Fragmentation - Where to from here?

Forums › Online streaming services › Fragmentation - Where to from here?

1 | 2 | 3

3848 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1220

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210594 4-Apr-2019 10:26

I have been saying this for a few years now that this would become and issue. It has got to the point now that to legally watch a number of different tv shows/movies you need to now sub to a few different services. It has gone from being easy to watch things from 1 set price to having to pay for a number of services to get the same. Has this worked out cheaper? For some yes, for a number of users no. Sports is now heading this way as well.

FineWine

3132 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2478

Trusted

Nurse (R)

Lifetime subscriber

#2210611 4-Apr-2019 10:48

Why can not they all just be Pay Per view (PPV) or buy outright. That kept the video/DVD rental stores going for 25 years till this new paradigm of streaming came along. I have bought more tracks than albums off iTunes than I ever bought as vinyl, tapes or Cd's. Why because I only wanted that track. Same goes for VOD, I only want that series or movie, I do not want the whole Sky like package and I definitely do not want multiple content provider subscriptions.

If just one or two content providers like Apple or Amazon can come up with, after fighting the studios & distributors and that is the crutch of the matter, a ONE STOP shop for all entertainment content; movies, TV programs/series, music, sports, live content, eBooks, and you can buy or rent JUST WHAT YOU WANT and NOT what they want you to buy and link it into FTA, then they will have solved it.

Music piracy has declined since streaming music. Movie piracy was declining but it is properly on the way back up due to the fragmentation of the VOD streaming industry.

But it will take a hell of a big shift in thinking by the movie & TV creators, studios & distributors. Yes they will loose money, they have always lost money on certain shows & movies, that is the nature of the game, but they will also make money, this has always been the case, they will make big money. I go to the movie theatre once every two years or more. Why because it costs too much and I prefer the comfort of my own home.

If you can watch/listen what you want to watch/listen when you want to watch/listen it without having to have multiple provider accounts you would AND this is why a one stop shop like the Apple TV App with its single sign-in facility will be a win win situation for the movie & TV creators, studios & distributors. (same as/with Apples News App)

Whilst the difficult we can do immediately, the impossible takes a bit longer. However, miracles you will have to wait for.

BlakJak

1341 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 750

Trusted

#2210636 4-Apr-2019 11:13

tdgeek:
gzt:
networkn:

gzt: One way to deal with this is a lower subscription price and a per item price that rapidly drops at the medium / high consumption end.

I think the minority of consumers would feel this way. People don't like to be nickle and dimed. It's a well studied topic. They would rather spend $50 a month and have everything, than $40 a month starting with a $20 base fee and $2 an item all the way to 40.

$60 per month?! That's Sky TV's problem ; ).

Exactly! The Sky non likers said it was too expensive, they wanted competition, and here we are

We wanted competition, what we got is content producers deciding to control the vertical and distribute their own content.

We got competition, but not in the manner envisaged.

Sky as a content aggregator was expensive and linear.

Netflix as a content aggregator was relatively inexpensive, and on-demand.

The fragmentation of the distribution market so that distributors no longer aggregate large sets of content and provide better value-for-money as a result, is the new problem, but has not a lot to do with the anti-Sky crowd... what we had was bad.

What we're getting now, is a new bad.

No signature to see here, move along...

rugrat

3148 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 951

Lifetime subscriber

#2210637 4-Apr-2019 11:15

You can buy off Microsoft.
Think it’s only rental, but a season pass to one series is like $30-$40.

You could subscribe to two streaming services for that, and get more then one season.
PPV model even more expensive currently

Edit: Response to Finewines post, trying to keep wall of text quote down.

tdgeek

30088 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9526

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210660 4-Apr-2019 11:56

BlakJak: We wanted competition, what we got is content producers deciding to control the vertical and distribute their own content. We got competition, but not in the manner envisaged. Sky as a content aggregator was expensive and linear. Netflix as a content aggregator was relatively inexpensive, and on-demand. The fragmentation of the distribution market so that distributors no longer aggregate large sets of content and provide better value-for-money as a result, is the new problem, but has not a lot to do with the anti-Sky crowd... what we had was bad. What we're getting now, is a new bad.

