TV networks expand on-demand offerings to fight 'cord-cutting'

[Reality]

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - U.S. pay TV customers will have more chances this fall to catch up on shows in mid-season as networks increase video-on-demand offerings in their battle to keep audiences from jumping to streaming services.

The shift is part of the jockeying among television networks, cable and satellite providers, and online subscription services like Netflix Inc <NFLX.O> to attract viewers and maximize profits in an industry undergoing rapid change.

Networks want consumers to stick with the cable and satellite services that provide their biggest revenue source. Cable channels, for example, will receive $52.7 billion in fees from pay TV operators this year, just more than half of total revenue, according to data from SNL Kagan.

To feed consumers' desire for the binge viewing made popular with streaming services, the networks are promising a significant increase in on-demand access to episodes of current seasons through set-top boxes, websites and mobile apps.

"Being able to catch up is clearly important," CBS Entertainment President Glenn Geller said in an interview. "Fans want to watch the shows when they want to watch them."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/tv-netwo...gs-fight-cord-cutting-100341217--finance.html

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

CBS is going to get some to sign up for it...even if it is just the Trekkers for the new Star Trek Series they are going to play on their online only.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

Thats not why cord cutting is happening though.

Cord cutting is happening because they charge too freakin much for tv.

 

[CyberB0b]

Thats not why cord cutting is happening though.

Cord cutting is happening because they charge too freakin much for tv.

That, and their technology is junk. I've used my dad's HBO Go before, and it is garbage. It's much easier for me to pirate.

 

[Kevinicus]

That, and their technology is junk. I've used my dad's HBO Go before, and it is garbage. It's much easier for me to pirate.

I've never had any trouble with HBO Go at all.

In many respects (like picture quality) it is better than the broadcast.

 

[CyberB0b]

I've never had any trouble with HBO Go at all.

In many respects (like picture quality) it is better than the broadcast.

I've used it on my Nvidia Shield and my dad's Roku. It is really clumsy, laggy, and it doesn't make it apparent where you last left off on a series. Netflix has nailed the user interface aspect.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

I've used it on my Nvidia Shield and my dad's Roku. It is really clumsy, laggy, and it doesn't make it apparent where you last left off on a series. Netflix has nailed the user interface aspect.

Yup. Netflix offers the best user interface of them all

 

[Reality]

So far, the only convenient, affordable and easy-to-use streaming service I've found is Netflix. All of the others either have poor technology in place or want you to use some heavy-handed or custom-built software that rarely works well or reliably in order to use their service

The networks just don't get it. People want access to everything, not crumbs. They want it to be fast and simple to use. They want on-demand and no limits. If people pay, they want no commercials or advertisements.

The major networks are losing control over television programming and most consumers are thrilled about this.

Netflix, Amazone Prime, etc. are creating new shows and resurrecting canceled shows, while the traditional networks reserve half their air time for reality tv shows. Reality tv was only ever popular with part of the population and many of that demographic has tired of the same-old story, different name shows that the networks keep throwing at them. Even off-brand networks like CW, AMC, TNT, etc. have gained ground in recent years due to new concepts, better writing and production quality.

We are witnessing the fall of the importance and relevance of mainstream media, the music industry, the movie industry and the television industry. Power is returning to consumers and consumers are telling all of them, you either give people what they want, or they will find it elsewhere, and most importantly, consumers are actually following through on it.

 

[EST_1986]

I've used it on my Nvidia Shield and my dad's Roku. It is really clumsy, laggy, and it doesn't make it apparent where you last left off on a series. Netflix has nailed the user interface aspect.

Never had quality/streaming issues with HBO but the interface does need a netflix style tune up

 

[Denim Chicken]

Can't wait until October when I say goodbye to Direct TV and my $90 bill.

Netflix
HDTV Antenna
Maybe Sling

I'll be fine.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Once my bundle service ran out and they upped my price. I cancelled everything, but my Internet. They have been outright hounding me to sign back up for stuff. Calling me asking to take surveys and stuff. They are in straight panic mode.

