ABC Affiliates Grapple With TV-Show Downloads 480
Carl Bialik writes "By making an episode of 'Lost' available for download last week just half a day after it aired, for a $1.99 charge, 'Apple may have helped open a Pandora's box for the media business,' the Wall Street Journal reports. The president of the association representing ABC's affiliate stations sent a letter to the president of ABC, reading in part, 'It is both disappointing and unsettling that ABC would embark on a new -- and competitive -- network program distribution partnership without the fundamental courtesy of consultation' with its affiliates. While the extent of Apple's TV downloads is limited, the Journal parses the potential impact: 'if downloading episodes over the Internet proves popular, analysts believe Apple will get permission to offer shows with better-fidelity pictures. Any success Apple has won't go unnoticed by other online media powerhouses with expanding video initiatives like Yahoo Inc., Google Inc. and Microsoft Corp., which could all help extend TV downloading to more viewers.'"
Choice (Score:5, Insightful)
P.S., Ted, thanks for the buffalo ranching, but there is more money to be made still in media. Don't give up.
Thank you Apple! (Score:5, Insightful)
The day when I can download my latest episodes of SG1 or my girlfriends O.C for $1.99 rather than wait 6-9months for it to come on TV in the UK is the day that I stop using eMule!
Thank you Apple you found the only way to stop priacy.
Re:Thank you Apple! (Score:3, Funny)
I've seen perhaps a half-dozen naysayers in total and an overwhelming majority praising Apple as if they've just solved world hunger. Where do you get the idea that "so many nay-sayers" are calling this a gimmick? Is there a special thread for naysayers that I have
Re:Thank you Apple! (Score:5, Insightful)
The day when I can download my latest episodes of SG1 or my girlfriends O.C for $1.99 rather than wait 6-9months for it to come on TV in the UK is the day that I stop using eMule!
I doubt that you will be able to do that, even with TV shows available on iTMS. I think that TV shows are still going to follow regional distribution and will only be released in a country's iTMS after it is aired in that country, even if it is already available in the iTMS of another country. The TV shows are only available in the US iTMS at the moment, and not in the UK iTMS. Even when the other countries get TV shows in their iTMS, they may still not be as up-to-date as the US store.
I think one of the reasons the record companies have co-operated so well with the iTMS is because it preserves the regional distribution business model their industry is based on, which just so happens to be the same model for the film and television industries. And if you think about it, the iTMS regional distribution method somewhat resembles DVD region coding, so it most likely will be used in the same manner.
Re:Thank you Apple! (Score:3, Interesting)
Once they start making real money with online distribution, they'll speed things up in order to take your money that much faster.
Re:Thank you Apple! (Score:5, Insightful)
US: $1.99 per movie
UK: £1.89 per movie. That's US$3.33 for fuck's sake.
That's not price parity, that is gouging.
-Nano.
Re:Thank you Apple! (Score:3, Interesting)
apple is simply making it so you can spend $1.99 instead of a couple of hours scripting to get the shows you want.
Hell
Re:Thank you Apple! (Score:3, Insightful)
Boy did I get that wrong.
The one thing that is seriously missing from the equation is DVDs. Since the video can't be burned I would like to have the ability to put my DVD collection into iTunes. One click and it downloads the video into Apples copy protected format. I can put them on my iPod and take them with me when I travel. When I get to my destination I plug into a TV with the supplied cable and viola the kids can watch their DVDs. I honestly
Re:Thank you Apple! (Score:3, Insightful)
iTunes and iPod is easy. That's why it's winning.
Re:Choice (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm a fan of Apple (just bought some shares too), but am I the only one who thinks that Apple's threat lurking in the far dark future might be antitrust litigation? I only see them grabbing more marketshare of the devices, of the online music business, not to mention that they just created another market with this portable device video clip downloading. It's clear they're only going uphill and accelerating too, but even though Apple's been that underdog company to Microsoft, the engine that could, they're not immune from the government.
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Choice (Score:4, Funny)
I'll bite.
