The National Association of Broadcasters held its annual convention in Las Vegas this week, and as usual the convention provided some fantastic quotes from representatives of media companies. That was especially true at the “FAST Channels and Furious Growth” panel, in which speakers discussed the future of free ad-supported TV (FAST) channels and their impact on the media landscape.
There’s no doubt that ad-supported streaming is currently having a moment in the sun. A survey from February shows that 75% of American consumers think of ad-supported video as a practical alternative to pay TV, and some industry executives are in lockstep with that thinking when it comes to FAST.
“I absolutely think it’s a replacement [for cable],” said Amy Kuessner, EVP of content strategy and global partnerships at Paramount Streaming.
Kuessner oversees Pluto TV, Paramount’s free streaming platform that houses hundreds of FAST channels. Her comments echo those of Iris.TV co-founder Field Garthwaite, who said in late March that he expects FAST will be bigger than broadcast and cable combined in the next two years.
“I think everyone here sees the cable numbers every day, and they are dwindling,” Kuessner continued. “And I used to be on that side of the business. It’s similar in the fact that what’s old is new again — we’re linear again, it’s back in style, but it’s digital linear, and ad-supported. It’s the same in that we’re still programming niche channels, which is what cable did so well, but it’s different in that it’s not Cable 2.0. It’s becoming this whole ‘must carry’ thing; it’s cable without borders, so it’s very different in the marketplace approach.”
But not all executives on the panel agreed with that assessment. Philippe Guelton, chief revenue officer of Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment (CSSE) — which operates the free streamers Redbox and Crackle — said that he thought of FAST as more akin to “syndicated television on steroids,” and that subscription video-on-demand (SVOD) has an important role in replacing the traditional cable experience.
“I don’t think FAST is the new cable at all,” Guelton said. “And the reason is, when you cut the cord, when you cut cable, you lost a lot more than what’s available on FAST today. Think about the premium channels — the HBOs, the Showtimes. This where the actual investment was taking place in cable, and now that is happening on SVOD, for the most part — this is where a lot of that content lives.”
Both executives have a definite point. Kuessner is spot on when she likens FAST viewing to the traditional cable-watching experience. Users can flip channels, see a grid-style listing of available networks, and not have to worry about choosing their next title, since it’s already been chosen for them.
But Guelton is also right in his assertion that FAST channels do not carry the breadth and quality of entertainment that cable channels do. FAST networks usually don’t carry new episodes of TV, and they don’t carry much in the way of live sports. Services like Local Now are trying to improve the amount of live local news available via FAST, but that will be a slow and steady process.
In the end, whether or not FAST is a replacement for cable really depends on the individual using FAST platforms. For consumers that get their live sports and news from other sources, or don’t value those categories highly, FAST can definitely provide enough lean-back entertainment to effectively supplant pay TV. Users who value news, sports, and prestige TV likely would not be satisfied with the FAST experience alone and would need to supplement their entertainment plans with SVOD services.