Fragmentation - Where to from here?

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

1 | 2 | 3

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210872 4-Apr-2019 18:52

Dairyxox: 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.

Monopolies?

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210875 4-Apr-2019 18:59

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.

Are you sure they are producing and not buying?

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210876 4-Apr-2019 19:01

Handle9:

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.

So they OWN the production, the actors/actresses, studios, infrastructure, everything, just as a movie production?

Handle9

11386 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210923 4-Apr-2019 20:41

tdgeek:

Handle9:

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.

So they OWN the production, the actors/actresses, studios, infrastructure, everything, just as a movie production?

Most movies are produced by a production company but a studio agrees to finance it in exchange for distribution it. In this case Netflix is playing the part of the studio. In exchange they own the IP rights to the production.

The whole point is to make their service sticky. If you want to stream the Crown you can either pirate it or watch on Netflix. There are no other options

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210930 4-Apr-2019 20:47

Handle9:

tdgeek:

Handle9:

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.

So they OWN the production, the actors/actresses, studios, infrastructure, everything, just as a movie production?

Most movies are produced by a production company but a studio agrees to finance it in exchange for distribution it. In this case Netflix is playing the part of the studio. In exchange they own the IP rights to the production.

The whole point is to make their service sticky. If you want to stream the Crown you can either pirate it or watch on Netflix. There are no other options

Ok, I guess the issue is the level of production. MGM produces, others can buy rights. IMO there is quite a gulf between a producer and a rights buyer. If a company underwrites a series, thats not really being a producer, its being a financier for the producer. if a company wants to be a 100% true producer thats a huge investment in infrastructure.

Handle9

11386 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210941 4-Apr-2019 21:01

For the purposes of discussing fragmentation what is the difference? It's exclusive content that other platforms can not access.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2210947 4-Apr-2019 21:07

There seems to be an assumption that original content will forever be clung to. That isn't always the case. I have seen Amazon's Grand Tour on Australian FTA.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210953 4-Apr-2019 21:18

Handle9: For the purposes of discussing fragmentation what is the difference? It's exclusive content that other platforms can not access.

In terms of exclusive, it makes no difference. Sky gets bashed frequently for that, but its normal. But if Netflix, or for that matter any SVOD provider who became a true producer such as MGM etc, thats a huge deal. Some one mentioned that its all becoming a vertical business as owners of the content, distribute it, but apart from a near future Disney thats not the case.

When we have s many SVOD players competing, there is only so much money consumers can pay. Perhaps MGM et al might bypass that model and sell direct one day. Im the meantime I may only be able to afford two providers so I dont contribute to all the top of the tree producers

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210961 4-Apr-2019 21:20

Rikkitic:

There seems to be an assumption that original content will forever be clung to. That isn't always the case. I have seen Amazon's Grand Tour on Australian FTA.

You are right. Todays super cool original content (you can only see here, pay me $x) will age and become cheaper.

Handle9

11386 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2211043 5-Apr-2019 00:32

tdgeek:

Handle9: For the purposes of discussing fragmentation what is the difference? It's exclusive content that other platforms can not access.

In terms of exclusive, it makes no difference. Sky gets bashed frequently for that, but its normal. But if Netflix, or for that matter any SVOD provider who became a true producer such as MGM etc, thats a huge deal. Some one mentioned that its all becoming a vertical business as owners of the content, distribute it, but apart from a near future Disney thats not the case.

When we have s many SVOD players competing, there is only so much money consumers can pay. Perhaps MGM et al might bypass that model and sell direct one day. Im the meantime I may only be able to afford two providers so I dont contribute to all the top of the tree producers

The point is that MGM, Fox et al are being bypassed by Netflix, Amazon and Disney.

Movies like Roma don't go through a traditional studio, Netflix acts as the studio and engages an independent production company or produces it themselves. Similarly in the TV space they are contracting creatives directly to produce content exclusively for Netflix.

They are expected to spend USD$15 billion this year on commissioning/producing content. These are movies that (mostly) won't be on a movie screen and TV Shows that (mostly) won't be on any other TV platform.

This is very different from a traditional distribution model where MGM sells a movie once they have commissioned it.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2211063 5-Apr-2019 07:25

It will be interesting to see how that goes. What strikes me is that some actors may find themselves limited to the platform, Netflix or Apple, who bypass the MGM's, as the MGM's wont want to hire them as they are front and centre in the declining theatre industry. More so, will the Netflix's just get production houses that are not MGM's to just pump out content after content after content, where quantity matters more? The MGM's may decide to not sell at all to SVOD and market their own. I read Netflix will lose all Disney content. All this if it comes to pass will guarantee that consumers must subscribe to many of them, and we go full circle from Sky is too expensive we want competition, to I cant afford all this SVOD, but I will miss out on so much if I dont, and its too expensive

The one variable that doesn't change much is total consumer revenue. That will have to be spread over more and more content providers, who may also find themselves pumping out more and more content just to stay relevant, and that all costs, but may not be offset by growing subscriber revenues

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2211110 5-Apr-2019 09:05

There is still this assumption that people will die if they can't watch every single latest and greatest hot hit TV series. If the content gets fragmented, viewers will pick and choose. Nothing new there.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Senecio

2710 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2211114 5-Apr-2019 09:14

What I find funny is that we have essentially got what we asked for in a round about way. 10yrs ago we were begging SKY to let us pay for only the content that we wanted rather than bundling it. We can do that now and we're still complaining because its fragmented across many different service providers. I know I'm paying far less today than I was even 2 yrs ago with no loss in quality or quantity of content that I really want to watch.

1 | 2 | 3