(09-27-2023 02:58 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 08:21 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, if cable truly does disappear, the consumer will be worse off.

You think so? On average?

I don't know. I think we're racing back towards a less-convenient version of a cable bundle as many end up with multiple streaming services that end up adding up to what they'd be spending on cable back in the day anyway. But not everyone, and I wonder how those numbers will shake out.

If you're not a sports fan, and grew up comsuming most visual media on youtube/tiktok/snapchat/instagram anyway, will that generation just shrug and let it go? While the oldest part of the population used to cable just settles for something like a tubi (for reruns of the tv of their youth) plus maybe an a la carte service for their favorite news channel? And maybe just the group in the middle who have multiple generations to account for bother getting 3-4-5 services so that everyone can see all the hottest shows and live sports and family programming?


I legit don't know. I very much don't think my viewing habits mirror the population at large, and I'm sure your view is more common than mine, but I wonder about the numbers.

I watch a ton of regular YouTube (not Youtube TV). I find people that do really good videos on stuff that I'm interested in. Hell I could never find stuff like that on TV.

(09-27-2023 02:58 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 08:21 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, if cable truly does disappear, the consumer will be worse off.

You think so? On average?

I don't know. I think we're racing back towards a less-convenient version of a cable bundle as many end up with multiple streaming services that end up adding up to what they'd be spending on cable back in the day anyway. But not everyone, and I wonder how those numbers will shake out.

If you're not a sports fan, and grew up comsuming most visual media on youtube/tiktok/snapchat/instagram anyway, will that generation just shrug and let it go? While the oldest part of the population used to cable just settles for something like a tubi (for reruns of the tv of their youth) plus maybe an a la carte service for their favorite news channel? And maybe just the group in the middle who have multiple generations to account for bother getting 3-4-5 services so that everyone can see all the hottest shows and live sports and family programming?


I legit don't know. I very much don't think my viewing habits mirror the population at large, and I'm sure your view is more common than mine, but I wonder about the numbers.

I think really only sports consumers will end up being worse off.

My parents are in their 70s. They watch A LOT of TV and A LOT of different programs/movies. I tried to talk them into cutting the cord for about 5 years, but my mom didn't think she'd be able to get access to everything she watches. They finally did it last year. And there is not much they're going without. They do a lot of churning of services and grab deals where available, like a year of Peacock for $12 on Black Friday.

And the under 30 crowd does watch shows. They just leach off passwords, binge, and churn.

(09-27-2023 03:22 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 02:58 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 08:21 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, if cable truly does disappear, the consumer will be worse off.

You think so? On average?

I don't know. I think we're racing back towards a less-convenient version of a cable bundle as many end up with multiple streaming services that end up adding up to what they'd be spending on cable back in the day anyway. But not everyone, and I wonder how those numbers will shake out.

If you're not a sports fan, and grew up comsuming most visual media on youtube/tiktok/snapchat/instagram anyway, will that generation just shrug and let it go? While the oldest part of the population used to cable just settles for something like a tubi (for reruns of the tv of their youth) plus maybe an a la carte service for their favorite news channel? And maybe just the group in the middle who have multiple generations to account for bother getting 3-4-5 services so that everyone can see all the hottest shows and live sports and family programming?


I legit don't know. I very much don't think my viewing habits mirror the population at large, and I'm sure your view is more common than mine, but I wonder about the numbers.

I watch a ton of regular YouTube (not Youtube TV). I find people that do really good videos on stuff that I'm interested in. Hell I could never find stuff like that on TV.

I think they'd all have a hard time, and be sad about what they had to give up, but if my kids (2nd through 8th grade) had to choose between just youtube and any one streaming service? I think at least one would probably pick youtube.

(09-27-2023 01:27 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 01:25 PM)CAJUNNATION Wrote:  

(09-24-2023 04:13 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  ... It’s not often that we see an industry collectively lose its minds and actively kill a great business model (the cable bundle) and go into one that may *never* be profitable (streaming), but that’s what we saw happen....

Yep.

At Home Visual Entertainment will never be as good as what we had for the last 40 years, and we've wrecked collegiate athletics. Nice work, everybody.

At least we cut the cord, huh?

Gloom and doom.

There'll never be another Beatles either. Anyone see the numbers Taylor Swift it putting up?

There is always the next big thing. Be patient.

