Follow us on...
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook
Register
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 153

Thread: Cord Cutters

  1. #101
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,481
    It's beginning to look like the world is now getting ready to join the Netflix generation. The fact that people want to be able to watch shomi with their cable boxes, doesn't mean that it will be enough to keep them grounded for good. Since the Internet has more wide open spaces to explore, it's not that difficult to see where these changes are all leading.

    However, the uncertainty of future legislation, or attempts at keeping the Internet less open to border crossings, might still get in the way of progress.

    By the time shomi and Bell's streaming service garner enough attention, it should become even more obvious to the Canadian masses, just how restrictive content deals between the middlemen can become.

    My electric shaver is cordless. I plug it in for a quick charge, but that's about it. I have to pay for the electricity, but not a monthly fee for the shaver itself. I shave what I want, when I want, and where I want. If I had to pay $10 a month to shave my face, $10 a month to shave my back, and so and and so on, I might as well get waxed. When the blades get dull, I might have to pay for replacement blades at ridiculous prices, or simply wait for a sale, and buy a brand new electric shaver for about the same price as the replacement parts.

    It will be interesting to see how many Canadians actually watch the new Canadian streaming services on their cable boxes (to avoid the online bandwidth charges), as opposed to watching everything online. And once you go online more often and find yourself running into the roadblocks and limitations of the walled gardens, it might be even more tempting to take out your electric shaver, and keep that cord unplugged for longer periods of time.

    Once you start shaving, it's only a matter of time before you go the cordless route.
    Warning: I'm not playing with a full deck.

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,481
    http://www.buzzfeed.com/peterlauria/...ure-of-the-bun
    [TV Execs on the Future of the Bundle]

    Disney CEO Bob Iger: “Consumers in most markets can get a multi-channel subscription with more than 150 channels and a wide array of diverse and quality programming for around $65 a month, a much greater value than a do-it-yourself portfolio of standalone options … it’s still clearly the dominant entertainment or television package in the home, and we think that’s going to continue for the foreseeable future.”

    Dish Network CEO Charlie Ergen said of his company’s planned streaming-only service, which is set to launch later this year at a price of around $30 per month with channels from Disney, Scripps, and A+E Networks: “We’re not going after the guy who spent $100 a month and got a house and four TVs and three kids, and he’s 55 years old. That is not the target market.”

    Ergen added: “The minutes that people watch cable television and the networks today this year is less than the minutes last year and less than the year before and less than the year before that, right? And it’s a little bit because people cut the cord, but it’s a lot because people are watching Netflix or YouTube or Amazon with the available minutes in their life, right? And if you have five hours a day that you can watch TV and you watch Netflix for 45 minutes of that, then you’re only watching four hours and 15 minutes of TV. And that’s what – that’s happening, right?”

    And even more Ergen: “So on OTT, we really target the 18-year-old to 35-year-old who’s not paying for TV today. It’s going to skew, short-term, more male. It’s going to skew more urban. It’s going to skew more apartments as opposed to homes. And it’s certainly going to skew towards sports enthusiasts. And it’s going to be a really good product.” (Dish ranks as the second-largest satellite television distributor and fourth-largest pay-TV operator overall with just over 14 million subscribers.)

    Charter Communications CEO Tom Rutledge: “To the extent that programmers voluntarily break up the very fat basic bundle that they have put together contractually, would be an opportunity for us to actually build a more compelling product … the interesting thing about the business is that people want our products, and the biggest strain on the business from a video perspective is cord-cutting is really financially driven more than it is content driven. And the reason it’s financially driven is because incomes have not kept up with the cost of the product. If we had that ability and if programmers were willing to allow us to have that ability, I think we could actually have a better, more successful video product.” (Charter ranks as the ninth-largest pay-TV operator overall with 4.4 million subscribers.)

