(08-11-2016 07:38 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Over on the realignment board there is eternal smugness about cord cutting but it misses what is happening.

With cable and satellite, the provider bundling channels also pays for the delivery infrastructure (the wires the satellites).

With Slingbox's semi-cable, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, and HBOGO, you are still paying someone to gather up content and bundle it and the delivery infrastructure now is in someone else's hands, except even that's not totally true, Netflix for example pays larger internet service providers to mirror content on their servers to shrink the size of the loop.

Lets also remember that "it's so cheap" is BS as well.
If you are a Netflix or Hulu user you are being subsidized by the investors. Neither service is profitable, the investors are betting that they can get you so hooked that when they change the price structure to reach profitability that you can't give it up.
Amazon no way is their video profitable. Until 2014 Prime was $79 a year whether you used video or not and it went up to $99. No way that covers their server costs and costs of licensing content. Amazon is willing to lose money on video (for right now) to gain market share in your spending habits.
HBO doesn't care right now if you share logins because dealers always give the first taste for free. They want you to watch the hell out of it and feel it is essential to your entertainment happiness. Then when there is simultaneous login from different areas they can kick one of them off, do it enough times, people start paying for their own.

All that is changing is you are going to pay more people. You will pay for the wire or radio signal to your home which is the pipe. Then you will pay the content aggregator and chances are you end up paying for more than one aggregator.

Correct. Go ahead and drop the mic.

But you did forget, our kids watch on their tablets!


I'm one of the earliest cord cutters of this era as I did it once in 2009 and again in 2013.

Cost is nearly even and the ease of having Directv and the deal of getting to keep unlimited data on my cell package makes it a viable option and will continue to do so for some time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#WolvesUp

(08-10-2016 10:17 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Broadcast Television isn't dead. Broadcast Television is free to air television...it's going to always be around in some form or fashion

Cable Television, those that charge a subscriber fee for access, that's what is in trouble. Major difference between the two.

Correct and of those who 'cord shave' most are using the antenna to get the free OTA channels. With the age of digital TV, a station can broadcast at least 3 sub-channels. And as more people discover that there are sub-channels in OTA broadcast and specific channels like Grit, MeTV, Comet...etc, the cable cut is easier. If you are in a larger cities there are more availability especially for kids, i.e.Qubo under the ION stations. And now with the American Sports Network making more progress in getting their 24 hr sports channel on the sub-channels.
The digital age is actually making Broadcast TV make a come back as a station doesn't need to have other channels in the spectrum to broadcast other networks, it can all be done under the spectrum the currently have.

Great responses by all, one thing for sure going forward, we the consumer will have more options regarding how we purchase our entertainment and obviously this is a good thing! One size doesn't fit all, so each person will have to explore available options where they live and consider their personal circumstances when deciding how to buy their entertainment.

(08-11-2016 07:38 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Over on the realignment board there is eternal smugness about cord cutting but it misses what is happening.

With cable and satellite, the provider bundling channels also pays for the delivery infrastructure (the wires the satellites).

With Slingbox's semi-cable, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, and HBOGO, you are still paying someone to gather up content and bundle it and the delivery infrastructure now is in someone else's hands, except even that's not totally true, Netflix for example pays larger internet service providers to mirror content on their servers to shrink the size of the loop.

Lets also remember that "it's so cheap" is BS as well.
If you are a Netflix or Hulu user you are being subsidized by the investors. Neither service is profitable, the investors are betting that they can get you so hooked that when they change the price structure to reach profitability that you can't give it up.
Amazon no way is their video profitable. Until 2014 Prime was $79 a year whether you used video or not and it went up to $99. No way that covers their server costs and costs of licensing content. Amazon is willing to lose money on video (for right now) to gain market share in your spending habits.
HBO doesn't care right now if you share logins because dealers always give the first taste for free. They want you to watch the hell out of it and feel it is essential to your entertainment happiness. Then when there is simultaneous login from different areas they can kick one of them off, do it enough times, people start paying for their own.

Granted Im not a TMT guy but last I checked NFLX has posted positive earnings (aka a profit) for at least the last year (probably more but don't really want to check). As for the other services you mention, I haven't dug into the financials of the respective owners to see any breakouts but you are definitely off on netflix.

I've heard in some markets, there are cord-cutting consultants. You tell them what type of content you HAVE to HAVE and then they set up which memberships/subscriptions/equipment you need and get it all set up for you. It seems like something people would just do for themselves, but it can take a lot of researching of available options and possibly piecing together multiple services to get it exactly how you want.

I thought for a while about possibly getting into that business, but I'm not sure how sustainable it would be.

(08-11-2016 12:05 PM)boroeagle2 Wrote:  I've heard in some markets, there are cord-cutting consultants. You tell them what type of content you HAVE to HAVE and then they set up which memberships/subscriptions/equipment you need and get it all set up for you. It seems like something people would just do for themselves, but it can take a lot of researching of available options and possibly piecing together multiple services to get it exactly how you want.

I thought for a while about possibly getting into that business, but I'm not sure how sustainable it would be.

One of my first businesses was a telecommunications consulting agency. We had multiple carriers, all with one or two distinct advantages over the others. My salespeople would set up a meeting with the business owner/CEO (I was the initial salesman at first of course) and ask thorough questions in order to decide which recommendation(s) to suggest. I was on the ground floor, much like it appears you would be with your business idea as well.

The providers gave us a percentage of the billing for the services we sold to the customer and that was our only compensation (residual) for our consulting. We didn't charge the customer a dime.

You can get started by inquiring about an "agent contract" with the providers in your area and most likely they will be delighted to sign you. Just do NOT ever sign a "non-compete" - a "non disclosure" is okay. Remember, as volume goes up, you go back and renegotiate your existing agent contract.

Hope that helps :-)

EDITED TO ADD: Quite often, you might get paid a flat amount per new account with no residual too.

(08-11-2016 12:03 PM)GSTexan Wrote:  

(08-11-2016 07:38 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Over on the realignment board there is eternal smugness about cord cutting but it misses what is happening.

With cable and satellite, the provider bundling channels also pays for the delivery infrastructure (the wires the satellites).

With Slingbox's semi-cable, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, and HBOGO, you are still paying someone to gather up content and bundle it and the delivery infrastructure now is in someone else's hands, except even that's not totally true, Netflix for example pays larger internet service providers to mirror content on their servers to shrink the size of the loop.

Lets also remember that "it's so cheap" is BS as well.
If you are a Netflix or Hulu user you are being subsidized by the investors. Neither service is profitable, the investors are betting that they can get you so hooked that when they change the price structure to reach profitability that you can't give it up.
Amazon no way is their video profitable. Until 2014 Prime was $79 a year whether you used video or not and it went up to $99. No way that covers their server costs and costs of licensing content. Amazon is willing to lose money on video (for right now) to gain market share in your spending habits.
HBO doesn't care right now if you share logins because dealers always give the first taste for free. They want you to watch the hell out of it and feel it is essential to your entertainment happiness. Then when there is simultaneous login from different areas they can kick one of them off, do it enough times, people start paying for their own.

Granted Im not a TMT guy but last I checked NFLX has posted positive earnings (aka a profit) for at least the last year (probably more but don't really want to check). As for the other services you mention, I haven't dug into the financials of the respective owners to see any breakouts but you are definitely off on netflix.

Netflix the profit is from the DVD shipping business, streaming is a money loser. Amazon makes a profit but not from streaming.

(08-11-2016 09:30 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(08-10-2016 10:17 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Broadcast Television isn't dead. Broadcast Television is free to air television...it's going to always be around in some form or fashion

Cable Television, those that charge a subscriber fee for access, that's what is in trouble. Major difference between the two.

Correct and of those who 'cord shave' most are using the antenna to get the free OTA channels. With the age of digital TV, a station can broadcast at least 3 sub-channels. And as more people discover that there are sub-channels in OTA broadcast and specific channels like Grit, MeTV, Comet...etc, the cable cut is easier. If you are in a larger cities there are more availability especially for kids, i.e.Qubo under the ION stations. And now with the American Sports Network making more progress in getting their 24 hr sports channel on the sub-channels.
The digital age is actually making Broadcast TV make a come back as a station doesn't need to have other channels in the spectrum to broadcast other networks, it can all be done under the spectrum the currently have.

We have a station in LR doing three video and four audio channels.
Jonesboro has ABC, NBC, Fox, and CBS operating off two broadcast licenses and the third broadcast license is a PBS affiliate that carries three video channels and a reading service for the blind on a fourth channel. Seven video channels off three licenses. Pre-digital Jonesboro had only ABC and PBS.

On the flip side, there is a big court battle over the ME TV affiliate in Little Rock, the expectation is that once ownership is resolved the station will go dark and the license will be turned back to the FCC for the digital services auction.