Actually, Taylor Swift is a throwback and might be the last gasp of the monoculture. There used to be several music stars at any given time that could command the type of attention that she has now, but that era is gone. The monoculture that we used to have - where the majority of people knew the same handful of hit songs, watched the same handful of TV shows (such as Friends and Seinfeld), and saw the same handful of movies, has been irreversibly erased. We’re a completely fragmented culture now - Spotify and other music streaming services allow us to essentially listen to any song in modern recorded history in an instant, a “hit show” on a TV streaming service has viewership numbers that would have gotten them canceled on network TV after a week up until around 2015, and people won’t go to the movie theater for anything less than the very biggest IP-driven blockbusters.

That’s actually what makes top sports properties like the NFL so valuable: they are pretty much the only monoculture properties that are left, so they have extraordinary value compared to all other forms of entertainment.

(09-27-2023 02:05 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  I cut cable about 5 years ago. Outside of live sports, TV is really bad. I swear the crap they have on network TV during prime time will make you lose brain cells watching it.

They're counting on the dumbest people.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

(09-27-2023 05:19 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 01:27 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 01:25 PM)CAJUNNATION Wrote:  

(09-24-2023 04:13 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  ... It’s not often that we see an industry collectively lose its minds and actively kill a great business model (the cable bundle) and go into one that may *never* be profitable (streaming), but that’s what we saw happen....

Yep.

At Home Visual Entertainment will never be as good as what we had for the last 40 years, and we've wrecked collegiate athletics. Nice work, everybody.

At least we cut the cord, huh?

Gloom and doom.

There'll never be another Beatles either. Anyone see the numbers Taylor Swift it putting up?

There is always the next big thing. Be patient.

Actually, Taylor Swift is a throwback and might be the last gasp of the monoculture. There used to be several music stars at any given time that could command the type of attention that she has now, but that era is gone. The monoculture that we used to have - where the majority of people knew the same handful of hit songs, watched the same handful of TV shows (such as Friends and Seinfeld), and saw the same handful of movies, has been irreversibly erased. We’re a completely fragmented culture now - Spotify and other music streaming services allow us to essentially listen to any song in modern recorded history in an instant, a “hit show” on a TV streaming service has viewership numbers that would have gotten them canceled on network TV after a week up until around 2015, and people won’t go to the movie theater for anything less than the very biggest IP-driven blockbusters.

That’s actually what makes top sports properties like the NFL so valuable: they are pretty much the only monoculture properties that are left, so they have extraordinary value compared to all other forms of entertainment.

Yup. The Super Bowl is probably as close as anything comes these days to an cultural touchstone event that we almost all universally experience together as a nation. There used to be lots of those types of events. I grew up in the 1970's and can remember how the mini-series "Roots" captivated the nation during that week.

(09-27-2023 04:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 03:22 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 02:58 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 08:21 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, if cable truly does disappear, the consumer will be worse off.

You think so? On average?

I don't know. I think we're racing back towards a less-convenient version of a cable bundle as many end up with multiple streaming services that end up adding up to what they'd be spending on cable back in the day anyway. But not everyone, and I wonder how those numbers will shake out.

If you're not a sports fan, and grew up comsuming most visual media on youtube/tiktok/snapchat/instagram anyway, will that generation just shrug and let it go? While the oldest part of the population used to cable just settles for something like a tubi (for reruns of the tv of their youth) plus maybe an a la carte service for their favorite news channel? And maybe just the group in the middle who have multiple generations to account for bother getting 3-4-5 services so that everyone can see all the hottest shows and live sports and family programming?


I legit don't know. I very much don't think my viewing habits mirror the population at large, and I'm sure your view is more common than mine, but I wonder about the numbers.

I watch a ton of regular YouTube (not Youtube TV). I find people that do really good videos on stuff that I'm interested in. Hell I could never find stuff like that on TV.

I think they'd all have a hard time, and be sad about what they had to give up, but if my kids (2nd through 8th grade) had to choose between just youtube and any one streaming service? I think at least one would probably pick youtube.

Pretty sure my college age 20s would choose You Tube.

(09-27-2023 06:56 PM)bullet Wrote:  Pretty sure my college age 20s would choose You Tube.

See, mine would choose Disney plus. (They think YouTube is for Boomers and Xers.)

(09-27-2023 06:56 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 04:45 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 03:22 PM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 02:58 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(09-26-2023 08:21 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  IMO, if cable truly does disappear, the consumer will be worse off.

You think so? On average?

I don't know. I think we're racing back towards a less-convenient version of a cable bundle as many end up with multiple streaming services that end up adding up to what they'd be spending on cable back in the day anyway. But not everyone, and I wonder how those numbers will shake out.

