• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

ivi.tv now cary locals from NY, LA, Chi and Sea!!

kenglish said:
Obviously, you are not a local advertiser who pays good money to have their ads (not) be seen by the local audience.
Wait until those rogue websites have to pay money for their programming, and have to bombard you with pop-up ads to pay the bills.
Click to expand...


At night you can get AM radio stations from all over the country. I live 1,000 miles away from Chicago, but I frequently listen to WLS. I also live almost 200 miles from New York. But my radio picks up WCBS, WINS, and WOR all day and all night. Even on the TV side of things I use my own antenna to grab stations from a market that my local cable company doesn't allow. As far as I'm concerned putting out of market stations on the net isn't much different. It reaches a niche market that likes this sort of thing. Most people will still watch programming from their local affiliates. You guys advertising your business on local airwaves shouldn't worry to much.
 
Skynet74 said:
Most people will still watch programming from their local affiliates.
Click to expand...

That is true, not only with TV but radio as well. For example in Denver one can dx many of radio stations from all over ( California & Texas to even Cincinatti's 700 WLW )..but what are the odds of me finding someone such as the average Joe who is not into dx'ing who would rather put up with the static of hearing say LA's KNX over local KOA? About the same as a hurricane hitting Denver. They may listen online? They may have an interest in their hometown? Maybe but chances are they will still favor local over out-of market even their old hometown, that is where local newspapers have the angle. My neighbors for example are from Buffalo. Outside of sports ( the Bills & Sabres ) They really couldn't care less about what is one WIVB, WKBW or some local talk show on WBEN radio because they live in Denver now..not Buffalo. Now they may still check out The Buffalo News online but they don't have any interest in WKBW.
 
What about sporting events? Are you able to watch NFL games (or any other sport) on the different local affiliates? I could see that being a major problem with the professional sports leagues since they make money off selling cable/satellite packages like NFL Sunday Ticket and NBA League Pass.
 
Excellent question. The NFL is very serious when it comes to who can see what and when. I'd expect some serious litigation threats in this situation. Good example, today I wanted to watch Chicago-New England, but my affiliate wanted to serve me Denver-Arizona, it would have been nice to switch over to WBBM Chicago. (Atleast for the first quarter...interest lost after the first half!)
 
Seeing the games would surely be a plus on there. The picture is not excellent quality, so I think
people would usually pick the local station over ivi.tv.

It seems to be the closest thing we have to a la carte TV. I know there are some on here who
don't pay cable or satellite (YOU GUYS WOULD REALLY DIG IT). I've really enjoyed watching it most of today (ME-TV in Chi town and a few other places also). I just watched "I Love Lucy" from L.A.
THE POWER IS IN YOUR HANDS instead of theirs (cable,sat,local).

I think it is a good thing and would like to see it stick around.
 
whoa whoa whoa.. and whoa!

You all are getting off into side issues that have no bearing on whether ivi.tv is legal or not.

Dxing a station from 1,000 miles away is possible due to atmospheric conditions. It doesn't happen because someone puts a repeater up 2 miles from your home.

Radio stations that stream over the internet have to strip out the commercials they broadcast over the air and replace them with different spots that are sold just for the internet. It's complicated, but basically the actors in the ads want to be paid a higher rate for working on a spot that's available nationally as opposed to one available locally. The courts have ruled they have a right to that demand. Therefore, it makes since to have different ads.

Ivi.tv started by taking these signals without permission and charging people for them. I suppose they are sending checks to the TV stations as part of the compulsory licensing they say is fair pay for those signals. I suspect the stations are not cashing the checks and are instead sending them to lawyers involved in the lawsuit.
 
tested said:
Ivi.tv started by taking these signals without permission and charging people for them. I suppose they are sending checks to the TV stations as part of the compulsory licensing they say is fair pay for those signals. I suspect the stations are not cashing the checks and are instead sending them to lawyers involved in the lawsuit.
Click to expand...

Well it's not up to me to figure out if it's legal or not to retransmit signals. Let them figure it out. If a court shuts them down than so be it. I guess that means it's illegal. But I'm hoping they stay in business. I'll be subscribing for as long as they are around. I like the service.
 
gregg75 said:
Seeing the games would surely be a plus on there. The picture is not excellent quality, so I think
people would usually pick the local station over ivi.tv.
Click to expand...

I think you missed my point. I'm talking about people watching out of market games that are not carried by their local affiliate. That's what the sports leagues are charging a lot of money for. Obviously nobody in NY is going to watch the Giants game on a Chicago affiliate if its available on a local NY affiliate. I'm talking about people in NY watching, say, a Bears game on a Chicago station when that game is not available in NY. If you're a Bears fan living in NY, you could just tune to ivi.tv instead of paying $300 per year to Directv for the service. I can see that causing big problems with the league.