    Piracy Prison CEO PokerFace: Our OTT service is strictly for prison inmates. We lock up content and charge the prisons a nominal monthly fee.
    In the near future, the masses will be watching TV from a jail cell. Piracy Prison plans on being the #1 content source for inmates.
    Warning: I'm not playing with a full deck.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4,823
    Quote Originally Posted by PokerFace View Post
    Disney CEO Bob Iger: “Consumers in most markets can get a multi-channel subscription with more than 150 channels and a wide array of diverse and quality programming for around $65 a month, a much greater value than a do-it-yourself portfolio of standalone options
    Number crunching.

    Example, Shaw Cable, "Personal TV : Enjoy over 100 channels, including 23 in HD. 41 SD channels." for 40$/month. In the "over 100 channels", they do count the 45+ Stingray Music (Galaxie) channels and the radio stations.
    Shaw Direct's "Digital Favourites : up to 253 HD channel" for 70$. Included in the 253 count are 40+ HD "positions" reserved for NFL Sunday Ticket, NHL Center Ice and MLB Innings and many variations of local CTV-Global/City stations.

    Not impressed with the "150 channels for around 65$ per month" claim.
    We had a good run: 2006 to 2020. Thanks for the informations and debates.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,481
    https://www.crumbles.co/?crumble=i%2...onary=standard
    [Cute way to make video statements using crumble.co]
    Last edited by PokerFace; 11-08-2014 at 10:56 AM. Reason: added link description
    Warning: I'm not playing with a full deck.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    885
    Do you realize that Iger is talking about US systems where they do have 150 real channels for around 65$ per month, unlike Shaw.

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,481
    http://www.fool.com/investing/genera...-the-cord.aspx
    [HBO, CBS, and Showtime Are Helping You Cut the Cord: Here's Why They Hope You Don't]

    Following in the footsteps of Hulu Plus, Time Warner's HBO, CBS' All Access, and Showtime are now offering, or planning to offer, over-the-top streaming subscription services. It appears the biggest trend in pay TV is a gradual movement toward unbundling. The ability for viewers to subscribe only to channels they wish to purchase, instead of subscribing to prearranged packages, comes as welcome news to many consumers fed up with high cable bills.

    There's just one problem: These channels apparently don't want unbundled cable and are treating their services as sources of incremental revenue from consumers without pay-TV service -- cord cutters -- and as opportunities to gain a stronger negotiation position with pay-TV providers. In the end, this appears to be less about changing the business model and more about monetizing the existing system more effectively.

    . . .

    However, outside of Hulu Plus, none of these over-the-top services appear to be priced to encourage viewers to cut the cord. Rather, they appear to be an opportunity to make revenue from those currently without pay TV. However, there's a more insidious reason for a station to offer an over-the-top service: to strengthen its hand in fee, marketing, and bundle disputes with pay-TV providers.

    If over-the-top services become moderately popular, pay-TV providers would find their importance diminished and would have to offer concessions to those networks. So, in a weird way, programmers would prefer their streaming offering to have "Goldilocks" success: not too hot to encourage cord cutting, but just hot enough to elicit concessions from pay-TV providers.

    Pay-TV provider Comcast appears to be working to strengthen its negotiation hand by its planned acquisition of Time Warner Cable. The combined entity would boast nearly one-third of all pay-TV subscribers, which should allow it to better negotiate exploding content costs going forward. That's important, as (according to financial data firm SNL Kagan) those costs could increase by 8.5% per year until 2018.

    Right now, the best deal for networks is to remain committed to the status quo. However, it appears many of them are preparing for a future without pay-TV providers. Interestingly enough, they could unwittingly be hastening pay TV's demise in order to improve negotiations against it.
    Warning: I'm not playing with a full deck.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,481
    People love to share, and since the Internet allows people to share on a grand scale, finding uploaded content by cable/satellite subscribers is often far too easy. Some of these cable/satellite subscribers can't seem to stop themselves from uploading content whenever somebody asks for something that the major uploaders (part of The Scene) have skipped, missed or delayed.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warez_scene

    ---------

    So, since the Internet is already like a giant PVR containing vast amounts of content (often uploaded by non-Scene members), cutting the cord isn't much of a sacrifice. In fact, many cord cutters seem to watch even more content than they did when they were cable/satellite subscribers.

