Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
ugh requires cable provider login. WHYYYY


I hear you.
But the content providers current business model requires packaging desirable content with mediocre content and then sending that package to content distributors.
Until that business model changes or is disrupted, this will continue.
 
You think the cable companies wouldn't balk at fox offering the same content for less to someone else?

Of course they would, but someone needs to drag them kicking and screaming into the modern era.

There was an article in the news over here a few weeks ago about our two big networks wanting to negotiate lower rates with studios; they used to pay a lot for "exclusives" and seemed to be happy enough... but these days the likes of Netflix/Hulu offer the same content and the local networks therefore want to pay less since the content isn't really exclusive anymore. It'll be interesting to see how that turns out.
 
Of course they would, but someone needs to drag them kicking and screaming into the modern era.

In the industry of broadcast media (incl. air/cable/satellite), you don't drag broadcasters, broadcasters drag you. They are the big dogs with the market majorities and the money to call the shots.

Why do you think Directv can shore up all rights to the NFL market? That's some of the most expensive (if not the most expensive) content available. A streaming app on internet boxes couldn't even provide 10% of that revenue, yet undermine the entire existing market. And for what, so a minority of consumers can enjoy their internet streaming experience at the expense of the majority of broadcast costumers. It goes for all content providers; no reason to give up the goose that lays the golden eggs for a lone golden egg that may hatch in the future.

The amount of exposure available to streaming boxes is still very minuscule compared to the gargantuan markets held by broadcasters. Why would they jeopardize their multi-billion dollar markets they currently enjoy, for a multi-million dollar market that "should" grow, eventually, over time.

As for Apple they provide the services on the Apple TV that content providers agree to. If there's no streaming subscription services yet, it's because no content providers are willing to agree to it yet. No content, no appeal, no service.
 
Of course they would, but someone needs to drag them kicking and screaming into the modern era.]

You can drag them kicking and screaming only to a point, that point being where they already have contracts that say you can't do what you're trying to do because they've already agreed to a different deal.
 
Great! I have more channels hidden than on show on my ATV presently, and because of the need to provide a cable provider, looks like Fox will be joining Korean TV and Disney.
 
I couldn’t justify cable for its scores of channels that I don’t watch, yet paid for. I’ll steer clear of announcements for content that requires a cable connection. I haven’t missed cable since cutting it.
 
In the industry of broadcast media (incl. air/cable/satellite), you don't drag broadcasters, broadcasters drag you. They are the big dogs with the market majorities and the money to call the shots.

Why do you think Directv can shore up all rights to the NFL market? That's some of the most expensive (if not the most expensive) content available. A streaming app on internet boxes couldn't even provide 10% of that revenue, yet undermine the entire existing market. And for what, so a minority of consumers can enjoy their internet streaming experience at the expense of the majority of broadcast costumers. It goes for all content providers; no reason to give up the goose that lays the golden eggs for a lone golden egg that may hatch in the future.

The amount of exposure available to streaming boxes is still very minuscule compared to the gargantuan markets held by broadcasters. Why would they jeopardize their multi-billion dollar markets they currently enjoy, for a multi-million dollar market that "should" grow, eventually, over time.

As for Apple they provide the services on the Apple TV that content providers agree to. If there's no streaming subscription services yet, it's because no content providers are willing to agree to it yet. No content, no appeal, no service.

agreed.

Ala carte is a pipe dream for those that don't understand how expensive it is to produce and deliver content.
 
I'm surprised that they don't just charge there own small fee and do away with cable subscription requirements
 
My first reaction!

homer-woohoo.jpg


Finding out that it only works in the US and that you need a cable subscription!
angry-homer_medium.gif
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.