The Demise of the Channel Up/Down Button

Repeat after me: pay-as-you-go. Say it again. Mmm. There is just something overwhelmingly satisfying about it. Getting what you pay for. Alright, well done. Now try this: fixed term contract. How about: monthly subscription fees. And while we are on a roll: cancellation costs. Notice a pattern in those last three? Yes, they are how we currently subscribe to Sky TV. Yes, they give you the sensation of being rolled up in a rug with no escape. And yes, they are all terms of what I hope to be a bygone era.

We are the now generation. We are more selfish, more greedy, more demanding than we have ever been.

Not on account of any biological evolution- if history has taught us anything, it is that us humans have always been pretty good at actively seeking what we want. But the reason for our unprecedented insatiability is on account of the gargantuan increase in our awareness of what we can have. How? Namely because of how globally connected we have become. I used to think 24 was violent, until I became aware of a man mountain crushing a prince’s skull with his bare hands. Think about it like this: Have you ever heard about how a shark can sense a drop of blood in the ocean from over a mile away? Imagine a Peter Jackson’s Brain Dead amount of blood in the water — that’s the level of exposure we are subject to.

I can, therefore I want, like, now.

Everyone will agree — we are the most connected we have ever been, and more connections mean more comparisons. To the point where certain apps help make ‘connections’ by making ‘comparisons’, but that is another story. What increasing comparisons mean is that we are collectively garnering a better and more global definition of the word ‘value.’ Simply put, we are increasingly exposed to what we can have, but we also know what we should be paying for it. And guess what? Movies and TV shows — they should be affordable and easily attainable!

As it currently stands in NZ, there are a handful of providers who have brokered us into paying for their service — instead of just their products. Admittedly I am picking a bone with Sky, only because of their long standing monopoly over the NZ market. For too long have Sky asked us to predict the future — “Pay all year round? But I spend at least 50 hours a week not even at home, let alone the amount of time actually able to be spent in front of the TV. Why should I be paying the same amount of money as someone who can watch it endlessly?”

What Sky needs to adapt to is that attention is the currency of this generation, and the only way to have any sort of hold on the market is to give us customers what we want, when we want it. Nothing game breaking there right? How about we explore the exact contrary, getting what we don’t want when we don’t want it, and see how familiar it sounds. I grew up to the routine of: “Oh, Prime Rocks has an Eagles concert on at 8.30pm, oh well we might as well watch Border Patrol and Vet Emergencies until then.” Now there is an hour you will never get back in your life that has only succeeded in reminding you to keep your keys in a zipped pocket close to the giraffe enclosures.

Skeptics of a ‘pay as you go’ model might argue that we might not continuously pay a stream of one-off fees; shit, it may even end up more expensive — well, to that I argue common behavioural tendencies.

1. We feel better about paying for something we consume the full extent of — it is like buying a day pass to the pool; you are never going to get your full value of the price paid because you are not going to spend the entire day there. A 50 minute show on the other hand? Perceived value and actual value are matched.
2. Call it the subliminal effect of having worked full time for a couple of years, but I do acknowledge that in the same way I expect money for the product I provide in my job, my conscious likes the sentiment of paying for each individual product I use.
3. Let us not forget the small incremental way in which we typically like to spend money; a lot of us will happily spend a small amount each day on lunch by simply waving our hands. Try this, add up your lunch spending for last month and imagine paying it as a lump sum at the start of every month. I can already hear the Glad Wrap unravelling…

For the first time it seems, Sky are not going to be ‘playing the game’ on their terms. Suddenly, we as the consumer are not just a generic target range that can be satisfied with endless re runs of The Simpsons and Cold Case. And in their defence, they are generally turning the corner, and have taken heed of the growing online presence of competing companies. But still remains the long term financial membership to get access to the ‘on demand’ content — since when do we pay a set amount to a restaurant to only eat their meals? We do not — we embrace that the place ending with ‘-etti’ is going to be our Italian fix, anywhere with the word ‘grill’ in it is going to give us our monthly intake of meat in one sitting, and so forth. Our food choices are not limited, but our TV choices are.

What’s my ideal? Sitting down on the couch, speaking aloud to my 55” LED Smart TV (I did say ideal) “Lets watch Terminator 2 Judgement Day” (in my most un-kiwi like accent so it understands), and I would get prompted: “Terminator 2 Judgement Day’s viewing rights are owned by Neon, are you happy to pay $1.87 to purchase a single viewing of this film?” To which I reply in my best Arnie voice, “No problemo”.

Can there be a balance though? I know I’m not alone in finding an almost romantic sense in turning on TV on a Friday night and finding one of my favourite older films is fatefully playing. For the one major draw that I have not addressed in favour of the way Sky is operating, is that at the end of each working day Sky has insightfully put Family Guy on right when I get home, leaving me to simply sit back, relax and enjoy. And sometimes, it is just easier for Sky to make decisions for you.