Does the introduction of blogsearch.google.com mean that content on whatever Google deems a blog is being segregated from the rest of the Internet? Try cutting and pasting a phrase from your favorite A-list blog into Google's regular search: nada. Try putting it in blogsearch: voila!
obTinfoilHat: This has happend because pressures from mainstream political parties (you know who you are) drove Google to make blog content effectively invisible to your average searcher after truth, given how influential (and unregulated, forsooth!) political blogs have become.
Re:Choice (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Choice (Score:3, Interesting)
Interesting. However, I searched on their blog and couldn't find a post on that. Got a link?
After doing a little more searching, I did read at least one good reason why blog search might be separated. It's actually done using the RSS (or whatever) feeds of the blogs; to use the usual spiders would mean blog posts take days to get indexed, which would not be so good for the timeliness of the usual blog posts. So, having a separate sear
Re:Choice (Score:5, Informative)
Itunes has 90% of the market because they have more music than anybody else. That's the thing about the long tail. You have to have A LOT of stuff in order to capture that last 50% of the market. Example: Last night I was looking for Julie Miller on Yahoo (my service of choice because I'm cheap). Two songs. Itunes has her whole catalog, four CDs worth.
Re:Choice (Score:3, Funny)
itunes lists 6 songs of her stuff, and none of her solo albums. Pity, since this post reminded me I kinda liked "He walks through walls" and wouldn't mind another copy (the later
Completely Analogous (Score:5, Funny)
Er, wait.
Re:Choice (Score:5, Insightful)
That's because those headphones are great.
The point you are missing is huge: Apple is gaining a big group of followers simply by giving them what they want, and not through "evil" means.
Lower your weapons and think again. Popular doesn't mean evil.
Re:Choice (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, apple's doing the exact same thing as Microsoft, but you don't see people making a fuss because people are apparently quite fond of iTunes. Additionally, I think that seamless intrgration of desktop applications into the Operating System is becoming a given.
Go ask a mac developor what he'd do without quicktime, or ask a windows developer what he'd do without mshtml.dll.
Also, you don't see apple entering i
Re:Choice (Score:5, Informative)
As far as I see it, the only anti-competitive behavior apple's shown is their proprietary encrypted-AAC fileformat.
AFAIK this was a requirement by the record labels before they would permit digital distribution of the music files. So is the anti-competitive behaviour Apple's or the RIAA cartel's?
Re:Choice (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Choice (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Choice (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Choice (Score:3, Interesting)
The difference is that Apple has one really big store...
Re:Choice (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Choice (Score:5, Insightful)
Feh, who am I kidding. That's exactly what they are going to do, all the while frantically trying to buy legislation to protect their business model, no matter how shortsighted and dumb it makes them look.
Re:Choice (Score:5, Informative)
You (along with everyone else) have apparently completely forgotten about the concept of VOD. In fact, there is nothing new whatsoever about downloading TV shows! I've got about 50 different channels on my cable box that allow me to do this whenever I want to, and at higher resolutions than iTMS.
The downloading, and the idea of digital distribution, is not new at all. And you're way, way off if you think the affiliates have not been working with the networks on this for years now. The only thing that's new about iTunes and TV shows is the act of putting it on an iPod. Is this really so revolutionary? I would argue that it's not. True, the iPod has never had video before, but plenty of other devices have, and I've been able to download episodes of my favorite TV shows for years now over my cable company's digital VOD system, transfer them to my PC and put them on whatever video device I want to.
Now, you can say "but it's going to bring downloading to the masses!" Well again, VOD is already quite popular. Almost everybody has it (whether they even know it or not) and all that's missing is a quick and easy way to transfer those shows to a portable device (sans PC). But that's a trivial thing to add - all cable boxes these days have high speed data ports of one type or another, and the cable industry's just been waiting for a reason to use them. Well, this might be it - if the cable industry feels truly threatened by iTunes, watch for them to open the floodgates.
I'm not arguing that what Apple's doing isn't a good thing or that it won't push the industry forward. But I don't see how downloading episodes of Lost for $1.99 a piece at 320x240 resolution beats what I've got on my cable box, which has thousands of TV shows available at any given moment for free. (Or at least for no more than I pay for standard cable service.)
