3 ms·
They outsource costs, the advertizing affiliates do (through things like triple play) and support (nobody calls HBO when they can't get to the channel.) These a
by ebiester 15y ago
They outsource costs, the advertizing affiliates do (through things like triple play) and support (nobody calls HBO when they can't get to the channel.) These are extra costs they would have to take on.
On the other hand, on the Internet, they have a relatively small library compared to their competitors, who have both a large library and scaled support. And much of the content is advertising-based, which doesn't work with HBO's model.
It seems to make sense to me.
- alttag 15y agoAnd they get (or would get) these same benefits by reselling content through Amazon's video-on-demand, iTunes, Hulu+, Netflix, or any other number of streaming Internet outlets. So, the argument makes sense in part, but it still comes across like a rationalization of previous poor decisions.
- cbsmith 15y ago> They outsource costs, the advertizing affiliates do (through things like triple play) and support (nobody calls HBO when they can't get to the channel.) These are extra costs they would have to take on. The way it was phrased, I sure got the idea that he was saying HBO was at a net advantage with that model.