- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 10/26/11 at 2:54 pm to Big Kat
Part of the problem that the LHN is going to face is that the cable network business model is going to fail in the next 5 to 10 years.
Internet delivery of a-la-carte networks is the future.
If you know anything about the way cable networks offer their channels to cable companies, then you'll know how it can't survive. Here's a post I made months ago on the LHN's business model:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well, with the business model that cable networks and cable providers have set up, the number of viewers doesn't matter all that much, at least not to the point of it being the primary issue.
The LHN's primary goal right now is to get on as many cable providers as possible. They would then get x amount of dollars per subscriber for that company.
For instance, if Cox Cable in the NOLA area picks up the LHN, and say Cox has 500,000 subscribers in that area (I have no idea how many they actually have), and say the LHN charges $0.75 per month per subscriber, then the LHN would get $375,000 every month, from just that one cable company. Extrapolate that to many companies all over Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, etc... and you have big bucks coming in, and that's not even counting advertising revenue.
FWIW, I don't know what the LHN per subscriber fee is going to be.
But this gives you an idea of how the network can be feasible.
Also, this demonstrates how shitty the cable TV business model is for the consumer.
But the good news is that its a dying model due to the internet and other delivery methods, and the real question is whether or not the LHN can survive in an "a la carte" type environment.
ETA: Obviously, if the cable company puts it in a "sports tier" then only subscribers to that "sports tier" would count towards the number of subscribers that pay the fee.
Found this chart from 2009 that details the subscriber fees for many networks. If you have cable and you get any of these channels, then you are paying these fees every month whether you watch them or not:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But like I said, that model is unsustainable. Technology is changing that, and rapidly.
One of the reasons people may not be yelling and screaming to their cable provider about getting the LHN is that they can probably easily do a google search for "college football games live streaming" and find a site that has a pirated stream available.
They will need to adjust to an internet model, and they will find when they do that it ain't worth 300 million.
Internet delivery of a-la-carte networks is the future.
If you know anything about the way cable networks offer their channels to cable companies, then you'll know how it can't survive. Here's a post I made months ago on the LHN's business model:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well, with the business model that cable networks and cable providers have set up, the number of viewers doesn't matter all that much, at least not to the point of it being the primary issue.
The LHN's primary goal right now is to get on as many cable providers as possible. They would then get x amount of dollars per subscriber for that company.
For instance, if Cox Cable in the NOLA area picks up the LHN, and say Cox has 500,000 subscribers in that area (I have no idea how many they actually have), and say the LHN charges $0.75 per month per subscriber, then the LHN would get $375,000 every month, from just that one cable company. Extrapolate that to many companies all over Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, etc... and you have big bucks coming in, and that's not even counting advertising revenue.
FWIW, I don't know what the LHN per subscriber fee is going to be.
But this gives you an idea of how the network can be feasible.
Also, this demonstrates how shitty the cable TV business model is for the consumer.
But the good news is that its a dying model due to the internet and other delivery methods, and the real question is whether or not the LHN can survive in an "a la carte" type environment.
ETA: Obviously, if the cable company puts it in a "sports tier" then only subscribers to that "sports tier" would count towards the number of subscribers that pay the fee.
Found this chart from 2009 that details the subscriber fees for many networks. If you have cable and you get any of these channels, then you are paying these fees every month whether you watch them or not:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But like I said, that model is unsustainable. Technology is changing that, and rapidly.
One of the reasons people may not be yelling and screaming to their cable provider about getting the LHN is that they can probably easily do a google search for "college football games live streaming" and find a site that has a pirated stream available.
They will need to adjust to an internet model, and they will find when they do that it ain't worth 300 million.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News