In the future, you're more likely to keep your cable company and use them for downloads than you are to switch to iTunes. The TV networks have been pushing VOD forward for years and while iTMS may hasten the transition, the cable and network TV industry are pretty well prepared.
Listen to what you are saying (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple has never been about doing things that are totally new. They just take things people would like to do and make them inviting for everyone to actually partake of.
Re:Choice (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Choice (Score:5, Interesting)
As for Apple's part of this deal, I downloaded Lost and my first impression was that iTunes is a terrible video player, at least on Windows. Not merely bad, but terrible. It crashes, it freezes for a second or more every time you click on something (including the seek bar, which makes it practically unusable), its user interface is completely unsuited for video, it glitches when it's not the top window, it seems to choose random brightness/contrast settings for each video (or perhaps that's just bad encoding), when downloading and watching videos at the same time it randomly pauses and skips for periods of 5 seconds or more (invariably at an important moment in the dialogue), I could go on and on. And of course you can't use any other video player because of the DRM (which AFAIK hasn't been cracked yet), unless you have a video iPod (I don't). I downloaded a BitTorrent copy to compare and the quality was *far* better, not to mention that it was in its native widescreen format (showing more of the action), and I could use a video player that didn't suck.
I still plan to buy Lost as it comes out to support legal TV downloads and because I have faith that Apple will soon fix iTunes, but when I want to actually watch those episodes I'm going to use BitTorrent.
Re:Choice (Score:3, Insightful)
Connect the dots together,ma
Re:Choice (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Choice (Score:3, Interesting)
This latest move threatens to make the TV station obsolete, and has cable scared shitless. 100 channels, and all I really care about is CNBC, and about 6 shows. 6 shows will be WAY cheaper then the monthly bill eventually (1.99 per episode can't last long, it's insane).
And we can all pre-order more episodes of a show, so they can MAKE THEM and not more crap.
Re:Choice (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Choice (Score:5, Insightful)
You mean you get commercial free television with your antenna, for free? And you're able to call up whatever television you want JUST with your antenna? Wow. That's incredible.
Give me something I can't already get for free
A commercial free program that is yours forever. That's something you can't get for free (unless you use a video or CD, which can be lost or destroyed).
Slashdotters have often complained about there not being a commercial alternative to illegally downloading television shows. Slashdotters often said that they would happily pay a few bucks to download episodes legally. Now there finally is a legal alternative, and people are complaining about it just being a replica of what's provided for free on tv. Typical.
Re:Choice (Score:3, Informative)
to quote Dave Letterman: What is WRONG with you? (Score:3, Insightful)
Sometimes I want to pull my hair out!
Exactly how is this bad for the affiliate stations? For a nano second I can't imagine this didn't help these affiliates. How much you wanna bet the viewership was up for the episode of Lost following the announcement of the video iPod? Peoples' normal reactions would be along the lines of:
I don't think any of the above are off-the-scale guesses of peoples' reactions and I think the viewership because of the video iPod could actually increase!
But, let's assume the death star, end-of-the-universe scenario the affiliates and others see this as. They see this as a threat rather than an extension. So, if it is true, boo-hoo!
Thank goodness the lobbyists and power brokers circling the wagons today for the hapless industry wasn't present in the late 19th and early 20th century to protect the horse and buggy industry in the same way... We'd have no cars today (since that would have threatened the established travel industry).
(So, for the record, does anyone know what the comparison was for Lost pre- vs. post-video iPod announcement? I don't really care, but it'd be interesting to know.)
Re:to quote Dave Letterman: What is WRONG with you (Score:5, Funny)
Forget tivo. This is it.
As far as I'm concerned, the modern day affiliate station is a simple load-balancing device.
The funeral for tivo will be held tomorrow evening, 2100 hours, at 1, infinity loop, Cupertino, CA.
