The Streaming Wars recently participated in a closed-door conversation at CES, bringing together industry leaders and executives to discuss the challenges and opportunities in today’s streaming landscape. The discussion underscored a recurring frustration among streaming platforms, programmers, and rights holders: the outsized role of CTV platforms in stifling innovation and growth.
The New Gatekeepers: CTV Platforms’ Grip on Distribution
CTV platforms (such as Roku, Samsung, and Vizio) have positioned themselves as indispensable gatekeepers of the streaming ecosystem. As streaming services seek distribution across connected TVs, they face increasingly onerous demands from these manufacturers. Whether through demanding significant shares of advertising inventory or asserting first-look rights over the most lucrative slots, CTV platforms have created a more restrictive system than collaborative.
One executive bluntly summarized the frustration: “Roku takes 30% of all inventory from publisher apps—fine, that’s been the standard—but now they want first look at everything. They’ll take the cream off the top and leave the rest unsold or under-monetized. It’s not sustainable.”
This behavior isn’t isolated. Executives shared that while some CTV platforms, like Samsung and Vizio, offer slightly more transparency or flexibility, these gestures are more about optics than systemic change.
“Samsung will give you a little more data or a better split, but they act like heroes for doing the bare minimum compared to Roku.”
Lack of Data: A Chokehold on Programming and Revenue
The lack of access to user data is a pervasive problem. Streaming platforms depend on data to refine programming, improve user experiences, and justify investments. CTV platforms, however, hoard this information, leaving programmers in the dark about viewership metrics and ad performance.
“The biggest frustration,” said one participant, “is that we can’t grow the business without data. I’d invest heavily in production if I had a clearer ROI path. But when CTV platforms don’t share data, they stifle our ability to innovate and succeed.”
This data drought also impacts advertising. Without granular insights into audience demographics and behaviors, streaming platforms struggle to command competitive CPMs. Meanwhile, advertisers grow disillusioned as they repeatedly encounter redundant ads or poorly targeted campaigns due to lack of transparency.
Carriage Disputes and Legacy Agreements: A System Under Strain
CTV platforms aren’t the only challenge. The streaming industry continues to grapple with legacy carriage agreements inherited from the cable era. These deals, designed for linear television, are ill-suited for the digital age. Executives shared harrowing accounts of negotiating with MVPDs and virtual MVPDs, where billions of dollars in deals are complicated by outdated terms.
An executive lamented, “We’re fighting over identity in a programmatic world. The MVPDs and CTV platforms want the user relationship and data, but we’re the ones creating the content. It’s a power struggle that’s dragging the entire industry down.”
FAST Channels and the Promise of Ad-Supported Streaming
FAST channels emerged as a beacon of hope for some in the room, with their ability to provide diverse content libraries and monetize via advertising. However, even this model is showing cracks under CTV platform pressures.
“We’re using an EPG designed in the 1950s,” said one programmer. “Platforms tell us they can only support 300 channels, but that’s an artificial limitation. They’re stifling choice and discovery, which is the opposite of what the streaming revolution was supposed to offer.”
Moreover, FAST channels face restrictive revenue splits and advertising conflicts. CTV platforms often demand large portions of ad inventory but fail to sell it effectively, leaving dead air or self-serving promos. These dynamics limit programmers’ ability to reinvest and innovate, creating a cycle of stagnation.
A Call to Action: Collaborate or Collapse
One theme was clear throughout the discussion: the streaming industry needs a healthier ecosystem. Collaboration among programmers, streamers, and even CTV platforms is essential to address these bottlenecks. Some executives proposed forming coalitions to pool resources and negotiate better terms, similar to how the Epic Games vs. Apple dispute challenged platform fees.
As one executive put it, “We must all hang together, or surely, we shall hang separately. The CTV platforms are hurting themselves by stifling innovation. If the economics don’t make sense, everyone loses.”
The conversation revealed a deep sense of urgency. If CTV platforms continue to prioritize short-term gains over long-term growth, they risk undermining the entire streaming industry. Streaming leaders must push for transparency, fair revenue splits, and better data-sharing practices to unlock the ecosystem’s full potential.
The Streaming Wars is intentionally ad-free
We don’t run display ads. Not because we can’t, but because we don’t believe in them.
They interrupt the reading experience. They cheapen the work. And they burn advertisers’ money on impressions nobody actually wants.
So we chose a different model.
We say the things people in this industry are already thinking but don’t say out loud. We connect the dots beyond the headline and focus on explaining why things matter to the people working in this business.
If you believe industry coverage can exist without clutter and interruption, you can support it here → SUPPORT TSW.
Support is optional. But it directly funds research and continued coverage — and helps prove this model can work.
Support TSW →