If you're not a sports fan, and grew up comsuming most visual media on youtube/tiktok/snapchat/instagram anyway, will that generation just shrug and let it go? While the oldest part of the population used to cable just settles for something like a tubi (for reruns of the tv of their youth) plus maybe an a la carte service for their favorite news channel? And maybe just the group in the middle who have multiple generations to account for bother getting 3-4-5 services so that everyone can see all the hottest shows and live sports and family programming?


I legit don't know. I very much don't think my viewing habits mirror the population at large, and I'm sure your view is more common than mine, but I wonder about the numbers.

I watch a ton of regular YouTube (not Youtube TV). I find people that do really good videos on stuff that I'm interested in. Hell I could never find stuff like that on TV.

I think they'd all have a hard time, and be sad about what they had to give up, but if my kids (2nd through 8th grade) had to choose between just youtube and any one streaming service? I think at least one would probably pick youtube.

Pretty sure my college age 20s would choose You Tube.

Today's YouTube certainly. There aren't enough shows to take up my time that much, and YouTube content is much more varied.

I save a lot of Netflix series for when I'm on flights. If they're good enough, I'll watch the rest when I get home (cross country trips to see the in-laws make it easy to get a big dent in them on the way).

(09-27-2023 07:04 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 06:56 PM)bullet Wrote:  Pretty sure my college age 20s would choose You Tube.

See, mine would choose Disney plus. (They think YouTube is for Boomers and Xers.)

It’s TikTok for the teenage and under set and it’s not even close.

(09-28-2023 08:55 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 07:04 PM)djsuperfly Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 06:56 PM)bullet Wrote:  Pretty sure my college age 20s would choose You Tube.

See, mine would choose Disney plus. (They think YouTube is for Boomers and Xers.)

It’s TikTok for the teenage and under set and it’s not even close.

Have you seen some of the nonsense on TickyTocky? Brain Cell killers! I guess you can say that about any platform though. What I like about YT is that people create series based on niche interests and these videos can be 15 - 45 minutes long and they produce them weekly and sometimes daily. I get my fill of Camping, Trout Fishing, Guitars, old Concerts.. just a ton of good stuff you can't find anywhere else (that I know of) for a series.

Just search on YT what your interests or hobbies are. Find a good series and subscribe to get notifications when new stuff comes out.

(09-27-2023 01:27 PM)Claw Wrote:  ...There'll never be another Beatles either. Anyone see the numbers Taylor Swift it putting up?

There is always the next big thing. Be patient.

Beatles --- Taylor Swift

Linear --- Digital

Yep. I think you nailed it.

(10-02-2023 11:23 AM)CAJUNNATION Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 01:27 PM)Claw Wrote:  ...There'll never be another Beatles either. Anyone see the numbers Taylor Swift it putting up?

There is always the next big thing. Be patient.

Beatles --- Taylor Swift

Linear --- Digital

Yep. I think you nailed it.

Comparing Taylor Swift to the Beatles is like comparing Huntington, WV to New York City. Yes, Huntington is the biggest city in WV, but....

(10-02-2023 11:54 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-02-2023 11:23 AM)CAJUNNATION Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 01:27 PM)Claw Wrote:  ...There'll never be another Beatles either. Anyone see the numbers Taylor Swift it putting up?

There is always the next big thing. Be patient.

Beatles --- Taylor Swift

Linear --- Digital

Yep. I think you nailed it.

Comparing Taylor Swift to the Beatles is like comparing Huntington, WV to New York City. Yes, Huntington is the biggest city in WV, but....

Charleston is the biggest city in WV

I'm in my late 20's and I just have an antenna to pick up local channels. I mostly just watch YouTube if I'm not watching sports. In January and February I pay for ESPN+ to watch MVC and OVC conference basketball games since there's a lot of weeknight games. Don't care at all about non-conference games. Used to buy ESPN+ for football season, but it's just not worth the money to me since football is only on once a week and I don't really enjoy watching rewinds.

(10-02-2023 11:58 AM)GreenBison Wrote:  

(10-02-2023 11:54 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-02-2023 11:23 AM)CAJUNNATION Wrote:  

(09-27-2023 01:27 PM)Claw Wrote:  ...There'll never be another Beatles either. Anyone see the numbers Taylor Swift it putting up?

There is always the next big thing. Be patient.

Beatles --- Taylor Swift

Linear --- Digital

Yep. I think you nailed it.

Comparing Taylor Swift to the Beatles is like comparing Huntington, WV to New York City. Yes, Huntington is the biggest city in WV, but....

Charleston is the biggest city in WV

Alright. Same point. Or I could say Huntington is the largest MSA centered on WV (excluding DC and Pittsburgh).