Affiliate stations: BE AFRAID
Re:to quote Dave Letterman: What is WRONG with you (Score:4, Funny)
Lobbyists are not a new invention. It appears the term was coined in the early 19th century. [alldc.org] It's a shame really. If they were a recent invention, someone would have patented the business method and then we would at least be free of them for about 20 years ;-)
Re:to quote Dave Letterman: What is WRONG with you (Score:5, Insightful)
That particular episode of Lost is irrelevant in the big picture. The issue is whether the network is going to undercut its affiliates by building an alternate distribution model.
Undercut (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:to quote Dave Letterman: What is WRONG with you (Score:2, Insightful)
The business model is that shows are only available as a television broadcast or DVD purchase. Sure, you have Tivo, but that's still television.
Now, you're taking the content of television and putting it onto a new medium: the digital medium. Networks are going to throw up rad flags, thinking "WE'RE GOING TO LOSE MONEY! FUCK!"
Then again, digital content is a hot-topic issue (see: illegal use of P2P apps). Th
Re:to quote Dave Letterman: What is WRONG with you (Score:3, Insightful)
What support do you have for this theory? To the affiliates this is maybe a small short-term increase (based on general Lost hype) in exchange for a very real threat of medium-term losses and long-term annihilation.
The affiliates should be scared, because today's TV mechanism is silly and out of date. The very idea of a "channel" is meaningless. And the advertisers are paying approx. $1
Re:to quote Dave Letterman: What is WRONG with you (Score:3)
You characterized the affiliates as whiners but you have to remember that they've signed long term contracts with ABC t
Re:to quote Dave Letterman: What is WRONG with you (Score:3, Insightful)
TV stations make money by showing ads. TV stations that sign up to be an affiliate for a network do so for the purpose of having access to the network content that the networks produce so that they can draw in viewers. A hot show can draw in a lot of local viewers which means that more money can be charged for ad slots during those shows. Less people watching their station during a show means that they might not be able to charge as much money for a
Re:to quote Dave Letterman: What is WRONG with you (Score:3, Insightful)
Translation from Weasel follows: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Translation from Weasel follows: (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't for a moment think that affiliate demands on the network are all one-sided. Maintaining affiliate status means a station has to comply with all kinds of rules set by the network too.
ABC is not simply acting as an independent agent, they are, in some sense, unilaterally re-writing their contracts with their affiliates. I would be damn pissed too if one of my clients decided that they could get away with rewriting our contract, in their favor, with no negotiation.
I agree that the net has changed things and it is high-fucking-time the television industry started to catch up, but don't go thinking ABC or even Apple is the white hat in this episode of the drama - its a lot more complex than that.
....oooooooooor (Score:4, Funny)
Re:....oooooooooor (Score:2, Insightful)
Once upon a time when bittorent was new I'd agree with you. I the Bablyon 5 Pilot Movie in 15 minutes back then. Today it would probably take me 20 hours to download. What Apple is attempting could still fill a niche because I'm not waiting a 20 hours to watch something I want to see on a whim.
Re:....oooooooooor (Score:3, Informative)
New Business Model (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:New Business Model (Score:2, Insightful)
Ding Dong . . . (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Ding Dong . . . (Score:2)
I can actually see this killing, or at least severly hurting, the local affiliates. Unlike VHS and the internet, this type of selling is very close to the original way of doing business.
VHS didn't do much as it took months for the movie to come out on VHS after theatres. Additionaly, some people want to see movies on an 80 foot screen versus their TV.
Advertisement Woes (Score:5, Interesting)
Most of national advertising rates fluctuate as they are based off of current Nielsen ratings which samples viewing habits year round. However local advertising rates are set for a yearly basis based off the TV audience during a specific period 4 times a year(Sweeps Week). With a smaller audience watching TV through this traditional method local affiliates lose a huge chunk of ad revenue.
Re:Advertisement Woes (Score:2)
You are absolutely correct.
