# more CBS threats ..will go subsciption if PVRs catch on



## Guest (Dec 17, 2002)

http://www.industryclick.com/micros...id=5948&siteid=15&magazineid=158&srtype=1#cbs

CBS threatens to go to a subscription model if PVRs catch on and people zap commercials.....


----------



## MrAkai (Aug 10, 2002)

I think of all the networks, CBS is the one I woulnd't mind paying 5 or so bucks a month for commercial free.

At least CBS is working on changing the model, rather than suing pvrs our of existance (although they may be doing that too).

The RIAA's refusal to change the "screw everyone but the RIAA" business model is why they went after napster/etc as enemies rather than new revenue sources.


----------



## Ryan (Apr 24, 2002)

I'm fine with a subscription model for OTA /commercial TV, but the limitation of the local market should be lifted. If I'm paying for it, I should at least be provided with my local feed, plus an alternate set of feeds.

They claim it's all about the local advertisers, right? Well, they're admitting I'm not really watching the ads if I'm using a PVR, hence the subscription cost.

However, the advertising and marketing people really need a slap. They are dillusional if they think the can hold back progress , especially with broadcast spectrum that really belongs to the citizens. Things change, markets evolve; they should be grateful they've had the public forced to feed at the slop trough of broadcast TV for decades. Now when the public gains a little independance and self control, the mass media gets all pissy?


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

I don't know what has happened to CBS the past few days but they have seemed to turned Anti Consumer. From their remarks that they are going to stop broadcasting in HD because there is no copy protection in place for over the air broadcasts. And then we have these stupid remarks which basicly makes me want to remove the CBS from my channel scans.

I think it's about time the citizens rally for their rights and let's end this BS with the RIAA and MPAA.


----------



## gcutler (Mar 23, 2002)

Do they think they can survive as an HBO? They will Alienate their viewers, I wish they would so they could be the "New Coke" of TV.


----------



## bogi (Apr 3, 2002)

I hope they do cause that will mean their terestrial band can be used for broadband


----------



## bryan27 (Apr 1, 2002)

Gee, doesn't the Tiffiny Network look a little tarnished. I hope they don't think they are going to get away with scrambling OTA signals. One of the OTA DTV signals on a channel has to remain Free and Unscrambled. I'm sure if they make the Free Signal an Info/Promo Channel for the scrambled signals the FCC would rule that it isn't serving the public interest.


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

I do not think the big networks would survive at all as pay networks. I have news for them, the vast majority of thier audience would not pay to watch them at the rate they would need to get rid of advertising. Who is going to pay $40/month additional to the cable/satellite bill for the big 5 networks? I watch 3-4 hours a week of "network" TV, most the shows I watch now are not on the big 5 networks.

What they really want is legistlation to make it illegal to have a PVR being able to skip a commercial. Probably want a speed limit like 2x on fast forward.


----------



## Bob Haller (Mar 24, 2002)

Honestly networks have a huge problem. Higher end customers get PVrs, skip commercials, less add revenue their business model is about to crumble.

Now just HOW they pay the bills will be a interesting problem. No doubt building the commercal into the shows, but that causes all sorts of syndication troubles later on.

OK you the president of CBS. How are YOU going to make it profitable?


----------



## markh (Mar 24, 2002)

Well, it looks like they want to charge for programming but I didn't see him saying they wouldn't still have commercials. 

I don't get it, they're not concerned about VCRs but PVRs scare them silly. Right now there are a lot more people skipping ads with their VCRs than PVRs. Are the networks substantially harmed more by skipping ads with PVRs? Maybe they just want to nip it in the bud like they didn't way back when with VCRs.

PS: I know PVRs are better than VCRs, skipping commercials is something they can both do. I just don't get their paranoia about this whole thing.


----------



## KenIdaho (Dec 4, 2002)

To answers Bob Haller’s question on how I would pay the bills if I were the president of CBS. I would first reduce the costs. The network’s pay stars millions a year for very little work. If they were paid more in line with the revenue the produce if the revenue for the ads goes down (the show becomes less popular their pay gets cut) A commission pay system for actors. There are millions of people who have worked on commission the producers and actors could also.


----------



## Guest (Dec 18, 2002)

I have news for CBS and the other Gang of Four networks. Even when viewing your shows in real time, I don't watch the commercials. The breaks are so long I can actually go do other tasks such as showering, washing dishes, get a meal, use the facility, or take the dog out to do his duty.

But that might be a good thing for the advertisers that I dont watch the ads. I tend to question why a product, if it's any good, has to be advertised -- other than to let it be known when it's initially introduced. Most of the small things I buy is based on reading labels. Larger-ticket items are researched via Internet articles and user groups.

If we can subscribe to a commercial-free CBS, does that mean that the existing hour-long shows excised of the current ads and other excretia, will require only 35 minutes to watch?


