The Official "I dont have dish or cable" anymore thread - Page 22 - AVS Forum

AVS Forum > HDTV > HDTV Programming > The Official "I dont have dish or cable" anymore thread

HDTV Programming

tighr's Avatar tighr
04:53 PM Liked: 66
post #631 of 1689
11-13-2011 | Posts: 3,246
Joined: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCF68 View Post

Everyone claims to hate reality shows yet they are some of the highest rated shows on TV. Here's an idea, stop watching them the ratings will drop and they'll get cancelled. When the network tries to show another one DO NOT WATCH IT. Hopefully they will get the point. As long as people will watch crap that is exactly what the networks will give them.

I'm doing my part.

Now to get the other millions of people to stop watching them.
lsilvest's Avatar lsilvest
06:05 PM Liked: 10
post #632 of 1689
11-13-2011 | Posts: 875
Joined: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by tighr View Post

I'm doing my part.

Now to get the other millions of people to stop watching them.

You first have to figure out how to elevate their IQs above 50.
thedeskE's Avatar thedeskE
06:46 PM Liked: 67
post #633 of 1689
11-13-2011 | Posts: 3,638
Joined: Dec 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCF68 View Post

Obviously my point totally flew over your head. mY point is many peole edxpect 100% free TV with no advetisng what-so-ever. Now tell me how that works in any economical sense? And yes I'm aware the same people don't care if the content producers don't make money or not. The point is the content producers are not charity and no is entitled to anything.

YOU don't work for free do you? Nope. You work of a company. A company exists to make money. That company has customers in which is charges them a fee for services rendered. And some of that money comes back to you in the form of a paycheck. Why this concept is hard to grasp when it comes to TV, movies and music I don't get.

I get you're point. I payed for 20 years and that's enough. I don't need it any more - simple.

You're right, I don't understand the concept of a company. I own one.
BCF68's Avatar BCF68
06:56 PM Liked: 19
post #634 of 1689
11-13-2011 | Posts: 2,463
Joined: Apr 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedeskE View Post

I get you're point. I payed for 20 years and that's enough. I don't need it any more - simple.

You're right, I don't understand the concept of a company. I own one.

Well then you know there is no such thing as a free lunch. Or you should.
borntocoast's Avatar borntocoast
08:48 PM Liked: 20
post #635 of 1689
11-13-2011 | Posts: 284
Joined: Feb 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCF68 View Post

Well then you know there is no such thing as a free lunch. Or you should.

The problem with commercials these days is twofold,

First: there are just too many of them. As little as 15 years ago, you could expect to see 10-12 minutes of commercials for every hour of programming. Today, these figures have more than DOUBLED. Some Channels actually show more commercials per hour than program! Is it any wonder people resort to recording a show before they watch it so they can fast-forward through all the advertisments.

Second: What's on those commercials. I cannot fathom WHY many advertisers feel the best way to present their Product is to do so in the most obnoxious and/or offensive manner possible. Some Advertisers don't care WHO is watching their ads when they are shown. There may be a place for commercials for "ED Pills" and other so-called "Adult Products", but 3:30 in the afternoon is NOT that time. Children are most likely watching TV at this time.

It is because of these two factors I no longer pay to watch TV. I have better things to spend $118.00 a month for.
tighr's Avatar tighr
10:07 PM Liked: 66
post #636 of 1689
11-13-2011 | Posts: 3,246
Joined: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntocoast View Post

Second: What's on those commercials. I cannot fathom WHY many advertisers feel the best way to present their Product is to do so in the most obnoxious and/or offensive manner possible.

This I will never get. For example: The commercials on the Super Bowl are among the most expensive 30 second time slots ever sold. The majority of the products (Bud Light, Doritos, Pepsi, etc) I already plan to purchase and seeing a $3 million commercial will not get me to switch to a different product. For the other products (Godaddy, financial advisers, etrade, etc) I have no interest in consuming that product in the first place, and even if I did I wouldn't make my decision based on a 30 second spot. Ironically, the companies that CAN spend $3M on a commercial also are already the companies with the market share and brand recognition to not NEED to spend $3M.

The thing that frustrates me the most? I work for one of those corporations that buys Super Bowl ads every year. I see that money as getting pissed down the toilet instead of being sent back to the employees in the form of annual bonuses. Our products sell themselves; they don't need MILLIONS in marketing every year.
Jedi Master's Avatar Jedi Master
04:40 AM Liked: 22
post #637 of 1689
11-14-2011 | Posts: 1,627
Joined: Jan 2009
I'm doing my part. I paid for TV for 18 years and I've been done since 2008. I don't watch reality shows either. But as long as people do keep watching them the prices of pay TV will keep going up and more cheap crappy programming will appear.