 

[dogunwo]

So far, the only convenient, affordable and easy-to-use streaming service I've found is Netflix. All of the others either have poor technology in place or want you to use some heavy-handed or custom-built software that rarely works well or reliably in order to use their service

I think those who claim to have "cut the cord" fully exaggerate how simple it is for the average consumer to do so, and there are too many moving parts to keep up with in most cases. There is still a large market for people who prefer simplicity, even if it costs them a little more money. Furthermore, its not THAT much more expensive unless you are getting higher end TV packages that include a bunch of channels that you don't watch anyway. For instance, you can get ATT Uverse U300 (over 400 channels) and digital fiber for about $115.00/month. For decent internet, most people pay about $60.00-$70.00 month, then you start adding the al a carte services, like Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go, Apple TV, Amazon Prime and you aren't saving that much money per month. Plus, you get the convenience of some On Demand and DVR as well. In the end, yes you can save some money, but I don't think the hassle is worth it to the average consumer, nor do they want to put the time in to keep up with all the separate services.

 

[YosemiteSam]

I think those who claim to have "cut the cord" fully exaggerate how simple it is for the average consumer to do so, and there are too many moving parts to keep up with in most cases. There is still a large market for people who prefer simplicity, even if it costs them a little more money. Furthermore, its not THAT much more expensive unless you are getting higher end TV packages that include a bunch of channels that you don't watch anyway. For instance, you can get ATT Uverse U300 (over 400 channels) and digital fiber for about $115.00/month. For decent internet, most people pay about $60.00-$70.00 month, then you start adding the al a carte services, like Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go, Apple TV, Amazon Prime and you aren't saving that much money per month. Plus, you get the convenience of some On Demand and DVR as well. In the end, yes you can save some money, but I don't think the hassle is worth it to the average consumer, nor do they want to put the time in to keep up with all the separate services.

The end result with be everything on-demand. Broadcast TV will end up only being events live events and news and even those will be streamed. Which in the end will open up more air waves for other types of communications.

The cable companies can't survive this way, because the "bundle" is not the only thing that is killing them. Look at Sling TV. They won't be long in the tooth either. All they are doing is facilitating the move to cut the cord. In the future, people will drop them and order their content ala carte. Each channel is more expensive, but most people don't actually watch 150 channels.

In the end, there will be less, but much better content out there. Ala carte is going to force the the bundle and all the trash with it out.

 

[YosemiteSam]

So far, the only convenient, affordable and easy-to-use streaming service I've found is Netflix. All of the others either have poor technology in place or want you to use some heavy-handed or custom-built software that rarely works well or reliably in order to use their service

The networks just don't get it. People want access to everything, not crumbs. They want it to be fast and simple to use. They want on-demand and no limits. If people pay, they want no commercials or advertisements.

The major networks are losing control over television programming and most consumers are thrilled about this.

Netflix, Amazone Prime, etc. are creating new shows and resurrecting canceled shows, while the traditional networks reserve half their air time for reality tv shows. Reality tv was only ever popular with part of the population and many of that demographic has tired of the same-old story, different name shows that the networks keep throwing at them. Even off-brand networks like CW, AMC, TNT, etc. have gained ground in recent years due to new concepts, better writing and production quality.

We are witnessing the fall of the importance and relevance of mainstream media, the music industry, the movie industry and the television industry. Power is returning to consumers and consumers are telling all of them, you either give people what they want, or they will find it elsewhere, and most importantly, consumers are actually following through on it.

 

[Reality]

I think those who claim to have "cut the cord" fully exaggerate how simple it is for the average consumer to do so, and there are too many moving parts to keep up with in most cases. There is still a large market for people who prefer simplicity, even if it costs them a little more money. Furthermore, its not THAT much more expensive unless you are getting higher end TV packages that include a bunch of channels that you don't watch anyway. For instance, you can get ATT Uverse U300 (over 400 channels) and digital fiber for about $115.00/month. For decent internet, most people pay about $60.00-$70.00 month, then you start adding the al a carte services, like Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go, Apple TV, Amazon Prime and you aren't saving that much money per month. Plus, you get the convenience of some On Demand and DVR as well. In the end, yes you can save some money, but I don't think the hassle is worth it to the average consumer, nor do they want to put the time in to keep up with all the separate services.