----------



## Eyedox (Nov 25, 2002)

Go ahead CBS (Continually Broadcasting Survivor) ... your idle threats are about as believable as that crap you pass off as REAL TV like Survivor which you run 5 nights a week and again on the Early Show and again during Letterman.
Your only original show that doesnt suck is CSI and we dont mean the miami one.
So if you go subscription, I hope you don't mind losing 30 million viewers, because frankly, your network isnt worth the cost of a magazine subscription. What a bunch of Crybabies ... threatening HDTV and now PVR. Screw you!

PS: We don't watch your stupid commercials now, so PVR changes nothing. I just dont have to get up and leave the room for 10 minutes six times an hour.


----------



## Randy_B (Apr 23, 2002)

#1 The number of PVRs in the market is insignificant and is having NO impact on tehir revenues. #2 I never watched commercials before I had the PVRs.

I would subscribe if NO commercials.


----------



## Bob Haller (Mar 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Randy_B _
> *#1 The number of PVRs in the market is insignificant and is having NO impact on tehir revenues. #2 I never watched commercials before I had the PVRs.
> 
> I would subscribe if NO commercials. *


The number of PVRs is about to EXPLODE! 3 years from now EVERYONE will have one. Thats what CBS is worried about.


----------



## gcutler (Mar 23, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Bob Haller _
> *The number of PVRs is about to EXPLODE! 3 years from now EVERYONE will have one. Thats what CBS is worried about. *


Bob,

I don't think the momentum is quite there yet. Without the DBS world, the # of PVRs growth would be much flatter. Until the growth is independant of the DBS world, the explosion probably won't occur. Too many people "Don't Get It"


----------



## The Tophinator (May 13, 2002)

If they don't want to play take their ball( license) and send them home. I give this threat as much credit as Sean Penn running off to Iraq to end the conflict.


----------



## belsokar (Jul 2, 2002)

i believe these threats to be pretty baseless....as it has already been said, millions of people record shows on vcrs, and fast forward through commercials...whether you have a pvr, vcr, or whatever...commercials will always most likely be viewed by those watching a show live...

like everything else in life, advertising will adapt to newer technology...perhaps commercial spots will be shorter, and more frequently used...perhaps we'll see more product placement during programming...

in the meantime, CBS is whining about the whole situation, in order to perhaps slow down the PVR invasion...or push its own agenda...

as for the person suggesting that legislation be pushed that protects commercials from being "skipped"...on top of that, we might as well create legislation that makes turning down the volume on your tv during a commercial illegal...while we're at it, maybe we can draft some legislation that requires some sort of gadget that locks us into our seats, straps our head down, and forces our eyes open during commercials...just a thought...


----------



## Lyle_JP (Apr 22, 2002)

> I just dont have to get up and leave the room for 10 minutes six times an hour.


By my math that means you would never actually be _in_ the room.


----------



## raj2001 (Nov 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by gcutler _
> *
> 
> Bob,
> ...


On the contrary. Cable companies are now offering PVR's, and dual tuner ones at that. Once it catches on (I predict not too far from now) PVR's will be standard. TiVo and Replay are selling good this christmas, and DirecTV is pushing TiVo, and Echostar is pushing their PVR's. It's only a matter of time before advertisers see that the PVR's are eating into their revenue stream.

But for the networks, all they have to do is cut the pay of the overpaid high school drop out bad attitude movie stars, writers, producers and directors.


----------



## DarrellP (Apr 24, 2002)

If the networks whine loud enough, you know what will happen: no more skip forward. Hell, we can't even skip past the FBI warning on a DVD and some of the pre-show trailers. It's all in the software and you know someone is going to try and enforce it. Then they will program the skip back button for 30 seconds, not 10.


----------



## Guest (Feb 6, 2003)

Just as a side note, not all viewers skip all commercials. I find myself regularly stopping and rewinding back to the commercials and watching them again. I have actually used my PVR to save a certain commercial on occasion because of a product that I was interested in buying.
Whereas if I were recording with a VCR I would not be able to pause a show while I was recording it and go back to get the information I desired. I would then need to wait until the recording were completed so as not to disturb the program being recorded.

I have recently bought 5 or 6 products just because I was able to get the information when I desired to have the information.which were not measley products such as food products or cleaning supplies

i.e. new computer, cell phone service etc...... Not to mention that I also recorded several of the commercials from the SUPER BOWL and others to VCR. 

So from my own stand point as I see it , I think that this move by broadcasters would a very stupid move to say the least......YMMV


----------



## RandyAB (Apr 4, 2002)

For what little I watch on Network TV, I could just wait a couple of years so I could get the complete season on DVD, then it would be commerical free for sure.


----------



## lee635 (Apr 17, 2002)

The networks are an important source of original programming. You look at how much new material they put out, then look at the cable channels. Other than news channels, what cable channel is programming the entire prime time slate, 7 days a week, with original material. I know they rerun episodes of, for example, Friends on NBC, but it's this year's shows, not synicated shows.

I think some of the problem is the how broadcast tv has evolved. 
What if they showed a lot fewer commercials, but charged more per commercial?

Or have a single sponsor for a program?

Or, do I dare say it run the ads during the show at the bottom of the screen ala TNN :evilgrin:


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

With all the wining that CBS has been doing lately they should just do what they want... Become a network of 24 hour infomercials in HDTV... Yes look at the sparkle of the diamondellet ring in HiDef... No need to worry about the theft of HDTV any more, no need to worry about PVRs, no need to play for expensive sports and series... just cash in 24 hours a day 7 days a week.


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

LOL.....I can just see it now.....Cubic Zirconia infomercials on the Tiffany Network.......all in glorious HDTV.....


----------



## RichW (Mar 29, 2002)

I have no problem with CBS going to a subscription service, BUT NOT ON THE OTA CHHANNELS. These frequencies do not belong to networks or even local stations. The spectrum was set aside by teh American people for FREE TV. If they don't want to supply programming on that basis, they should turn their broadcast licenses back in and let someone else have them.


----------



## raj2001 (Nov 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by bogi _
> *I hope they do cause that will mean their terestrial band can be used for broadband  *


6MHz isn't an awful lot of space.


----------



## DarrellP (Apr 24, 2002)

Those of us recording CBS on our Dish PVR's are already paying a subscription fee. Granted, it's only $.86/month, but it's still a subscription.


----------



## Cyclone (Jul 1, 2002)

They funny thing is that this is only important now because CBS wears the HDTV Crown. In a few months to a year, there will be much more HDTV content on the air. CBS won't be able to pull off this threat.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

The answer is simple. Make the commercials interesting or entertaining to watch... like the Victoria's Secret spots. Then I'll watch 'em!


----------



## DarrellP (Apr 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Nick _
> *The answer is simple. Make the commercials interesting or entertaining to watch... like the Victoria's Secret spots. Then I'll watch 'em!  *


I agree Nick, especially now that the Dish PVR's have Slo-Mo & Frame-by-Frame advance, those commercials are knock outs.:lol:


----------



## invaliduser88 (Apr 23, 2002)

I don't see CBS's threats panning out. They would essentially be screwing all of their local affiliates and they can not afford to do that period.


----------



## raj2001 (Nov 2, 2002)

> _Originally posted by invaliduser88 _
> *I don't see CBS's threats panning out. They would essentially be screwing all of their local affiliates and they can not afford to do that period. *


Yes, I think they are just empty threats. I will continue using my TiVo PVR as normal 

Even if they do go subscription, there is very little that I watch on CBS anyway.


----------



## dtcarson (Jan 10, 2003)

> _Originally posted by raj2001 _
> *
> 
> Yes, I think they are just empty threats. I will continue using my TiVo PVR as normal
> ...


See ya bye! I can't think of the last time I watched CBS. This is like the RIAA saying P2P is affecting record sales, when in reality, the reason people aren't buying as many records is that the music sucks. Besides, doesn't CBS have a lot of those 'reality' shows, which cost about 1/10th what a 'real' show costs to make? So with the growing focus on those shows, their profit margin, even counting lower commercial rates, should be the same or growing.


----------



## Doug E (Jul 6, 2002)

The airwaves belong to us, the viewers. The FCC may grant use of the frequencies to the broadcasters, but there is no way they can begin to charge for their programming. If CBS is PO'd let them give up their spectrum and network affiliates and go satellite exclusively. I for one would not miss any of their programming. Except for the NFL, which I doubt they would be able to carry then since they would not be truly OTA. Enter ABC or NBC to pick that contract up.


----------



## DaYooper (Jan 7, 2003)

I would say at least 25% of the TV programming I watch is on CBS, so if it came right down to it I would probably pay for CBS. I already pay for the 5 Superstations which I watch in total about at much at the single CBS channel.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

The three shows I watch on CBS are CSI, Survivor, and The Amazing Race.


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

Did anyone see Andy Rooney's take on this last night. I was rolling on the floor laughing.

Too bad no one at CBS is listening to him, he was right in what he said.


----------



## mnassour (Apr 23, 2002)

Let 'em do it. Go ahead. Break a leg. Rock and roll!


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

I read in a Popular Science magazine four years ago about High Definition and Digital television in the future and it said that there would be a number of channels each network would offer, one being free and the rest would be subscription based and that they may choose to have one station in best format or three in a less quality.


----------



## DoyleS (Oct 21, 2002)

Half of the reason the show is even on my PVR is that there was something on the other channel that I wanted to watch more than there show. Tonight is a good example. I will watch The Practice in HD and 3rd Watch goes to the PVR. Tomorrow, NYPD Blues gets watched in HD and Kingpin gets kicked to the PVR. Half of the time on the HD channels in the Bay Area there aren't any commercials. There is a logo or a public service spot and that is it. In the case of a Football game, I do record them and watch them in shall we say, an abreviated mode. I don't even want to watch the halftime let alone the plethora of commercials. Football season is not bad weather time in Northern California. 

..Doyle


----------