I don't follow what I bolded. Right now, the distributors are distributors, Netflix, Lightbox, etc. The only producer I am aware of that is distributing tbeir own content is Disney and that's yet to start. That may well be a cheaper option for consumers as it removes the middleman and we buy direct from the manufacturer, to coin a retail analogy. The same has been voiced in sports, maybe the sports owners provide their wares direct to the public.

howdystranger

152 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 32

#2210680 4-Apr-2019 12:13

I think we'll come full circle and Sky might start to look convenient and easy again, even if it's a bit more expensive. Particularly if they get their act together and bring out better digital services.

I put my money where my mouth is and bought a small number of Sky shares yesterday. Maybe I'm a fool :-)

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

BlakJak

1341 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 750

Trusted

#2210822 4-Apr-2019 15:45

tdgeek:
BlakJak: We wanted competition, what we got is content producers deciding to control the vertical and distribute their own content. We got competition, but not in the manner envisaged. Sky as a content aggregator was expensive and linear. Netflix as a content aggregator was relatively inexpensive, and on-demand. The fragmentation of the distribution market so that distributors no longer aggregate large sets of content and provide better value-for-money as a result, is the new problem, but has not a lot to do with the anti-Sky crowd... what we had was bad. What we're getting now, is a new bad.

I don't follow what I bolded. Right now, the distributors are distributors, Netflix, Lightbox, etc. The only producer I am aware of that is distributing tbeir own content is Disney and that's yet to start. That may well be a cheaper option for consumers as it removes the middleman and we buy direct from the manufacturer, to coin a retail analogy. The same has been voiced in sports, maybe the sports owners provide their wares direct to the public.

I guess I see Disney as the writing-on-the-wall. https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/3/15/18225269/streaming-future-cable-netflix-hulu-disney is a good article... "a new business reality in the streaming era: If a streaming service doesn’t own the TV shows it airs, those shows have to be massive hits to justify the expense of licensing them."

Note how much time Netflix is spending promoting 'Netflix Originals' and note that they don't produce them all; where they don't produce it, they obtain an exclusive right to distribute (The Expanse, Star Trek Discovery, etc).

Either way when only a single streaming service carries the popular shows, the consumer is forced to subscribe to more services to get access to the shows that they want, and the distributors are trying to get every cent they can from the consumer... hence... profit.

Not sure that microsubs (turn it on and off at will) will solve theproblem as a lot of people will not be bothered, and pay flat fees instead. Again more profit for the streamers.

Not sure how to address the problem, except to accept that some shows I won't see in a timely fashion.

No signature to see here, move along...

MikeB4

MikeB4
18814 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12851

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2210831 4-Apr-2019 16:20

One just has to look at what fragmentation did to Linux Desktop. Being spoilt for choice can ruin the choice and the consumer is left wanting despite the choice.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Dairyxox

1595 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 455

#2210833 4-Apr-2019 16:26

The way I see it, the golden age of TV content has passed.

Doesn't mean a new golden age wont happen.

Eventually the successful 'big fish' will purchase and swallow the minnows, and we'll be back to a few services with all the content.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18814 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12851

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2210837 4-Apr-2019 16:31

I spend more time reading now than I did while I was studying. I guess that is the silver lining.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Handle9

12085 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9914

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210843 4-Apr-2019 16:38

tdgeek: Right now, the distributors are distributors, Netflix, Lightbox, etc. The only producer I am aware of that is distributing tbeir own content is Disney and that's yet to start. That may well be a cheaper option for consumers as it removes the middleman and we buy direct from the manufacturer, to coin a retail analogy. The same has been voiced in sports, maybe the sports owners provide their wares direct to the public.