Aside from that, I don't give any company my credit card for a "free" trial. Even if they are not actually going to charge the card I don't want them to have that information. After the 30 days the service should be turned off and if I choose to continue then I can enter my credit card info.
 
No, I got your point. You didn't get mine.
Yes places would watch a blacked out game on this service. In this day and age
who does "blacked out" actually help? NFC, AFC and team owners/promoters!
BRING THE POWER BACK TO THE PEOPLE.
 
If I were the NAB, I would much more worry about the plan the FCC has to take even more spectrum from broadcasters to give it to wireless companies. After all, spectrum IS business to a broadcaster. Stuff like ivi.tv, while important, aren't nearly as urgent as making sure that stations keep the signals already assigned to them.

As to the NFL, now that's an interesting angle about this whole business. I can understand the stations not risking the severing of long-time relationships with leagues like the NFL. OTOH, the NFL is such a greedy monster that I wouldn't discourage people from finding ways to get games not readily available in the local market. If I were a business, I would certainly hire from the NFL to increase my profits. They're THAT good. Unfortunately, people who want to watch certain games have to spend through their nose to get them.
 
I watched a whole season of Major League Baseball this past summer and I didn't even have cable TV! Like I said.... anything is available on the internet if you look for it. Things like ivi.tv just make it easier for people because all the channels are presented to you in a nice little window. Even without them I have found people who are streaming affiliates from every Network.
 
I hope some of you on here will sign up. They probably need all the cash they can get
to fight for this service. It would be interesting if the price eventually rose to $29, but we
were all locked in at the basement price of $4.99.

I've only had it for about 1 day.............and I've probably already gotten 75 cents worth.
 
I'm always tuning in. Sometimes I'll want to get off the computer and check to see what's on TV. But I often just scan the channels using ivi.tv now. I do hope they improve the frame rate a little. Somebody wrote in a review that the picture is 12 frames a second. If they could just push that to 20 frames a second it would be great. 30 frames a second is the same as regular TV. But at least at 20 frames the picture would be a little smoother.
 
PHILADELPHIA is next!!! As fast as they are rolling this out I wouldn't be surprised if
that doesn't happen sometime in January. The company founder says this is much
faster and cheaper to get to consumers than either cable or satellite.......and I believe it.

They now have 65 channels, but only about 45 are actually worth watching. How
many can they get on there? I'd think at some point we will have to pick 4 favorite
cities or one from each time zone.

The odds seem stacked against them, but if YOU suddenly found a cheaper, faster and
better route to England (PROGRESS) who's to say that route should be blocked? Cable
and satellite systems would like for everyone to continue to take Route 66 (which they
own) but YOU should have the right to take the interstate if you desire.
 
I'm surprised that they actually keep adding cities. I thought that one set of East Coast and West Coast affiliates was enough. I wasn't thinking that they were going to try to add every TV station in the country! LOL. Of course I'm not complaining. This is certainly fun for me and I am sure for many others as well. I hope the fun doesn't end any time soon.
 
tested said:
Radio stations that stream over the internet have to strip out the commercials they broadcast over the air and replace them with different spots that are sold just for the internet. It's complicated, but basically the actors in the ads want to be paid a higher rate for working on a spot that's available nationally as opposed to one available locally. The courts have ruled they have a right to that demand. Therefore, it makes since to have different ads.
Click to expand...

True that many radio stations DO strip out the ads but on the other hand there are a good many who do not as in what you hear online is the exact same as one would hear on the radio in that town, of course pretty much we are talking small market stations where the "actors" in locally produced ads are usually local radio announcers so therefor its "..part of the job". Good luck trying to get extra money for doing ads in many rural markets..and this was even before the net. Also with small market stations when a commerical isn't streamed online it is usually due to a request by a client not anyone who appears in the ads. Now with large market stations where often the union comes into play and announcers may get paid extra for spots appearing online or even on other radio stations...yeah airing spots online can be "touchy".
 
As much as I LOVE this idea, I smell trouble. Look at how the individual stations behave when a cable system offers or dish subscriber gets an out of market network affiliate (even one from nearby). The idea of having a smorgasbord of network affiliates from around the US to enjoy is literally too good to be true.

I truly hope that I am wrong - but I don't see this venture lasting for long in its present form. So enjoy it while you can.
 
I'm not really defending them, but I do like to point out some things.

It's 1970 and you are in Nowhere, West Virginia. You put up an antenna to pick up
WLOS 13 from Asheville, NC so you can add that station to your local cable tv company
you are runing. NOW, move that idea to 2010, it almost seems to be the same thing.

Probably not the best example above. Many cable systems used to have 2 or more
of the same network on them back in the day.

A city example: The picture is not as good as regular TV on ivi, so 98% of the time you're
going to watch the program on local tv anyway. I think it ADDS to TV/choices for the
consumer, especially when there is nothing else on worth watching.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom