How does the traditional broadcast type business model work from a content generator's perspective? What value or disruption can an On-demand type of business model bring to small scale/indie movie producers/directors?

All above is 100% correct. A few things to note tho: 'From the Content Producers side' the broadcast model looks like: we'll buy X number of episodes from you, so long as you do exactly what we tell you during production, based on the one or two you paid to do yourself. Content producers make their margin keeping production costs low (Craigslist PAs!) and selling to networks above cost. The content providers usually have risk on the development side - will show idea X get bought. Networks eliminate that risk (by buying it) and make their margin through ads, subscriber fees, etc, as outlined above. Networks are brands, and they market themselves as much. They need good content that matches their brand. They want this content to be cheap, and more or less fresh in the sense that not everybody has seen it (they buy that stuff too - in syndication...) For cable system VOD (as opposed to websites) I have seen lots of different ideas all fail miserably. Nobody wants to go thru menus on their TV, and people only tolerate it when they know that what they want is there (like a missed episode of Mad Men, or a movie that is 1/2 over on HBO right now.) Every attempt I have seen at a VOD channel was a mess and went no where. The cable companies are not going to market it for you, nor even mention it, unless it's already a huge hit and it might win then new subscribers. So, you can try and start a VOD centered Brand, and go out into the wide media universe and market it super widely using your own money, and when it's a hit you'll have your choice of many different people to sell it to under many different contracts. Or, you can take a much smaller cut and not put your own money on the line. Why would you want to compete w/ IFC anyway? They seems helpful, on top of it, and generally have good taste. They aren't doing anything super dumb, nor are they passing on amazing distribution options. Everything they air is available on VOD too. The content is the message. How it is delivered is not where the innovation is anymore. There are more pipes then most of us care to use, think about, maintain or support. If you make highly compelling content, you will have your choice of publishing platforms. There is no publishing platform that even necessarily helps your content be more compelling then it is.....

A broadcaster may have one, or an appropriate combination, of the following funding models: 1) Government funding through direct or indirect taxation. 2) Advertising between programmes or during programme breaks. 3) Programme sponsorship 4) Direct consumer subscription 5) Service selling e.g.: phone-in, micro-payments (SMS, etc), or direct selling 6) Public donations, or private equity funding Most common base funding models are: advertising, subscription or government funding. Subscription is generally done on a platform basis and channels are sold to the consumer in bundles/packages. The revenue from the bundle is then used to fund the infrastructure. A channel itself may then pay the service provider to be listed as part of one, or more, bundle(s). There may also be a return share of on-going revenue back to the channel based on the subscription income but this would occur only if the channel actually contributed to a significant draw for consumers. Typically a channel may not expect to gain significant revenue from subscriptions, or as in many channels they would not be in a closed subscription network but would be broadcast Free To Air (FTA). Most public service broadcasters are FTA within their home territory, this is unless there are other commercial or political concerns which require them to apply some security to the transmissions in which case 'free' subscriptions to a secured network are common and this is called Free to View (FTV). A channel which cannot fund itself by subscription, tax or direct income will typically be funded by sponsorship or advertising. The broadcaster will sell advertising slots between programmes and during artificial breaks within a programme. Slots are typically around 30 second and breaks are vary depending on the culture and business model, although legislation in different countries does sometimes regulate the advertising quantities. Sponsorship is where a brand will fund the broadcast of a programme segment or period, either in whole or in part. In some cases it is also possible to permit product placement within programmes for which the brand will pay a programme maker, or channel in order to subsidise the programmes creation. Sponsorship is regulated in some markets due to the potential ability to influence programmes editorial or to manipulate the viewer. Channels commission programmes to be on their network and according to the value of that programme and it's demographic it will be scheduled to be broadcast at the most suitable time with the most suitable advertising and/or sponsorship. A broadcast may either own the entire rights to a programme or just for certain showings of that programme. A channel will often pay per broadcast, including repeat fees arrangements. A broadcaster may also only have rights for certain markets and territories, for example they may have to separately arrange for rights to broadcast over the internet, or if their channel is relayed into another country then a separate rights arrangement would have to be made for delivery of that content. As a result on-demand should be treated separately from the traditional broadcast channel methods because they are a different business model with different rights and income structures. Potentially on-demand allows independent producers to get exposure and more direct income from their efforts but it introduces much greater risk for those entering because they cannot be sure that their efforts will actually receive payment. A producer can make a programme and then distribute it directly but the support of a broadcaster or studio typically comes with the support of substantial a team who will do everything to ensure the success of their investment. It is possible for a content aggregation company to make deals directly with a producer for their content and for the producer to then perhaps get a bigger margin, but they perhaps do not also have a strong negotiating position and must accept a lower price than a bigger traditional distributor might get when speaking to an on-line aggregator. Also the question is raised as to how a producer can get exposure, their content would need to be in a mainstream on-demand portal in order to gain the maximum exposure because most people will not want to watch a film or serial via their computer. Getting access to the main TV screen in a home is usually dependent on being supported by a large aggregation platform. On-demand presents a risk to broadcasters because there is less tolerance for extensive advertising but at the same time the advertising can now be targeted at the consumer instead of broadcasting. Knowing exactly who is seeing your advertising allows an advertiser to understand the demographics much better and thus get more value from the advertising. In addition to this the adverts can be customised to give the consumer adverts that are more relevant to their demographic and so maximise the possibility of purchase. Targeted advertising can command more money than traditional statistical broadcast advertising because of these enhanced demographic profiles. Fewer advertisements are needed for the same content and the adverts are more appealing to the consumer. The cost of distribution in on-demand is also linear rather than the fixed cost of broadcasting. Broadcasting requires a significant investment in infrastructure up-front, but on-demand typically makes use of existing infrastructure and the cost of distribution are proportional to the number of viewers actually viewing the content. Broadcasting has great economies of scale compared to on-demand but at the sacrifice of flexibility. I'll stop this now because otherwise I will have to write a book.