3 ms·

$30/month? It's not that cheap around here! I think the bigger crash is that people prefer to watch a full season of a TV show in one sitting, rather than once

by larrik 11y ago

$30/month? It's not that cheap around here! I think the bigger crash is that people prefer to watch a full season of a TV show in one sitting, rather than once a week for 9 months or whatever. How do you make television when the audience you really want is going to wait until you have already produced a few seasons to even start looking? Nevermind the damage that premature cancellations due to future viewership.

exelius 11y ago
It's about $30/mo when you consider the incremental cost of a cable+internet bundle over just internet (since that's what a potential cord cutter would be considering). And while I understand your viewpoint, cable video does offer on-demand, and they can negotiate for extended series rights if they feel it's important to their product. I don't think that's a deal breaker; just a product feature. But at a minimum, the price needs to come down -- and I think it will as consumers become used to the idea that not every show will be available on every service. It's no longer completely ridiculous to imagine a cable TV service without ESPN or any of the other Disney channels, for example.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
scott_s 11y ago
I think very few people actually watch an entire season in one sitting - but I think most people want access to an entire season at once. I think this is a good thing; I read a book at my own pace, and I want to watch a season of a show at my own pace. (Which usually is about five episodes of the show a week.) There was an NY Times piece (which I cannot find) back when House of Cards first came out talking about why actors and directors who typically do movies are now doing television. Giving viewers an entire season at once gives them enough space to tell long, subtle stories, and the up-front investment from companies like Netflix lets them have production values typically reserved for feature films.
- ripter 11y ago
  The link isn't NY Times, but it agrees with you; according to Netflix people tend to binge watch 2-3 episodes a sitting. It makes sense, that's roughly the length of a movie. http://www.cinemablend.com/television/Unsurprising-Netflix-Survey-Indicates-People-Like-Binge-Watch-TV-61045.html http://www.cinemablend.com/television/Unsurprising-Netflix-S...
untog 11y ago
Am I alone in disliking the binge watching trend? I rabidly read recaps of Game of Thrones episodes every Monday morning, talk to my friends about it, etc. etc - by comparison I never talk to anyone about House of Cards because the conversation always starts "what are you up to?" "oh, OK, well I won't spoil anything then!". There's a social aspect to TV for me (boy was I addicted to reading Lostpedia back in the day), and binge watching diminishes it. Even though it is very convenient.
- ghaff 11y ago
  I'm ambivalent about the binge watching trend--especially for more complex serialized shows where I appreciate being able to watch along in a paced way more or less synchronously with a broader community. (For short more sitcom-y series OTOH, I'm fine with everything being released at one time.)
- user_0001 11y ago
  Am with you. I remember watching the first season of 24 in 2002 or whenever it was. It was on BBC, so no adverts. Everything had to be ready before, tea made, special cigarettes prepared, no drinking an hour before to avoid toilet breaks. 6 months of talking about the show on Monday, guessing what would happen. Then a twist comes in and memories coming back of what happened 2-3 months ago and ahhhhhhh yes yes yes amazing, totally forgot about that Had a friend watch it for the first time, a year or so later when we shared a house. He watched it in 2-3 days. Less twists, less "oh yes I forgot moments" because for him those twists were only a few hours ago. I think it is a case of "the more you point in, the more you get out" Saying that, I binge watch now :-(

by larrik 11y ago

exelius 11y ago

It's about $30/mo when you consider the incremental cost of a cable+internet bundle over just internet (since that's what a potential cord cutter would be considering). And while I understand your viewpoint, cable video does offer on-demand, and they can negotiate for extended series rights if they feel it's important to their product. I don't think that's a deal breaker; just a product feature. But at a minimum, the price needs to come down -- and I think it will as consumers become used to the idea that not every show will be available on every service. It's no longer completely ridiculous to imagine a cable TV service without ESPN or any of the other Disney channels, for example.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

scott_s 11y ago

I think very few people actually watch an entire season in one sitting - but I think most people want access to an entire season at once. I think this is a good thing; I read a book at my own pace, and I want to watch a season of a show at my own pace. (Which usually is about five episodes of the show a week.) There was an NY Times piece (which I cannot find) back when House of Cards first came out talking about why actors and directors who typically do movies are now doing television. Giving viewers an entire season at once gives them enough space to tell long, subtle stories, and the up-front investment from companies like Netflix lets them have production values typically reserved for feature films.

ripter 11y ago
The link isn't NY Times, but it agrees with you; according to Netflix people tend to binge watch 2-3 episodes a sitting. It makes sense, that's roughly the length of a movie. http://www.cinemablend.com/television/Unsurprising-Netflix-Survey-Indicates-People-Like-Binge-Watch-TV-61045.html http://www.cinemablend.com/television/Unsurprising-Netflix-S...

untog 11y ago

Am I alone in disliking the binge watching trend? I rabidly read recaps of Game of Thrones episodes every Monday morning, talk to my friends about it, etc. etc - by comparison I never talk to anyone about House of Cards because the conversation always starts "what are you up to?" "oh, OK, well I won't spoil anything then!". There's a social aspect to TV for me (boy was I addicted to reading Lostpedia back in the day), and binge watching diminishes it. Even though it is very convenient.

ghaff 11y ago
I'm ambivalent about the binge watching trend--especially for more complex serialized shows where I appreciate being able to watch along in a paced way more or less synchronously with a broader community. (For short more sitcom-y series OTOH, I'm fine with everything being released at one time.)
user_0001 11y ago
Am with you. I remember watching the first season of 24 in 2002 or whenever it was. It was on BBC, so no adverts. Everything had to be ready before, tea made, special cigarettes prepared, no drinking an hour before to avoid toilet breaks. 6 months of talking about the show on Monday, guessing what would happen. Then a twist comes in and memories coming back of what happened 2-3 months ago and ahhhhhhh yes yes yes amazing, totally forgot about that Had a friend watch it for the first time, a year or so later when we shared a house. He watched it in 2-3 days. Less twists, less "oh yes I forgot moments" because for him those twists were only a few hours ago. I think it is a case of "the more you point in, the more you get out" Saying that, I binge watch now :-(