Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
I did say "without looking it up"................
Cord Cutters have changed the pay-for-play landscape forever.
- Thread starter Overmind One
- Start date
heisenberg
Earl Grey
Doesn't matter but it's obvious that our parties can easily be influenced and bought.
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
Yes, I agree with you. What -pisses me off- is the whining from people that "there is nothing good to watch" on TV or at the movies. If only the "lowest common denominator" continues to pay for entertainment, then that is what will be produced. You guys like the Expanse, but at a 1.19 with a .3 rating on it's second season (which are SGU numbers for a S2 premiere, worse IIRC) it -will not last-. Yet, it gets great reviews, but it cannot sustain itself. (And if I hear any "but that does not account for XYZ", I am gonna slap you with a fan excuse bingo card)
I do not disagree that the paradigm is shifting, I never have, but people will not produce stuff for free, that too is just human nature.
One, it costs less to make than SGU. When you say "it cannot sustain itself", what you are really saying is that you think it cannot sustain itself on Syfy. Ratings are only relevant in a framework of a cable channel funded by advertising dollars (the existing paradigm which is dying). Two, the "lowest common denominator" are the ones who have stuck with cable TV and continue to pay the exhorbitant fees for it because they have not made themselves aware of alternatives (or that cable is serving a place like a nursing home or school or other business).
Please see: People who still read newspapers and magazines. People who use AOL. People who still do not have a smartphone. People who still use typewriters or have rotary phone landlines, those people are the "lowest common denominator" when talking about technology.
The last comment is easily wrong: "people will not produce stuff for free, that too is just human nature.". WRONG dude!
Human nature is to produce everything for free, give away their efforts and love and cooperation FOR FREE, and to receive everything for free. This human nature was the way of things for thousands of years before "others" came who changed all of that. All they did was to add layers of capitalistic bullshit over actual "human nature". Money, ratings, profit, control and the like...all having nothing to do with human nature. Lets not go there. Shows like Star Trek Continues, Star Trek New Voyages, the countless fan films and shorts, YouTube, etc...those are the next major producers of original material. Many will go on to be offered on pay services online, others will simply be viewable for free on their own websites. Funding will come from Crowdfunding, and as Axanar has shown, that money is no small potatoes.
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
Prove that. Even Syfy say it is the most ambitious thing they have EVER made, so please, back it up, or stop with the bullshit. You attack anyone who says anything without backing it up, so back it up/
YAY, fan excuse bingo comes out, didn't see that coming at all...............
And as Syfy does not give a TOSS about the sell on market, and are paying the bill to make the show, you just ticked fan box two.
I am not talking about technology, I am talking about paying for the show, so stop moving the goalposts.
Jesus Fucking H Christ.The last comment is easily wrong: "people will not produce stuff for free, that too is just human nature.". WRONG dude!
Look, you got challenged, and you brought race into it, why am I not shocked.
Oh, do you mean kickstarter projects?
Stuff that get's paid for by people who are interested in it?
Yeah, they do it for free.................
So, you mean people PAY for it rather than the creators making it for FREE, and you cling to the notion that people will do it for free, while admitting that they cannot................
Yeah..................
Ambitious does not equal expensive. However, I am seeing anywhere from 4 million to 6 million per episode of the Expanse. That would put it considerably above the 2 million cost of SGU. You might have me there. Still, this show will not have to worry about it's funding because Syfy will simply subsidize it like they did NuBSG (whose ratings were shit). They are getting that coveted critical acclaim and though it's audience is under 2 million, it will likely get second and third seasons.
Dude, YOU are the one giving excuses! You talk about ratings, then you are talking about advertising dollars vs costs to a CABLE CHANNEL.Ratings are irrelevant to fan productions or web series or anything on Netflix or commercial-free Hulu. Ratings will be replaced by subscriber money. THAT is what this thread is about.
That is ridiculous. Syfy lives on advertising dollars, with just a bit coming from cable revenue (subscribers). They dont give a "toss", they give analyses and crunch advertising dollars vs production costs. They have to, because that is how they survive. Ultimately, they will still need higher ratings, but they can subsidize the show in the interest of prestige, like they did for NuBSG. It's a flagship show.
This thread does not have goalposts. We are talking about cord cutting here. We are talking about how it has changed the pay-for-play model forever, not the costs of shows on paid cable channels. You are rambling on about the costs of shows on paid cable channels.
WTF? Where????? You just did.
Crowdfunding is not a commercial process. It is a charitable/philanthropic process having nothing to do with ratings, advertising, sales or subscribers or profit.
The creators need equipment to make the shows. They need to pay CGI artists, etc. So people are making some money on the lowest level, but the overall production is still creating a product which will be free to the audience in the end. Capitalism forces the exchange of money. Until those CGI artists can just put in a requisition for new computers and before the State is distributing free food and housing, this will be the case. But the end product is free...unlike anything on cable or sold in a store.
Back to topic please....
