Future of Canadian TV

dialamah · September 27, 2016

Cogeco does that now. But you still have to order a minimal number of channels (10, 20 etc increments) . The catch is that the popular sports and premium cable channels come at a premium.

Yeah, I figured the premium channels would come at an extra cost, but good to know about the minimum number of channels. I may end up spending the same amount on TV as I ever did, but at least what I'm getting are ones I think I'll actually watch.

TimG · September 27, 2016

There's no value for consumers to have to subscribe to three or four services to get all of their content.

People already do this. It is called 'cable channel packages'.

The cost of shomi/cravetv/netflix is no more than a single cable tv package.

Imagine if you had to have three different cable subscriptions in order to get all the channels you wanted.

You are forced to go through a middleman because of the technology. With the Internet you can cut out the middle and buy the channel directly. This is a huge improvement.

I can't see why anyone would see the cable company monopoly was a good thing.

Edited September 27, 2016 by TimG

Boges · September 27, 2016

You are forced to go through a middleman because of the cable. With the Internet you can cut out the middle and buy the channel directly. This is a huge improvement.

Yeah but you still need that same middleman to provide you with unlimited Internet. They win either way. Sports channels are already offering their channels to stream, for a cost of course.

TimG · September 27, 2016

Yeah but you still need that same middleman to provide you with unlimited Internet.

Except we now have competition for basic internet access and your channels can be watched anywhere such a hotels when travelling.

YSports channels are already offering their channels to stream, for a cost of course.

Cable packages have always been an additional cost.

Boges · September 27, 2016

Except we now have competition for basic internet access and your channels can be watched anywhere such a hotels when travelling.

That technology has existed for awhile with Slingbox. Cable subscriptions come with streaming services now. I can steam Jays games from any IP now with my Sportsnet subscription.

Bryan · September 28, 2016

People already do this. It is called 'cable channel packages'.

They don't order a package from one cable company, then a different cable package from another cable company.

I can't see why anyone would see the cable company monopoly was a good thing.

What monopoly? I can choose from several different companies. I've switched a few times when I was offered a better deal.

cybercoma · September 28, 2016

Bryan's right. You can order the same channels and content from different companies, e.g., Bell, Rogers, Telus, Cogeco. Often times there's a couple offering services in the same area. Shomi and Crave, on the other hand, cornered the market with exclusive contracts. Putting aside the shows produced by Netflix, it's not at all the same thing as competition between cable/satellite/fibreop providers. The C/S/F providers all offer the same things and you have the option of choosing between them to get the things that you want. Netflix, Shomi, and Crave are like choosing between completely different channels that have very little overlap. That's not competition at all. Hopefully with the death of Shomi, CraveTV folds soon as well. The sooner the content that was cornered by those delivery services is brought back into play on Netflix, the better. If you don't like Netflix and don't want to pay for it, then get a cable subscription and get the movie channels. They all have On-Demand services that operate similarly to Netflix and that's true competition. They don't have exclusive rights to the content, blocking others from providing it.

Edited September 28, 2016 by cybercoma

Bryan · September 28, 2016

The exclusive licensing is what's holding back the sports streaming services from being ready for prime-time too. There are local blackouts, certain network blackouts, etc. I can't even count the number of times I went to watch an event on UFC Fight Pass, only to find out that it's not available live due to an agreement with a broadcast network that is either not available at all from my cable company, or is available but only in SD. Prior to that obscure channel getting the license, I could watch all those events live on Fight Pass. The best thing for me as a consumer would be for that hard-to-watch channel to go out of business and their exclusive license to go away.

Edited September 28, 2016 by Bryan

TimG · September 29, 2016

They don't order a package from one cable company, then a different cable package from another cable company.

So what if you have two line items on your visa bill instead of one? Having two companies which can provide you with similar services if better than having one with a monopoly.

What monopoly? I can choose from several different companies. I've switched a few times when I was offered a better deal.

I have zero interest in Cable TV. I am only interested in internet streaming. I had three legal suppliers. Now I have two. If CraveTV disappears I will have to deal with a monopoly.

cybercoma · September 29, 2016

So what if you have two line items on your visa bill instead of one? Having two companies which can provide you with similar services if better than having one with a monopoly.

So what if you have 100 line items on your bill because every individual show has a different provider?

It's still a monopoly when they lock competitors out from delivering the same content. Cable companies don't have exclusive rights to Much Music or TSN or TMN or HBO. They all provide it and are theoretically competitors, despite the price collusion that goes on.

With online streaming, if you want HBO, you need CraveTV. If you want AMC, you need Netflix. If you want Marvel films you not only need Netflix, but you need a Canadian ISP because Netflix doesn't have US distribution rights for those films yet. The companies are not competing with each other, so it's not a competitive market like you are claiming.

TimG · September 29, 2016

It's still a monopoly when they lock competitors out from delivering the same content.

So? Individual shows will be distributed on a limited number of channels. Different streaming services compete by offering different catalogues. If a particular content provider wants too much for their shows then no streaming service will carry them. Other content providers will not provide exclusive licenses. With multiple streaming service competing for viewers customers get greater choice than they would get with a monopoly service. This is competition at its purist. Edited September 29, 2016 by TimG

Boges · September 29, 2016

Having to subscribe to multiple streaming services doesn't really save the consumer any money. The upfront cost of unlimited bandwidth, the higher cost of streaming services as opposed to traditional channels and the fact that instead of being bundled at a lower cost you have to buy all your streaming services separately.

