NBC's Chief Executive is NOT happy about Piracy

[urban1]

Who watches ads anyways? If Im watching live TV, when an ad comes on I will either flip the channel or I will get up and do something else like hit the internet, get some food or drink, or go to the bathroom. If Im watching it from the PVR, Ill either get up and do the same as i just mentioned, or Ill FFW thru the commercial.

Im certain companies must do market research studies but i cant figure out who sits there and watches the 20 minutes or so of commercials that run in an hour.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Juventus3

The way apple handled that whole situation made me think they aren't profiting very much by making these shows available. I think its more an attempt by jobs to do a favor for the networks. When NBC said it wanted more control...It was as if apple said screw you we've done enough.

Apple gets 1 cent from song downloads so I can't imagine they get much for TV shows.

[Flashpoint]

Every time the corporations have tried to stomp out "illegal" downloads they have only exacerbated the problem. Napster was just music. KaZaa was music and small files. Now there is Bit Torrent with everything. If they find a way to stop Bit Torrent, they will simply spawn a more efficient sharing system.

Between the handful guys in white labcoats with 6 figure salaries, and the millions of 15 year olds with too much time on their hands... well it is pretty clear who is going to win every time.

I haven't watched an ad in years. I can't. They're too distracting. Even when the Flames are on, I don't watch until it is 10 minutes in. That way I can skip the TV timeouts.

It's the same thing when I listen to the radio. Well... I don't. I either listen to online streaming, or change the station when a commercial comes on.

The paradigm needs to change. Product placement is one way. PPV is another. HBO is the model of the future. You pay for the network and get it commercial free - with the sponsors placing their products within the show itself.

[llama64]

Originally Posted by urban1

Who watches ads anyways? If Im watching live TV, when an ad comes on I will either flip the channel or I will get up and do something else like hit the internet, get some food or drink, or go to the bathroom. If Im watching it from the PVR, Ill either get up and do the same as i just mentioned, or Ill FFW thru the commercial.

Im certain companies must do market research studies but i cant figure out who sits there and watches the 20 minutes or so of commercials that run in an hour.

The TV networks don't care if you watch the ads, only that they can sell the ad-space. More ad-space means more money. When a business practice continues to be successfull, there really isn't any incentive to change it.

Until the networks figure out a way to package their product and sell it to the end consumer that satisfys everyones needs, they will continue to suffer from piracy.

If I buy a show online, I expect it to be easier to use then something I download illegally. That isn't the case in any type of legal media format, which I think is stupid.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

Every time the corporations have tried to stomp out "illegal" downloads they have only exacerbated the problem. Napster was just music. KaZaa was music and small files. Now there is Bit Torrent with everything. If they find a way to stop Bit Torrent, they will simply spawn a more efficient sharing system.

Between the handful guys in white labcoats with 6 figure salaries, and the millions of 15 year olds with too much time on their hands... well it is pretty clear who is going to win every time.

I haven't watched an ad in years. I can't. They're too distracting. Even when the Flames are on, I don't watch until it is 10 minutes in. That way I can skip the TV timeouts.

It's the same thing when I listen to the radio. Well... I don't. I either listen to online streaming, or change the station when a commercial comes on.

The paradigm needs to change. Product placement is one way. PPV is another. HBO is the model of the future. You pay for the network and get it commercial free - with the sponsors placing their products within the show itself.

Well said. One thing I would add is Apple has essentially created a distribution method that networks can take advantage of essentially for free. They tried it and it was succesful. Now, they are greedy and want to do it on their own. Why start from scratch when the service is already in place.

[urban1]

Yes, its clear the networks will sell ad space as long as someone is willing to buy it.

My point is geared towards advertisers who continue to buy the tv time for their commercials. Im guessing their still must be people who watch commercials otherwise advertisers wouldnt be buying the time. I know my parents who are older arent big channel flippers will watch commercials but theyre not much of a target demographic.

Originally Posted by llama64

The TV networks don't care if you watch the ads, only that they can sell the ad-space. More ad-space means more money. When a business practice continues to be successfull, there really isn't any incentive to change it.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Well said. One thing I would add is Apple has essentially created a distribution method that networks can take advantage of essentially for free. They tried it and it was succesful. Now, they are greedy and want to do it on their own. Why start from scratch when the service is already in place.

One word: CONTROL

[HOOT]

Im curious when people will realize you will NEVER stop piracy, if they find a way to stop it, it won't take long for people to find a way around it.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by urban1

Yes, its clear the networks will sell ad space as long as someone is willing to buy it.

My point is geared towards advertisers who continue to buy the tv time for their commercials. Im guessing their still must be people who watch commercials otherwise advertisers wouldnt be buying the time. I know my parents who are older arent big channel flippers will watch commercials but theyre not much of a target demographic.

If it works then that is one way to generate income. The new YouTube service is supposed to show ads every so often at the bottom of the screen so people can link on them if they are interested in the product.

The thing with the ads delaying the show is they (the networks) keep arguing
they need the additional ad time to generate more income. But because of the additional ad time they are driving away viewers. So they need more ad time.

If you ever watch TBS shows and it mentions the show has been compressed for time, they have literally sped up the episode then corrected the audio so it doesn't sound like a chipmunk. The older shows that were filmed with more content (less commercial time) need to be shoe-horned to fit in today's timeslot somehow.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Im curious when people will realize you will NEVER stop piracy, if they find a way to stop it, it won't take long for people to find a way around it.

It doesn't stop the pirates, and it makes life difficult for honest people, so it becomes easier for honest people to get pirated material than to get legitimate material. Arrr, shiver me timbers!

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

And the scary thing is just when it looks like media are starting to get the idea (offering DRM free music downloads for sale), others (Sony) just never seem to clue in:

"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Making "a copy" of a purchased song is just "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy'," she said.

Interesting. I have my whole music collection on my computer at home. If Sony BMG thinks I stole it then I wonder what they think I paid them for.

[BlackEleven]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

The paradigm needs to change. Product placement is one way. PPV is another. HBO is the model of the future. You pay for the network and get it commercial free - with the sponsors placing their products within the show itself.

Good post. However, I think the idea of networks is outdated. I think that on-demand television is the model for the future.

Imagine instead of broadcasting content your cable provider allowed you to download anything you wanted from any network ad-free. You could watch your show at any time you wanted, without having to put up with stupid ads, and shows wouldn't have to be formatted to fit into a one hour time slot. And you could browse all the content sorted by network, by actor(s), by genre, etc.

The cable provider makes money from buying the content from the networks that produce it and then hosting it, charging their customers fees for downloading. The networks replace ad revenue from selling the content directly to cable companies. And the cable companies don't have to stop having a subscription revenue model. They could still sell monthly subscriptions ($x/month for y hours of content for example), and they could open up new revenue streams by simply charging a higher fee per download for customers that don't want monthly fees. And shows could still be promoted as well. The cable company and network could enter into deals where new shows that the network wishes to promote can have the first three episodes downloaded for free and have free content where the user can view trailers of upcoming shows.

And these are just a couple ideas cooked up by me in 5 minutes. I'm sure some high powered marketing execs with fancy business degrees could think of something even better.

Piracy doesn't have to kill the market. Itunes proved this. They still make money when the same content is available for free. They make money (in part) from making it easy and convienient to get the music you want. The broadcast industry should learn from this and take a hint from the RIAA that trying to force your consumers to pay for content that they can get for free (and more easily) doesn't work; the way to succeed is to use the Internet to make your product better, cheaper and more convienient for your customers.