With an antenna and OTA I still watch football all weekend. But come Sunday night I'm so tired and aggravated by the most obnoxious and/or offensive commercials and the amounts of them. I'm ready to get back to watching DVDs during the week.
Thomas Desmond's Avatar Thomas Desmond
08:32 PM Liked: 15
post #638 of 1689
11-14-2011 | Posts: 2,336
Joined: Jun 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post

On a similar note, I noticed while editing down shows that the last three episodes of "Person of Interest" were 44 minutes long.... compared to "NCIS," "Castle" and just about everything else I cut up. They're roughly 41-42 minutes per episode. I've gone back a couple of times to see if I missed anything and I haven't. Remove the promos and the local news break and that's only about 12 minutes of actual commercial time.

It's a bit more than that -- typically, an hour of broadcast network TV will contain 11 minutes of national advertising and 3 minutes of local advertising, for a total of 14 minutes. Add in the promos and local newsbreaks, and you hit anywhere from 16 to 19 minutes of non-program material depending on how much of that other stuff they lard in.

For a bit of a historical comparison, if you went back to the seventies, that break down would have been 6 minutes of national ads and 2 minutes of local ads. Then you would have had the network promos (typically adding up to 1:20 in an hour -- four twenty second promos) plus a couple of six second local station IDs, and the network IDs (ie "This is...CBS!"). All of that would come in under 10 minutes per hour.

And related to that -- I'm not aware of any older shows that had two minute opening sequences, although there were some that ran over a minute ("The Invaders" and "Star Trek: The Next Generation" both come to mind).
scorpiontail60's Avatar scorpiontail60
08:52 PM Liked: 11
post #639 of 1689
11-14-2011 | Posts: 419
Joined: Jun 2011
The only thing I hate about commercials is that I have to spend a minute chopping them out of everything I want to watch in VideoReDo prior to viewing the program
NetworkTV's Avatar NetworkTV
09:14 PM Liked: 458
post #640 of 1689
11-14-2011 | Posts: 15,631
Joined: Oct 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntocoast View Post

The problem with commercials these days is twofold,

First: there are just too many of them. As little as 15 years ago, you could expect to see 10-12 minutes of commercials for every hour of programming. Today, these figures have more than DOUBLED. Some Channels actually show more commercials per hour than program! Is it any wonder people resort to recording a show before they watch it so they can fast-forward through all the advertisments.

15 years ago, the average length of an hour show was 48 minutes. Now, it's 42. That's not anywhere close to double, much less more than double.

Quote:


Second: What's on those commercials. I cannot fathom WHY many advertisers feel the best way to present their Product is to do so in the most obnoxious and/or offensive manner possible. Some Advertisers don't care WHO is watching their ads when they are shown. There may be a place for commercials for "ED Pills" and other so-called "Adult Products", but 3:30 in the afternoon is NOT that time. Children are most likely watching TV at this time.

Well, some of those aren't sent out by the networks. 3:30 in the afternoon, you're likely seeing syndicated programming, which means those spots were already placed within the show from the syndicator.

When I worked for a local station, we'd roll only about half the spots for syndicated shows still in production, with the rest already being within the show. We only ran the full spot load for syndicated shows out of production that we received on tape to run.

On cable, sometimes the cable company will roll in spots they've sold. Those usually roll over promos run by the network. Those are usually those 2:00 spots for "The Best of..." some reject recording artist by Time Life or some product hawked by Billy Mays (even in death).

So, it's not always the network running those ads.

Quote:


It is because of these two factors I no longer pay to watch TV. I have better things to spend $118.00 a month for.

I wouldn't pay $118 a month, either.
scorpiontail60's Avatar scorpiontail60
09:31 PM Liked: 11
post #641 of 1689
11-14-2011 | Posts: 419
Joined: Jun 2011
Am I the only one who doesn't have a problem with shows being shorter?

There is soooo much entertainment out there that it better be a damn good 42 minutes to warrant watching. All too often, it's just filler taking up most of the time anyways. Most of the OTA network programs are unwatchable because they are dragged out to 20+ episodes a season with so. Much. Filler. The cable networks like AMC and HBO are better about this with their 13 episode seasons that consist of non-stop interesting content.