And with the idea that people can just share passwords, the growth potential is stunted.

Bryan · September 29, 2016

I have zero interest in Cable TV. I am only interested in internet streaming. I had three legal suppliers. Now I have two. If CraveTV disappears I will have to deal with a monopoly.

There are a lot more than 3 legal streaming services in Canada.

overthere · September 29, 2016

This is all getting too complicated and, of course has been much too expensive for some time now.

Can't somebody tell me in simple steps how to steal my entertainment from the Internet?. I like HBO, the premium cable channels, and live sports. Don't need CBC or any mainstream networks. Thank you in advance.

Boges · September 29, 2016

This is all getting too complicated and, of course has been much too expensive for some time now.

Can't somebody tell me in simple steps how to steal my entertainment from the Internet?. I like HBO, the premium cable channels, and live sports. Don't need CBC or any mainstream networks. Thank you in advance.

I guess an Android Box is where people go now. I've given up on BitTorrents, it's just a feasting ground for Malware.

You can pay for streaming channels where people post their live streams of live sporting events or TV shows etc. Similar to what I use to watch sports without the popups. Obviously there isn't a consistent quality you're getting and no DVR capabilities.

Bryan · September 30, 2016

This is all getting too complicated and, of course has been much too expensive for some time now.

Can't somebody tell me in simple steps how to steal my entertainment from the Internet?. I like HBO, the premium cable channels, and live sports. Don't need CBC or any mainstream networks. Thank you in advance.

There are plenty of streaming sites that carry almost everything.

TimG · September 30, 2016

Having to subscribe to multiple streaming services doesn't really save the consumer any money

If multiple services collectively provide access to more content they should cost more because more content providers have to be paid. Competition simply limits the profit that the streaming services collect.

And with the idea that people can just share passwords, the growth potential is stunted.

This is a variation on piracy.

cybercoma · September 30, 2016

The scarcity is artificial. They're creating it through exclusive rights which is by definition anti-competitive.

Ash74 · September 30, 2016

All this fear of piracy.

I am guilty as hell of it. I am not ashamed of it at all.

I also use to loan my friends music tapes to copy and let them borrow my movies.

I pay for unlimited high speed internet and Rogers has over charged me for years. I will enjoy the free tv for as long as I can. I still pay for netflix because it is easier for my toddler to use but when she is old enough and wants her own android box than I will get her one.

This is the future and media must adapt or fail.

Product placement would work for many shows and in the UK there is a TV tax (good luck with that here) but life will go on.

Yes you can say how I am a terrible person and what not, but I just don't care.

I refuse to pay for stations I do not want or that only use languages I do not speak.

TimG · September 30, 2016

This is the future and media must adapt or fail.

No media can survive with zero revenue since the people producing quality content need to be paid or they will find something else to pay the bills. There is no scenario where piracy returns money to the people producing the bills so it quite absurd for you to suggest that media must adapt to your desire for pirated content.

I am not going pretend that I am "holier than thou" since I have resorted to piracy when I am unable to find a legal way to view shows online in Canada. However, I make an effort find legal ways to view shows. If the cost is too much ($30/season for most pay-per-view sites) then find something else on Netflix/Crave/Showmi.

bush_cheney2004 · September 30, 2016

Anybody who can't afford the ten dollars per month for Netflix probably needs to steal content.

Ash74 · October 1, 2016

No media can survive with zero revenue since the people producing quality content need to be paid or they will find something else to pay the bills. There is no scenario where piracy returns money to the people producing the bills so it quite absurd for you to suggest that media must adapt to your desire for pirated content.

I am not going pretend that I am "holier than thou" since I have resorted to piracy when I am unable to find a legal way to view shows online in Canada. However, I make an effort find legal ways to view shows. If the cost is too much ($30/season for most pay-per-view sites) then find something else on Netflix/Crave/Showmi.

I do not have to look..

I have a box that lets me watch anything, any time with no commercials and I don't have to pay the Canadian Gestapo tax on it all for the price of internet.

Which I am also over charged for.

TimG · October 1, 2016

I have a box that lets me watch anything, any time with no commercials

If you are not contributing to the cost of producing content then you are freeloader that depends on other people being willing to pay for content. This is nothing to be proud of. You are not a lot different from people who hide income to avoid paying taxes.

Ash74 · October 1, 2016

If you are not contributing to the cost of producing content then you are freeloader that depends on other people being willing to pay for content. This is nothing to be proud of. You are not a lot different from people who hide income to avoid paying taxes.

Am I not a freeloader if I watch free to air TV with commercials and not buy the products being advertised?

Have you ever gotten up to use the washroom or get a drink skipping the commercials?

When I read an online newspaper and close the pop ups?

I seriously believe that product placement will start to be used.

Period pieces will suffer and I admit I am watching mostly BBC programming lately which I cannot receive without paying for cable and I would not have the ability to watch what I wanted to watch when I have time to watch it in the manner I do now.

I find Canadian TV boring and I watch American TV less and less.

So I will continue my freeloading ways and watch what I like.

Bryan · October 1, 2016

The producers need to find new ways to monetize what they do. iTunes was able to turn millions of pirates into paying customers. Netflix converted millions more. Satellite radio was able to convince a lot of people who were used to content that was ALWAYS free to pay. Many content providers are finding ways to monetize without charging their consumers directly.

Those who still haven't got their target audience covered are going to have to keep thinking. People will pay if the system in place works for them. If it doesn't, they WILL just take it. Whining about them not contributing won't change that. Find another way to make money from what you're doing.