Draven

In light of the flare-up over Tivo revealing the ability to time-delete things from a person's machine, I got to thinking about this again.

It's come up in various TV show threads, but I'd like to dedicate a thread to the discussion. I'm curious to hear what those who hate commercials and always fast-forward through them (which I do as well) would offer as an alternative to the traditional ad-based revenue method.

I have a simple alternative - you have to pay for television. I am willing to pay 12 bucks a month to XM Radio, mostly to avoid having to listen to commercials. This is well worth the expense to me.

But I realize not everyone shares that feeling. What are some other options? Ads within shows? Scrollbars or windows with commercials during programs? Corporate sponsorship? Selling shows on DVD a week after they air on TV?

I think we all hate "intrusive" ads, but I wonder how people expect the shows to be paid for if everyone is trying to bypass the ads.

Just thinking out loud here. The current situation is a real mess but I rarely hear alternatives, just "I hate commercials!"

Daniel-A

Most of us already do pay for TV. While I still believe Network TV is the best TV I think they should deal with the cable providers. The networks do not have to allow the networks to broadcast their programming. In fact I think cable companies do have to deal with networks if they want to air the stuff.

Josh H

That will never work. You pay for cable TV and it still has ads on the non-broadcast networks/non-movie channels.

If you mean everything is like HBO and you pay for each channel you want, that won't work either as it would be too costly for each person. It would take a lot of money to make up for ad revenue through subscriptions.

Say it's like $12 a month for each coporations group of channels (same fee as HBO etc on DirectTV now. If someone watch a decent amount of shows and sports, they'll probably need to get at least 10 of those, which would put the bill at $120 a month for fewer channels than one can get now on cable or satellite for $40-50 bucks or less.

And that's a best case scenario as you know most companies would want a subscription to each individual channel rather than a package of all their channels (or the packages would be much more than $12).

And it's assuming that the cable and satellite companies would ever let that happen.

The obvious solution is to get a DVD recorder with good repeating recording functions, and then you can fastforward commercials as with Tivo.

Not ideal, but would be tolearble IMO in the unlikley instance that this time deletions thing becomes a reality for most shows on DVRs in the future.

Daniel-A

What is this time deletion thing you guys speak of? I jsut have basic cable and VCRs.

rw2516

I don't hate commercials as much as the split screens during end credits and little pop-up ads in the corners during the show.

Jimmy James

If I really hated ads, I think I'd just drop out of watching shows as they air and would get the biggest plan Netflix has to offer.

LasVegasMichael

Strong agreeement. At least I can ff through the commercials with the DVR. I NEVER watch anything live anymore due to the need to FF.


There really is no alternative, unfortunately. I gladly shell out $130 a month for cable (and would gladly shell out a hell of a lot more to be commerical free), and as long as I have the digital DVR, I will keep FF through every commercial. I hate commercials, and feel they are completely unnecessary. When I want to see ads for something, I will go to the store or look at my junk mail.

ChrisHicks

what about product placement within shows? instead of having a cast member drinking a can of "soda" they could be drinking a pepsi or something. of course they would never allow the products to be just another prop on the show and I'm sure they would have to have the characters make some stupid comments on it every time its shown but if its done right I think it could work.

besides, how many people here crave a Mountain Dew or some Pringles while watching Survivor?

Draven

It still doesn't address the inherent problem: SOMEONE has to pay for these television programs. Timeshifting/fastforwarding commercials is not helping the production companies pay for the shows.

I really think the only way to do it is to either charge for TV (and yes, that might mean you have fewer channels if you aren't willing to pay for it) or very intrusive advertisements. I'm thinking 2/3 of the screen is the program and 1/3 is ads. It would suck but I'm not sure what other alternatives there are.

Jimmy James

I'm not so sure of that. Timeshifting has essentially no effect in and of itself. Using FF reduces the value of the commercial to the company, but it does not eliminate it. I know that on the fastest FF speed of my DVR, I am still very aware of exactly what is being advertised. That's worth something, particularly when an ad is creative enough to get me to rewind and watch it.

Josh H

http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=438933

Josh H

It was never an issue with VCRs which have had manual repeating recording options for years.

I think DVD recorders would be the same way. Most home won't have them, and they're not as easy to use or hyped up as Tivo and other DVRs so they won't likely be used as extensively and thus not be as much a threat to the advertisers.

coladar

The alternative is IPTV. Pay per episode you watch... Perhaps have the pilots of all episodes be available free over an iTunes like service, then charge a reasonable fee to watch and own each following episode. I don't think there's any doubt that eventually, within the next twenty years, this is what the industry will do to survive the DVR/Torrents of episodes revolution.

Jimmy James

The pricing structures there are going to be very interesting to watch. I wonder if we won't see something sort of like the movie release process play itself out. This may even mean that some shows or some special events for popular shows would make appearances at movie theaters. Home PPV would come next, possibly followed by some sort of pay network/package, and possibly filtering down to "free" (or much less costly) network/package. To be a bit clearer:

- Theatrical release (big shows/big events only)
- Home PPV, perhaps a week or two after theatrical release for big shows
- HBO-style subscription service, perhaps a month after PPV
- Cable/broadcast network-style service, perhaps 6 months after the prior tier starts

TheMadMonk

I pay for my basic satellite service. I pay more for "upper tiers" of channels. I pay more for a DVR. I pay for the phone line that the DVR has to be plugged into. I paid for the actual TV, and I pay for the electricity to run it all.

I pay enough for what little there is on tv that is even worth watching.

Jadzia

My idea for how to get people to watch commercials in the age of Tivo is simple: the networks should recruit the network stars to appear in the commercials.

If you're watching Alias, and reach for your remote to FF through the commercials, you might stop if you see Jennifer Garner starring in a cool ad. The networks could write that into the actors' contracts. It would be cool if the ads were only to be played during their show which would give you even more of an incentive to watch.

Make the commercials interesting and people will watch. I found myself watching the ads during the Nip/Tuck premiere because I was interested in seeing what movies were coming out this Christmas. It was cool seeng those extended trailers.

mike1977

Same here. I wish they'd go back to bumpers, and they need to be the first thing at commercial breaks with their promo stuff there instead of having it ruin the shows.

mookiemeister

If you don't like ads, maybe the best solution is to wait for the DVD to be released?