Originally Posted by theatredaz
That would change quickly if lets say NFL and direct Tv's conglomeration was disrupted by multiple new broadcasters entering the Cable scene> so...we would see 2-3 maybe even 4 new cable providers entering the Market, they would want to get NFL's product line...NFL says ok but you pay the same price as Direct TV does...fine...But ...the market that was once invlolved with only one provider decides that cable company 2 or 3 is to their liking- for what ever reasons, when they leave Direct TV...Direct TV's bottom line leaves as well...direct TV goes back to NFL and say's our bottom line quotas are not being met, even if they don't procur that information to the NFL , their abilities to carry that product at the requested licensing costs could prove unaffordable due to a decreased demand for it.
The problem is, D* pays what they do for the contract because they have the exclusive contract. No one will pay anything close to that for a shared contract. As more parties carry the package, the price per party goes down since it's no longer "special".
Even if multiple providers banded together to pay the same amount that D* does now, now the NFL has to deal with multiple parties instead of one single entity. Plus, if one provider drops out of the pool, what happens to the amount the others pay to keep it? What happens if both Comcast and FIOS in the same market want in on it when they are in direct competition? Do they each pay less than an MSO that has the exclusive for their individual market? Pools simply add compexity that the NFL might not want to deal with unless the money actually increases.
Originally Posted by JWhip
Once HD streaming is reliable, then why have cable companies? The content providers can sell directly to the consumer and bypass the middleman. You can store the stuff on a home server and watch it where and when you want. You can pick what you want to buy or more importantly, what not the buy, the ultimate in ala carte. The content provider, whether it is CBS or any sports net can keep all the money. The NFL would love it. They get to control the announcers, how the games are produced and presented and get to keep all the advertizing revenue and all the subscription fees. That will dwarf what they earn now from CBS, NBC, Fox and directv combined. That is the future of television distribution and it is no more than 10 years away.
Aside from the fact that most people get their internet service from companies that are also MSOs, I think true show by show ala carte would kill the ability of new shows to find an audience. If people have to pay be the show or series, they're going to be less likely to sample something unknown. Established shows leading in to new shows is how a lot of people learn about them. They aren't like us where we read the news about them and decide to check it out based on reviews. The majority of viewers still find and watch shows based on a lead in from a show they already watch. You only have to look at the ratings drop for Revolution to see the effect without a strong lead in.
Further, most shows on cable get made based on the total potential audience supporting the channel, not just those who watch the show. Simply put, Breaking Bad or Mad Men wouldn't get made if only the actual viewers financed it. There aren't enough there in the current system. There would be even fewer if the channel wasn't just there for people to tune in to it. You'd be lucky to get half the viewers if they specifically had to subscribe to an individual show.
Finally, while people generally accept that commercials on regular TV are a fact of life, the simply wouldn't tolerate them under a show by show subscription plan. There are a ton of people who think that Internet=Free and if it's paid content, it can't have commercials at all. Since, under your model, there would be no first run under regular TV to support the costs, the subscription model would have to be a lot more expensive to pay the costs of the show. Right now, streaming is in addition to the main broadcast, not in place of it.
Something has to pay for this stuff, and the audience isn't going to want to do it if they have to actually think about how much it costs. With a monthly all you can eat fee, they don't have to.