Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Bailout Blogs -> Macroprudential
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Bailout
: MacroprudentialThe changing landscape of the TV business
By Felix Salmon
Andrew Vanacore has a long and sometimes confusing overview of the state of play in the television industry, which concentrates on the possibility that one or more networks might convert into cable channels sooner or later. But there seem to be lacunae in the story — not least the large number of cable channels which pay for the privilege of being featured in the cable-TV lineup, rather than being paid by the cable companies.
Also missing is any indication of the effects of the move to digital broadcasting. Reader William Wang notes that this vastly increases both the quantity and the quality of free-to-air television stations, which, combined with Hulu and Boxee and YouTube and all the other free sources of TV, should put a lot of pressure on cable companies who have historically had local monopolies and the ability to raise their prices every year with impunity.
The networks are increasingly fighting with the cable operators, now that the likes of Rupert Murdoch have decided that network TV, just like newspapers, is something which should have more than one revenue stream. Now free-to-air digital broadcast TV does not, of, course, come with any kind of monthly subscription stream from a cable operator desperate to still be able to serve up American Idol to its loyal customers. But the networks still reach vastly more viewers than any cable channel, and so if they started adding their in-house cable channels, like Fox News, to the digital broadcast spectrum, they might be able to get a significant bump in viewership.
I still think that by far the best outcome for most constituencies would be a la carte pricing, where viewers — rather than cable companies — decide what’s worth paying for. Every television station on cable could then charge as much as it liked, with an eye to maximizing the sum of subscription revenues and advertising revenues. But what’s clear is that we’re moving to a world where the number of options is multiplying, and corporate strategy is going to get extremely complex extremely quickly.
The latest round of fights between producers and distributors smells like the dying gasp of a 20th-century TV business model to me, with essentially only two sides in the game. The consumer is left out in the cold, shivering as cable bills rise much faster than inflation. Pretty soon, the consumer is going to have a lot more power, and that’s going to change the game in profound and fundamental ways.
Full post as published by Macroprudential on December 30, 2009 (boomark / email).
Express Scripts Inc.
Over $9.5 million payout in deceptive business practices lawsuit.
FedEx
Ground Business Model Wins Class Action in Washington
Business Lawsuit
Elbit Imaging Ltd. agrees to pay CP Holdings Ltd. a $5 million settlement.
Personal Business
Jundts to pay $1.8 million settlement in debts lawsuit.
Tagged.com Sued over Deceptive Business Practices
Tagged.com Faces Potential Class Action
Tanning Salon Defamation
WDIO-TV pays undisclosed settlement after reporting false information about a business owner.

"Solo Transformation" - The Changing Landscape of Solo Practice
The 'Changing Landscape' of ERISA Litigation
Voice, Video and Broadband: The Changing Competitive Landscape and Its Impact on Consumers
Private Labels, Brands and Competition Policy: The Changing Landscape of Retail Competition
America's Changing Religious Landscape
The Changing Landscape of Internet Liability








