or business?  Uhm, ok.  Tell that to John Malone.  Or Bloomberg.  Etc.

Meanwhile, back to HBO...here's a new analyst, agrees with me that HBO will likely be $20 to $25, I know you two experts thought it would be cheaper, but what do we know.  Maybe it does come in cheaper, if it does, they'll lose on the back end with CNN, TNT, TBS, etc.  Make sure you factor in the COMPLETE costs.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2014/10/29/despite-cord-cutting-cable-future-looks-very-familiar/L0SeHkhPVKxonu646PQhmI/story.html



« Last Edit: October 30, 2014, 07:00:19 PM by ChicosBailBonds »

brandx

  • Guest
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #112 on: October 30, 2014, 09:07:00 PM »
Sigh.  You're right, you and your vast experience in this space vs their expertise in this space.  What was I thinking.  No, you're right,....BrandX too.... it will be closer to $15....I mean, of course you guys are right.  For the record, I said north of $20, but presented you with an analysts opinion of $30.

Do the math gents.  Here are the variables

$8 for ESPN by 2016.  
$1 for ESPN 2 by 2016
$.50 for ESPNews & ESPNU by 2016

100M ESPN and ESPN2 paying customers
75M ESPNews & ESPNU customers

About 60% of customers don't watch ESPN today, but are paying for it anyway.  

Now, how many more drop off if the price goes up so that they can hit their nut.  Don't forget, they are committed to billions through the years 2027 on NFL, NCAA, NBA, etc.  They must get the revenues to pay for those liabilities.

Do the math.  

Oh, here are a few more.  John Malone, you might have heard of him...if you haven't, I'd suggest a google search.  He thinks $20.  What does he know, should be $14.95 according to you.  http://ipcarrier.blogspot.com/2013/04/espn-could-cost-20-month-la-carte.html

Another prediction, $20 to $30 a month.  http://www.thewire.com/technology/2013/07/true-cost-la-carte-tv-high/67289/

And another....http://go.bloomberg.com/tech-blog/2013-01-31-your-cable-bills-going-up-again-but-forget-a-la-carte-pricing/

So on and so forth.  What was the language you used....clearly doesn't understand economics or business?  Uhm, ok.  Tell that to John Malone.  Or Bloomberg.  Etc.

Meanwhile, back to HBO...here's a new analyst, agrees with me that HBO will likely be $20 to $25, I know you two experts thought it would be cheaper, but what do we know.  Maybe it does come in cheaper, if it does, they'll lose on the back end with CNN, TNT, TBS, etc.  Make sure you factor in the COMPLETE costs.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2014/10/29/despite-cord-cutting-cable-future-looks-very-familiar/L0SeHkhPVKxonu646PQhmI/story.html


Doesn't matter what your opinion is. And for that matter, it doesn't matter what their opinion is NOW. IF they go a la carte, it will be at a price that they know will sell.

These opinions change all the time depending on the current atmosphere. Years back, probably because of Seinfeld and Friends (among others), network execs decided they didn't want the hassles of high-priced talent. It was cheaper to go with reality shows. So, the smart, creative people went to the cable channels. And the networks are still paying the price.

Chicago_inferiority_complexes

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 844
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #113 on: October 30, 2014, 09:51:12 PM »
Sigh.  You're right, you and your vast experience in this space vs their expertise in this space.  What was I thinking.  No, you're right,....BrandX too.... it will be closer to $15....I mean, of course you guys are right.  For the record, I said north of $20, but presented you with an analysts opinion of $30.

Do the math gents.  Here are the variables

$8 for ESPN by 2016.  
$1 for ESPN 2 by 2016
$.50 for ESPNews & ESPNU by 2016

100M ESPN and ESPN2 paying customers
75M ESPNews & ESPNU customers

About 60% of customers don't watch ESPN today, but are paying for it anyway.  

Now, how many more drop off if the price goes up so that they can hit their nut.  Don't forget, they are committed to billions through the years 2027 on NFL, NCAA, NBA, etc.  They must get the revenues to pay for those liabilities.

Do the math.  

Oh, here are a few more.  John Malone, you might have heard of him...if you haven't, I'd suggest a google search.  He thinks $20.  What does he know, should be $14.95 according to you.  http://ipcarrier.blogspot.com/2013/04/espn-could-cost-20-month-la-carte.html

Another prediction, $20 to $30 a month.  http://www.thewire.com/technology/2013/07/true-cost-la-carte-tv-high/67289/

And another....http://go.bloomberg.com/tech-blog/2013-01-31-your-cable-bills-going-up-again-but-forget-a-la-carte-pricing/

So on and so forth.  What was the language you used....clearly doesn't understand economics or business?  Uhm, ok.  Tell that to John Malone.  Or Bloomberg.  Etc.

Meanwhile, back to HBO...here's a new analyst, agrees with me that HBO will likely be $20 to $25, I know you two experts thought it would be cheaper, but what do we know.  Maybe it does come in cheaper, if it does, they'll lose on the back end with CNN, TNT, TBS, etc.  Make sure you factor in the COMPLETE costs.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2014/10/29/despite-cord-cutting-cable-future-looks-very-familiar/L0SeHkhPVKxonu646PQhmI/story.html





Great, Chicos. Best of luck to you and yours. It sounds like you can't lose. Though I do wonder why you then feel the need to be so defensive about it on anonymous message boards.

ChicosBailBonds

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22695
  • #AllInnocentLivesMatter
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #114 on: October 31, 2014, 12:17:29 AM »
Great, Chicos. Best of luck to you and yours. It sounds like you can't lose. Though I do wonder why you then feel the need to be so defensive about it on anonymous message boards.

I get defensive when some clown says I don't understand business or basic economics around an industry I've been part of for many years.  Just as I won't tolerate some clown calling my wife a liar and not apologizing.  I could be dead wrong on this stuff, but that means many experts in the field are also dead wrong....be it billionaires, business journalists, industry analysts, etc.  It can happen.

No one can predict the future, not you or me...many things can happen, I'm merely pointing out that just because you want something to be that way doesn't make it so when it comes to business.  The lack of fundamental business understanding on this board is alarming at times, quite frankly.  MU should make every student enroll in several business classes because too many graduates either believe fairy dust is running the world or they just don't get it.

chapman

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5746
Re: Stand alone HBO
« Reply #115 on: November 07, 2014, 01:07:36 PM »

Chicago_inferiority_complexes

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 844
Re: None of your favorite shows would exist in an a la carte world
« Reply #116 on: November 07, 2014, 02:22:45 PM »
I'm merely pointing out that just because you want something to be that way doesn't make it so when it comes to business.

On this we can agree.

brandx

  • Guest
Re: Stand alone HBO
« Reply #117 on: November 07, 2014, 03:20:07 PM »

Canned Goods n Ammo

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
  • Ammo, clean shaven Ammo.
Re: Stand alone HBO
« Reply #118 on: November 07, 2014, 03:45:39 PM »
IF IT MAKES MONEY, They will all do this - in due time.
FIFY.

brandx

  • Guest
Re: Stand alone HBO
« Reply #119 on: November 07, 2014, 03:58:15 PM »
FIFY.


Good catch!!

There will be some misses as well as hits. As well as assets being bought and sold.

There will probably end up being about three or four major players with several more still in play. It will be interesting to see how it shakes out. Amazon and Google will be players, as well as Netflix, Hulu, HBO and the networks. And of course the cable companies. I think the networks will end up with the short end of the stick eventually - especially based on their track record concerning big decisions.

 

feedback