This also applies to video games too - I'd rather have a 6 hour non-stop action fest instead of a 60 hour game filled with tedious filler content. I actually did the math on Dragon Quest VIII - most people complete the game in around 75 hours. I used cheat codes the entire time to skip random encounters and I finished it in about 25 hours. At least half to 2/3 of that game's play time consists of monotonous, boring random battles. Wow.
Jedi Master's Avatar Jedi Master
02:01 AM Liked: 22
post #642 of 1689
11-15-2011 | Posts: 1,627
Joined: Jan 2009
In TV shows that I like I want 22 episodes are more a season. Its more new material and less repeats. If the show is 48 minutes long you get less commercials. Its called getting more bang for your buck.

I video games I want a long single player campaign. Some of the video games today you pay $60 for and the single player campaign is over in 6 hours.
borntocoast's Avatar borntocoast
10:34 AM Liked: 20
post #643 of 1689
11-15-2011 | Posts: 284
Joined: Feb 2011
In the 1950s TV Shows often had as much as 40 Episodes a Season , today you are lucky to get 20 . Does anybody remember when the "Sweeps" Periods each November, February and May meant you'd get Blockbuster Movies and Elaborate, Well-Produced Made-For-TV Movies and Miniseries ? Nowadays you just get new Episodes of whatever Series they're showing, and as soon as the "Sweeps" are over it's back to reruns.
zarg7883's Avatar zarg7883
02:46 PM Liked: 15
post #644 of 1689
11-15-2011 | Posts: 182
Joined: Jul 2009
^ Yeah. They'd give us A Very Special Episode of "Blossom." But back in the 70's we'd get "Roots" or "Centennial."
Desert Hawk's Avatar Desert Hawk
01:21 AM Liked: 10
post #645 of 1689
11-16-2011 | Posts: 982
Joined: Oct 2007
If I remember correctly, Centennial was made during the 80s and it originally ran on cable ((W)TBS).
Jedi Master's Avatar Jedi Master
05:00 AM Liked: 22
post #646 of 1689
11-16-2011 | Posts: 1,627
Joined: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desert Hawk View Post

If I remember correctly, Centennial was made during the 80s and it originally ran on cable ((W)TBS).

Centennial is a 12-episode American television miniseries that aired on NBC from October 1978 to February 1979. I recently bought Centennial and the North and South miniseries (broadcast on the ABC network in 1985, 1986, and 1994) on DVD. They were both great. You won't find them on any channel these days.
Jedi Master's Avatar Jedi Master
05:09 AM Liked: 22
post #647 of 1689
11-17-2011 | Posts: 1,627
Joined: Jan 2009
Local viewers are tuning in to free TV again

Quote:
Irked by the growing number of reality shows, Minneapolis salesman Jay Weberling considered tossing his six television sets out the window. But lately, he's been soothed by old episodes of "The Beverly Hillbillies" and "Perry Mason," as well as a steady stream of music videos.

He's not getting them through his computer, cable system or Netflix. They're all coming through his rooftop antenna.

More and more, beloved sitcoms, classic films, weather reports and even hip-hop showcases are being offered on free TV, as Twin Cities programmers experiment with subchannels -- additional feeds that became available in 2009 when the country switched from analog to digital...

Subchannels could play a significant role in the Twin Cities because 333,000 households have no interest in coughing up $100 a month for cable or satellite. That number represents 19 percent of the population, the highest share for any major metro in the United States...

Glynn believes that companies will want to advertise on both subchannels because of the people expected to be watching. According to USA Market Research, 46 percent of over-the-air households in the Twin Cities earn more than $50,000 a year and 18 percent of those viewers have a college degree. Adults 18-34, the demographic most coveted by advertisers, make up 34 percent of antenna or rabbit-ears users.

http://www.startribune.com/entertain...133660073.html


Tom Wellman's Avatar Tom Wellman
07:11 AM Liked: 36
post #648 of 1689
11-17-2011 | Posts: 1,134
Joined: Nov 2008
I can understand the reasoning for subchannels since they offer viewers more choice for free, thus a better chance at earning more revenues for the local station, however there is a cost associated with it. Degraded picture quality on the main HD channel of the local station.
gruven42's Avatar gruven42
09:22 AM Liked: 11
post #649 of 1689
11-17-2011 | Posts: 497
Joined: Dec 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Wellman View Post

I can understand the reasoning for subchannels since they offer viewers more choice for free, thus a better chance at earning more revenues for the local station, however there is a cost associated with it. Degraded picture quality on the main HD channel of the local station.

Since when have most people cared about picture quality?
lsilvest's Avatar lsilvest
09:33 AM Liked: 10
post #650 of 1689
11-17-2011 | Posts: 875
Joined: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Wellman View Post

I can understand the reasoning for subchannels since they offer viewers more choice for free, thus a better chance at earning more revenues for the local station, however there is a cost associated with it. Degraded picture quality on the main HD channel of the local station.

