NZ Television

Forums › Freeview (DVB-T/DVB-S) › NZ Television

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

6701 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#916341 16-Oct-2013 22:19

Cloudy: I find it interesting that those that are saying nz tv sucks are the ones that want just news, doco's current affairs etc type shows. I would have thought that this sort of programing is easily found online and in greater variety. The vast majority of NZ'ers seem to me to be pretty happy with the tv being broadcast. I know I am, mostly, can't please everyone all the time.

On the contrary, it seems to be that there are options such as Netflix popping up to provide entertainment viewing but as someone who is mainly interested in NZ news and current affairs I still find that I still rely on the traditional broadcasters. It's great to have things like the 3News iPad app and the ability to stream RadioLive from an iPhone app, but let's be honest, this is exactly the same content as you would enjoy on an ordinary radio or television.

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#916351 16-Oct-2013 22:45

KiwiNZ:
JimmyH:
KiwiNZ: Taste is individual, that is why I like the pick and mix idea.

Agree with that.

It's also the reason why I should be allowed to buy what I want to watch, rather than a government taking my money off me via a "licence fee" or taxes, and buying what they think I ought to want to watch on my behalf.

That is hard to avoid. The choices are taxes, licence fee, subscription or hire. Payment has to be made.

I agree with this, although you missed the fifth form of payment - enduring screaming Harvey Norman ads. However, I think you may have missed my point.

For entertainment, which TV is, I'm happy for ad-supported models to exist, then I can decide whether or not to watch. I'm also happy with subscription and hire models, then I can decide whether or not to subscribe or hire, depending on whether I see it as value for money. In fact, I do subscribe to services and make monthly payments to get things I enjoy (SoHo etc). However, I'm not happy with tax/licence funded models where I am effectively compelled to pay for something that I may not consider value for money, or indeed anything I remotely want at all.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#916414 17-Oct-2013 07:10

JimmyH:
KiwiNZ:
JimmyH:
KiwiNZ: Taste is individual, that is why I like the pick and mix idea.

Agree with that.

It's also the reason why I should be allowed to buy what I want to watch, rather than a government taking my money off me via a "licence fee" or taxes, and buying what they think I ought to want to watch on my behalf.

That is hard to avoid. The choices are taxes, licence fee, subscription or hire. Payment has to be made.

I agree with this, although you missed the fifth form of payment - enduring screaming Harvey Norman ads. However, I think you may have missed my point.

For entertainment, which TV is, I'm happy for ad-supported models to exist, then I can decide whether or not to watch. I'm also happy with subscription and hire models, then I can decide whether or not to subscribe or hire, depending on whether I see it as value for money. In fact, I do subscribe to services and make monthly payments to get things I enjoy (SoHo etc). However, I'm not happy with tax/licence funded models where I am effectively compelled to pay for something that I may not consider value for money, or indeed anything I remotely want at all.

The Adv supported model is OK to a point, there needs to be some rules. We were watching a show
Last night on TV 2, during the entire show there was 2 minutes programme then 5 minutes Adv's that is
rediculous and quite typical of TV2.

Jas777

838 posts

Ultimate Geek

#916436 17-Oct-2013 08:07

KiwiNZ

What was the show? I don;t watch much of TV2 anymore so don't even know what shows are on.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#916460 17-Oct-2013 09:00

Jas777: KiwiNZ

What was the show? I don;t watch much of TV2 anymore so don't even know what shows are on.

it occurs during the Prime time, Big Bang being the worst, it could force one to use alternatives

Jas777

838 posts

Ultimate Geek

#916462 17-Oct-2013 09:06

Ok,

Isn't Big Bang one of those shows that is being made even shorter in the US? It has gone from 22 minutes to 19 as they know they can get more adverts in.

And isn't it also to combat people fast forwarding that they are making advert breaks smaller in duration but more of the breaks ie go from two 4 minute breaks to four 2 minute breaks

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#916470 17-Oct-2013 09:26

Jas777: Ok,

Isn't Big Bang one of those shows that is being made even shorter in the US? It has gone from 22 minutes to 19 as they know they can get more adverts in.

And isn't it also to combat people fast forwarding that they are making advert breaks smaller in duration but more of the breaks ie go from two 4 minute breaks to four 2 minute breaks

what ever they are doing it is &^%$$%%^ annoying, completely breaks up the flow and I end up changing channel. It is a good example why NZ TV needs an overhaul and that does not mean following the seriously broken US example.

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.

Jas777

838 posts

Ultimate Geek

#916525 17-Oct-2013 11:08

KiwiNZ,

The problem is always going to be that a programme like Big Bang is a ratings winner so they have to put more adverts in it. The only way I could see them changing the model is a bit like here where if you pay a subscription you don't get adverts if you don't want them. This however could have political ramifications for something like 'Free to Air' TV.

Journeyman

1186 posts

Uber Geek

#916596 17-Oct-2013 14:12

KiwiNZ:
We were watching a show Last night on TV 2, during the entire show there was 2 minutes programme then 5 minutes Adv's that is
rediculous and quite typical of TV2.

That's a bit of an embellishment though, isn't it? BBT last night was 4 parts. First part was 7'04", 2nd part was 4'31", 3rd 5'03" and 4th part was 3'39".
The first ad break was 1'30". The second was 4'05". The 3rd was 4'45".