The TV ad game is a constant push-me-pull-you between the agencies and the networks. The advertisers are all, "You expect me to pay WHAT for a
Given another o
Boo Freakin' Hoo... (Score:5, Insightful)
At that point, any content I can't get online, I simply will do without. Sell me entertainment online, or sell me nothing. It makes no difference to me. There's plenty of free and legal clips of amusement here and there at least as worthwhile as the junk they air on TV anyway.
Besides, I find reading books and doing technical reading online is a better use of my time than watching television in the first place.
hah wtf! (Score:2, Insightful)
it's incredable these people haven't be investigated for anti competitive behaviour yet.
Re:hah wtf! (Score:3, Insightful)
Not exactly. Local affiliates pay for the right to rebroadcast content. Now ABC is comming along and saying that they will by-pass the local affiliates and sell content directly.
They have every reason to be annoyed. What w
How dare they! (Score:5, Funny)
Really, this seems like a very self-regulating situation. If consumers enjoy and respond to this offering, then both content producers and consumers have a great new option, and neither one of them owes previous distribution channels a damn thing. If people don't care for the new format, then existing distribution channels continue to maintain their position and profits.
Obviously this has a strong chance of being a bad deal for advertising-driven distribution in the long term. But even if it is, the notion that content producers had any obligation to avoid it out of mere politeness is absurd.
I wonder when we'll see FedEx and UPS complaining that offering software for download--rather than shipping CDs--was a very rude thing for the software industry to begin doing without so much as a by-your-leave.
Re:Dude, read the article more closely. (Score:3, Insightful)
Look, if you choose to go into business with an entirely slimy, underhanded, and utterly vile business like a major media conglomerate (*any* major media conglomerate) then when you get fucked you whine like a little bitch, then you are being a crybaby.
You (not you you, the
Tivo now solving a problem that ceases to exist (Score:5, Insightful)
It makes no sense any longer for people to do ANYTHING but download shows and access the contents as they please, when they please. That's what Apple is opening up to the mass market for current TV, and what people will most naturally except. Fighting this migration is a loosing battle.
I really feel like as cool as Tivo is, it's trapped between a rock and a hard place. The rock are media companies that are unsure about people being able to record anything. The hard place is when people discover they like random media so much, they'd rather just download everything and use it that way. Apple is taking over the space Tivo could have if they'd started looking at a downloadable TV market.
Not solved unless... (Score:5, Insightful)
...you're going to tell me how Apple is going to cram a 35 inch screen inside your iPod case.
OK, so you can take your episode of Lost with you, and watch it on your pocket TV. Pocket TVs have been around for...what, more than a decade? How many people do you know stopped buying 25, 32, 50 inch TVs for their house, and multi-thousand dollar sound systems to plug those TVs into, because, well golly gee, now they can put their TV in their pocket.
iPod TV downloads and TiVo solve different problems related to TV viewing. The new iPod service lets you take portable TV shows with you. TiVo lets you time shift, search and archive, and if you have the personal motivation to set up TivoToGo and upgrade your PocketPC handheld with the right WMP software, take portable TV shows with you.
So really, the only thing the new iPod/ABC service does is remove the requirement that your TiVo be available at the time the show comes on the TV. Of course, it's not like you actually have to do anything to make your TiVo record...just set up the season pass, and they'll be there, assuming the show aired in the first place.
All the iPod/ABC service does is remove the requirement for the show to have aired at its original time. And it still has the shortcoming of only being watchable on a screen that, at it's best, is less than a quarter the size of the smallest laptop I've used in the last 5 years.
I wouldn't start the funeral dirge for PVRs and PVR services yet. Not unless that's a TV in your pocket, and not just that you're happy to see me.
Mac mini with DVI/SPDIF/composite out (Score:3, Informative)
That's where the Mac MINI with proper home theater output comes into play. I don't like portable video either but would love a mac HTPC. You can already use the mini in just such a way but it's more cumbersome and involves external adaptors.
Re:Not solved unless... (Score:3, Informative)
And it still has the shortcoming of only being watchable on a screen that, at it's best, is less than a quarter the size of the smallest laptop I've used in the last 5 years.
