Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

Game of Thrones' Director Claims Illegal Downloads Don't Matter

Posted on 2/26/13 at 6:51 am
Posted by Byron Bojangles III
Member since Nov 2012
51603 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 6:51 am


quote:

A television director who has helmed Game of Thrones' episodes recently claimed that although Game of Thrones was the most pirated show of 2012, it survives thanks to "cultural buzz."

David Petrarca, who has also directed episodes of Hung and True Blood, made the statement while speaking at the Perth's Writers Festival last weekend, according to The Sydney Morning Herald. He was speaking at a panel focused on the rise of premium cable TV channels as a dominant form of storytelling, and was keen to emphasize the fact that shows like Game of Thrones capitalize on the social commentary they generate.

Petrarca also made the observation that HBO has 26 million subscribers in the US and 60 million worldwide, so really, the cable channel's not doing too badly at all, despite last year's somewhat grim statistic.

More interestingly, Petrarca observed that there was a "false line" between Hollywood and television these days, as "everyone wants to do premium cable now," noting Martin Scorsese's involvement in Boardwalk Empire as a prime example.


[link=(m.ign.com/articles/2013/02/26/game-of-thrones-director-claims-illegal-downloads-dont-matter)]LINK[/link]
This post was edited on 2/26/13 at 6:57 am
Posted by TigerinATL
Member since Feb 2005
61391 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 7:57 am to
quote:

Petrarca also made the observation that HBO has 26 million subscribers in the US and 60 million worldwide, so really, the cable channel's not doing too badly at all, despite last year's somewhat grim statistic.



First, that's a declining subscriber base for HBO. Secondly, things are ok for now. The entertainment industry's war on their customers has created an entire generation of people that both know how to pirate and are completely comfortable with. The only thing that might limit piracy growth is the shift from desktop to mobile devices using the cloud. Fewer home servers running around will probably mean less people doing P2P sharing.
Posted by Tiger in NY
Neptune Beach, FL
Member since Sep 2003
30352 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 8:09 am to
quote:

First, that's a declining subscriber base for HBO.


Yes, but they are able to charge more to equalize things. That is due to the quality of their programming. Moral of the story, make good shows and people will pay to see them.
Posted by cssamerican
Member since Mar 2011
7099 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 8:37 am to
quote:

First, that's a declining subscriber base for HBO.

This could also just be due to a poor economy more than anything else. When money is tight discretionary spending is the first things to go, and in many households premium channels are consider discretionary. I know in my household we eliminated all of the premium channels, except for HBO because it was the only one we perceived a value due to the programing.
Posted by elprez00
Hammond, LA
Member since Sep 2011
29342 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 9:48 am to
quote:

Moral of the story, listen to your customers and people will pay to see them.

FIFY.

Quality programming is only one piece of the puzzle. Conventional Cable TV in its current model is antiquated and will eventually fail because of digital media. The record companies finally figured this out. Its not been that long ago that the war on Napster happened, and despite the record companies perceived "victory", consumers got what they wanted: choices. We no longer have to pay $15-20 to legally buy an album we only want one song for. We can stream music wirelessly. Record companies are catering and embracing the digital download.

The traditional idiots in the movie industry are trying to use the victories won by the recording industry to "have their cake and eat it too." They dont have to combat mainstream pirating like Napster and Limewire, and they are resisting the shift to digital media as wholly as possible. Look at the Netflix fiasco. They saw a system immensely popular with consumers that threatened the traditional model, so they tried to rape Netflix with price increases. What they didn't count on was the overwhelming response from consumers. Netflix, stupidly, had no idea how strong they were and should have taken the studios actions to the world of social media and fought.

HBO is actually ahead of the game pushing HBO Go. The format is great, its very reliable, and all of their original content is available. I wouldn't be surprised if HBO is the first premium subscriber to break the cord and start offering online/streaming subscriptions. All it takes is for these distributors to give the consumers what they want and realize the power they really have.
Posted by TK421
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2011
10411 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 10:15 am to
quote:

I wouldn't be surprised if HBO is the first premium subscriber to break the cord and start offering online/streaming subscriptions.


I don't know why premium cable companies haven't done this yet. It is easy money for them.

I would gladly pay for HBO on a monthly basis, especially when shows like Game of Thrones are airing. But I don't want to purchase a 100$ cable package to get to that point.
Posted by elprez00
Hammond, LA
Member since Sep 2011
29342 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 10:21 am to
quote:

I don't know why premium cable companies haven't done this yet. It is easy money for them.

If they did, they could not offer the same subscription rates because the cable providers subsidize some of the studio costs. HBO would either have to raise rates, or bank on getting a shite ton more subscribers. You also have to imagine that the cable companies would lobby the studios hard to give them the Netflix treatment. HBO would have to be ready for a fight.
Posted by weaglebeagle
Alabama
Member since Jan 2011
1559 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 10:23 am to
I basically posted something similar to the last two posts in a thread about how Netflix knew House of Cards would succeed.

I would also gladly pay for a web streaming subscription to HBOGo. I cut cable a few months ago and don't plan on going back. I don't mind paying for programs I enjoy but I'm not willing to pay for a million other things I don't use. I'm more than happy to wait for something on Bluray or find an alternative means to watch it.
Posted by TK421
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2011
10411 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 10:48 am to
quote:

If they did, they could not offer the same subscription rates because the cable providers subsidize some of the studio costs.


This doesn't seem accurate to me, but I know absolutely nothing about how cable television operates. It seems that the only funding cable companies would give HBO is in the form of subscriber fees. I could be very wrong, however.

I would think a rate of 10-15$ a month would provide them with pretty good revenue. But I'm not businessman.



Posted by TigerinATL
Member since Feb 2005
61391 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 11:16 am to
quote:

It seems that the only funding cable companies would give HBO is in the form of subscriber fees. I could be very wrong, however.


But they already have an established subscriber base through the cable companies. You have no guarantee that current HBO subscribers would automatically become HBOGO subscribers. Moving from a reseller model to a direct to consumer model is a big risk. That'd be like Samsung saying "people really like our TVs, let's cut the price but only sell them on Samsung.com" They'd be nuts to go that route. Yeah it might work out, but the risk of it failing is just too great.

IMO what is going to happen is that in another decade or so Roku/Apple/Microsoft/Sony/Google/Amazon will replace the cable companies as the middle man. You'll have an account with whoever manufactures your streaming device and they'll sell you access to NetFlix, HuluPlus, HBOGO, etc. I just don't see the average consumer signing up for every streaming service individually.
This post was edited on 2/26/13 at 11:17 am
Posted by weaglebeagle
Alabama
Member since Jan 2011
1559 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 11:20 am to
Why couldn't they just continue to do both though? Subscriptions on cable\satellite and streaming? I wouldn't imagine that the number of people who would cancel all cable just because they can get hbo go a la carte would be that high. So both sides would win. The cable companies don't really see their business being cut into that much and HBO get's additional revenue it would have otherwise missed out on.
Posted by DVA Tailgater
Bunkie
Member since Jan 2011
2905 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 11:26 am to
The older crowd will continue their cable subscriptions and premium subscriptions.

The younger crowd who are currently just pirating offerings from premium channels would be the ones to subscribe directly from premium services for the convenience of having these services available on their numerous devices anywhere and in the proper high quality format.
Posted by F machine
Member since Jun 2009
11886 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 11:27 am to
quote:

Why couldn't they just continue to do both though?


This is what I'm wondering, too? Just offer both. The people who don't want the switch to online can just watch it through the cable provider while others go online and watch it. Not that hard.

Also, some say TV and Hollywood resist digital, but I don't really agree with that. For most shows you can watch new episodes on Amazon or Itunes the day after while new dvd releases are offered on Amazon and iTunes also.
Posted by TigerinATL
Member since Feb 2005
61391 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 11:40 am to
quote:

Why couldn't they just continue to do both though?


Because their cable partners view independent streaming as a death threat and would start playing hard ball and threaten to cut them off, raise rates, etc. HBO can either maintain the status quo which is very good for them and wait for a time when new middlemen that are more aligned with consumer demand appear (the aforementioned Roku/Apple/MS/etc.) or they can rock the boat and possibly go out of business just so they can be free of the cable companies. They may not be free now but they are well paid and able to do mostly what they want to do.
Posted by TiGeRTeRRoR
Member since Nov 2003
19883 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 12:31 pm to
Trey Parker and Matt Stone have been saying this for 15 years.
Posted by F machine
Member since Jun 2009
11886 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 12:39 pm to
I think if any network could cut ties with cable it would be hbo. You already have millions of people actively paying $10-15 a month for hbo. I would be willing to bet most hbo watchers are fairly young people who would actually watch online if given the chance.
Posted by busbeepbeep
When will then be now?
Member since Jan 2004
18297 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 12:51 pm to
I've bought the blu-ray sets for both seasons so glad there's no hard feelings for the weekly downloads during the season.
Posted by Turbeauxdog
Member since Aug 2004
23098 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 1:04 pm to
Time warner owns hbo I believe, they'd be cannibalizing their own revenue at minimum and losing subscribers who are partly inclined to subscribe for hbo at worst.
Posted by Commandeaux
Zachary
Member since Jul 2009
7253 posts
Posted on 2/26/13 at 2:16 pm to
quote:

elprez00


Wow, I agree with everything you said.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram