VOD : The future for linear TV channels

Originally Posted by harry_hitch

Have you actually read the article OB? I would suggest it is clear you have not.

Yup - the article is based on a false dichotomy.

[theone2k10]

Originally Posted by denphone

And the vast majority still watch linear TV......

Tbf i can't remember the last time i watched linear tv, i can't even remember last time i had a areil or sattelite connected, all my tv is done via on demand and online.

[Mad Max]

Originally Posted by harry_hitch

Have you actually read the article OB? I would suggest it is clear you have not.

and i would suggest you took your head out of the sand! It's pretty easy to understand Harry, these young ppl, 18-34 year olds, of today, will carry on what they do now in 20 years time, so linear TV will defo still exist, but not as much as it does now.

---------- Post added at 00:35 ---------- Previous post was at 00:34 ----------

Originally Posted by theone2k10

Tbf i can't remember the last time i watched linear tv, i can't even remember last time i had a areil or sattelite connected, all my tv is done via on demand and online.

Did you read that Harry?

[denphone]

Originally Posted by theone2k10

Tbf i can't remember the last time i watched linear tv, i can't even remember last time i had a areil or sattelite connected, all my tv is done via on demand and online.

Well in our household , our parents household , my sisters household and so on and so on linear TV is very very much the number one.

The inference is that "young people" do things differently and when they get older, demographics will see to it that linear TV dies off.

This is based on the incorrect assumption that young people's habits at home persist into adulthood and on into their settled years as homeowners and parents.

When I was 18 I watched TV mostly in my bedroom, because I didn't have my own house, nor control of my own living room. Today I don't even have a TV in my bedroom. There's no need. My kids, however, steam a lot of stuff to their tablets, in their bedrooms, especially in the evening when I'm hogging the TV.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by harry_hitch

Have you actually read the article OB? I would suggest it is clear you have not.

Your point being...?

Yes, I did notice that the older generation was currently choosing to relate more to conventional TV. You are failing to grasp the point that, as the younger generation comes through into older age, they will be used to relating to the TV in a different way.

---------- Post added at 10:11 ---------- Previous post was at 10:03 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

The inference is that "young people" do things differently and when they get older, demographics will see to it that linear TV dies off.

This is based on the incorrect assumption that young people's habits at home persist into adulthood and on into their settled years as homeowners and parents.

When I was 18 I watched TV mostly in my bedroom, because I didn't have my own house, nor control of my own living room. Today I don't even have a TV in my bedroom. There's no need. My kids, however, steam a lot of stuff to their tablets, in their bedrooms, especially in the evening when I'm hogging the TV.

To the older generation, all this is new and many either find it more difficult to understand or don't really know where to start. However, it will be familiar and much more straight forward to our younger generation as they move into more advanced years.

Perhaps you can tell me why you think that the younger generation, as they get older, would want to substitute their world of on demand without ads for the more conventional model of scheduled TV full of irritating commercial breaks in their busy lives? True, some will do this, but I am certain that the majority will not. This is certainly being borne out in my experience, seeing how my daughters' friends watch TV in an entirely different way to your way, Chris.

OB ... as I have said repeatedly over the past year and more: all these arguments have been covered already, even this one. Please trouble yourself to read back over the thread. I'm rather too busy for this right now.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Yup - the article is based on a false dichotomy.

Not at all, Hugh. That same division of the way people watch TV is very apparent to me in my experience, and I do have a wide circle of friends and acquaintences to draw on in making that assessment.

Yes, the article is based on forced preferences, but it is interesting to see the choices people make when they can only choose one or the other. It certainly provides the basis for believing that viewer habits are changing significantly.

---------- Post added at 10:18 ---------- Previous post was at 10:16 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

OB ... as I have said repeatedly over the past year and more: all these arguments have been covered already, even this one. Please trouble yourself to read back over the thread. I'm rather too busy for this right now.

Thanks so much for clarifying, Chris, I thought you may have forgotten!

[spiderplant]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Yes, the article is based on forced preferences, but it is interesting to see the choices people make when they can only choose one or the other.

But based on a biased question. A survey of pay-streaming vs. pay-tv may have been more useful.

[OLD BOY]

Agreed, Spiderplant, and a forced choice between conventional channels and on demand/streaming would have been even more interesting.

However, the problem with that is that a fair proportion of the population does not take pay tv in any of its forms and so have not experienced either yet.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Agreed, Spiderplant, and a forced choice between conventional channels and on demand/streaming would have been even more interesting.

However, the problem with that is that a fair proportion of the population does not take pay tv in any of its forms and so have not experienced either yet.

The number of pay tv subscribers in the UK is growing...

http://www.broadbandchoices.co.uk/ne...-million-00494

[theone2k10]

Originally Posted by denphone

Well in our household , our parents household , my sisters household and so on and so on linear TV is very very much the number one.