Nope. Netflix and Amazon are both producing a ton of content. The back catalogue is incredibly valuable to them and vertically integrated content has been a clear strategy for a number of years.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 545

#2210844 4-Apr-2019 16:43

Handle9:
tdgeek: Right now, the distributors are distributors, Netflix, Lightbox, etc. The only producer I am aware of that is distributing tbeir own content is Disney and that's yet to start. That may well be a cheaper option for consumers as it removes the middleman and we buy direct from the manufacturer, to coin a retail analogy. The same has been voiced in sports, maybe the sports owners provide their wares direct to the public.

Nope. Netflix and Amazon are both producing a ton of content. The back catalogue is incredibly valuable to them and vertically integrated content has been a clear strategy for a number of years.

I beleive that Netflix and Amazon are buying exclusive distribution rights from production houses. Our Planet, for example, being the David Attenborogh documentary, is a Netflix exclusive but still produced by Silverback Productions.

If you can give some examples of Netflix and Amazon produced content it'd be appreciated.

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

BlakJak

1341 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 750

Trusted

#2210851 4-Apr-2019 16:55

ockel:
Handle9:
tdgeek: Right now, the distributors are distributors, Netflix, Lightbox, etc. The only producer I am aware of that is distributing tbeir own content is Disney and that's yet to start. That may well be a cheaper option for consumers as it removes the middleman and we buy direct from the manufacturer, to coin a retail analogy. The same has been voiced in sports, maybe the sports owners provide their wares direct to the public.

Nope. Netflix and Amazon are both producing a ton of content. The back catalogue is incredibly valuable to them and vertically integrated content has been a clear strategy for a number of years.

I beleive that Netflix and Amazon are buying exclusive distribution rights from production houses. Our Planet, for example, being the David Attenborogh documentary, is a Netflix exclusive but still produced by Silverback Productions.

If you can give some examples of Netflix and Amazon produced content it'd be appreciated.

To be fair they're commissioning their own content, which is slightly different from purchasing existing content.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_original_programs_distributed_by_Netflix

No signature to see here, move along...

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 545

#2210855 4-Apr-2019 17:14

BlakJak:
ockel:

Handle9:
tdgeek: Right now, the distributors are distributors, Netflix, Lightbox, etc. The only producer I am aware of that is distributing tbeir own content is Disney and that's yet to start. That may well be a cheaper option for consumers as it removes the middleman and we buy direct from the manufacturer, to coin a retail analogy. The same has been voiced in sports, maybe the sports owners provide their wares direct to the public.

Nope. Netflix and Amazon are both producing a ton of content. The back catalogue is incredibly valuable to them and vertically integrated content has been a clear strategy for a number of years.

I beleive that Netflix and Amazon are buying exclusive distribution rights from production houses. Our Planet, for example, being the David Attenborogh documentary, is a Netflix exclusive but still produced by Silverback Productions.

If you can give some examples of Netflix and Amazon produced content it'd be appreciated.

To be fair they're commissioning their own content, which is slightly different from purchasing existing content. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_original_programs_distributed_by_Netflix

No different from Viacom commissioning content - its not producing. Or CBS. Or Sony. Or ABC/Disney. They are all distributors. For example in that list, under co-productions - Lilyhammer is produced by Rubicon TV - Netflix is a distributor.

A production house will either sell its product at sometime like MIPS, or will pitch an idea (possibly with a pilot or rough pilot) to a distribution house. When it gets green-lit it goes into production for future distribution.

If you can give some examples of Netflix and Amazon produced content it'd be appreciated.

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

Handle9

12085 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9914

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210863 4-Apr-2019 18:18

Netflix have got production facilities at their new headquarters and have bought ABQ Studios in Albuquerque.

For the purposes of this thread commissioning and in house production is effectively the same. Netflix have exclusive rights to the IP, which they paid to develop, and don't rely on licensing it from external content providers. They aren't buying finished content, they are signing development deals with content creators (eg Shonda Rhimes).

The point is that their IP isn't (generally) available on other platforms (there are some exceptions) and they can control it. Amazon, Disney and Netflix all have exclusive content that the other platforms can not access.

1 | 2 | 3