Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
As you know, I was not referring to FAST channels in my original posts. These are are relatively new phenomenon and to be honest, I don’t think they will stay the course once on demand becomes a more natural means of watching TV.
They may survive, but I don’t see them attracting anywhere near the number of viewers as the channels on our EPGs get, and the lesser viewed ones are barely keeping going, aren’t they?
The FAST channels are cheap to run and presumably, therefore, they won’t need so many viewers to keep them financially viable, but we’ll see.
|
FAST channels are made possible by exactly the same technology that supports VOD. They are delivered over IP and are available on exactly the same TVs that support Netflix etc. People are generally getting easy access to them at the same time as they’re getting easy access to Netflix, via integrated apps and fast home internet connections.
People who are choosing to watch them are choosing them even though the streaming apps are right there and just as accessible.
The companies delivering them have now formally identified, by research, the problem several of us pointed out to you years ago, and have given it a name: ‘discoverability’. Forcing people to search and make playlists leads to *less* TV viewing, not more. Lots of people *want* to come home from work and enjoy a programme that has been curated for them.
And yet you *still* think on demand is going to become ‘more natural’ at some point.
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.