    It will be interesting to see what changes occur in 2015 and beyond ...

    When will online sharing of copyrighted material become less common?

    How much longer will Internet prices remain at an irresistible level (in the $40/month range for Unlimited or at least 350GB)?

    -------

    About 6 months from now, I plan to greatly reduce my physical media consumption, hoping that it will make it easier for me to keep up with all the fresh online content that never seems to stop appearing.

    I'm not sure when I'll be successful at greatly reducing my consumption of online content, but I assume that I have about a year to go until I have some kind of nervous breakdown, thus forcing my Internet exit.

    T-minus 365 days and counting ...
    Warning: I'm not playing with a full deck.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    How much longer will the current system of broadcast television last? Netflix CEO guesses it will be dead by 2030.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/netf...2030-1.2853604
    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...n-plans-751931

    Also interesting that Nielsen wants to try to come up with some way to compile online TV ratings.
    Last edited by Donovan's Monkey; 11-29-2014 at 01:45 PM.

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,481
    The Internet has so many layers to it, that after I get comfortable with one layer, I get curious and move on to another layer.

    The first layer revolves around Google searches, but now that Google has once again changed its search results algorithm(s), there are now many lesser-known sites and forums that often appear when searching for content or information. So, in Google's attempt to make things harder for people to find things online for free, it has actually made it even easier for me to expand my horizons and stumble across free content.

    Not only that, but now that there are so many websites designed to help people find legitimate legal streams and downloads out there, there are also more chances that errors will be made, such as official streaming links remaining active, long after they are supposed to, as well as some official third-party links bypassing the authentication process (in error) of various official sites.

    The learning curve for streaming HD sports content is a bit steeper than I would like to deal with right now (since there are so MANY different ways to do it), so I'd rather let other people do the streaming for me. I see them set it up, and then my eyes glaze over as I switch to other websites to stream some TV content while they do whatever it is they do. I return to see what content they decided to stream in beautiful HD, and then if it's rare enough, or I'm in the mood to watch it live, I'll watch it.

    And once the sporting events end, they might even leave the channels running (or switch to something else), so that you can still watch whatever else the channel is airing (still in beautiful HD).

    I'm not sure how many people stream HD content online for free (some are even Canadian, based on the channels they stream), but they all try to fly below the radar, otherwise, they terminate the feeds (or add passwords to protect the content from the masses), and move to other URLs. It's like a bunch of secret societies sharing with complete strangers. Once you know the secret links, you keep your mouth shut, or they kill you (or something like that). I would estimate that there are only about 200 people (per stream) watching some of these "secret" HD streams. And some of the content is so random and odd (in the early morning hours), that I'm curious to see if there's a specific plan-of-action each day, or are these streamers just randomly flipping channels and then staying with whatever catches their fancy?

    After just a few days of sampling the various randomly selected HD content (as selected by a few anonymous uploaders) from various channels (some that I can already get elsewhere), I felt like I was perhaps sitting in a Toronto sports bar (although I actually never went to one) watching a few different TVs tuned to the big games (or somewhat random content) of the day. One streamer will even say a few funny things (into his mic) while he's watching his own stream.

    I bring all of this up to illustrate that as long as you have an Internet connection (even slow 6M DSL), you can still feel connected to the world of cable/satellite TV. I can only imagine what other Internet "secrets" are still left for me to stumble across.
    Last edited by PokerFace; 12-08-2014 at 11:55 PM. Reason: typo
    Warning: I'm not playing with a full deck.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,481
    Wow. When it comes to live streaming, I still can't believe how many loopholes there are that can be exploited to gain access to the official live sports streams without any authentication necessary. I can't do it with my limited setup (and my limited knowledge/experience), but if I had a better computer and/or a month to learn the ins-and-outs of all the various options that exist, I assume that I'd be able to do what they are doing.

    The "TV Anywhere" Internet options have basically made it even easier for cord cutters to watch live sports streams in beautiful HD.

