Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70
12518 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2215

Trusted

  Reply # 1599277 26-Jul-2016 21:50
Send private message

charliebrownnz:

 

 

tdgeek: Shipping reels and tapes is not a significant cost.

 

 

Broadcasting via sattelite or UHF requires a hefty piece of gear - and often set top boxes. Certainly not as cheap watching a global stream. Likewise broadcasting has a host of other issues that streaming doesn't eg, bandwidth, owning rights to a limited range of frequencies and more. That physically meant that a catalogue the size of netflix's couldn't be shown without massive amounts of additional expenditure.

 

 

 

 

So the TV ep has no value? Make it once and duplicate it 20 million times for free? Like a Stihl, is has a cost to produce. It therefore needs to be sold. I cant sell my Stihl twice. If I sold my GOT to your network in NZ, on the basis of a good price for me, exclusivity for you (more audience, higher priced ads, you get more subscribers) I cant then sell to Joe's ChCh TV as well. 

 

 

Here is a fancy and obviously foreign term... cost. The cost of producing and distributing an episode of GOT for one person to watch is almost the same as it would cost to distribute to a million people. The production costs change little after the initial show is produced. That Chainsaw you buy will cost the manufacture approximately $200 to make, and if you buy two it will cost $400. There is a cost to each sale of a piece of hardware that manufacturers incur. And if someone steels that chainsaw, then that manufacturer is $200 out of pocket as someone else would have bought that chainsaw. Obviously piracy is usually wrong, but it isn't theft, One pirated movie does not equate to one lost sale. And it is a means to meet demand for something of which there is often no practical supply. And that is where things are heading with the geo-blocking thats goes on. 

 

And if Reebok was to sell exclusive rights at a huge price to sell their shoes to Rebel Sport who would only sell them in boxes of ten with a fishing rod, rugby ball and expensive jacket, all whilst they provide you with a three course five star meal whilst you have your shoes fitted. That would make Rebel Sport complete schmucks given people don't want to pay such rediculous prices for a large bundle. Instead they would parallel import them where they can be bought as the consumer wants it at a price point that is far more reasonable to them. 

 

 

To compare US and NZ ignore the exchange rate, compare an average job and prices. As if you lived there. Ok, Sky has a monopoly, every network therefore has a monopoly. 

 

So 95% of content is a monopoly, as invariably, you want be able to watch hardly any of what is on Sky, TVNZ, TV3, or anyone else at the same time. Going by the other comments, you favour piracy, free content and ungeoblocking. The key is actually free, as stated. Like some, not all posts, it comes only don to money, I want it free and I want it now.   

 

 

Nope, as stated earlier, I'm happy to pay for it - hell I spend about 18 bucks NZ on US netflix and another $19 for a vpn provider every month - on top of that I spend about $50 every other month to see movies at the cinema. With the exception of moments when I'm in bed sick and want to binge watch a tv show, I watch more on youtube (and I support the youtubers I like with Patreon) than I do on netflix. For that price I can watch four concurrent HD streams of nearly everything I want to watch - however if I was to not use US netflix and to get the content I currently get I would have to spend more than twice that and the service I would get would still be inferior - and on top of that I'd have to deal with joining fees and\or contracted terms. If the only option I'm left with is to spend $100 (bearing in mind its $20 overseas) a month to one or two NZ providers with monopolies on the shows I want forced in with a bundle of shows I have no desire to see then I see nothing wrong with piracy.

 

 

They are stuck in the mindset that having shows transmitted o ver the internet means they don't cost much to make. In actual fact they probably cost more as their is so much content competition

 

 

Well thats a first - I've never heard that argument thrown about before - actually wait, Sky seems to follow that model, increase prices as a response to increased competition. Pretty successful business practice to keep clients I hear. Prices may increase on some shows where production values, CGI and salaries increase - but that is nothing to do with competition. In fact with the online age and ease of availability, audiences are far more vast and smaller producers can become profitable whereas under the old model of limited broadcasting bandwidth they wouldn't be.

 

 

Huge variety? Well, flat arte streaming is the one main option. Music is say $12 per month, similar to NF. You don't get everything too, as some wont sell rights to NF, same as content, and seem don't as they, the creators get ripped off.

 

 

  • Itunes
  • Google Play store
  • Xbox music
  • Amazon
  • Spotify
  • Youtube
  • Pandora
  • Last.fm
  • Deezer
  • 8 tracks
  • Band\singers website
  • ...