Cord Cutters have changed the pay-for-play landscape forever
The cord cutting phenomena is increasing the revenues of Netflix and Hulu:
http://www.sfchronicle.com/business...tting-accelerates-as-Netflix-Hulu-6509739.php
It is happening on a transitional basis, rather than full severing of all cable services:
http://techcrunch.com/2015/06/23/ne...ched-pay-tv-in-2014-up-1-3-yoy/#.ubxffao:mdNB
There’s been some debate about how many consumers are actually cutting ties with their pay TV providers and replacing them with over-the-top streaming media services – a trend generally referred to as “cord cutting.” But a recent study indicates that the number of cord cutters in North America is, in fact growing – in 2014, 8.2 percent of former pay TV subscribers surveyed by TiVo subsidiary Digitalsmiths said they ditched their service – an increase of 1.3 percent over the prior year. Meanwhile, a much larger 45.2 percent said they reduced their cable or satellite TV service during the same time frame.
It appears to me that most all of this shifting is based in cost cutting and not any sort of over-arcing philosophy. In my case, it was definitely cost cutting as the main reason, but the other reason was an angry rebellion against commercials. It got to such an extreme level that having cable and having to endure almost 20 minutes of commercials per hour of programming. After years away from commercials, that has morphed into a philosophy, but the beginning was cost cutting.
What were your reasons? If you are not a cord cutter, then tell us why you decided to keep your cable?
http://www.sfchronicle.com/business...tting-accelerates-as-Netflix-Hulu-6509739.php
It is happening on a transitional basis, rather than full severing of all cable services:
http://techcrunch.com/2015/06/23/ne...ched-pay-tv-in-2014-up-1-3-yoy/#.ubxffao:mdNB
There’s been some debate about how many consumers are actually cutting ties with their pay TV providers and replacing them with over-the-top streaming media services – a trend generally referred to as “cord cutting.” But a recent study indicates that the number of cord cutters in North America is, in fact growing – in 2014, 8.2 percent of former pay TV subscribers surveyed by TiVo subsidiary Digitalsmiths said they ditched their service – an increase of 1.3 percent over the prior year. Meanwhile, a much larger 45.2 percent said they reduced their cable or satellite TV service during the same time frame.
It appears to me that most all of this shifting is based in cost cutting and not any sort of over-arcing philosophy. In my case, it was definitely cost cutting as the main reason, but the other reason was an angry rebellion against commercials. It got to such an extreme level that having cable and having to endure almost 20 minutes of commercials per hour of programming. After years away from commercials, that has morphed into a philosophy, but the beginning was cost cutting.
What were your reasons? If you are not a cord cutter, then tell us why you decided to keep your cable?
Last edited:
Yep, that is the usual path, and this is no different. The part that makes it a problem for cable providers is their business model. They have built themselves on advertising dollars and money from other sponsors, and they have bundled their offerings into chunky, expensive (and unpalatable) monthly charges. When you open that bundle, there is a lot of junk filler inside you don't need or want, and very little of anything good. Even then, it is riddled with commercials too? Who do they think is going to continue to be okay with that?
I go to other people's homes and experience the cable programming experience and I still find it unbearable. Unless you are in the midst of a movie or show, you are going to be getting waves of commercials. Here's why (from Aug 2015):
http://nypost.com/2015/08/16/expect-more-commercials-thanks-to-ratings-plunge/
Let us buy what we want to watch and no more, and we will pay money! Try to prohibit it and people will create ways to get it anyway.
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
It already has a season 2 confirmed.
The expanse (you know, the example I am using) IS a cable show. -ALL- I am talking about is cable shows (or FTA). What fans do is up to them, assuming they don't get shut down.
Really??
I did not know that..............
Notice I said "sell on market", I said nothing about how they make their money.
OK.
If you can't see it, I don't know what to tell you.
Correct, the point is it is still -paid for-.
Correct, it is not free to produce, and for the most part, fan produced product is sub-par.
Yep, there is more shit out there.
Tripler
Well Known GateFan
I have Internet cable an no TV so ya . It's easy to do . I only asked for Internet and no TV ...
Me too.
And yet I can still watch all the shows I want (when I want), and watch them commercial free and in HD. I think one of my turning points when I had cable was having to pay for certain broadcasts ON TOP OF the cost of the cable (pay per view), even though the cable bill was already over $150.00/mo, and there were still commercials! I do not regret cutting the cord years ago.
Bluce Ree
Tech Admin / Council Member
Of course. However, cable makes you pay for access to content providers giving you content already paid for with butt-loads of commercials.
This is the whole problem right there. The commercials DO pay for the shows. The extra dollop of them is for PROFIT and not to pay for shows or overhead. Cable stations generally are not also production studios. They are digital distributors using datacenters and transcoders, operating over the cable infrastructure (which is overhead too). They have employees to service the cables and computers, and they have accounting departments and secretaries and offices and especially SALES people selling the service and accepting advertising dollars for promises to flood every effing program with their commercials. Tell me why I need to be hooked up to that machine?
*SNIP!*
