Research into piracy in NZ

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › Research into piracy in NZ

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2188091 27-Feb-2019 13:23

aspett:

Lias:

Who the hell did they interview lol, because _noone_ I know has stopped pirating because of Netflix.. most have _reduced_ their piracy because of it, but as soon as something they want to see isn't on Netflix (or Lightbox or whatever else they subscribe to), they will pirate it..

Pretty much this. No one wants to subscribe to 4 different streaming platforms, and even if they do, those major ones probably won't cover all the popular content you want to watch. If they really want to put a dent in piracy, there needs to be a larger aggregate service..

Like a monopoly? Then you will complain and say we need competition, that's what has happened. Mayne the monopoly will give you everything that exists for $20 a month

aspett

122 posts

Master Geek

#2188098 27-Feb-2019 13:32

tdgeek:

aspett:

Lias:

Who the hell did they interview lol, because _noone_ I know has stopped pirating because of Netflix.. most have _reduced_ their piracy because of it, but as soon as something they want to see isn't on Netflix (or Lightbox or whatever else they subscribe to), they will pirate it..

Pretty much this. No one wants to subscribe to 4 different streaming platforms, and even if they do, those major ones probably won't cover all the popular content you want to watch. If they really want to put a dent in piracy, there needs to be a larger aggregate service..

Like a monopoly? Then you will complain and say we need competition, that's what has happened. Mayne the monopoly will give you everything that exists for $20 a month

You can call it a monopoly if you want. The fact is, consumers don't care, as long as it provides the service they're looking for for a reasonable price. People started leaving Sky because it wasn't good value for money, and it wasn't good value for money, because they couldn't get all their content in one place anymore. In some ways it's positive that content has split across many providers, because now if you only want a subset, it's very easy to get a subset- but for those who want content across providers, they've been done over by the increase in competition. People won't pay a service a full $10-20/m just for one show they want to watch.. so piracy will win those cases.

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2188100 27-Feb-2019 13:38

aspett:

You can call it a monopoly if you want. The fact is, consumers don't care, as long as it provides the service they're looking for for a reasonable price. People started leaving Sky because it wasn't good value for money, and it wasn't good value for money, because they couldn't get all their content in one place anymore. In some ways it's positive that content has split across many providers, because now if you only want a subset, it's very easy to get a subset- but for those who want content across providers, they've been done over by the increase in competition. People won't pay a service a full $10-20/m just for one show they want to watch.. so piracy will win those cases.

Understood. You mentioned reasonable price, I agree. My litmus test on reasonable price is if the providers profit shows it is not rorting.

So, "reasonable price" actually means dirt cheap as I don't care what it really costs to provide.

Coil

6614 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2188106 27-Feb-2019 13:43

tdgeek:

aspett:

You can call it a monopoly if you want. The fact is, consumers don't care, as long as it provides the service they're looking for for a reasonable price. People started leaving Sky because it wasn't good value for money, and it wasn't good value for money, because they couldn't get all their content in one place anymore. In some ways it's positive that content has split across many providers, because now if you only want a subset, it's very easy to get a subset- but for those who want content across providers, they've been done over by the increase in competition. People won't pay a service a full $10-20/m just for one show they want to watch.. so piracy will win those cases.

Understood. You mentioned reasonable price, I agree. My litmus test on reasonable price is if the providers profit shows it is not rorting.

So, "reasonable price" actually means dirt cheap as I don't care what it really costs to provide.

Its a race to the bottom! We want it YESTERDAY and YOU pay us to use it attitude is what our consumers have.

But 15x4=60, Thats a lot of money per month to just watch TV, equal that of SKY. So it is sort of standing in as a replacement for consumers if you want a range of content. Clearly people can chose what they want and pay less but if they don't want pirates then they will need to make it convenient for consumers.

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek

#2188111 27-Feb-2019 13:49

tdgeek:
aspett:

You can call it a monopoly if you want. The fact is, consumers don't care, as long as it provides the service they're looking for for a reasonable price. People started leaving Sky because it wasn't good value for money, and it wasn't good value for money, because they couldn't get all their content in one place anymore. In some ways it's positive that content has split across many providers, because now if you only want a subset, it's very easy to get a subset- but for those who want content across providers, they've been done over by the increase in competition. People won't pay a service a full $10-20/m just for one show they want to watch.. so piracy will win those cases.

