Re: Digital TV in rural areas and my old VCR tapes!

Gymda Wrote: "There is a lot of product out there. Take cable there are
hundreds of
old sitcoms never re-run, but for some reason we have 3 cable nets
running Roseanne reruns.

We have the Golden Girls channel, I mean life time. "

Part of the problem is that Hollywood got spoiled by the compact disc,
and is again being spoiled by the DVD boxed set of OTA television
shows. Of course, we're the ones spoiling them, since we keep buying
the stuff, but as long as we see some advantage to consuming the same
content over and over again, they'll be more than happy to dish it out.

Why do you think the copyright has been extended to life+95 years? So
Disney could continue to re-release "for the last time ever" all those
movies made in the 1930's (removed of their non-PC material, of
course).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonny_Bono_Copyright_Term_Extension_Act

Later on, S/he added: "True there is only so much of the pie to go
around but the number of
people watching TV has declined. Where are these people? "

Well, many of them are working longer hours, and more than a few moved
to the Internet, and since most shows still target 18-34 year olds,
even though there are less of them than ever, there's a lot of people
who just don't care.

http://www.blackcollegeview.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2004/04/10/4078304240d0a

Also, most of the time they don't count time-shifted programs, or DVD
viewing (at least when I had a Nielson diary they didn't).

Gmyda finalized: "So as great as HDTV is I think stations and people
will opt for more
stations. And the profit will be there. "

The strength of the broadcaster is being able to deliver a large local
audience to advertisers. They will be shooting themselves in the foot
if they start segementing their audience. Look at what happened with
Clear Channel and Cidadel buying up all the FM spectrum and
consolidating the sales force. It has been mostly a disaster, at least
from an individual station's revenue basis. Overall, yes, the
coporations are doing OK, but now that they've completed their
aquisitions, they've been flat.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=5y&s=CCU&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=&c=%5EGSPC

The big reson is because the sales force doesn't know what to do with
all these stations. It used to be that the real smart sales types quit
and started their own agency (taking their best clients along). They
could then build marketing plans and actually put clients in the right
place. When the big corporations saw this, they wanted to cut out the
agencies, and get the client to pay full rate, and lock them into the
corporation's stations. However, it didn't really work out that way,
since it is not all that easy to figure out where clients fit in, and
most clients want to get the agency to work out a better deal (which
they almost always do).

Now, let's look at television. One of the big reasons television
advertising is so expensive is becuase there is a very small
inventory/hour. The one exception to this is local news (I'm speaking
from a local station's perspective). Typically, there are only 2
minutes of local "avails" in a 1/2 hour sitcom (and a minute or 2 on
each end). These avails are typically sold first to the big agencies,
then the smaller agencies, and then the local advertiser. If no one
bites, a process that resembles a game of chicken and an auction begins
with the salesmanager and an agency to find the "correct" price. If the
sales manager blinks, the ad could go very cheap. If the agency blinks,
it could go much higher. If the GM overrides, they might not run
anything. In fact, if you see a PSA or "The More You Know" running in
primetime, the agency went too low. :)

Anyway, the value of broadcast television is the excusive nature of the
product, and the large number of eyeballs present. Think about DeBeers
and diamonds. There is no reason diamonds should cost as much as they
do, but DeBeers keeps the supply low. If broadcasters start
multicasting, they will increase their supply and dilute the market.
This is what happens with cable advertising, and the rates are an order
of magnatude lower than broadcast, to the point that cable looks at
advertising as a source of incremental revenue, where a broadcaster
looks at advertising as the primary source.

It gets worse than the DeBeers/diamond example, though. If you can get
people to switch over to the secondary feed, they take away viewership
from the primary feed. This will lower the Nielson rating for the
primary feed, which is how the network makes money (at least how the
price their shows. It has been proven over the years that Nielson is a
very flawed rating system
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4864036, but
networks especially keep using it, because the agencies and networks
use the ratings like curency and a way to get a rough value to a show).
Networks might not mind too much, since they know they can get a show
sold on the secondary market, but it is much easier to syndicate a hit
than a dog, and that can mean big money for the production houses
(which are more likely then ever to be a network related company).
Lower rated shows will be able to make it to DVD (and now Internet),
but I would think the margins for DVD distrubution would be much less
due to retail markup and all that stuff, and for the time being, the
revenue deals are more likely to favor the producers, since they
typically get a bigger chunk of unusual distrubution deals.

So, at least for the next few years, I doubt we'll see much in the way
of multicasting, other than the 24/7 news reruns and the weather over
and over again. Personally, I'd like to see just an HD camera pointed
at a nice scene (maybe a towercam) all day and night, but hey, I like
to watch Sunrise Earth on DiscoveryHD.

BTW: My old boss has a theory of why people buy television advertising.
It is not to get their message out, or drive traffic to their stores
(at least not on the local level). It is so they can call all their
buddies over and point at the TV and say "look, I'm controlling the
TV." I really think that's the main reason why people buy the superbowl
ads, even though they all justify it with all the numbers of eyeballs
(which have been dropping over the years).

.

Relevant Pages

  • NBC sets new approach to upfronts, will announce schedule in April
    ... 52-Week Primetime Programming Schedule to be Unveiled to Advertisers ... One-on-One Client Meetings to be Held During Three-City Roadshow ... partners to allow for a more collaborative dialogue with clients about ... the advertising opportunities presented in the schedule. ...
    (rec.arts.tv)
  • Google to sell commercials for some NBC Universal cable networks
    ... Google to sell commercials for some NBC Universal cable networks ... television advertising business received a boost Monday when NBC ...
    (rec.arts.tv)
  • Re: AKICF: CEEB choices (Was Re: IMDB.com "Studio Briefing" - Few over-the-air
    ... It may have something to do with the cost of advertising being forced ... With the rise of multiple networks, there was some competition for keeping ... of filmed drama programs increased dramatically from the 1980s forward. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.fandom)
  • Re: Awwww, the poor thing.....
    ... this attitude is what has helped change RCTN. ... This attitude is what has caused many a designer to forgo posting here ... But that isn't the only reason this group has devolved. ... that could be construed as advertising. ...
    (rec.crafts.textiles.needlework)
  • Re: TAs Advertise Free Here
    ... encourage clients to refer others to my agency via a referral program ... I personally have no issue with the content of Ray's posts, ... It's not a matter of the frequency of violation. ... advertising it elsewhere as you suggested, ...
    (rec.travel.cruises)