HBO Has Only Itself To Blame For Record 'Game Of Thrones' Piracy

[Cth]

Forbes does it again..

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain...hrones-piracy/

Andy Greenberg has some troubling numbers on HBO’s Game of Thrones. Turns out the show is not only really popular with HBO subscribers, it’s also really popular with pirates who are well on their way to making this the most-pirated show ever.

According to Greenberg, “the second season of the show has been downloaded more than 25 million times from public torrent trackers since it began in early April, and its piracy hit a new peak following April 30th’s episode, with more than 2.5 million downloads in a day.”

Meanwhile, season one of the show was the second-most-pirated season of all time, right behind the sixth season of Dexter.

Now, it’s important to note the reason for all this piracy: lack of access to the show for people who can’t afford, or choose not to purchase, a cable-TV subscription.

“HBO hasn’t helped the problem by making the show tough to watch online for the young and cable-less,” notes Greenberg. “The show isn’t available through Hulu or Netflix, iTunes offers only Season 1, and using HBO’s own streaming site HBO Go requires a cable subscription.”...

He also wrote a follow up on why he believes HBO cannot afford a streaming service to his critics:

So I’ve sparked something of a controversy without really meaning to by writing this post on piracy and Game of Thrones. I basically argued that if HBO wants to curb piracy, they should offer a stand-alone HBO GO service for non-cable customers, cord-cutters, and so forth.

The thing is, HBO probably isn’t all that concerned with piracy.

They have a business model that works, they make plenty of money and have gained plenty of subscribers and, to make a long story short, they don’t want to fix something that isn’t broken.

This is a frustrating reality for those of us who prefer to consume our entertainment online, but we represent a relatively small demographic. This may change in the future, and certainly cord-cutting is on the rise, but at the present there is no incentive for HBO to worry about piracy or to offer a stand-alone service.

I do think that the fact that cable has become so expensive, especially since customers now also pay for broadband access, is a problem. I’m not sure that there is any simple way to address this problem, however, until it becomes unsustainable for the entertainment industry. The huge number of channels and costs associated with those channels provide subsidies for the content we see on premium channels such as HBO.

If HBO were to break off and do a stand-alone service they would be giving up those subsidies and would incur huge additional costs in terms of support, billing, and infrastructure that they currently aren’t burdened with. This would make producing the content they produce now – including extremely expensive shows such as Game of Thrones - impossible. At the very least, it would be a huge risk.

Furthermore, if HBO broke away from cable they would have to do so by ending lucrative contracts with the cable industry that make their business model possible. These are the challenges and obstacles that make such a move a gamble for HBO. So my earlier post may as well be chalked up to wishful thinking.

The wishful part hasn’t changed, but I realize the flaws in my arguments. Indeed, the flaw in my premise. It turns out, piracy just isn’t that big of a deal for HBO – which is sort of what techie types have been saying all along. It’s sort of a catch-22 for internet evangelists when you think about it...

[WillieLee]

So soon Cth? The well is going to go dry!

But this article is so ridiculous. It's like they were up against a quota of piracy stories. "I know! Lets do one on HBO! We won't even have to deal with their upfront production costs and the kids will repost it. Who cares about integrity? We have a massive debt load we need to get out under from."

[Humphrey_Lee]

It isn't completely wrong though. $15 a month is fucking outrageous for a cable channel. Charge $8 a month for a streaming app ala Hulu or whatever and I think they'd find themselves on the better end of a buttload of money.

[Garth]

It isn't completely wrong though. $15 a month is fucking outrageous for a cable channel. Charge $8 a month for a streaming app ala Hulu or whatever and I think they'd find themselves on the better end of a buttload of money.

I'd pay for that like crazy. Hell, I'd pay for a $15/month for that app. But HBO requires you to have a cable subscription. It just seems backwards compared to what everyone is wanting or asking for. The fact that they don't even offer the episodes for watchers to stay current via iTunes is a great demonstration of how out of touch HBO is. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely ADORE HBO. I own the entire series of OZ, Six Feet Under, Sopranos, Deadwood (and double dipped for the blu-ray), Band of Brothers, The Pacific, Rome, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Extras, Game of Thrones, Carnivale, but they need to reevaluate how they appeal to those who have "cut the cord".

[Humphrey_Lee]

I'd pay for that like crazy. Hell, I'd pay for a $15/month for that app. But HBO requires you to have a cable subscription. It just seems backwards compared to what everyone is wanting or asking for. The fact that they don't even offer the episodes for watchers to stay current via iTunes is a great demonstration of how out of touch HBO is. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely ADORE HBO. I own the entire series of OZ, Six Feet Under, Sopranos, Deadwood (and double dipped for the blu-ray), Band of Brothers, The Pacific, Rome, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Extras, Game of Thrones, Carnivale, but they need to reevaluate how they appeal to those who have "cut the cord".

Exactly. I'm good for probably four Blu-Ray sets a year from them no problem, but given my having no interest in having anything beyond basic basic cable, I'm not ever going to subscribe to the channel, especially at that price. Give me the ability to stream new episodes - even if they did not last long past the season's end - and I'd gladly throw some money at them again. $15 would probably be too rich for my blood, but I'd easily do up to $10.

[majorjoe23]

People act like this is HBO's choice. Cable companies would revolt if the channel offered it's choices at a lower price or ala carte. HBO is the reason many people have cable to begin with.

If people can't afford HBO, they just need to ask their parents/grandparents who aren't using HBOGo if they can use their account to stream it.

[HOOKS]

I own the entire series of OZ, Six Feet Under, Sopranos, Deadwood (and double dipped for the blu-ray), Band of Brothers, The Pacific, Rome, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Extras, Game of Thrones, Carnivale, but they need to reevaluate how they appeal to those who have "cut the cord".

Where's THE WIRE?

[Garth]

Where's THE WIRE?

Fuck, I knew there was one I forgot!!! I do love The Wire also. And I actually double dipped when Amazon had a Gold Box deal, because I liked their "Complete Series" box set and sold my individual season sets.

[Artie Pink]

This article is exactly right. Fair, legal or not, it's beyond dumb to think people are going to jump through the same hoops to watch these buzz shows - the same hoops that were in place for Tanner '88.

My days of paying $50 a month to watch WWII documentaries and ghost hunters and Saving Silverman and The Chappelle Show, and THEN another $15 on top of it to watch Veep and What About Bob are over.

And these are very much buzz shows - people want to talk about these on Monday morning, not in 11 months when the expensive, no-extras DVD comes out. If HBO doesn't have these on iTunes/Xbox/whatever the day after they air, that's a failure for HBO and they really need to realize what decade they're in and which way the wind is blowin'.

Again, right or wrong - it's HBO's failure to drag themselves up to modern expectations that's making this worse.

[bachman]

"I can't wait for the Blu Ray to come out! I want it now! Now! I'm entitled! It's HBOs fault that I'm an asshole!"