TV is increasingly for old people • Hacker News Board

Re: TV is increasingly for old people

#21

Post by jonnathanson » Sat, Sep 06, 2014, 5:45 PM UTC

bronbron wrote: post #15

Sambdala wrote: post #7

> And he’s part of one camp that believes young professionals and students will eventually become cable subscribers. > “We suspect they will trade up,” Skipper said. The implication here seems to be that cable is the premium/preferred product, and people will switch to it once they can afford a cable subscription. That does not at all strike me as being the case in this day and age. The internet, and piracy, created…

It's worth considering that he's with ESPN, and sports is an unusual case. Television shows and movies don't have nearly the timeliness factor sports broadcasting has. If I see guardians of the galaxy a week after it comes out it doesn't really matter, but there's very little point in watching 'the game' even a day after the fact (unless there's some exceptional reason to). So in some regards, they do have kind of a…

Sports is indeed, far and away, the biggest driver of cable subscriptions. Sports is also the reason why most cable packages are so expensive. Licensing sports costs a fortune, and networks who license sports turn around and charge big fees to cable companies. Their parent companies also bundle their other networks with the sports network, so as to raise rates for all of their networks. This is why ESPN is the most profitable network on all of TV (broadcast or cable), and one of the most important jewels in Disney's crown. Disney would probably sell off ABC before it would sell off ESPN.

Re: TV is increasingly for old people

#22

Post by digikata » Sat, Sep 06, 2014, 5:46 PM UTC

bronbron wrote: post #15

Sambdala wrote: post #7

> And he’s part of one camp that believes young professionals and students will eventually become cable subscribers. > “We suspect they will trade up,” Skipper said. The implication here seems to be that cable is the premium/preferred product, and people will switch to it once they can afford a cable subscription. That does not at all strike me as being the case in this day and age. The internet, and piracy, created…

It's worth considering that he's with ESPN, and sports is an unusual case. Television shows and movies don't have nearly the timeliness factor sports broadcasting has. If I see guardians of the galaxy a week after it comes out it doesn't really matter, but there's very little point in watching 'the game' even a day after the fact (unless there's some exceptional reason to). So in some regards, they do have kind of a…

If you're someone who doesn't watch sports, you also might think about how much a cable subscription subsidizes those who do. If sports franchises ever start moving off cable, the cable industry is in for a pretty rapid readjustment. I assume the sports franchises know and leverage this in their negotiations with cable companies.

The whole LA Dodgers fiasco may be a leading edge indicator of a breakdown between franchises and cable operators. There have to be some conversations within sports teams wondering if they would make more money going direct to fans. On the other hand, it might make both sides more resolved to cooperate for a bit longer in negotiations.

Re: TV is increasingly for old people

#23

Post by sliverstorm » Sat, Sep 06, 2014, 5:47 PM UTC

bellerocky wrote: post #10

I don't understand why older people hang on to less optimal way of doing things? I hope I never do this. Being able to watch content at any time you want is better than having to schedule your time around broadcasts. No advertisements is better than having to endure advertisement breaks in the middle of a show. Same with newspapers. You can't share newspaper content easily. You can't click on a word and Google it or…

Because people tend to stick with what they are used to.

Re: TV is increasingly for old people

#24

Post by moggflunkies » Sat, Sep 06, 2014, 5:48 PM UTC

tedks wrote: post #9

themartorana wrote: post #2

The plethora and popularity of reality TV doesn't say much about our older generations. Sarcasm aside, the relative popularities of Fox News on TV and Vice on the Internet are pretty good examples of what this article is talking about.

In my experience, only people above 30 watch reality shows. Virtually all reality shows are for old people. Real Housewives, everything on HGTV, everything on the History and Discovery channel... the only network that's associated with youth that has reality shows I can think of is MTV, but even that is probably more watched by aging men trying desperately to relive their cool days.

Teen Mom, Laguna Beach, Awkward... these shows are for people above 30?

Re: TV is increasingly for old people

#25

Post by Sambdala » Sat, Sep 06, 2014, 5:52 PM UTC

bronbron wrote: post #15

Sambdala wrote: post #7

> And he’s part of one camp that believes young professionals and students will eventually become cable subscribers. > “We suspect they will trade up,” Skipper said. The implication here seems to be that cable is the premium/preferred product, and people will switch to it once they can afford a cable subscription. That does not at all strike me as being the case in this day and age. The internet, and piracy, created…

It's worth considering that he's with ESPN, and sports is an unusual case. Television shows and movies don't have nearly the timeliness factor sports broadcasting has. If I see guardians of the galaxy a week after it comes out it doesn't really matter, but there's very little point in watching 'the game' even a day after the fact (unless there's some exceptional reason to). So in some regards, they do have kind of a…

Outside the US, expats (or anyone, I just mostly know expats who use it) who follow US sports can subscribe to streaming packages that are far superior to watching it over broadcast.