"... use an optional S-video cable with iPod to play VJ on your TV. You can perform the same big-screen feat with iPod photo slideshows. Oh, and you can do it all from across the room using the optional Universal Dock and handy new Apple remote." [apple.com]
Quality (Score:4, Interesting)
Does anyone have any first hand experience with the downloaded episodes? How is the quality on a pc or tv screen?
Pretty good (Score:3, Informative)
I really look forward to when they start offering pay-per-download HDTV shows.
Re:Quality (Score:3, Informative)
The color banding problem is made much much worse by something which could be
Television for the masses... FINALLY... (Score:2, Insightful)
this Pandora's box can be closed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:this Pandora's box can be closed (Score:3, Interesting)
Why do the Affiliates even care? (Score:2)
However, why the hell would the Affiliates even care? They still get the first airing of the show and thats the important airing. After that, their add buys are so crazy low anyways, what does it matter if I can get it for $1.99 online? If the Affiliates really want to do something, they should learn and start making things like local news casts available online for say $.50 or free with 2-3 min of comercials i
PVR to Ipod (Score:2, Insightful)
I could see Tivo making out well if they made it easy for ipod video users to sync to their PVR.
Re:PVR to Ipod (Score:5, Insightful)
Because for many consumers it is simply too hard to set up the computer to record the show, edit out the commercials, compress it in a suitable format and copy it across to the player. Then there is even a subset of geeks like me that can easily do it but just couldn't be bothered.
It's TV after all; a bit of entertainment after a hard day at work. I just want to watch the show, not muck around with recordings, having to preview it by editing out commercials first etc. For $2 - I'll pay that!
With the same logic, why spend up to $5 at Starbucks to buy a coffee when I could just buy some beans, grind them myself, brew, froth the milk, and serve for next to nothing?
There will always be smart people like yourself willing to go the extra mile to save a buck, but the majority simply don't care.
convenient (Score:2)
Mr. Dinosaur meet Mr. Meteor (Score:5, Interesting)
Once broadband reaches 25mbps there is no reason for a separate tv connection.
The tv networks will become what UPN has already a dumping ground for
tv viewers who are Old and poor.
The networks however have a saving grace, they can still outcompete
itunes. People will happily accept commercials in their tv programs
if they get the programs for FREE...history has already proven this.
There is no technical reason people cant simply download their favorite
programs and watch them with commericals for free or commerical free
for an additional fee.
This would actually free up networks ro produce programs audiences wanted
instead of programs affiliates wanted...programs that could be targeted
to niche audiences rather than lowest common denominator.
content quality vs. distribution mechanism (Score:4, Interesting)
"Lost?" Come on. I don't even watch that stuff on TV let alone waste bits from my broadband connection to download it...
Produce something worth watching and I'll go back to watching TV.
Re:content quality vs. distribution mechanism (Score:3, Insightful)
You cannot "solve" creativity by throwing more resources at it; advancing technology will never change that fact.
(Care to give us an example of what you will deign to watch, so we can understand why you pooh-pooh one of the best shows on TV right now?)
Lost is a great show, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
Now if only they'd put some of that effort into the technical writing.
Remember Sayid's attempt to triangulate the French woman's broadcast from season 1, by placing antennas at various points around the island and turning them on all at once, even though there was only one radio and it wasn't connected to any of them? Or how about when he walked around looking for cellphone-style "bars" on his walkie talkie so he could transmit a distress call? Or when he couldn't transmit because there was a powerful signal on a different frequency? Simply ridiculous.
People have been speculating about the machines in the hatch.. you know, "That computer looks like [system XYZ] but the Execute key only appeared on [system PQRS], so this must be a special lab if it has that kind of custom equipment!" I can't help but laugh, because the writers obviously don't care about making any of the technology realistic.
I know that feeling... (Score:5, Funny)
dude, you've just been dumped for somebody hotter.
Oh the horror (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's a wacky idea, rather than just rebroadcasting network crap, why don't local affiliates actually produce quality programming of their own that they could sell on the iTunes video service. Believe it or not they used to do this sort of thing back in the day. Oh wait, that would require them to work, which is much harder than sitting on your ass and making a lot of money by squatting on publicly owned airwaves.