E veryone has different preferences mate i disagree with the 20-34 year old part (not posted by you btw lol) i'm 36 and do not watch linear tv, ofcourse i'm probably in a minority in my age range lol but tv is certainly starting to change.
Linear tv will always be here that will never go anywhere but i think in the future we may see less linear channels and much more online services, both will co-exist alongside each other quite happily.

[harry_hitch]

Originally Posted by Mad Max

and i would suggest you took your head out of the sand! It's pretty easy to understand Harry, these young ppl, 18-34 year olds, of today, will carry on what they do now in 20 years time, so linear TV will defo still exist, but not as much as it does now.

Firstly, kudos for the first sentence, it made me chuckle.. At no stage have I denied things will change. I fail to see why my head is in the sand, if you actually bothered to read anything properly on this thread, you would see no-one has their head in the sand.

If you actually read, and digested, the link he posted, you will see it had no bearing to the statement he attached to it.
---------- Post added at 00:35 ---------- Previous post was at 00:34 ----------




Did you read that Harry?

lol, yes thanks.

---------- Post added 22-05-2016 at 00:33 ---------- Previous post was 21-05-2016 at 23:58 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Your point being...?

Yes, I did notice that the older generation was currently choosing to relate more to conventional TV. You are failing to grasp the point that, as the younger generation comes through into older age, they will be used to relating to the TV in a different way.

---------- Post added at 10:11 ---------- Previous post was at 10:03 ----------


To the older generation, all this is new and many either find it more difficult to understand or don't really know where to start. However, it will be familiar and much more straight forward to our younger generation as they move into more advanced years.

Perhaps you can tell me why you think that the younger generation, as they get older, would want to substitute their world of on demand without ads for the more conventional model of scheduled TV full of irritating commercial breaks in their busy lives? True, some will do this, but I am certain that the majority will not. This is certainly being borne out in my experience, seeing how my daughters' friends watch TV in an entirely different way to your way, Chris.

Why are you still continuing with this thread? I think we (now) all broadly agree that linear TV will continue for a long time, and no one denies linear TV will be streamed over the internet by more and more people in the future.

My point being, your statement, unsurprisingly, made no sense in relation to the article. The survey is deeply, deeply flawed. It forced a limited scenario on people and made them choose. What was the definition of a streaming service? Is Now TV a streaming service in this survey? If so, surely it can be classed as pay TV too? Where was the option for people to choose neither and stick with freeview? What were the price points of streaming services compared to pay tv? What happens if people can't afford either? (I know you won't be able to answer these, I am just highlighting how stupid the survey is.)

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by harry_hitch

lol, yes thanks.

---------- Post added 22-05-2016 at 00:33 ---------- Previous post was 21-05-2016 at 23:58 ----------



Why are you still continuing with this thread? I think we (now) all broadly agree that linear TV will continue for a long time, and no one denies linear TV will be streamed over the internet by more and more people in the future.

My point being, your statement, unsurprisingly, made no sense in relation to the article. The survey is deeply, deeply flawed. It forced a limited scenario on people and made them choose. What was the definition of a streaming service? Is Now TV a streaming service in this survey? If so, surely it can be classed as pay TV too? Where was the option for people to choose neither and stick with freeview? What were the price points of streaming services compared to pay tv? What happens if people can't afford either? (I know you won't be able to answer these, I am just highlighting how stupid the survey is.)

This is exactly why I proposed that we use this thread to post how things are actually moving in relation to on demand/streaming tv. There are to sides to the argument about whether or not our conventional broadcast channels will eventually disappear and after all this time there is no sign of an agreement on this. However, this thread has (at the time of writing) enjoyed over 65,000 hits, and it continues to rise, so there is not an inconsiderable amount of interest in this subject.

As you say, I think we do all agree that linear TV will continue, because without it, we couldn't watch live events. However, and as you well know, my proposition is that linear TV will eventually come into our living rooms via streaming rather than broadcast on channels such as ITV.

The article was not 'deeply flawed'. Yes, it was based on forced choices, but the article was very clear about that. It was intended to draw out the way people thought about how they would prefer to watch TV. If you want actual viewing figures, and how they are split between broadcast channels and on demand/ streaming, there are plenty of articles on that.

As for my statement 'not making sense in relation to the article', I will leave others to judge. If you read my statement and then read the article as intended, it makes perfect sense.

As for this obsession with definitions, I have already pointed out that in common parlence, on demand and streaming tend to be regarded as one and the same, and linear TV is taken to mean conventional broadcast channels. Technically, there are differences, of course, but the way I have been referring to methods of viewing is no different from the very many articles that have been written about it or the way the average man in the street sees it.

You reckon the survey is 'deeply flawed' but you are not really in a position to say that at all. To the best of my knowledge, you have not actually seen this survey or read the definitions attached to it, you have just read the article which summarises this work. And you accuse me of jumping to conclusions, Harry!

Pots and kettles come to mind....!

[1andrew1]

Old Boy may like this article.
http://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2016/...-distribution/