NBC and CBS unveiled separate plans to make some of their prime-time shows available for viewers to watch at their leisure — without commercials — for 99 cents an episode, throwing open the door to “on-demand” television.
The back-to-back announcements on Monday from NBC Universal, a unit of General Electric Co., and Viacom Inc.-owned CBS, came weeks after Walt Disney Co.’s ABC began offering commercial-free Internet downloads of its biggest hits, “Lost” and “Desperate Housewives,” for $1.99 a piece.
The two latest TV deals add CBS and NBC shows such as “CSI: Crime Scene Investigation” and “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit” to the mix of programs networks are scrambling to deliver outside of traditional broadcasts.
All three ventures highlight growing efforts by the major commercial networks to shake up “old media” models and expand their avenues of distribution.
But the NBC and CBS ventures are the first to give viewers access to several prime-time broadcast offerings on a next-day, on-demand basis through their television sets, as opposed to a personal computer or portable digital device like iPod. And viewers do not have to record shows in advance.
Both launch early next year, with NBC programs distributed through satellite broadcaster DirecTV Group and CBS through cable giant Comcast Corp.
It took Apple and ABC to shove the other networks into the water. The interesting part is that they’re now willing to consider a commercial-free business model. The predictable bit is that they were afraid to be the innovator.
It would be interesting to know what kind of feedback the affiliates have been giving the networks about this idea.
I wonder what this will do to Tivo?
Brenda Helverson, the affiliates are dead. I think about 85% of people watch TV from cable or satellite. The major networks could easily dump their affiliates and start their own cable/satellite channels and still reach the majority of viewers.
What I’m curious about is the DRM on these downloaded TV shows. And what format?! If I’m going to pay a buck I’m going to want to make a back up of it, watch it on ever computer in my house, and transfer it to a portable device.
Couple of things I see screwy about this:
#1 NBC narrowly beat CBS to the punch by announcing its tie-in first. Under its plan, select shows from NBC Universal’s flagship network, NBC, and its cable networks will be made available for on-demand viewing to homes equipped with a new DirecTV digital video recorder (DVR).
So you need to have a DVR to be able to watch the shows pay-per-view? So why not record them like, say, you do currently? So does that mean cable/satellite companies will start charging you to record content?
#2 According to a similar article on Yahoo News, CBS will still include commercials in its pay-per-view shows. So you have to pay to be subjected to commercials. Thats not nice.
I like the idea but it’s still priced too high.
What do the affiliates think? The ABC affiliates wrote a nasty letter to ABC about the iPod deal. I in turn wrote a nasty letter to the affiliates suggesting they . It seems and are creating their own iPod content now.
What I don’t understand is why can’t they just use the RSS feed/Podcast model?
You could even offer it for free and insert some commercials. I’m sure some technology could be developed to insert a different commercial each time the file is downloaded. They could even be tailored to who they think is downloading the episode.
Actually, I think the show creators should do this and knock the network out of the loop. Maybe with this model I could get more episodes of Wonderfalls or Serenity.
You take away the network programming from the affiliates and the affiliates wither and die. When that happens, it won’t be long before the networks fade away. It’s the strong affiliate presence that helps to keep the major networks going.
And with no affiliates, the CNN’s, MSNBC’s, and all of the other broadcast news outlets also go way. What makes those cable networks viable, is the huge depth of broadcast affiliate participation. Without the network of broadcast affiliates, TV news as we know it goes away. Local TV news, sports, and weather also go away. So don’t look to the local TV outlet to warn you when the tornado is coming, or to raise money for the next disaster relief fund. That will all be gone.
What I don’t understand is that the FCC seems to be hell bent on driving this country to wireless everything, except for broadcasting. There the FCC wants us all on the cable tit for some reason. When the power fails, cable is useless. The phone still works and most local broadcasters are still on the air trying to serve the public.
Be careful what you wish for. Someday you may get it and then realize you didn’t want it.
I’m really interested in this because it tells us how much that networks think they can make off of us in advertising per episode.
$22 per season is pretty good.
Imafish wrote Brenda Helverson, the affiliates are dead.
Yeah? Then maybe you could explain why there are so many more networks and network affiliates than there were 20 years ago. And maybe you could explain the huge amount of money that flows in and out of these networks and affiliates. And then explain why TV stations trade at huge (and increasing) prices.
Have you ever compared network rates to cable rates? Someone is paying a premium for network placement, and even the stupidest company wouldn’t pay to support a dead industry.
Right now, the networks need all of their affiliates. If your scenario was correct, the nets would just cut a deal with the cable companies for direct carriage and stop paying affiliates to carry their programs.
Netwoks and their affiliates may die some day, but right now thay are alove, functioning, and raking in the cash.
While I was drafting my reply, Ben answered my question and Gyro explained everything else. Well put, guys!
“There the FCC wants us all on the cable tit for some reason.”
Could it be because the cable industry has tons of money to pour into Congress?!
“Brenda Helverson” I’ll say it again, only 15%