Cable companies to encourage pirating again

  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cable
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the ongoing shift in the entertainment industry towards authentication models, driven by cable companies and networks aiming to protect their content and profits amid changing viewing habits. Despite a slight increase in overall spending on home entertainment, digital streaming has surged, highlighting the decline of traditional video rentals. Hulu's strategy of requiring cable subscriptions for access to certain content has sparked frustration among consumers, leading to perceptions of the platform as out of touch. Users express dissatisfaction with Hulu's model, preferring direct subscriptions to content creators without the need for cable packages. The conversation also touches on the appeal of à la carte content delivery, with some advocating for a more streamlined approach to accessing shows and channels. Overall, the sentiment reflects a growing desire for flexibility and direct access in content consumption, contrasting with the traditional cable model.
Greg Bernhardt
Admin
Insights Author
Messages
19,773
Reaction score
10,728
The move toward authentication is fueled by cable companies and networks looking to protect and profit from their content. The effort comes as entertainment companies continue to face drastic shifts in home viewing habits. Overall spending on home entertainment edged up 2.5 percent to $4.45 billion in the first quarter as a surge in digital streaming — which rose more than fivefold to $549 million — offset a continuing collapse in video rentals, according to Digital Entertainment Group. ... Hulu racked up some $420 million in ad revenue last year and is expected to do well in this year’s ad negotiations. But the move toward authentication, which could take years to complete, will make cable companies happy because it could slow cord-cutting by making cable subscribing more attractive.

It's amazing how clueless these guys are! I cut the cable cord 3 years ago and will never go back. I'm still super ticked I can't get ESPN3 unless I get a cable subscription.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/tv_in_real_dime_ph0GiKk7rC9agDUEkHae2I
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It is a bit shocking how completely out of touch the cable companies are. At one point during my lifetime, cable companies were considered high tech. It was a cutting-edge industry. Now, it seems like they're luddites incapable of adaptation.
 
Wait, this is about non-cable companies, like Hulu striking deals with cable companies to restrict their online access to cable users.

In fact, the move by Hulu toward the new model — called authentication because viewers would have to log in with their cable or satellite TV account number — was behind the move last week by Providence Equity Partners to cash out of Hulu after five years, these sources said.

So Hulu is a turn coat. Not saying cable companies aren't gladly working these deals.

It's all based on money. No one is doing anything for the consumer out of the goodness of their heart.

Who needs tv, I have PF!

Hulu made their first deal last year with DISH. If you wanted to watch a show the next day, you had to be a DISH customer and they told people that were blocked from viewing to contact their cable or satellite provider to make a deal with Hulu if we wanted to watch shows next day, otherwise wait 8 days. I gladly waited the 8 days. Heck it was only the one time I'd miss a show anyway. No big deal.
 
Last edited:
Greg, start an online tv station! Count me in as your first paying customer!
 
I think I'd be happier if we could cut out the distributors altogether and just pay the content creators directly. I'd be much more willing to subscribe to, say HBO or Showtime if I didn't also have to have a cable package along with it. Let me give HBO $10 or $15 a month directly for access to any of their shows online, and I'd be on that.

The BBC is doing that, I believe. They launched "global" access to their iPlayer app to 11 counties (not including the US), and are looking into giving access here too. Hopefully, they release it for the US, because I'd pay for that in a second.
 
The à la carte method of content delivery does sound appealing. But one has to wonder, if network X is making all the money, then networks 1,2,3,...,n would follow X. Nothing new comes from that. Look at all the cookie cutter "blockbuster" movies and such we have now. There is something to say for purchasing a sort of package deal (cable) which essentially subsidizes low popularity or niche channels.

PS: I had hulu plus this past week and already canceled it. Really hulu, you're going to list shows and movies like I can watch them and then link me to HBO.com or something when I click and try to sell me cable packages?? Back to netflix...
 
QuarkCharmer said:
PS: I had hulu plus this past week and already canceled it. Really hulu, you're going to list shows and movies like I can watch them and then link me to HBO.com or something when I click and try to sell me cable packages?? Back to netflix...

No kidding! I tried Hulu Plus and couldn't even figure out what extra features I was getting. I canceled almost immediately.
 
If you get hulu plus basically all you get is the shows that are delayed a week normally are available immediately after they air.

It's all based on money. No one is doing anything for the consumer out of the goodness of their heart.

Of course not, they're all in the business to make money.

I think this is evolving into a reasonable business model. You have a middleman, like Verizon, which you pay money to. In return they get you access to all the sites like espn3, hulu, hbogo etc. So instead of having to manage subscriptions to every channel/show you want to watch, you get them all at once
 
Office_Shredder said:
Of course not, they're all in the business to make money.

I think this is evolving into a reasonable business model.

Really? I think this is evolving away from a reasonable business model, with all the outrage I've heard.
 
  • #10
I have Dish, simply because the broadcast TV is unreliable or unavailable, and there is no cable out here. Counting this house, there are 8 houses on this stretch of road leading to Route 201 (where the cable passes). 8 Houses (one unoccupied) in over 2 miles...nope! no cable ever.

The only time I actually watch TV is for the news. If Dish is on at other times, it's so I can listen to BB King's Bluesville mix on Sirius XM. We have a collection of favorite movies on DVD and the DVD player gets more performance time than Dish.

There is a PBS show about Jesse Owens tonight (8 Eastern), and I'll probably watch that. There is little or nothing on TV that interests me, though. Dish will stay because my wife likes to unwind after work by watching Law and Order or NCIS.

Greg, if you take Evo's advice and start an on-line TV outlet, you could begin by looping BBC's "Planet Earth" videos (the Attenborough narration, please). Educational and entertaining for young and old. I hate seeing kids parked in front of a screen for hours, but "Planet Earth" would be a welcome exception.
 
  • #11
turbo said:
Greg, if you take Evo's advice and start an on-line TV outlet, you could begin by looping BBC's "Planet Earth" videos (the Attenborough narration, please). Educational and entertaining for young and old. I hate seeing kids parked in front of a screen for hours, but "Planet Earth" would be a welcome exception.

Slightly tangential to the discussion but I was given the Planet Earth series on Blu-Ray by a family member and it really does look superb in 1080p in addition to being expertly narrated. Almost worth my license fee by itself.
 

Similar threads

News Is a Major Overhaul of the US Government Possible? Feedback Wanted!
Replies
11
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top