Understood. You mentioned reasonable price, I agree. My litmus test on reasonable price is if the providers profit shows it is not rorting.

So, "reasonable price" actually means dirt cheap as I don't care what it really costs to provide.

Piracy is not about price it's about convenience. If you can get your selection of content from different providers when you want, without having to wait for artificial time windows to expire then it's convenient, right?

Oh wait..... no, it's about the price. If I have to pay the same amount but get it from multiple places it's not going to work. Sure I have to do some search work to source my pirated material but it's not too inconvenient.

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

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2188113 27-Feb-2019 13:56

Coil:

tdgeek:

aspett:

You can call it a monopoly if you want. The fact is, consumers don't care, as long as it provides the service they're looking for for a reasonable price. People started leaving Sky because it wasn't good value for money, and it wasn't good value for money, because they couldn't get all their content in one place anymore. In some ways it's positive that content has split across many providers, because now if you only want a subset, it's very easy to get a subset- but for those who want content across providers, they've been done over by the increase in competition. People won't pay a service a full $10-20/m just for one show they want to watch.. so piracy will win those cases.

Understood. You mentioned reasonable price, I agree. My litmus test on reasonable price is if the providers profit shows it is not rorting.

So, "reasonable price" actually means dirt cheap as I don't care what it really costs to provide.

Its a race to the bottom! We want it YESTERDAY and YOU pay us to use it attitude is what our consumers have.

But 15x4=60, Thats a lot of money per month to just watch TV, equal that of SKY. So it is sort of standing in as a replacement for consumers if you want a range of content. Clearly people can chose what they want and pay less but if they don't want pirates then they will need to make it convenient for consumers.

Yep, I get all that! Not sure if I see it as a race to the bottom though. Its like a product in a shop may cost $20. Then people want it for $15, then $11 then $8 then $4. All the while it always cost $12 to manufacture. TV is like that, it still costs what it costs even though many want it all for nix. Thats the item in this case is not physical, its "not real". That's the excuse when I might argue, you don't want to buy my $20 widget so you offer $4 or steal it. I';m sure most piraters would not steal from anyone, and pirating isn't stealing is it? Its replacing a sale though, same thing. While I don't agree with Sky et al saying it cost us 45 gazillion, it is removing sales

Bluntj

556 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2188114 27-Feb-2019 13:59

tdgeek:

Bluntj:

As long as Apple charge $26 for an album there will be pirates. Not sure how this price can be justified for a digital release.

Thats about what CD's used to cost IIRC? Whats a more reasonable price? The physical CD is almost a worthless amount of money, the cutting of it, the printed holder, transport would add some cost as would the ticket clippers on the way (wholesaler/distributor margin). I have no idea, say $8?? Make an online album $19?

If an online digital album was $15 or under (latest release) a lot less would be pirated. I suspect Apple makes way too much money on these sales. Artist still probably gets around $2 per sale.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

rugrat

3107 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2188117 27-Feb-2019 14:03

Bit torrent might be down because there’s a lot of free sites that stream the program directly, no need to wait for download. So because torrent traffic is down doesn’t mean piracy is down by same amount.
I do believe Netflix would’ve reduced Piracy some bit though.

I do find it crazy that pirated stuff can be better quality then the paid NZ streaming services.

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2188118 27-Feb-2019 14:06

Bluntj:

tdgeek:

Bluntj:

As long as Apple charge $26 for an album there will be pirates. Not sure how this price can be justified for a digital release.

Thats about what CD's used to cost IIRC? Whats a more reasonable price? The physical CD is almost a worthless amount of money, the cutting of it, the printed holder, transport would add some cost as would the ticket clippers on the way (wholesaler/distributor margin). I have no idea, say $8?? Make an online album $19?

If an online digital album was $15 or under (latest release) a lot less would be pirated. I suspect Apple makes way too much money on these sales. Artist still probably gets around $2 per sale.

