geezer wrote: LawBeefaroni wrote:geezer wrote:People want quality original content, want to skip the advertising but refuse to pay a buck fifty for an hour of someone's work. This is why we can't have nice things.
I'm OK with passive advertising, what I don't want is a bunch of discreet subscriptions. And I certainly don't want a pay subscription full of ads. If having to subscribe to each network/content producer is what it takes to get content, I'm happy to not watch. I don't feel it's my right to torrent or whatever, I'll just pass on it.
You're ok with *watching* passive advertising, or you're ok with advertising you can skip through?
I'm ok with being shown passive advertising because I understand that it pays for the content. I don't use an adblocker. I've never had TIVO or a DVR (though that's more because I've never liked committing to a scheduled show, even if I can record it). If I can't bear the ads I don't watch the content. Is there a chance I'll get up and get a drink during an ad? Sure. But I don't fast forward.
geezer wrote:FWIW I certainly get your point - it's already annoying to have to subscribe to Hulu, Netflix, etc. etc. etc. as various content providers choose up partners and segment their shows amongst various platforms, and CBS will just be one more platform to manage. (That said, for years I've been listening to people complain that they want to get just ESPN, or just the big networks and add ESPN or CNN or, God forbid, just Fox News or whatever.)
It's crazy. It's the app-ization of everything. I have a single "app" on my computer that lets me watch Netflix, trade stocks, manage bank accounts, play casual games, read news, chat, text, manage photos, etc. It's called a browser. On my phone I have 15 apps to do the same thing. Everyone wants you in
their ecosystem.
People do want a la carte but they don't want to eat each item in a different restaurant.
geezer wrote:Bringing it back on topic, we are now going to have the chance to get 4-5 hours of new Star Trek EVERY MONTH for the price of a Pumpkin Spice Latte, or 1/2 to 1/3 the price of a movie ticket. That hardly seems outrageous.
I'd be hard pressed to watch 5 hours every month. There might be one weekend where I can watch 5 hours in a single sitting but those weekends happen like once or twice a year. I'd much rather pay for what I watch when I watch it. If that means paying $6 for 5 hours, that's fine. If it means watching a bunch of annoying ads, fine. What I don't want to do is pre-pay in the event I
might end up watching something (and Star Trek is the only think I would want to watch on CBS online) and continue paying every month.
Subscriptions are great for the balance sheet but for the consumer are just another slow bleed.