The WB Returns: Why?
Published March 13, 2008
WBTVG has already aggressively put in motion its plans to create its own ad-supported channels. The new WB.com site, which should be in beta soon, is meant to primarily target women from 12-34, and while that may seem like a narrow demographic, it’s the easiest sell to advertisers. They’re holding onto the programming that will specifically appeal to this demographic. WB.com will also feature new short series, with each of these new episodes running five minutes, with 10 installments slated, and at a total cost less than that of an hour of broadcast network drama. An online animation channel is also due to be rolled out soon, possibly by April.
Rosenblum expressed last month, during a frank discussion with Stanford law students, the overall discontent by the major studios with iTunes and their business model. While the studios like the way they can cheaply distribute their content through the site, they’d like to be charging more money for certain shows. Apple prefers the one-size-fits-all model and charges the same for all shows, while the studios want to set their own prices. iTunes revenue hasn’t become a significant business for Warner, although Rosenblum didn’t indicate they were losing money on that model either. By offering their own streaming, WBTVG would earn revenue from ads that doesn’t happen for them on iTunes.
Premise #2. Network television will continue to decline.
Rosenblum also painted a hazy picture about the future of network television during his discussion at Stanford. He assured these students they were witnessing the “complete disaggregation of the networks.” Rosenblum stopped short of predicting the end of the big broadcast networks, since all these bold new online moves aren’t planned to be optimal for another five to ten years. He predicted networks’ share will continue to drop, as will advertising revenue, but the lost revenue will be supplemented by other sources.
In layman’s terms, studios are going to use new media to sidestep the networks and make money by distributing their own content via cheaper channels. Rosenblum also revealed during the speech at Stanford his belief that audiences are going to watch without any concerns about video quality “because viewers 16 to 25 are multitasking rather than watching closely.” He also observed that viewers seem to be tolerating the annoying promo bugs that have been popping up on network shows and don’t mind the fuzzy full screen pictures online since Hulu has found that not everyone is going full screen. Because of all this, “quality is irrelevant,” he said.
- The WB Returns: Why?
- Published: March 13, 2008
- Type: Opinion
- Section: Video
- Filed Under: Culture: Business and Economics, Sci/Tech: Internet, Video: Film and TV Business, Video: Television
- Writer: Alice Jester
- Alice Jester's BC Writer page
- Alice Jester's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us