Agree. In Apple's case, their 30% replaces the costs I summarised which is unfair. What are album's available for from others? (non Apple)

Talkiet

4793 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2188119 27-Feb-2019 14:07

rugrat: Bit torrent might be down because there’s a lot of free sites that stream the program directly, no need to wait for download. So because torrent traffic is down doesn’t mean piracy is down by same amount.
I do believe Netflix would’ve reduced Piracy some bit though.

I do find it crazy that pirated stuff can be better quality then the paid NZ streaming services.

I was going to ask if you seriously believed that hadn't been considered (at least by some people) but decided to address it directly.

The stats I have access to include a very generous allowance of non torrent/P2P traffic still being pirated content, and yet there's still around 10x that amount being legit paid or free streaming..

My stats assume 100% of all VPN traffic is piracy, plus any traffic unable to be categorised is 100% piracy, plus a percentage of HTTP and HTTPS traffic is piracy.

Note, I don't believe these are accurate AT ALL, but even vastly overestimating the piracy contribution I get it at less than a 10th of legit streaming traffic.

Cheers - N

Please note all comments are from my own brain and don't necessarily represent the position or opinions of my employer, previous employers, colleagues, friends or pets.

aspett

122 posts

Master Geek

#2188120 27-Feb-2019 14:07

Piracy is not about price it's about convenience. If you can get your selection of content from different providers when you want, without having to wait for artificial time windows to expire then it's convenient, right?

Oh wait..... no, it's about the price. If I have to pay the same amount but get it from multiple places it's not going to work. Sure I have to do some search work to source my pirated material but it's not too inconvenient.

Bluntj:

If an online digital album was $15 or under (latest release) a lot less would be pirated. I suspect Apple makes way too much money on these sales. Artist still probably gets around $2 per sale.

I haven't pirated audio in years because the streaming services have pretty much all the content I'd ever want to listen to... in one place, for a reasonable price (~$15/m). That was first Pandora, and now Google Play Music.

If there was a similar offering for TV shows; available quickly, with all the content I'd watch.. then I'd happily fork out $30? $40? More, maybe? If they could have plans that included subsets of media, even better. But the idea is one place to pay. One place to view. I don't care how they spread the moolah in the background. Just make it convenient and reasonably priced.

waikariboy

902 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2188123 27-Feb-2019 14:10

IMHO PLEX is slowing down piracy.

Balm its gone!

tdgeek

29753 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2188124 27-Feb-2019 14:15

aspett:

I haven't pirated audio in years because the streaming services have pretty much all the content I'd ever want to listen to... in one place, for a reasonable price (~$15/m). That was first Pandora, and now Google Play Music.

If there was a similar offering for TV shows; available quickly, with all the content I'd watch.. then I'd happily fork out $30? $40? More, maybe? If they could have plans that included subsets of media, even better. But the idea is one place to pay. One place to view. I don't care how they spread the moolah in the background. Just make it convenient and reasonably priced.

These music services are great. Not for the writer and singer. Its peanuts, they get stuff all. If all TV and movies were $30-$40 then "I don't care how they spread the moolah in the background." There wont be any worth spreading, the creators etc etc will be doing charity work for you and me

But, I'm out of this topic its been hashed around for years.

rugrat

3107 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2188129 27-Feb-2019 14:32

Talkiet:

I was going to ask if you seriously believed that hadn't been considered (at least by some people) but decided to address it directly.

The stats I have access to include a very generous allowance of non torrent/P2P traffic still being pirated content, and yet there's still around 10x that amount being legit paid or free streaming..

My stats assume 100% of all VPN traffic is piracy, plus any traffic unable to be categorised is 100% piracy, plus a percentage of HTTP and HTTPS traffic is piracy.

Note, I don't believe these are accurate AT ALL, but even vastly overestimating the piracy contribution I get it at less than a 10th of legit streaming traffic.

Cheers - N

Ok, so Piracy is down a lot taking into account all sources. Thanks.

Most people I know that Pirate or use to Pirate do pay for Netflix, and for some it’s easier to pick something off Netflix then look else where.

rugrat

3107 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2188165 27-Feb-2019 14:39

Is Sky still trying to have the internet censored?

Haven’t heard anything about it lately, and I’m guessing that was what the report was done for.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5