So that's a show of 20'17". Ad breaks total 10'20". That's still doesn't seem fantastic for the viewer, but it's a bit different from the claim of 2 minutes of programme.

When a broadcaster is sent a twenty minute long programme to fill a 30 minute slot, what are they to do? Fill the remainder with ads of course. Because that's how you pay the bills.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#916621 17-Oct-2013 14:47

Journeyman:
KiwiNZ:
We were watching a show Last night on TV 2, during the entire show there was 2 minutes programme then 5 minutes Adv's that is
rediculous and quite typical of TV2.

That's a bit of an embellishment though, isn't it? BBT last night was 4 parts. First part was 7'04", 2nd part was 4'31", 3rd 5'03" and 4th part was 3'39".
The first ad break was 1'30". The second was 4'05". The 3rd was 4'45".

So that's a show of 20'17". Ad breaks total 10'20". That's still doesn't seem fantastic for the viewer, but it's a bit different from the claim of 2 minutes of programme.

When a broadcaster is sent a twenty minute long programme to fill a 30 minute slot, what are they to do? Fill the remainder with ads of course. Because that's how you pay the bills.

I didn't stop watch it I have ummm other more productive things to do sheesh, still four breaks in a 20 minute programme

WyleECoyoteNZ

1049 posts

Uber Geek

#916623 17-Oct-2013 14:52

KiwiNZ:
JayTaicho:
KiwiNZ: Oh and another thing, for the love Jiminy Cricket can we just get rid of all the reality TV and rubbish talent shows and Shortland Street.

What do the bright folks of GZ think should happen with TV services in NZ?

Believe it or not, NZ reality TV and Shortland Street are the most watched shows in NZ, according to ratings. Don't watch them myself, but don't think they'll be going away anytime soon.

Sad really

No. TV is there to entertain the viewer, and to some reality TV and Shorty do that.

Unless you have Sky\Vodafone (Telsrta) TV, your not paying for it (aside from an initial cost of TV and freeview), so if you don't like what's on, turn the TV off. Easy.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#916654 17-Oct-2013 16:12

WyleECoyoteNZ:
KiwiNZ:
JayTaicho:
KiwiNZ: Oh and another thing, for the love Jiminy Cricket can we just get rid of all the reality TV and rubbish talent shows and Shortland Street.

What do the bright folks of GZ think should happen with TV services in NZ?

Believe it or not, NZ reality TV and Shortland Street are the most watched shows in NZ, according to ratings. Don't watch them myself, but don't think they'll be going away anytime soon.

Sad really

No. TV is there to entertain the viewer, and to some reality TV and Shorty do that.

Unless you have Sky\Vodafone (Telsrta) TV, your not paying for it (aside from an initial cost of TV and freeview), so if you don't like what's on, turn the TV off. Easy.

Freeview is not free, the cost is levied in taxes

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#916706 17-Oct-2013 20:02

KiwiNZ: Freeview is not free, the cost is levied in taxes

Not really, apart from some minor NZ On Air co-funding and Maori TV, it isn't taxpayer funded.

You get to pay either way.

If you have Sky, you are essentially the customer, and you pay by cutting them a cheque every month.

If you use Freeview, you are the essentially product not the customer, and you pay by having your eyeballs sold to advertisers. The cost isn't to you monetary - it's having your programme interrupted every 5 minutes so that some demented person can scream "GO HARVEY GO HARVEY!" at you.

But, under either model, you pay.

Cloudy

150 posts

Master Geek

#916717 17-Oct-2013 20:29

JimmyH:
KiwiNZ: Freeview is not free, the cost is levied in taxes

Not really, apart from some minor NZ On Air co-funding and Maori TV, it isn't taxpayer funded.

You get to pay either way.

If you have Sky, you are essentially the customer, and you pay by cutting them a cheque every month.

If you use Freeview, you are the essentially product not the customer, and you pay by having your eyeballs sold to advertisers. The cost isn't to you monetary - it's having your programme interrupted every 5 minutes so that some demented person can scream "GO HARVEY GO HARVEY!" at you.

But, under either model, you pay.

But it works- This is the second time(I think) that Harvey has been used as an example..........

Journeyman

1186 posts

Uber Geek

#916784 17-Oct-2013 23:37

KiwiNZ:
Journeyman:
KiwiNZ:
We were watching a show Last night on TV 2, during the entire show there was 2 minutes programme then 5 minutes Adv's that is
rediculous and quite typical of TV2.

That's a bit of an embellishment though, isn't it? BBT last night was 4 parts. First part was 7'04", 2nd part was 4'31", 3rd 5'03" and 4th part was 3'39".
The first ad break was 1'30". The second was 4'05". The 3rd was 4'45".

So that's a show of 20'17". Ad breaks total 10'20". That's still doesn't seem fantastic for the viewer, but it's a bit different from the claim of 2 minutes of programme.

When a broadcaster is sent a twenty minute long programme to fill a 30 minute slot, what are they to do? Fill the remainder with ads of course. Because that's how you pay the bills.

I didn't stop watch it I have ummm other more productive things to do sheesh, still four breaks in a 20 minute programme

I didn't stopwatch it either, but there's a bit of a difference in estimating 2 minutes and nearly 4 minutes ;)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9