View Single Post
Old 10-02-2024, 08:28   #781
OLD BOY
Rise above the players
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wokingham
Services: 2 V6 boxes with 360 software, Now, ITVX, Amazon, Netflix, Lionsgate+, Apple+, Disney+, Paramount +,
Posts: 14,604
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
Re: The future of television

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh View Post
Nothing in that articles forecasts the end of TV channels, just changing the method of delivery
Nothing in your post is disputed. But what I said over 9 years ago still stands as far as I am concerned. The linear and streamed versions of channels will exist side by side for a while, but it is most likely to be a transitional arrangement, not a permanent one (unless there is government intervention).

The last paragraph of my link is a clue:

While big channels like BBC One and ITV1 can still command large audiences via traditional platforms, the shift to streaming is already disproportionately affecting smaller and niche channels.

---------- Post added at 08:26 ---------- Previous post was at 08:22 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman View Post
Sport is streamed all the time, OB.

Sky have been doing it for the best part of twenty years. The issue - that you seem to have missed - is that "deep pockets" streamers have challenges competing with incumbents in a well established market (pay-tv). Streaming in itself isn't a new market, merely a subset of an existing one.

You seem to have missed off this part:-



Nothing indicates this will replace existing offerings, rather the proposal is to complement them.
What I said was that the idea of making a package of sports available on different platforms could catch on. It's one way of reducing the cost to companies of providing sports content, and consumers pay less too because they are not forced to subscribe to more than one streamer to watch their favourite content.

---------- Post added at 08:28 ---------- Previous post was at 08:26 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul View Post
So 9 channels Ive never even heard of have dropped from a system I've never used. Ok.

The only thing in that article that remotely bothers me is the loss of Sky Satellite.
Sky Stream is not a suitable replacement unless they build in a recording or download system.
The mangled method they use atm is just bad, not to mention my TV still works when the internet fails.
More worrying for you if this is the beginning of a trend, though, isn't it?
__________________
Forumbox.co.uk
OLD BOY is offline   Reply With Quote