It's true. I had an antenna and HDTV when the locals first started broadcasing in HD and before they put in the subs the pictures were pristine. They are still better than cable/sat but have lost a little luster.
greaser's Avatar greaser
03:53 PM Liked: 29
post #651 of 1689
11-17-2011 | Posts: 734
Joined: Mar 2010
I have DishNet satellite tv,but i recently bought a DB2 in/outdoor antenna just so i could watch ME-TV,which one of my local stations started carrying on one of its subchannels(26.2). I love being able to watch shows like "PERRY MASON","THE UNTOUCHABLES"and now,the very rare 1hr."TWILIGHT ZONE" episodes,i am recording them to disc.The PQ is very good,but i won't be giving up my satellite service any time soon. Love my TCM tooo much, and ME-TV's programming is the only OTA programming that, IMO is worth watching.
8traxrule's Avatar 8traxrule
04:37 PM Liked: 14
post #652 of 1689
11-17-2011 | Posts: 746
Joined: Jul 2008
Me-TV has a BUG, so automatic fail there.

I've seen an unacceptable amount of compression on HD stations even with no subchannels.
Rammitinski's Avatar Rammitinski
04:47 PM Liked: 20
post #653 of 1689
11-17-2011 | Posts: 17,437
Joined: Sep 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by lsilvest View Post

It's true. I had an antenna and HDTV when the locals first started broadcasing in HD and before they put in the subs the pictures were pristine. They are still better than cable/sat but have lost a little luster.

Most of them here look no better than very good SD-DVD now.
Rammitinski's Avatar Rammitinski
04:51 PM Liked: 20
post #654 of 1689
11-17-2011 | Posts: 17,437
Joined: Sep 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by gruven42 View Post

Since when have most people cared about picture quality?

Well, the majority that posted here in the "HDTV" area of AVS forum did, up until all those "the more subchannels the better, at any cost" DTV USA Forum'ers swooped down upon us (they used to direct all the pro-subchannel talk over to the "CECB" sub-forum - somewhere along the line that changed).
tomhunter8's Avatar tomhunter8
04:51 PM Liked: 175
post #655 of 1689
11-17-2011 | Posts: 874
Joined: May 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8traxrule View Post

Me-TV has a BUG, so automatic fail there.

I've seen an unacceptable amount of compression on HD stations even with no subchannels.

Bug or no bug, Me-TV is awesome.
greaser's Avatar greaser
05:10 PM Liked: 29
post #656 of 1689
11-17-2011 | Posts: 734
Joined: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomhunter8 View Post

Bug or no bug, Me-TV is awesome.

I have no trouble with ME-TV's bug either,it's not at all obnoxious,it's pretty much opaque,and not very large.And i agree,ME-TV is awesome,where else can you find "PERRY MASON",and "THE UNTOUCHABLES" + the rare 1hr."TWILIGHT ZONE" episodes???
tomhunter8's Avatar tomhunter8
05:32 PM Liked: 175
post #657 of 1689
11-17-2011 | Posts: 874
Joined: May 2008
Agreed. Me-TV has a LOT of great shows on throughout the week. I've had DirecTV since 1997 and right now I watch more of Me-TV using my OTA than any single channel on DirecTV.
scorpiontail60's Avatar scorpiontail60
01:01 AM Liked: 11
post #658 of 1689
11-18-2011 | Posts: 419
Joined: Jun 2011
What the hell are you doing watching "The Twilight Zone" on some standard definition subchannel loaded with channel bugs and commercials when the complete series has been released on Blu-ray?
Jedi Master's Avatar Jedi Master
01:44 AM Liked: 22
post #659 of 1689
11-18-2011 | Posts: 1,627
Joined: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8traxrule View Post

Me-TV has a BUG, so automatic fail there.

I feel that way about stations you have to pay for. But I can accept it on a free OTA station. That is why the only programming I pay for is on DVD.
Jedi Master's Avatar Jedi Master
01:48 AM Liked: 22
post #660 of 1689
11-18-2011 | Posts: 1,627
Joined: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by scorpiontail60 View Post

What the hell are you doing watching "The Twilight Zone" on some standard definition subchannel loaded with channel bugs and commercials when the complete series has been released on Blu-ray?

MeTV is a free channel if you watch it OTA with antenna. But if you were paying for that channel I would agree.

Reply HDTV Programming

Subscribe to this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3