I think you can even switch between different commentators as well as a few other options.

As for myself, I'm sure plenty of money from my local taxes, once I move back to the US, will go to subsidizing pro sports teams. I don't particularly feel like doing so with a cable subscription as well.

Re: TV is increasingly for old people

#26

Post by WalterBright » Sat, Sep 06, 2014, 5:59 PM UTC

Sambdala wrote: post #7

> And he’s part of one camp that believes young professionals and students will eventually become cable subscribers. > “We suspect they will trade up,” Skipper said. The implication here seems to be that cable is the premium/preferred product, and people will switch to it once they can afford a cable subscription. That does not at all strike me as being the case in this day and age. The internet, and piracy, created…

Ironically, even when I own the DVD I'll still watch the Netflix streaming version, simply because it is more convenient.

Re: TV is increasingly for old people

#27

Post by mikegioia » Sat, Sep 06, 2014, 6:03 PM UTC

sparkzilla wrote: post #20

My kids spend all their time on YouTube. They would rather watch video on their phone than sit down in front of a TV. This has big implications for all media, not just broadcast TV.

I don't have kids, but I noticed my cousins would all watch TV up until age 12/13 when they were allowed to get phones. As soon as they got phones, they abandoned the TV. Snapchat, instagram, netflix, games, and even hulu are now the only media they consume! I'm honestly excited to see what the TV landscape looks like in 10 years when these kids are 22-25.

Re: TV is increasingly for old people

#28

Post by iconjack » Sat, Sep 06, 2014, 6:05 PM UTC

bellerocky wrote: post #10

I don't understand why older people hang on to less optimal way of doing things? I hope I never do this. Being able to watch content at any time you want is better than having to schedule your time around broadcasts. No advertisements is better than having to endure advertisement breaks in the middle of a show. Same with newspapers. You can't share newspaper content easily. You can't click on a word and Google it or…

Because the aggravation of obtaining, understanding, and maintaining a computer + internet connection is not worth the trouble.

I hear people claim that once everything's set up, it's easy. That's not my experience. Every time I go home I've got to deal with issues with my mom's computer and internet. They're never her fault, and sometimes they're difficult to solve, even for a tech person.

Watching video online is great when everything goes right. But it seems like a good portion of the country has fairly lousy internet, which makes videos sputter or stop. People who grew up with the ease and reliability of tv have a hard time stomaching these kinds of problems.

Also, when you get older, you don't necessarily want more choices. Your mind is tired and cluttered, you just want to relax in front of the tv and not have to sort through an infinite array of choices or deal with technical issues.

Re: TV is increasingly for old people

#29

Post by bryanlarsen » Sat, Sep 06, 2014, 6:08 PM UTC

bronbron wrote: post #15

Sambdala wrote: post #7

> And he’s part of one camp that believes young professionals and students will eventually become cable subscribers. > “We suspect they will trade up,” Skipper said. The implication here seems to be that cable is the premium/preferred product, and people will switch to it once they can afford a cable subscription. That does not at all strike me as being the case in this day and age. The internet, and piracy, created…

It's worth considering that he's with ESPN, and sports is an unusual case. Television shows and movies don't have nearly the timeliness factor sports broadcasting has. If I see guardians of the galaxy a week after it comes out it doesn't really matter, but there's very little point in watching 'the game' even a day after the fact (unless there's some exceptional reason to). So in some regards, they do have kind of a…

I recognize that I'm in the minority, but tape delay is the only way that I'll watch sports. I don't really mind the commercials, but fast forwarding through them let's me watch a 3 hour game in 2 hours -- that's significant. It also makes it easier to avoid the dreadful commentators like Don Cherry.

That doesn't really change your point though. I typically start watching after about an hour -- I'm highly unlikely to watch the game if I've already seen the score in the newspaper.

Paying >$100 a month to watch a couple of games a month sure is expensive, though. It'd be cheaper to watch them live, if watching them live wouldn't require plane tickets most of the time...

Re: TV is increasingly for old people

#30

Post by userbmf » Sat, Sep 06, 2014, 6:09 PM UTC

Is this simply because regular TV has advertising and advertisers want to target the people with the most money?

There is a huge gap in wealth between generations thanks to debt via housing and education. Are advertisers putting pressure on program makers to make shows that appeal to old people? I'd guess they've done a lot of thinking on this.