Well fukk em' the majors not getting a dime from me...
That’s fair. But then like @Dominic Brehetto said you can’t complain when shyt gets cut homie. I get where you’re coming from though just think it’s the wrong hill to complain from
Well fukk em' the majors not getting a dime from me...
I, personally, wouldnt pay much for network TV, cuz they show selection has been ass for a while. maybe 99 cents a month. for me its to the point where i'd just wanna pick shows or something. shyt even with cable. i only watch the expanse on syfy, all the other shows on there are kinda whatever to me.Counter to that: Netflix and Hulu are bloated in content as well and have a lot of trash. Networks have mandated set of hours to fill so there’s going to be stuff you don’t like just like there’s stuff on Hulu or Netflix or amazon I don’t bother with. So what’s the difference?
Most people I know who say they’ve cut the cord is because they don’t want to pay. It’s got jack and shyt to do with quality or perceived quality and everything to do with cable being outrageous and no one wanting to pay all that when they don’t watch half the channels being presented. Which makes all the sense in the world to me. People want to pick and choose their channels now
That’s fair. But then like @Dominic Brehetto said you can’t complain when shyt gets cut homie. I get where you’re coming from though just think it’s the wrong hill to complain from
I, personally, wouldnt pay much for network TV, cuz they show selection has been ass for a while. maybe 99 cents a month. for me its to the point where i'd just wanna pick shows or something. shyt even with cable. i only watch the expanse on syfy, all the other shows on there are kinda whatever to me.
Impossible to do when you’re an actual network tho that’s the point I’m making. Again unless you convince people to pay for something they’re used to getting for free. And then you’re only appealing to high end clientele.
Like the Wall Street journal can have a paywall for their articles because their clientele, in general, will pay for that. And if you’re in a position where you need WSJ on the reg, then you do what you gotta do for access. But USA Today isn’t doing that. It’s worked for the Washington post and the New York Times but it took a long while for it to work.
The closest we’ve gotten to a steaming network is cbs all access and the main draw there is programming not found on cbs. And as long as local networks have some ownership in those broadcast channels, it’s never going to be just like Netflix or Hulu. Netflix doesn’t have to worry about local news or local sports, or soap operas and talk shows.
I think most of the syfy series should be on netflix, my greatest complaint is that most of the good syfy shows air on netflix anyways...Continuum, Dark Matter, etc etc... Then they end up getting cancelled anyways... I could care less about the major networks cancelling shows it's always the premium cable shows I got a problem with...
It's the same reason why brick and mortar stores keep falling yet Amazon is building physical stores. If you aren't a digital company or you didn't adapt early, you're beat now.
I honestly don't know what advertisers are going to do in the future because so many people under 40 are immune to it and they'll pay 9.99 to not see advertising instead of just buying an digital antenna and watching broadcast TV.
Look at Crackle, it's free and has a pretty good selection for a free service yet barely anyone uses it.
It’ll all go back to the people under 40 who don’t have the means for real. For a lot of us, 9.99 here and 9.99 there ain’t a thing but there’s still people where that shyt matters and is the difference between paying a bill or not. So network tv will always be there because the cost of entry isn’t monthly. Even if you can’t afford cable you can get an antennae and do your thing that way.
Plus, sadly, there are still parts of the US that don’t even have broadband and they’re still going on 56K dial up. That person isn’t streaming shyt. Now if we had broadband around the country? That’d be a different story entirely and then I’m sure the networks would really look at that and figuring out how to capitalize on it. But for political and economic reasons, we aren’t there yet. I’m not sure how it is in other countries tho
Maybe your right. I know people under 40 who are hurting and basically only subscribe to certain streaming services every other month rather than all 12 months.
I didn't even think about areas where people don't have broadband yet. Reminds me of how WWE used to clown people for buying PPVs instead of the Network, when some people's internet can't handle the Network.
I don't have cable so I can't dvr it... I would watch it if it was on netflix or amazon tho...
i hate the anti-bootlegger argument that people use when shows get cancelled
I'm an 80's baby...I used to watch Fresh Prince, the Cosby Show, Martin, NY Undercover, A Different World, etc. for FREE. Those shows got multiple seasons not only because they were great sitcoms, but BECAUSE THEY WERE FREE. If they were on tnt or the Oxygen, they wouldn't have gotten half the viewership and longevity.
Big corporations making these shows virtually inaccessible through rampant greed is why these shows get cancelled...PERIOD. it's ridiculous that for many of these shows, you have to have cable service and a subscription to that particular fukking channel if your cable package doesn't have it (which is common nowadays).
So yea, I'm going to bootleg shows on HBO. fukk it. I'm not paying close to $200 a month for some TV. It's ridiculous. I don't blame anyone for bootlegging these shows at all.
Is it going to be the final season?