    The cable/satellite, subscribers' uploaded live streams seem to go beyond the 1000 viewers (per stream) level at times, so when you add in all the people also streaming the live content through their own media players (using the piracy loopholes), it's the sports streamers who are the truly advanced ones.

    Compared to what the sneaky, sports streamers already know, I'm just a dumb rookie. When I first started to learn how to stream free content online, I couldn't believe how much there was to learn. I didn't pay much attention to live sports streaming until I got broadband at home, but even then, I simply watched the occasional average-looking streams and didn't bother searching for the better HD streams.

    I'm not really interested in taking any extra-sneaky steps to stream everything in glorious HD, but I will be interested to see what happens on Sunday, when there will probably be even more "wild" streams in glorious HD, uploaded by various individuals with their own cable/satellite subscriptions (some even use PIP to display another game in the corner of the screen).

    All of this HD sports-streaming research has kept me away from my typical TV-streaming routine, so after this weekend, I intend to go back to my regular routine (more concentrated on TV content).
    Warning: I'm not playing with a full deck.

  11. #111
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    I've never done any "research" to make any effort to look for them. They were just casually mentioned on sports related forums or comments after sports blog posts -- obviously independent ones not owned or run by the major media conglomerates or the leagues or teams. I can't think of any relatively well-known sports events that I have been unable to see, although sometimes it can be a little blurry. The only thing I've ever paid to see online involved subscribing to the official FIA World Endurance Championship (sports car racing for the teams and cars that race in the 24 Hours of Le Mans) site and its good 720p feed, although I know I could see it freely at a lower quality elsewhere.
    ----------------

    TV is Over: Mobile Is Demoting TV To The Status Of Newspapers In Viewers And Ad Money
    About 26% of customers who call US cable TV companies request "internet only" service ...
    Last edited by Donovan's Monkey; 12-12-2014 at 09:35 AM.

  12. #112
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    wiziwig.tv was forced to shut down on Jan. 1, as you can see by the explanation on the website.
    Until then, it had brazenly listed and linked to multiple freely available streams for just about every live major sports event around the world.
    Last edited by Donovan's Monkey; 01-06-2015 at 10:43 AM.

  13. #113
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Donovan's Monkey View Post
    Hundreds Of Thousands Of Canadians Ditch Cable
    I was only one of the 111,000 who dumped Rogers.
    Quote Originally Posted by TVViewer View Post
    This is a very misleading statement ...
    Cord cutters still don't matter ...
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/niel...ideo-1.2944432
    U.S. television viewership declined by 12 per cent in January compared to the same month a year earlier, the eighth consecutive double-digit drop, according to new data from ratings firm Nielsen...
    On an annual basis, overall television viewership has declined by more than 10 per cent annualized every month since last July...
    "The viewership declines that we observed throughout most of 2014 accelerated for most media companies in January," the analysts said. "This does not bode well for domestic cable TV ad revenue trends."...
    Add it all up and it's a worrisome trend for the industry that's facing exponential growth from online streaming services...

  14. #114
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    924
    Quote Originally Posted by Donovan's Monkey View Post

    This is exactly why Canadian companies like Rogers, Bell and Shaw need to offer their streaming services to anyone willing to pay them money. I think Rogers/Shaw will let Internet only customers subscribe but it has to be Rogers Internet or Shaw Internet. With CraveTV, you have to subscribe to a Bell TV package or Bell Fibe TV package.

  15. #115
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4,823
    Quote Originally Posted by bigoranget View Post
    This is exactly why Canadian companies like Rogers, Bell and Shaw need to offer their streaming services to anyone willing to pay them money. I think Rogers/Shaw will let Internet only customers subscribe but it has to be Rogers Internet or Shaw Internet. With CraveTV, you have to subscribe to a Bell TV package or Bell Fibe TV package.
    They won't, because they expect canadians to choose a TV service provider that will give them exclusive access to the "best" OTT service for 4$ or 10$ more.

    During this time, while the CRTC encourages skinny basic, Bell is adding RDS to the basic service for Quebec Fibe subscribers starting mid-february.
    One thing leading to another, subscribers just received a notice that basic service will increase by 2$ starting April 1st...