Cutting the cord is not just about costs though. I had DirecTV for around 10 years, primarily so I could watch NFL games during football season. I rarely watched TV other than games. Most of the TV shows I used to watch, I waited until they released their seasons on DVD. Around 10 years ago, I cancelled my DirecTV service and replaced it with an antenna for local stations, various streaming services and NFL gamepass (rewind). I was paying for NFL Sunday ticket and 8 of the 16 games were on national or local channels most years.

Am I saving money? Probably, but I don't really care. I get to choose what I watch, when I watch it and how I watch it. That matters more to me than anything.

Given the huge and continued growing popularity of services like Netflix and Amazon Prime, people are getting more and more used to binge watching TV shows and movies and doing so without commercials. People are more aware now that most hour long TV shows are actually 40-42 minutes long, with 18-20 minutes of commercials. That's an hour each night of prime time TV (7pm to 10pm) that is wasted on watching something you don't even want to watch. While you can find some things to do during a few commercial sets, you won't do that for all of them and the networks count on that fact.

The major networks better start adapting to consumer demand and expectations or they will fall into the same trap print media did when they resisted putting all of their content online for so long. The clock is ticking ..

 

[dogunwo]

People are more aware now that most hour long TV shows are actually 40-42 minutes long, with 18-20 minutes of commercials.

This is a huge factor. Definitely more so than costs. I know ESPN is even trying to find a way to monetize their currently free radio app. Why listen to radio when you can listen to commercial free podcasts later? Apparently it is a big problem for them as they are seeing their podcast download numbers skyrocket.

In the end, I think you will be right about TV trends. I just don't think it's as simple as a lot of people think, and the cord cutters on the board represent a minority. I'd be willing to bet that most TV subscribers are paying for some streaming services too anyways.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I think those who claim to have "cut the cord" fully exaggerate how simple it is for the average consumer to do so, and there are too many moving parts to keep up with in most cases. There is still a large market for people who prefer simplicity, even if it costs them a little more money. Furthermore, its not THAT much more expensive unless you are getting higher end TV packages that include a bunch of channels that you don't watch anyway. For instance, you can get ATT Uverse U300 (over 400 channels) and digital fiber for about $115.00/month. For decent internet, most people pay about $60.00-$70.00 month, then you start adding the al a carte services, like Netflix, Hulu, HBO Go, Apple TV, Amazon Prime and you aren't saving that much money per month. Plus, you get the convenience of some On Demand and DVR as well. In the end, yes you can save some money, but I don't think the hassle is worth it to the average consumer, nor do they want to put the time in to keep up with all the separate services.

This.

My wife wants to pick up her TV guide, circle what shows she wants to watch and watches them.

In addition we have 4 TVs, and I don't need the complication.

 

[dogunwo]

This.

My wife wants to pick up her TV guide, circle what shows she wants to watch and watches them.

In addition we have 4 TVs, and I don't need the complication.

That's right. I hadn't considered the full family aspect of it. Easier for singles probably too cut the cord.
I do know some couples that have done it, but it was more about trying to save money.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

That's right. I hadn't considered the full family aspect of it. Easier for singles probably too cut the cord.
I do know some couples that have done it, but it was more about trying to save money.

Agreed.

My wife's choice of viewing (Lot's of PBS, Hallmark Channel, network TV) differs a great deal from mine (Chiller TV, true crime, Food TV).

 

[jrumann59]

It will be interesting come sometime next year, when you can buy your own cable boxes loaded with said streaming services. The cord cutters are less about the cords and more about why in the hell do I need 500 channels to watch 20 and why do I have watch 5 minutes of show then 4 minutes of commercials, rinse and repeat for 1 hour.