as dvrs get more and more popular, fast forwarding through ads becomes more and more prevalent. the
problem with tv ads is:
1) way too many...18 min out of every 60?
2) blocks of ads, which goes along with 1.
how many times do you think people use that 5 minute commercial break on tv to go get a snack, go to
the bathroom, flip to another channel (and maybe stay there) or do something else, effectively
missing most of the ads? compare that to something such as hulu with significantly reduced ads and
runtimes of ~30s (i think the most i've gotten is a 60 second ad). its just not worth going to do
something else in that time, so the ad is more effective.
besides, what does an advertiser lose if i fast forward through an ad that doesn't interest me? why
should i have to sit through an ad that wants me to buy adult diapers or ladies undergarments or
something else i'm not going to buy? if an ad grabs my attention (which is rare whether i watch
part or all of it, but i may be in the minority), i watch it the first time i see it. maybe it
makes me want to buy the product, but thats not likely. will i be any more likely to buy this after
seeing it for the 34th time? probably not. face it guys, your tv advertising dollars are already
90% wasted. forcing uninterested parties to sit through them is not the solution.
[#155852]
Written by: Impervious1 [25/03/2011, 20:34]
hehheh i knew it wasn't gonna get cancelled, i love this show.
[#155853]
Written by: cherry*bombshell* [25/03/2011, 21:16]
woot! that so made my day
[#155857]
Written by: mattdrum [25/03/2011, 22:40]
good news, could this be the end of the "friday night death slot"?
[#155863]
Written by: RodPowermaster [26/03/2011, 03:57]
Quote by ryan8374
downloading doesn't count because advertising is not included. no advertisers, no
funding = canceled.
unless the people downloading here have a nielson box. it doesnt matter.
[#155881]
Written by: lastgateguard [26/03/2011, 13:46]
"i dont get how this show has lived for 4 seasons.. couldnt get past the second season. thought the
story
was always so shitty." yet here you are posting your hate on a forum only fringe fans will read.....
if an ad grabs my attention (which is rare whether i watch
part or all of it, but i may be in the minority), i watch it the first time i see it. maybe it
makes me want to buy the product, but thats not likely. will i be any more likely to buy this after
seeing it for the 34th time? probably not. face it guys, your tv advertising dollars are already
90% wasted. i so very much agree, 80-90% of the time i mute and do something else like talking to
my family on commercials (hope i spelled that right)
i'm glad the show got another season i was afraid it was going to be canceled. fox has a paranoia
with anything less then 5million people watching their shows
nielson box?
[#155894]
Written by: STEvil [26/03/2011, 19:50]
Quote by jeanlucpicard
Quote by tn0
if they were smart they would distribute hd copy freely on the net
including whatever ads
they
wishes , hell those ads would have more coverage than the ones on tv as they would likely be seen in
dozens of countries
what networks are truly afraid of is that everyone will just skip the ads by fast forwarding ...
downloadable content would surely feature some kind of user prohibited operation like with bd and
dvd ... or ads that play constantly during the content itself.
furthermore, networks and studios are afraid that bd and especially dvd sales would take a major hit
if tv shows were being made available as free downloads in hd ... studios would soon have to face
the fact that extras on dvd's are not worth the actual extra money.
and we pay attention to ads as it is?
[#155905]
Written by: Tn0 [27/03/2011, 03:46]
Quote by stevil
and we pay attention to ads as it is?
nope , but once in a while you get a smart ad , one out of 3000 though , but that's not what's
important,
brands , companys, .... do use ads to get exposure on their brand / product / ... and pray that they
will get some return from it , and the way the market is setup , the more people would potentially
be exposed to the ad , the more they have to pay to get the slot , doesn't matter that no one
watches the ad , or that the ad is pittyful , they 'll pay the market price anyway , so keep
fastforwarding or just do whatever while its on , just know that people paid so that you can ignore
their stupid ads :d
[#155926]
Written by: Ruzkhul [27/03/2011, 11:57]
this is such great news!
whilst i've been enjoying the 'other side' i'm hoping that the next season will be last to deal with
it in a major way. it would be nice for a new storyline to be brought in just to keep the show
fresh. with a show such a fringe, there is so much potential.
whether they stick with the alternate universe or not isn't a big matter. i will still watch any
episode of fringe there is
[#155927]
Written by: Abductor [27/03/2011, 12:43]
i'm trying not to be cynical. fox is already trying to "fix" the show by adding a hottie fbi agent. let's hope
they don't try to "fix" the scripts as well.
[#155941]
Written by: esign [27/03/2011, 21:03]
that's great news! now, on to the debate about how sensible people (all of us here, of course) can
be turned into valuable customers of the entertainment industry:
today, the philosophy behind ads are based on two things. first, the concept that the networks have
the moral right to somehow force people to watch them, and that it therefore makes sense to assume
that people really are being forced to watch them. second, that the ads should be interminably long
and boring, so as to brainwash people thoroughly. obviously, the second won't work, unless the first
works, which it doesn't. also obvious, even if it was possible to prevent people from downloading,
fast forwarding, muting, and changing channels, you can't prevent them from walking away, which they
will, if the ads are interminably long and boring. so, there are two completely defunct principles
at work here, both of which could single-handedly explain why advertising revenues go down. instead
of accepting this, the industry blames technology, and the audience for using the technology.
it's not really that hard to figure this out:
- back when people had to watch the commercials (no workable remote, no recording equipment, few
channels available, etc.), the commercials were shorter than today. think about it! once people were
provided with the chance to skip the commercials entirely (advent of the vcr), the networks retorted
by making the commercials more of a bother, rather than less, or, at least, the same. incredible.
so, that's #1 figured out: have shorter commercial breaks!
- commercials have always been boring. in the beginning, that worked fine, because people "had" to
watch them, and because they were short, and, besides, anything that was on tv was entertaining by
definition. that's no longer true. however, there's hope: these days, some commercials are actually
entertaining. some few are even downright good. i don't know much about american commercials, but in
scandinavia the trend is towards commercials that are so good and entertaining that you turn the
sound back on, just to enjoy them - for the 10th time. these aren't even the most expensive
productions; it's all about doing the basics well (script, idea, acting, directing). so, that's #2
figured out: make commercials that people don't hate!
nobody will fast forward through a 20 second commercial that entertains them. in fact, with good,
inventive commercials, you can probably keep people watching for at least a minute, maybe more.
that'll be more commercials in a row than people ever before watched with any degree of attention.
if you keep your greed in check (as in "don't try to screw over your customers"), the customers
won't feel the need to circumvent your business strategy (as in "screw you over"). it's supply and
demand, the basic premise of market economy. you'd think marketing experts had some grasp of it.
don't set a price (commercial length and boredom, and clumsiness of distribution) for your product
that can't be supported by the demand in the market (the need or wish to use your preferred channels
of content distribution).
the fantastic thing, though, is this: with fewer minutes of commercials available, the market value
of each minute increases. to the advertisers, the actual time is (nearly) insignificant, it's the
exposure relative to that of the competitors that matter the most. twice as much as the competition
is twice as much, regardless of the absolute quantity.
[#155942]
Written by: esign [27/03/2011, 21:09]
what, what, what?!? my <end quote><end parenthesis> turned into smileys! depressing! anyway, no
smiling intended.
[#155956]
Written by: JeanLucPicard [28/03/2011, 02:38]
Quote by esign
back when people had to watch the commercials (no workable remote, no recording equipment, few
channels available, etc.), the commercials were shorter than today. think about it!
i never ever watched commercials. not even back in the day ...
whenever my favourite program has been interrupted by ads, i either hit the head, got myself
something to drink or eat, went out for a smoke - you name it.
bottom line ... ads have never been very effective on me ... no matter what tech was at my disposal.
[#155972]
Written by: bathrug [28/03/2011, 09:41]
before we happily enter the world of the demolition man, where the adds are all thats on with a
possibility of being interrupted by a " show break", lets look at a selection of shows
chuck on break, returns: 2011-04-17 ( so off for a month without reason )
glee on break, returns: 2011-04-18 (hmmm same month, we have some consistency)
house on break, returns: 2011-04-17 (ok ... some things going on isn't it)
never mind at least we have frin........ oooohhh no we dont
fringe on break, returns: 2011-04-14.
now being a brit, im not quite sure whats on in the usa that would take a load of shows off air for a few
weeks, yet it seams as though if the stations cant maintain a regular slot then ultimately every spot
during the week is a death spot.
if we look at tv like any other service let say ... telephone
you want to have the service so you pay your telephone operator lets say $100 for that service, you
expect that service to be maintained without any trouble.
now if we apply the entertainment industry model to that service, you would be talking to your friend
and mid conversation somebody would jump in the call and say " would you like to buy insurance " or "
buy a new ford at blah blah blah motors" and then they would ring off again, you would cancel that
service in a heart beat as you have paid to have your calls connected.
and of course not forgetting that if the telephone company just decided that even though you have paid
for the service, they have chosen to block your service for 2 weeks as they have decided that they
want to give your telephone number to somebody else... you really wouldn't be impressed.
yet this is what the tv industry is doing
you pay for a service ( and yes .. i do pay for my tv in the uk, i do get all the shows i download from
the states just about a month later) you should receive a service.. and service relies on stability and
quality. if you remove one people stop using your service. and that's why these stations are having
issues, because they are moving things about, pausing a mid show run in order to put on super bowl or
something or other. in the uk ... we do have things like football etc but they would never ..ever in a
million years blow out a show for the sake of something only for it to return a few weeks later as people
would just stop watching. is it possible that the shows are getting so expensive to make that your
subscription to a channel just doesn't make enough money to pay for them. its all an outdated business
model for a society without internet .. its frozen in the 1950's.
i hate to say this .... but if you dont want people to download a show " illegally" then do what the movie
industry has started to do, and do international release dates so that you at least have some consistency across the board. a perfect example of this is bsg. the show was heavily funded by sky
tv in the uk so season one was played in the uk first, season two came about and we were
deliberately held up because americans didn't like that the show which was " american" (which it wasn't
.. it was paid for by anglo/canadian cash) and they should have it first so we got it a few months after
it aired in the us.
anyway whine over...... im glad fringe has been renewed but as i've said before lets stay away from
god in scifi it has no place
[#155997]
Written by: VALNAC [28/03/2011, 19:49]
Quote by westsayid23
i don't care what any of you turds say this show is titties.
...and titties are good! love the show but agree they should pull away from the absurd a bit and get on with the main arc.
