Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Tuesday October 18 2016, @07:52AM   Printer-friendly
from the dunno,-change-channel dept.

The Guardian asks: Is the golden age of television over?

Money is the root of TV's problems. In the US, where the TV economy is headquartered, TV and internet access costs two to three times what it does in the UK, and networks are in a tug-of-war with Americans, who are increasingly shredding steep cable bills in favor of Netflix and streaming services. This summer, many networks became locked in all-out legal battles with cash-strapped cable companies, with multibillion-dollar distribution deals at stake to fund those networks' huge programming budgets.

Executives are planning for a less luxurious future, in which TV shows may be briefer, lower-budget and filled with the kind of product-placement ads that audiences hate and advertisers pay for. Worse still, the company that started much of the trouble may soon confront flaws in its own business model.

Netflix reports earnings on Monday. Its problems, and those of companies like it, are more pressing than those of traditional television. At a conference in New York this month, chief executive Reed Hastings was blunt.

"Disney, who is very good in China, had their movie service shut down," he told an audience at the New Yorker Tech Fest. "Apple, who is very good in China, had their movie service closed down. It doesn't look good."

Hastings said his company was seeking to expand in other countries, India in particular. But there's a reason media businesses seeking vast scale tend to view China as the solution to all their problems: internet penetration in India is rising from 26% according to the World Bank. In China, it's rising from 50%.

[Continues...]

Netflix needs the money that increased scale would provide, in part, to pay top dollar for shows such as Arrested Development and Lost. In January, it told investors it owed $10.9bn in TV show licenses alone, with $4.7bn of that due this year. After that, almost the entire balance is due before the end of 2018.

Netflix will have to keep buying reruns at what will almost certainly be increasing rates if it wants to retain its users, and the companies selling those shows are now in a tight spot too – largely thanks to the ad-free Netflix model.

At US television networks, budget struggles mean making shows more as UK networks do, except with lots of ads and product placement: shorter lifespans, fewer sets and special effects, fewer episodes per series – and then little margin for error if shows look like they're failing early on.

Netflix cannot scale back. Its viewers pay for it outright and express their displeasure by canceling subscriptions, not by changing the channel. If anything, its executives are spending more: Baz Luhrmann's 1970s New York period piece, The Get Down, came with a record price tag for a service that had already driven up the cost of new scripts: $120m for 12 episodes, according to Variety.

In short, television content is expensive. With fewer people watching, the advertisers are getting fed up with paying the premiums the television networks ask for, and people aren't willing to pay the real price required for good television content. Unless something changes soon, expect cheaper television shows with shorter seasons and lots of product placements within the shows.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday October 18 2016, @06:39PM

    by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday October 18 2016, @06:39PM (#415788)

    Andromeda started off strong. It had an unfortunate lead actor and people skipped it because of his previous show but he actually did very well in it. But by season 3-4 it was starting to creak under its own story/mythos weight. Season 5 was pretty cool being one complete story.

    Unfortunately they fired the showrunner after season 1 episode 22, then the story kind of wobbled away from where it started. You can generally draw a line through "Ouroboros" and consider before and after as separate canons.

    Robert Hewitt Wolfe released a script [cyberspace5.net] online of what his original series finale would have been, and we really missed out :-(

    The horribly existentialist fifth season was highly allegorical and generally didn't make any sense, and at the very end they popped back to the end of season 4. Argh!

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday October 18 2016, @06:46PM

    by tangomargarine (667) on Tuesday October 18 2016, @06:46PM (#415793)

    Er, sorry--season *2* episode 22. So when you say "by season 3-4 it was starting to creak under its own story/mythos weight" I blame that on the replacement showrunner not really understanding half of what RHW was trying to do in the story. There are a lot of plot threads from those first two seasons that never end up leading anywhere.

    The machine collective Harper was supposed to join, Trance story that only sort of half-happened, the futuristic cyborg version of Beka they ran into, the isolated Commonwealth planet that survived the fall and they dropped by like 3 times ever, etc.

    --
    "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"