UK Leads in TV Show Downloading

dirutz writes "Britain has emerged as the world's biggest market for downloading pirated TV, with Australia being the second and the U.S. sitting at third. Among the top pirated TV shows, '24' ranks the first. 'The Simpsons,' 'Enterprise,' 'Stargate SG-1' and 'Battlestar Galactica' are also among the top hitters." 'Pirated' seems a strong word, at least for watching those programs which have been beamed (unencrypted) through my body. Where can I pay a quarter per show for moderate-quality, sanctioned torrent files?

It's not hard to work out why

[onebuttonmouse]

We get series weeks and weeks after they first air in the US, and then only on sky TV. Downloading the shows from torrents is the only way you can see them while they're still a current topic of conversation. Also, the UK get gouged on DVD prices (just like everying else!), hey DVD makers, £1!=$1 damn you!

Lousy dupe...

[fremen]

This is a dupe, but I'll put in my thoughts anyway:

Most of the television torrents I've seen have been free of advertisements. I know those ads are obnoxious, but they're the bread and butter of whatever network you (the show ripper) took that show from. The least you can do is leave them in the file and let the downloader decide what to do with them.

End of thought. Back to my regularly scheduled dupe righteous indignation.

Re:A quarter a show?

[MMMDI]

I also believe that it might fuel DVD sales. I believe this because if it only costs say $1 per show then people might be a bit more adventerous and buy shows which they wouldn't just go buy the dvd of. And if they like these shows, they would like to get all the extra stuff that the dvd gives, and hence go out and buy the dvd.

Exactly. I've got basic cable (ie, no HBO)... as a result, I've missed out on some (supposedly) great shows. As an exmample, I've been meaning to check out The Soprano's, as everyone I've heard talking about it goes on about how it's one of the greatest shows ever, blah blah blah. For a buck a pop, I'd download a few episodes and then determine whether or not that $80 DVD set was worth purchasing.

<insert a similar stance on a number of other shows / DVD sets>

Re:WTF - Battlestar Galactica

[cfuse]

speaking from AU, I'm glad that the UK folks made it available - I never would have been able to see such an excellent series otherwise.

The networks here don't give a damn about the viewers and seem to change a show's timeslot every five minutes. Who's got the time to chase the network around to see the shows they want? At least this way I get to see the show on my terms.

Maybe Networks Should Post Their Shows?

[kakos]

If networks posted their shows, with the ads intact and maybe a few extra, I'd download it in a heartbeat. It'd sure beat the hell out of finding a torrent (especcially with the sudden lack of good torrent directories). Sure, I can fast forward through commercials, but I could do that if I used TiVo or if I recorded it.

Re:Dupe

[WarwickRyan]

Little Britain is an amazing parody of some British stereotypes. It is very funny if you understand the context it's parodying. Sadly, most of the jokes will go right over the head of anyone who wasn't brought up here. Shame really, as it is very good.

Re:A quarter a show?

[slavemowgli]

That's the wrong question to ask, though. The correct ones would be:

1) Are you willing to pay 30 bucks for watching season 2 of "family guy" (on DVD)?
2) Are you willing to pay 5 bucks for watching season 2 of "family guy" (downloading it)?

I'm pretty sure there are many people who would say "Yes" to 2) but "No" to 1), and although it may seem tempting to try and force these people to pay 30 bucks instead of 5 after all, it won't work. Sometimes, lowering your prices is the best way to make more money...

Re:WTF - Battlestar Galactica

[Nurgled]

A few of my friends watched it on TV and then downloaded it to keep. A DVD full of MPEG4-encoded episodes beats a commercial box set, and it's easier than everyone hooking up equipment to record it themselves.

I'd probably buy more TV series on DVD if they came up with a DVD-like format that could store an entire US series on one disk.

Re:I am totally shocked Aust. is Second

[Wild Wizard]

Hardly surprising

Take ST:VOY for example, the last episode finally aired on 9 last month, you could buy/rent the tape in Australia quite a few years ago and TV execs wonder why no one watches their networks anymore

Re:Maybe Networks Should Post Their Shows?

[mpesce]

I agree wholeheartedly, and I think something like that is not far away. It'll probably end up being a three-step process:

1) Broadcast the program - in all international markets - on the same date, everywhere. This means you won't have downloading between and early-air market and a later-air markets. (As is the case often between the USA and Australia, which is per capita the king of TV downloading for just this reason.)

2) Release the program on the torrent, with commercials.

3) Release an HD DVD of the series, with lots of special features.

This is actually a win for the networks, because they get an extra chance for revenues. They lose the repeat market (which is substantial, don't get me wrong) but they'll make up for at least some of it by selling adds into the downloadable version.

If the networks adopt this approach, they'll make it through the age of filesharing in a way the record companies seem unable to. We'll see if they're flexible enough, or if they'll go down in flames fighting P2P.

Re:A Quarter A Download

[CastrTroy]

Most TV shows worth buying have about 20-26 episodes. At 22 minutes per episode, that 440 minutes of playtime(for 20 episodes). This is actual play time, not including stupid extras. This ends up being over 7 hours of actual watchable stuff. $50 isn't bad when compared to the 1.5 hour movies they often sell for $20. It get's to be an even better deal when you get the show's with 45 minute episodes (1 hour with commercials), which usually cost around $65 CDN.

Re:A Quarter A Download

[N3koFever]

Sky don't make their advertising rates public (if they did you'd find them on the BRAD [intellagencia.com] database), but from what I know about TV and media advertising I'd hazard a guess that it costs around £100,000 ($189,421 US) for a slot on Sky One, the station that broadcasts 24 here. The first two episodes of 24 which were shown back-to-back got a peak average of 680,000 [digitalspy.co.uk] viewers which means that the advertisers are paying £0.18 ($0.34 US) per viewer to advertise on there.

As a Brit who's been downloading 24 to keep up with the US schedule (I think episode 5 is shown here tonight as opposed to 10 in the US on Monday, and I plan to buy the DVDs when they come out as I've done with all previous seasons), I'd gladly pay 20p per episode to download them early. It's 20p in their pocket that they wouldn't have otherwise and when I watch commercial television I'll go and do something else while the ads are on anyway. Hell, I pay £30/month for Sky anyway.

Re:Not Suprising

[henni16]

It is not that surprising from an economical point of view:
Reality soaps are really cheap to produce compared to most sci-fi (special effects, space scenes etc),
but sadly still get a lot of viewers.
So you have a cheap show that can sell more or less expensive advertisement blocks.
Compared to that a sci-fi show would have to draw a _huge_ audience to generate the same profit per dollar spent to create it.

At least that's one reason I read why some sci-fi show was canceled despite somewhat decent ratings
(?or was it why Firefly didn't get a second - some might say: a first - chance in light of the DVD sales?
IIRC it was really expensive per episode, even for sci-fi).