Consumers Defy Market Research: Won't Pay for Ad-Free Content

[GHoosdum]

A recent statement by Chuck Porter, an advertising industry executive, shows that consumers shy away from choking up the cash when it comes to paying for advertisement-free content, a finding which defies prior market research data.

Porter noted that when it came time to sign up for such services, many of the consumers being studied changed their minds.

"Every focus group we have had, people said, 'We don't want commercials on the radio; We will pay to not have commercials," he said at the Summit held in New York. "But they wouldn't, and they didn't."

Quality programming, on the other hand, is a more attractive incentive, Porter added.

"People are not buying HBO because it doesn't have ads, they are buying it because they want to watch the Sopranos," he said, referring to the popular organized crime-family drama on the Time Warner Inc. TV network. "It's about content."
A disconnect between what people say they'd do and what they actually do? What a shock!

Source: Reuters (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyid=2005-11-30T232812Z_01_SPI083193_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-COMMERCIALFREE.xml)

[Gargoyle]

Great, now they'll put ads on HBO because they think they can get away with it.

[drasnor]

I pay for HBO because not only does it have good content but the content is uninterrupted. I couldn't care less if they put in commercials between movies as long as it's not in the middle. It's also why I don't watch movies on TBS, Comedy Central, Sci Fi, USA, Spike, etc.

-drasnor :fold:

[Enverex]

Yeah, trying to watch Hallmark is a nightmare. Adverts for 5 minutes every 10 minutes.

[Leonardo]

Yeah, trying to watch Hallmark is a nightmare. I'd say Hallmark is a nightmare under any condition! :eek: ;D

Eventually, when broadband is truly broad (no not a women's channel...doh!) programming on demand will be available. It wouldn't surprise me if there will be a choice between "free" programming with advertising and fee-based programming. An example would be back to back Law & Order episodes where the viewer has an option of watching them with commercials or $.75/episode without advertising.

Well, let's at least hope so. But at least Canada and the US don't have a television tax levied on households to pay for public broadcasting as some European countries do. If that's what they want to do, fine by me; but I don't want to pay a tax whether I watch television or not, merely because one sits in my living room.

[Khaos]

Eventually, when broadband is truly broad (no not a women's channel...doh!) [b]programming on demand[b/] will be available.
This already exists as a Comcast service. Oddly enough, it's called OnDemand.

[Enverex]

I don't think my parents would want to pay more as we already pay over 30 pounds a month for Sky (which is how we recieve the channels, like "Cable" but with Satallites) so we ARE already paying for the channels.