tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10931739.post7916319202651949888..comments2023-12-11T15:35:23.779-08:00Comments on Pulp 2.0: Wiring TeeVee and the WebCunninghamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07137025404327426886noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10931739.post-78485362325730697702008-08-15T14:07:00.000-07:002008-08-15T14:07:00.000-07:00Whatever the model is, something that should be co...Whatever the model is, something that should be considered is less intrusive revenue generation. Pay-per-view is fine, but I think it has the tendency to carve your audience down to the true believers. You lose a majority of the impulse-watch audience. ("Do I really want to pay $5? What if I don't like it?")<BR/><BR/>Cable has a lot of strengths with less-intrusive revenue, because the consumer is paying for the "service", not for the show. If you see a bad episode of Survivor, you don't cancel your cable, and cable's multiple channels allows for the impulse-watching that can grow audiences and keep shows alive.<BR/><BR/>Is this a stop-gap measure? Possibly. When you boil it down that way, eventually cable will carve through all the shows that aren't good enough to keep people watching, but then, that was the challenge all along, wasn't it?Earl Newtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17097757244062301721noreply@blogger.com