I can legally get music from any one of those digital content providers - I can buy bundles if I wish or I can buy a single song if I wish to. I can play the music in my car, on my phone, on the tv or on a stereo. Imagine if TV and movies were so flexible - imagine if people could buy only the digital content that they want, and options existed to use the content in whatever fashion they wanted to?

 

 

Before I read your long post, I appreciate the effort. 

 

So now I shall digest. 

 

1. Bandwidth. On the surface, why pay for satellite and STB's when streaming is next to no cost? That incorrect. Neil aka Talkiet knows, ask him. Spark and I feel many other RSP's provide NF CDN capability. Thats just NF. To allow a good if not great NF to RSP to user experience. Thats a cost. Its not cheap. 

 

2. Rebel sport? And BTW learn to spell ridiculous. The cost once a content is made is done. Agree. The distribute to 1 or 10 million is more or less not relevant, agree. BUT, GOT is sold to me at 10 million, I can obtain new subscribers, get prestige, demand higher advertising. So, you cannot watch it, unless you subscribe to me in NZ. I might not air it in NZ right now, why? Its too freaking expensive, so I own the NZ rights for later. Or it conflicts with another really cool series, so I will air later so as not to dilute it. And NF cannot play it as I OWN IT. I paid for it. You have NF NZ geo unblocked and watch it, for free, but i paid for it. IF NF US wish to won it they can buy it, but they cannot buy eberyting for everyone for free, and if they did and the monthly fee rose, the world will end.

 

3. Do you subscribe too all those 8 or more music providers? 

 

Please clarify the two pints before the list of music providers you've lost me. You've gone off on a tangent


12518 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2215

Trusted

  Reply # 1599278 26-Jul-2016 21:51
Send private message

networkn:

 

charliebrownnz:

 

that chainsaw, then that manufacturer is $200 out of pocket as someone else would have bought that chainsaw. Obviously piracy is usually wrong, but it isn't theft, One pirated movie does not equate to one lost sale. And it is a means to meet demand for something of which there is often no practical supply. And that is where things are heading with the geo-blocking thats goes on. 

 

 

 

 

I'd be curious to know when piracy isn't "wrong". If it weren't wrong, then it would be called PURCHASING, surely?

 

How do you figure that one pirated movie doesn't equate to one lost sale?

 

 

 

 

Millennial??


12594 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5909

Trusted

  Reply # 1599280 26-Jul-2016 21:56
One person supports this post
Send private message

The piracy debate is the same as repeated head butting a brick wall.  I would rather go on holiday with the mother in law than participate in another piracy bang fest.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


12518 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2215

Trusted

  Reply # 1599282 26-Jul-2016 21:58
Send private message

charliebrownnz:

 

tdgeek:

 

charliebrownnz:


Charlie Browns main focus is free and near free, his comments.



Completely wrong. My focus is on choice and value proposition. The focus of tdgeeks comments have been along the lines of not supporting geoblocking and the current distribution methods makes you a free loader not much better than a pirate. It is a mind set that music companies and pc game publishers had 10-15 years ago. It is an outdated and regressive mindset and is delusional to think that a tech savvy generation of consumers will accept paying rediculous prices for something that can easily be sourced via other means.

 

Please expand on choice and value. Im serious. Dont make choice everything, and value 15 bucks. be realistic. Im not picking for a fight, just be realistic.   

 

 

From a personal point of view, 0-$5 for a tv series per month of available access - with no term contracts or joining fees. Some of the top shows could charge more for the most current episodes. Prices would vary based on quality, number of episodes, timeliness and whether there are advertisements. I know that I would probably spend twice what I do now under such a model - that is what happened with my pc gaming where I have a huge library which I've barely touched 10%. The service would be for the person\family, not house or room. If sky offered such a service I would take it up on the shows I want.

 

Another option would be all you can eat free versions in standard definition with adverts - kind of what youtube did for music. I could almost guarantee that piracy would drop substantially and at least customers that would never have bought the content would be contributing via ad revenue.

 

 

 

 

ok, so we love 5 TV series, thats up to $25 per month for them, and nothing else?

 

I can see where yay are going All you can eat. Musicians get F all of that. Do you get all you can eat latest games for how much her month?

 

Where I am heading is there is a cost. And all you can eat works very well for past it titles, whether that be music, games or video. NF has heaps, but its old and its cheap. An SVOD that had all the latest and greatest will have very low content, but top content and probably cost 3 x as much. My take is everything costs, its good to be happy to pay, but are we all happy ro pay what it really costs, or is is what SUITS ME?


12518 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2215

Trusted

  Reply # 1599283 26-Jul-2016 22:01
Send private message

MikeB4:

 

The piracy debate is the same as repeated head butting a brick wall.  I would rather go on holiday with the mother in law than participate in another piracy bang fest.

 

 

Well said! Those of us submitting to punishment know that, yet we still do it! For me, its principle so Im ok with that. I dont have an ego need to be right. (Although I am lol)

 

/slap


4411 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1924

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1599337 27-Jul-2016 07:14
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

If it were a physical item with a prison sentence for taking it without paying, you'd assume a 1:1 ratio.

 

 

Would you? Why? People who steal cars would hardly have gone and bought them if they couldn't steal them, would they?





iPad Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.


Glurp
7568 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3541

Subscriber

  Reply # 1599364 27-Jul-2016 09:12
Send private message

OK, in the bad old days when CDs that cost a few cents to produce sold for $40, I copied the occasional track. I did it because I could and because I thought the price of the CD was outrageous. If I had not been able to, I still would not have purchased the CD. I can promise I would not have. So no sale was lost. I'm sure I was not the only one.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


12594 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5909

Trusted

  Reply # 1599375 27-Jul-2016 09:40
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

OK, in the bad old days when CDs that cost a few cents to produce sold for $40, I copied the occasional track. I did it because I could and because I thought the price of the CD was outrageous. If I had not been able to, I still would not have purchased the CD. I can promise I would not have. So no sale was lost. I'm sure I was not the only one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I know I will regret this but one last head bash.

 

Your scenario does not make it right, your actions then were contrary to the legally imposed conditions set by the creator/owner of that creative work. Your legal options were (A) Buy it, (2) Rent it, (3) listen to it at a concert or broadcast media, (4) wait until you could afford to purchase it.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


Glurp
7568 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3541

Subscriber

  Reply # 1599379 27-Jul-2016 09:49
Send private message

Yep yep and yep. It was along time ago and I don't do it anymore. Really.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


Awesome
4799 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1060

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1599460 27-Jul-2016 12:24
4 people support this post
Send private message

MikeB4:

 

 

 

I know I will regret this but one last head bash.

 

Your scenario does not make it right, your actions then were contrary to the legally imposed conditions set by the creator/owner of that creative work. Your legal options were (A) Buy it, (2) Rent it, (3) listen to it at a concert or broadcast media, (4) wait until you could afford to purchase it.

 

 

Much analysis has shown that piracy often actually helps content creators - it gives exposure of content to people who would otherwise not have seen or heard it, and would not have paid for it originally.

 

Game of Thrones is a good example of this - while it's the most pirated show on Television, it does make huge money globally, and much of it's global success has been attributed to the widespread distribution achieved through piracy, particularly in markets where it wasn't initially available. The movies that top the piracy list also correlate to highest box office earnings.

 

Piracy is illegal, but people break laws all the time that exist for a good purpose but in many cases the 'illegal' act doesn't actually hurt anyone. If you can get away with it (and I am certain we've all knowingly broken a law or two at times when we've been able to safely get away with it), it comes down to a moral argument. Who is it hurting if you were never going to buy it anyway? 

 

To me, there is a clear moral distinction between something being available at a fair and reasonable price and consciously choosing not to pay for it because there is an avenue to do so with little risk, and either not being able or genuinely unwilling to pay for the content but consuming it anyway.

 

And in my mind at least - when content creators use market power to deliberately inflate content prices or impose arbitrary restrictions on its availability in order to achieve supernormal profits, they are creating a situation whereby people who would have been willing and able to licence the content at a fair market price are prevented from doing so, and therefore the content creator is making themselves worse off by locking out a portion of the marketplace who would not have paid for the content under any circumstance at that price. If those would be customers then choose to consume the content anyway, then the creator is no worse off that they would have been if that person did not consume the content, and possible better off in the end.





Twitter: ajobbins


70 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 53


  Reply # 1599508 27-Jul-2016 14:07
One person supports this post
Send private message

5 TV series, thats up to $25 per month for them, and nothing else?


I can see where yay are going All you can eat. Musicians get F all of that. Do you get all you can eat latest games for how much her month?


Where I am heading is there is a cost. And all you can eat works very well for past it titles, whether that be music, games or video. NF has heaps, but its old and its cheap. An SVOD that had all the latest and greatest will have very low content, but top content and probably cost 3 x as much. My take is everything costs, its good to be happy to pay, but are we all happy ro pay what it really costs, or is is what SUITS ME?



Five tv series is plenty for me, under the current model it will be 2-4 times more expensive without vpn's. The list of music service providers show that there are many ways to monetise a service. All you can eat is just one model, I'd expect an all and anything you can eat model in 4k to cost far more, but I don't think many people would realistically expect that. A free service with ads would be an attractive service for people that currently pirate, it would also lead to making pirating unacceptable for many people that currently believe it is ok given the lack of options.

There are just so many different ways content can be monetized, but we currently have only one or two expensive or very limited choices with tv content in NZ. And I know why sky are pushing thier model... Its profitable and they answer to thier shareholders... But it is also shortsighted as they won't be able to stop the alternatives as people become more Tec savy.

17249 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4927

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1599678 27-Jul-2016 19:35
Send private message

SaltyNZ:

 

networkn:

 

If it were a physical item with a prison sentence for taking it without paying, you'd assume a 1:1 ratio.

 

 

Would you? Why? People who steal cars would hardly have gone and bought them if they couldn't steal them, would they?

 

 

 

 

/me SMH 

 

People who steal cars for a living are RESELLING them and they are NOT the people we are talking about in this thread, and you know it. 

 

 


4411 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1924

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1599716 27-Jul-2016 20:15
4 people support this post
Send private message

OK, they resell it. Then the victim goes out and buys another car to replace it. Thus, 1 car stolen = 1 car purchased. Likewise with any other physical thing. Who ends up wearing the cost of that? We all do, in higher insurance premiums, because eventually a replacement widget has to be manufactured.

 

That is not the case for a downloaded music track or movie; nothing needs to be replaced. Nothing is lost. And it is certainly not the same as going out of your way to pay for something that you could just pirate.

 

I'm sorry, but this 1 download = 1 lost sale is total rubbish.





iPad Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.


17249 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4927

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1599721 27-Jul-2016 20:18
Send private message

SaltyNZ:

 

OK, they resell it. Then the victim goes out and buys another car to replace it. Thus, 1 car stolen = 1 car purchased. Likewise with any other physical thing. Who ends up wearing the cost of that? We all do, in higher insurance premiums, because eventually a replacement widget has to be manufactured.

 

That is not the case for a downloaded music track or movie; nothing needs to be replaced. Nothing is lost. And it is certainly not the same as going out of your way to pay for something that you could just pirate.

 

I'm sorry, but this 1 download = 1 lost sale is total rubbish.

 

 

 

 

Well I'd agree it's not 1:1 but it's not 1:5000 either.


3199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1727

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1599747 27-Jul-2016 21:30
2 people support this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

 

 

Well I'd agree it's not 1:1 but it's not 1:5000 either.

 

 

Yeah it's more like 1:1000000000 :-P





Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

 

Thinking about signing up to BigPipe? Get $20 credit with my referral link.


1 | ... | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central launches
Posted 10-Jul-2018 10:40


Spark completes first milestone in voice platform upgrade
Posted 10-Jul-2018 09:36


Microsoft ices heated developers
Posted 6-Jul-2018 20:16


PB Technologies charged for its extended warranties and warned for bait advertising
Posted 3-Jul-2018 15:45


Almost 20,000 people claim credits from Spark
Posted 29-Jun-2018 10:40


Cove sells NZ's first insurance policy via chatbot
Posted 25-Jun-2018 10:04


N4L helping TAKA Trust bridge the digital divide for Lower Hutt students
Posted 18-Jun-2018 13:08


Winners Announced for 2018 CIO Awards
Posted 18-Jun-2018 13:03


Logitech Rally sets new standard for USB-connected video conference cameras
Posted 18-Jun-2018 09:27


Russell Stanners steps down as Vodafone NZ CEO
Posted 12-Jun-2018 09:13


Intergen recognised as 2018 Microsoft Country Partner of the Year for New Zealand
Posted 12-Jun-2018 08:00


Finalists Announced For Microsoft NZ Partner Awards
Posted 6-Jun-2018 15:12


Vocus Group and Vodafone announce joint venture to accelerate fibre innovation
Posted 5-Jun-2018 10:52


Kogan.com to launch Kogan Mobile in New Zealand
Posted 4-Jun-2018 14:34


Enable doubles fibre broadband speeds for its most popular wholesale service in Christchurch
Posted 2-Jun-2018 20:07



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.