之前在雜誌社的「收錢Post」我寫過一下我對Twitter及Youtube加強直播電視服務的看法,其實我對呢個題目一直好有興趣,所以在這裏我都做一啲跟進報道。

一是其實在同一個星期,Hulu在美國都推出了直播有綫電視的服務,基本月費為39.99美元,有以下一系列的頻道,特別要留意都係有ESPN的:

但可以想像,不少評論都認為Hulu的Live TV服務與Youtube TV都一樣,未必太受歡迎,一個基本的原因就是價格仍然偏高。有興趣可以看看Engadgate的評論:

Hulu Live TV has the potential for greatness, but it’s a tough sell

Starting at $40 per month, Hulu’s live offering delivers more than 50 channels, 50 hours of “cloud DVR” recording and an ad-free viewing experience for its existing content (which normally costs $12 per month). That’s a big step up from Sling TV’s entry-level plan, which costs $20 per month with 30 channels.

另一個問題,是網上直播電視是否能夠解決「Cord-cutting」的問題? UBS的一份研究報告就認為答案是否定的:

圖中的Virtual MVPDs就是網上有綫電視直播組合的簡稱。

This chart should send a shiver of fear through the cable TV industry

Media stocks took a dive this week, following bad news about subscriber numbers for pay TV (~400,000 below expectations) and worrying comments from Turner about the TV ad market. The subscriber decline, in particular, should concern cable and satellite TV companies.

較為詳細的解讀,大家不妨看看Business Insider以上這篇報道。

The End


如果你覺得本網嘅文章有價值,強烈建議大家係 Google News follow 我地。
Econ記者亦正研發Substack Newsletter,不定期向各位發送我地嘅經濟學術及經濟時事討論文章。
Previous article民粹領袖原來真係利好股市…
Next articleFOMC 等於 Federal “Open Mouth” Committee?
Econ記者網站新聞團隊(絕大部份時間其實得一個人主理)

留言區

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.