4 ms·

Aside from ads, freedom of choice with respect to just what you watch seem to be the other key motivator. With the capability of streaming and on-demand servic

Aside from ads, freedom of choice with respect to just what you watch seem to be the other key motivator. With the capability of streaming and on-demand services, why would any consumer put up with having to choose any channel with a fixed programming schedule? I almost certainly don't want to watch what you're trying to sell. No other industry seems to operate in this manner. When it comes to books, games, music, etc, consumers choose specific products. With cable TV you don't get that granularity of choice. Netflix just brings the traditional TV model into alignment with seemingly everything else. Anecdotally, cable prices seem to rise but the new channels that are sold to me as a benefit are the exact opposite of what I watch. More sports channels? Despite me having never tuned into a single one? If you're going to profile me, at least make an effort to do it well.

RHSeeger 11y ago
Don't forget that, as a non-sports-watcher, you get to pay a fee to subsidize all the sports channels you don't watch. It's not even the cost of the channels, per se... you get the extra "regional sports surcharge" on top of that.
- clentaminator 11y ago
  I never knew about that, so thanks. This is a significant argument against the traditional cable model, at least for me. Are there other genres (for want of a better term) where this applies?
  - MagicWishMonkey 11y ago
    It's around $6/month per subscriber - http://blogs.wsj.com/numbers/how-much-cable-subscribers-pay-per-channel-1626/ http://blogs.wsj.com/numbers/how-much-cable-subscribers-pay-...
- icefox 11y ago
  At least Verizon FIOS in the Boston area lets you opt-out of all sports channels so you are not charged this fee.
  - mattmanser 11y ago
    I imagine you're probably still subsidising the sports watchers though. All of these companies use sports as a major buying motivator, like in the UK Sky basically went mad on buying every sport they could. I would assume the extra subscription alone doesn't cover the high licensing prices they pay, so they spread out the cost to all the other consumers too but just charge a bit extra to the sports fans.
  - RHSeeger 11y ago
    Oddly enough, I recently moved to the Boston area (from NY) and I did not know this. I'll need to look into it. Nobody in my family has any interest in watching sports at all.
KJasper 11y ago
Most push media work exactly like tv. Magazines and newspapers have ads in between the content and don't forget about radio that works exactly the same.
benten10 11y ago
2 points. I won't speak for myself, but from what I've gathered from friends: 1. A lot of people seem to like video ads. Movie ads specially tell you 'whats hot', and general ads put you 'in the loop' so to speak. I've tried to install ABV for a couple of people who won't let me because they actually like ads (as in youtube, not the shiny bright popups). This may be true for more people than HN crowd would assume. 2. One of the biggest problems I have with non-cable is that I need to think. When I'm with friends, we spend a very considerable amount of time trying to agree on what we want to watch, and often end up watching some stupid cute cat video because we couldn't decide. TV solves that. Perhaps if cable were referred to as 'a curated platform of best video content, being streaming 24/7', the conception would change?
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  I believe crowd-sourcing 'what to watch' will drive you to the lowest common denominator (cat videos). Instead, we take turns choosing. And live with what the other guys choose because, well, that's called being social. Its not too awfully painful to watch a costume drama once in a while.
- sosuke 11y ago
  Number 2 is true and very frustrating. I'd like to have a Netflix channel option. Sci-fi channel, horror channel etc. Did you ever call up someone else and tell them to turn to a channel then share in the same experience?
  - talmand 11y ago
    But there are categories like that. A recent update to Roku made them easier to get to for those devices.
  - jonlucc 11y ago
    One issue with this will be that so much media seems to be moving to very compelling stories, and you don't want to miss any. You used to be able to tune into the middle of a show without really missing anything.
- 11y ago

RHSeeger 11y ago

Don't forget that, as a non-sports-watcher, you get to pay a fee to subsidize all the sports channels you don't watch. It's not even the cost of the channels, per se... you get the extra "regional sports surcharge" on top of that.

clentaminator 11y ago
I never knew about that, so thanks. This is a significant argument against the traditional cable model, at least for me. Are there other genres (for want of a better term) where this applies?
- MagicWishMonkey 11y ago
  It's around $6/month per subscriber - http://blogs.wsj.com/numbers/how-much-cable-subscribers-pay-per-channel-1626/ http://blogs.wsj.com/numbers/how-much-cable-subscribers-pay-...
icefox 11y ago
At least Verizon FIOS in the Boston area lets you opt-out of all sports channels so you are not charged this fee.
- mattmanser 11y ago
  I imagine you're probably still subsidising the sports watchers though. All of these companies use sports as a major buying motivator, like in the UK Sky basically went mad on buying every sport they could. I would assume the extra subscription alone doesn't cover the high licensing prices they pay, so they spread out the cost to all the other consumers too but just charge a bit extra to the sports fans.
- RHSeeger 11y ago
  Oddly enough, I recently moved to the Boston area (from NY) and I did not know this. I'll need to look into it. Nobody in my family has any interest in watching sports at all.

KJasper 11y ago

Most push media work exactly like tv. Magazines and newspapers have ads in between the content and don't forget about radio that works exactly the same.

benten10 11y ago

2 points. I won't speak for myself, but from what I've gathered from friends: 1. A lot of people seem to like video ads. Movie ads specially tell you 'whats hot', and general ads put you 'in the loop' so to speak. I've tried to install ABV for a couple of people who won't let me because they actually like ads (as in youtube, not the shiny bright popups). This may be true for more people than HN crowd would assume. 2. One of the biggest problems I have with non-cable is that I need to think. When I'm with friends, we spend a very considerable amount of time trying to agree on what we want to watch, and often end up watching some stupid cute cat video because we couldn't decide. TV solves that. Perhaps if cable were referred to as 'a curated platform of best video content, being streaming 24/7', the conception would change?

JoeAltmaier 11y ago
I believe crowd-sourcing 'what to watch' will drive you to the lowest common denominator (cat videos). Instead, we take turns choosing. And live with what the other guys choose because, well, that's called being social. Its not too awfully painful to watch a costume drama once in a while.
sosuke 11y ago
Number 2 is true and very frustrating. I'd like to have a Netflix channel option. Sci-fi channel, horror channel etc. Did you ever call up someone else and tell them to turn to a channel then share in the same experience?
- talmand 11y ago
  But there are categories like that. A recent update to Roku made them easier to get to for those devices.
- jonlucc 11y ago
  One issue with this will be that so much media seems to be moving to very compelling stories, and you don't want to miss any. You used to be able to tune into the middle of a show without really missing anything.
11y ago