    Those companies are ran by idiots.
    We had a good run: 2006 to 2020. Thanks for the informations and debates.

  16. #116
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    12,204
    Quote Originally Posted by Donovan's Monkey View Post
    This article is about the U.S. and is not even about cord cutting. It's about the viewership declines of U.S. cable (cable is what they call specialty) channels. Although not mentioned in the article, viewing of the broadcast networks available to cord cutters OTA has been declining in the U.S. for several years now (which is probably why it was not mentioned in the story as viewership declines for U.S. broadcast networks is not new news).

    More people are watching TV online and other platforms and this includes people who still subscribe to cable or satellite. The fact that major increases in online television viewing is guaranteed to result in a decreased amount of viewing on the actual TV does not change the fact that cord cutters still make up a minority too small to care about serving here in Canada.

    I see you continue to make misleading claims from misinterpreting news stories to fit your own obscure views. When I post facts that poke holes in your delusional theories you respond by calling me a "phoney lying doucebag", are you now going to refer to yourself as a "delusional misinterpreting doucebag" for posting these type of articles and misinterpreting what they actually say?
    My views are my own and do not represent any company.

  17. #117
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    12,204
    Quote Originally Posted by bigoranget View Post
    This is exactly why Canadian companies like Rogers, Bell and Shaw need to offer their streaming services to anyone willing to pay them money. I think Rogers/Shaw will let Internet only customers subscribe but it has to be Rogers Internet or Shaw Internet. With CraveTV, you have to subscribe to a Bell TV package or Bell Fibe TV package.
    I'm sorry but I just don't see the logic in this. Let's assume this article was actually about cord cutting increasing in Canada, why does it make sense for companies to provide an incentive for consumers to cut the cord and harm the profitable part of their business just so they can get a few more subscribers for their streaming service? Even if allowing cord cutters made a major positive impact on their streaming services, why hurt the other parts of your business just to have a more profitable streaming service? Right now they have more than enough TV/internet customers for their streaming services to work, if it comes to the point where they don't have enough TV/internet customers for their streaming service, the concern should be the fact that they have lost all those TV/internet customers, not the fact that their streaming service doesn't have enough subscribers. I fully understand why you as a consumer would want to access shomi and CraveTV, and I respect that you are upset you don't have the ability to do so, but I don't see how you think this is a mistake for these companies to make.
    My views are my own and do not represent any company.

  18. #118
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    12,204
    Quote Originally Posted by InMontreal View Post
    They won't, because they expect canadians to choose a TV service provider that will give them exclusive access to the "best" OTT service for 4$ or 10$ more..
    No streaming service is $10 dollars a month. shomi is $8.99, same price as Netflix
    My views are my own and do not represent any company.

  19. #119
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    I posted a link to an online article. I didn't even say anything else about it.
    Yeah, I guess I'm the delusional one here.

    I will acknowledge that it is kind of fun to know that I can just post a quote from an article knowing that it will provoke an entirely predictable but still hilarious temper tantrum that the rest of us can laugh at!
    Last edited by Donovan's Monkey; 02-05-2015 at 04:26 PM.

  20. #120
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    924
    I fully understand why you as a consumer would want to access shomi and CraveTV, and I respect that you are upset you don't have the ability to do so, but I don't see how you think this is a mistake for these companies to make.
    Because they don't sell portable subscriptions, my money is going to US providers that are willing to sell me their product; Netflix, Hulu Plus. I am satisfied with what I have for Internet streaming. Just food for thought, approx 30-40% of Netflix customers are accessing a Non-Canadian library. That trend is likely going to continue to rise. Cord cutters may seem irrelevant right now but it's going to become a significant problem for many BDU's in the next 5 years. It's also not just a BDU issue, it's also an issue for their media distribution arms (Shaw Media, Bell Media). The younger generation is very resourceful with accessing the content they want and if media dinosaurs like Bell, Rogers and Shaw don't offer services that they are looking for, they will easily find it somewhere else, which is bad for Canadian broadcasting and bad for the Canadian economy.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •