Google executive chairman says YouTube has already displaced broadcast TV

Discussion in 'hardware' started by SweX, May 6, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
  2. guest

    guest Guest

    I'm not too surprised. I've already killed my TV and just watch YouTube or playing games on my spare time. YouTube is just so flexible, you can pick what to watch and when to do that. No more predefined TV schedule tyranny FTW!! :D
     
  3. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    http://www.telecompaper.com/news/youtube-set-to-announce-subscription-channels-report--941608
     
  4. Mman79

    Mman79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Posts:
    2,016
    Location:
    North America
    Yes no more...until a takedown letter arrives and you find yourself a few shows short. Youtube is a terrible "replacement" to TV unless you want to relive the glory days of MTV or somehow enjoy the random ramblings of teenage girls and "viral clips". Then again, nothing will replace TV so long as streaming companies have to deal with U.S licensing, not even Netflix, who loses more content than it gains.

    Schmidt continues to show with that statement that he's either slowly losing touch with reality or he believes in Google way too much.
     
  5. guest

    guest Guest

    I don't think so. You see, Google make lots of $$$ each day with their services, including YouTube. It'd be an epic fail if they decided to limit/restrict/whatever unpleasant fantasy that we might imagine for them to destroy YouTube, just like Vimeo. It just made no sense at all. o_O

    Well, in the end, time will tell. But for now, this *is* the reality and the chance for YT to replace the TVs is pretty big (or should I say, already replaced :argh: ).

    Sometimes the boundary of dreams and reality is so thin that it doesn't matter anymore. ;)

    I've heard that paid subscription some time ago. Not sure how that will work, but I have a strong feeling that lots of videos will get banned. Oh God may forbid. :gack:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2013
  6. Mman79

    Mman79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Posts:
    2,016
    Location:
    North America
    What does it matter how much Google makes with their services each day? They don't own the content and don't have any control over what they're allowed to stream unless the content companies agree to deal. Subscription channels have been talked about for a while now, and the plan thus far is to have user-generated content..users who will get charged to put their content up and users who will get charged to hopefully sit through something other than the "norm" on Youtube.
     
  7. guest

    guest Guest

    Ads?

    I absolutely have no idea about the subscription mechanism, but I just don't think it'll be that simple, honestly. :doubt:
     
  8. Mman79

    Mman79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Posts:
    2,016
    Location:
    North America
    I might not have explained myself well enough. I mean, what does their financial situation have to do with whether or not Youtube could replace TV? Money will buy the rights to stream TV, most certainly. But that doesn't mean those rights will necessarily result in a good experience for end users. Netflix has the rights to stream TV, but it only has the rights to certain shows long out of syndication and half-seasons. They were better with movies, much better, until Starz bailed on them and now Warner has stripped out most of its older content as well.



    Well, that was the gist of the original plan. I haven't heard much in a while on how that is going. Google seems to be concentrating on music streaming competition at the moment. User-generated TV content has the potential to take people by storm, or it has the potential to completely blow up in faces. But, so does major network TV. I'm just saying that if the "norm" of Youtube is what is to be expected from these subscription channels, it's going to be pretty pathetic, imho. What Google charges these content creators will make a world of difference as well.
     
  9. guest

    guest Guest

    I'll admit that I misunderstood your post. :p But still, ads could be the matter. It's *not* about YouTube could replace TV, it's about YouTube wants to replace TV. It's pretty much like:

    YouTube --> Shows/videos --> Ads --> $$$ --> Big Uncle Googley's pocket --> YouTube

    It goes like in a circle. It might work, it might not. Depends on the marketing strategy. But if they can implement that properly, it's more than likely that YT would kill TV for the reasons that I've mentioned. And TBH, by default* YT is more convenient for most people than TVs. And that's what Google is seeing right now, a chance. And (again) if they implement that properly, it would benefit us. No need to buy a separated TV anymore, just your PC monitor. :D

    *assuming that Google didn't screw things up.

    Music streaming has potentials, especially for teenagers. That's smart. :D They better not screwing it up though. Completely super-duper-ultra-omega-wonderful-magnificent-epic-fail for Google/YouTube if they charged people just to watch/upload yet another "Harlem Shake meme" or "the shortest video on youtube". :argh:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 6, 2013
  10. Mman79

    Mman79 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Posts:
    2,016
    Location:
    North America
    I don't think content holders are really going to let Youtube replace TV. They're already fighting tooth and nail in court against streaming services like Aereo. For some reason, music labels are more understanding than the TV conglomerates are about the digital age (although believe you me, labels aren't happy whatsoever about Spotify and its kin either) We're going to have to see what happens of course.

    Google definitely wants into the streaming music business, but, the thing is that that business isn't guaranteed to last forever. The biggest reason it took off like it did was mobile and there's really no profit to be made in it. Google can handle that because they've got the advertising business giving them the money. Spotify, Pandora (who won't last another year or two I'm willing to bet), Rdio, these guys aren't making profit and may never make one themselves. The problem with the business is that nobody wins in the long term. Short term it's great for end users and bands wanting to get their names out there. Long term, streaming companies barely cover operating costs, record labels never make the amount of cash they want, artists may as well hang it up, and users never "own" anything they're listening to and lose when these companies shutter. Rdio refuses to talk much about their business, I suspect I know why.
     
  11. Wroll

    Wroll Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2011
    Posts:
    549
    Location:
    Italy
    To me the TV is dead. I only watch MotoGP & F1 on TV because it's full only with crap I don't care.
     
  12. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    http://www.digitaltveurope.net/53521/google-plans-youtube-video-subscriptions/
     
  13. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    I'm curious to find out what it is exactly that you can find on YouTube in terms of, TV series, programs from national/local TV channels etc etc.... Or what type of content is it exactly that you are watching on YouTube that you also could have seen on your TV. Since you're talking about the "replacement" as if all the content on your TV is already available on YouTube, wich I find hard to believe at the moment. :)

    IMO if YouTube has already taken over then YouTube would "broadcast" the Ice Hockey World Championships that are taking place in Sweden/Finland right now, where do you find that on YouTube? Or Golf, Football, or whatever sport that you would like to watch. They don't have that kind of content since it costs a lot of money. And no one likes to watch that kind of content infront of a computer monitor. TV is the right platform for that :thumb:

    Haha LOL! Well, do you really think that I will sit in my chair and watch Golf PGA/European Tour for 4 hours? Haha no, no way that will work.

    Edit: BTW :https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=346892
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2013
  14. guest

    guest Guest

    In my place, it's the other way around. I can watch more things on YT than all of the TV stations could offer, especially when they're not too creative about the programs. Oh hai, talent hunts. :D

    Time will tell. :D I hope TV Tokyo will be broadcasted on YT, though I won't put much hope on that.
     
  15. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    I see, I think that's another reason as to why Youtube can't take over all over the world, the content differs very much from USA, Europe, Asia, Africa, not the same content everywhere, some is national content only, some is international etc....:)



    Nothing special on TV Tokyo from what I can see here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TV_Tokyo :D
     
  16. guest

    guest Guest

  17. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    That's something I will never understand why it is so addictive to people, maybe I should start watching too :D :D
     
  18. guest

    guest Guest

    If you decided to do that, be careful. There are a few instances that they'll make you feel guilty. What has been seen cannot be unseen. ;)
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.