[amchugh]

I used to think IP TV or TV on demand was the wave of the future, but what really determines price is the content providers. They'll allow you an a la carte selection of channels or perhaps programs, but bump up the price so you are paying the same as for your 200 channels. It is not what it is worth, but what the market will bear. ATT UVerse is probably going to be TV on demand eventually, bundled with your Internet connection.

[mikeybaby]

I don't know, other than to agree that content is where the value resides.
The method of distribution of that content is, in my mind, the real issue.
I feel the current video providers (ABC, NBC, etc.) have much more power than the record guys have (or had), due the fact that the video providers also have tie-ins with the networks.
For example, I watch CNBC, which is tied to NBC since both are owned by GE.
OTOH, the record guys thought that their monopolies were unassailable, too.
YouTube is a new wrinkle also.
The conventional (ie., Hollywood, if that can be called conventional) thinking is that only big budget films can succeed. Along those lines, I think films like "The Blair Witch Project" and "300" and "The Passion of the Christ" argue against that "wisdom".
Should be fascinating to watch.