Plain and simple the major OTA networks haven't made it easy for me to watch their content. I cut the cord 5 years ago and watch everything online.
I get poor reception where I live and I'm not in the mood to install an antenna on the roof. I was hoping Aereo wouldn't get shut down so I could actually watch that OTA content.
The networks are going to have to embrace a real digital content strategy if they want to keep up with the trend of people consuming increasingly more content on their pocket computers.
Netflix charge to watch too. When CBS, FOX etc offer an online feed or a "catch up" service it will come down to them either charging a monthly fee or plastering adverts all over it. Personally, I would prefer a monthly fee for the whole package or a pay-to-watch price for each show.
They did do this (Hulu Plus), and surprise, surprise, the greedy bastards chose to both charge a subscription AND continue to plaster ads everywhere.
It kind of reminds me of Nokia and digital photography. Their inability to abandon their current business model is destroying the massive advantage they have (had?) in terms of access to existing paying customers.
I still don't understand why they don't stream their channels online. It's fairly cheap to do so, they'd get more viewers (and more accurate data about their viewers), and the only real restriction it would remove is the ability to filter viewers by location, but this can be solved by mailing out postcards or something during registration.
I tried using a usb ota tuner a few years ago, but it was painful. Driver issues, reception issues (in the middle of recordings a lot of times), etc. It really wasn't worth the time.
Licensing of syndicated content. When an OTA station buys programming, they buy the right to air it in the specific geographical area that station is licensed to broadcast it, so the production firm can sell it in the next city as well.
If the station streams that programming online, there's no clear way to limit the broadcast to the same (or any) geographical area and that means the price would be a lot higher. Basically, the only content they could stream would be their own stuff, like news. And even then, TV production is a myriad of sub-contractors and small production firms and the contracting in place might only release the right to broadcast in the specific area (so, if they get a story of wider regional or national interest, they can license that content to other stations).
On the other hand, if the production firm streams it online (or licenses it to Netflix or to someone else with streaming rights), the content isn't exclusive and can't be relied on in the same way to drive eyeballs to the TV station that might license it, and the content would command a lower price - so the production firm is only interested in that if they can command a price from streaming that makes up for this.
It seems that production firms are increasingly finding that last possibility to be viable, and given the fast migration of viewers online, it's only going to go that way.
OTA receivers and DVR's are pretty cheap these days if you want your OTA fix without cable or satellite. The HDHomeRun line is inexpensive and works quite well as an ethernet attached tuner.
I get poor reception where I live and I'm not in the mood to install an antenna on the roof. I was hoping Aereo wouldn't get shut down so I could actually watch that OTA content.
The networks are going to have to embrace a real digital content strategy if they want to keep up with the trend of people consuming increasingly more content on their pocket computers.