"If downloading episodes over the Internet..." (Score:3, Insightful)
Uh, what do they mean if? It's already exceedingly popular on BitTorrent and the like, just not sanctioned by the media companies until now (OK, the BBC is doing it but not many others). The genie is already out of this bottle and yet another industry wants to bury it's head in the sand. They have to realize that people, including myself, are willing to pay money to see shows we've missed or cannot get in our area. Where's a capitalist when you need one? Steve Jobs yet again has pulled off a marvelous coup and now the affliates, Hollywood, SAG and anyone else who didn't have the forsight to start this on there own want a piece.
Re:"If downloading episodes over the Internet..." (Score:3, Insightful)
iTorrent? (Score:5, Interesting)
Sure, many wouldn't be able to figure out how to open up their firewall, but enough people would, that it would make a tremendous difference for some poor podcaster. It will likely let them cut their provider bill in half. Or they could reach 10 times as many people for the same cost. They could even make sure that all their friends have seeds before they release the podcast, that way they don't even really need a server provider (not of the type where you need to know how many GB per month you are allowed).
This would also be a tremendous benefit for Apple since being on iTunes definitely would be the shiznat for all the podcasters because now it also has a very direct benefit for them.
Also, if they did the torrent thing then they would get some serious Google type respect from geeks. Apple would be credited for making decentralized file sharing mainstream.
I can't even think of a down side. Can someone slap me out of this?
Re:iTorrent? (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously, people might not be thrilled about donating their upstream bandwidth to help defray's Apple's bandwidth costs... and I guarantee you that some people will frame it that way.
A bigger mess than music... (Score:4, Interesting)
"Lost" and "Desperate Housewives" are Touchstone productions, so Disney has a lot more control over their distribution. That's not always or even often the case-- many times a network works with a separate production company, and if it's an older show someone else may have the rights to syndication. Which basically means the contracts for many programs, especially those "in the vault", are going to have to be renegotiated before a network can make them available for download, and some won't be available at all. It also means $2 downloads may not end up being the standard.
I wouldn't be surprised if the guilds got involved, too. Actors, writers, and directors are due royalties from syndication and DVD compilations. Are they going to get a cut of that $2? Their contracts most likely specified terms for residuals from reruns, but what's their cut of an iTunes download? This will be addressed in every contract from today forward, but what about the ones in place now (and the ones from a decade ago?)
On the bright side, what I've noticed on Apple's marketing is that they keep slipping in references to "video podcasts"-- which at the moment barely exist. This could mean iTunes could branch into a new distribution channel for indie programs, like how Netflix is having some success as the sole distributor of certain movies.) It could be both the "bush leagues" for aspiring shows, or the place where shows with a fan base but who can't get the numbers to stay on the air (like Futurama or Freaks and Geeks) could end up.
Re:A bigger mess than music... (Score:3, Informative)
Too late... Unions seek video iPod residuals [yahoo.com]
Fine for established shows but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Television Advertising Executives.. (Score:3, Insightful)
While I seriously doubt that we will ever completly be rid of TV with commercials, I do suspect that at some point, that the TV viewing audience will be limited to the following:
1) Viewing Live Events
2) Viewing low quality shows
3) Those destitute enough to not afford to download favorite shows.
If viewers can pay to download a TV show they want to see, and keep it as long as they want, it will lead to several consequences. The first is that as noted in the article, the downloaded version of the show may be available in a higher definition. The second is that since its not broadcast, you wont have to worry about the FCC censoring naughty words or naughty images. The third is that the shows will no longer be forced to allow commercial breaks, and can run longer or shorter as needed by the story of that episode.
This in turn could create the possibility that the version of the show that gets broadcast will be the inferior version of the show. And if your a true fan of the show, why settle for the crappy version?
On top of that, once yoru no longer beholden to the schedule of the broadcaster, why be limted to watching only what they want to show you? If your a hard core sci-fi fan, why waste time with sitcoms? You could just download shows like every episode Star Trek, Battle Star Galactica, X-Files, Babylon 5, Firefly, and whatever else you actually want to watch. I am sure that the content providers will have no objections to selling to you from their back catalog.
When (not if) downloading a selected version of a TV show becomes viable choice, TV Advertisers will be largely screwed.
Welcome to the Revolution!
END COMMUNICATION
Oh, boo-f'ing-hoo (Score:3, Insightful)
You mean like the rest of us got used to the idea of having our jobs outsourced to east Crapistan? I don't remember any consultation for that, do you guys?
So what's stopping you from forming a local group and developing your own content? Maybe that idea would occur to you if you weren't so busy whining about the world moving on.
This is what capitalism is all about. New technolgies arise and induce change. The market adapts and either business adapts or goes the way of RCA. You can either keep whining to the parent network, hoping they'll throw you a bone to get you to shut up. Or you can start understanding the new environment and content creation and get off your big, fat rolling in cash TV ass and learn to operate in the new reality.
Paid downloads by the numbers (Score:5, Informative)
That comes to $11.9 million per episode. That means 6 million people need to purchase each episode in order to match what ABC currently gets from advertisers.
Somehow I think the people talking about the death of broadcast TV are a bit pre-mature.
Re:Paid downloads by the numbers (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Paid downloads by the numbers (Score:3, Interesting)
And Desperate Housewives averages 21.3 million viewers per episode. If a market can be created where even 1 out of 3 viewers downloads the episode instead of watching the advertising-laden version, they've made their money. If half the viewers downloaded instead of watching over the air, the business model is changed forever. Better than that. Offer a discount to people willing to commit
For those who don't want to read the text (Score:3, Funny)
Affiliates: Wah!
This has been a special presentation. We now return you to your busy work schedule.
Re:I would buy TV shows (Score:3, Insightful)
Where in the world are you buying your cable TV from? Or is this one of those classic Slashdot price exaggerations like "CD's cost $20" when they really cost $12 from any large retailer? (Even the grossly overpriced music stores in the mall charge $18 or so for a CD)
I've never seen basic cable cost over $40 per month, and digital satellite companies have plans starting at $30 per month. I'm all for "stickin
Re:I would buy TV shows (Score:3, Informative)
I've never seen basic cable cost over $40 per month, and digital satellite companies have plans starting at $30 per month. I'm all for "sticking it to the man", but exaggerating prices at every opportunity doesn't make us sound like a reasonable group.
His pricing is right on with what I pay. I signed up for $50 a month basic cable that became $60 a month after taxes. Add to that $15 for a digital box so I can get On Demand, toss in the broadband, and it's $100.00 a month. It would be $15 less if I didn'
Re:Cost of the DVD's (Score:5, Informative)
I certianly wouldn't want to buy any of these right now, sure the bit rate is good for the iPod video, or even a computer screen, but blowing them up on a TV must suck!
Most TV's have worse resolution than the average monitor. These are acceptable, but not great for either.
Combine that with the fact that an average season (22-24 episodes) would cost $43.78 - $47.76 and I would much rather spend that money buying something that can be displayed on my TV!
Full seasons cost less than the price of all their episodes, just as full albums cost less than the price of all their songs. These episodes do end up undercutting DVDs, but not by a lot. The strength of this offering is in the instant gratification, easier portability, and granularity. Just as many people want to buy just that one song they like from an album, many people also want to buy just that one episode they missed or a TV show.
I assume the DRM is FairPlay
So they say, although seeing as FairPlay is an Apple trademark term, FairPlay could be something different for video than audio. I expect it will be the same or very similar and hopefully, locked down to the same degree,
Re:Prices (Score:3, Insightful)
Music is generally pretty cheap to make. Nowadays you don't need expensive studios or musicians, nearly everything is done with pro-track. And let's face it; the artists rarely ever get paid unless they can stretch a career out for several years. That's why I think a dollar is too much. I'd probably pay 10 cents a song if it was in a lossless format.
However, TVs shows have executive producers, producers, directors,