We will ALL be metered to death for bandwidth consumption in an a-la-carte TV channel universe.

imgres

One of the results of the merger between Comcast and TWC will be how Comcast plans to halt the cord cutters and deal with the calls for unbundling the current TV landscape. Pay and cable TV are ripe for disruption. The writing I think is on the wall.

OTT (over-the-top) IP channels exist because they are carried into your home via IP. So is Aereo. And soon, so will most other channels today that we all watch on cable. The days of bundling 180 ‘basic’ channels while offering an option to buy ‘Pay’ TV channels with your ‘basic’ subscription monthly is outdated and no longer reflects the current TV landscape. The move to get the set-top box out of the living room is happening. The result? We will no longer have bundled channels or packages of ‘programming’.

Instead, think about this.

Just like the electric meter gets read every month and we pay for the amount of electricity we use, our TV will also become metered. The bandwidth caps will melt away and in its place will be a connection that Comcast will provide — but strictly for bandwidth. Then, as you decide which channels to watch on TV, whether its HBO or ABC, CBS or The History Channel you will be billed for the amount of time each and every channel is turned on in your home, incrementally.

That’s right. Watch HBO for several hours a night and you’ll be billed for this at some rate. (That ‘rate’ might be higher than if you watched VH1 or Spike TV, or lower if you watch ESPN). Want to see ABC and your local news, well that’s a slightly different rate. All channels will be delivered via IP. You will get notified throughout the month when you approach a set tier or amount that you decide is your ‘cap’. Or you can simply keep watching and pay the bill at months end. The bills won’t be too different but now will reflect the REAL usage in the home.

Since you’ll be getting the Internet already through Comcast’s coaxial cable, why not deliver every channel that exists in the TV universe and YOU decide what to watch. Cord cutters can’t cut the cord under this plan — they need bandwidth too (to see Netflix, Hulu, etc.). A DVR you say you need? No problem, Comcast will supply you one over the Internet (a software DVR).

Why might this happen? It eliminates expensive set-top hardware, allows for subscribers to watch whatever they want (package or bundled channels now melt away). It puts all channels on an even playing field. Sure HBO, Netflix, Showtime, etc. might have a minimum monthly charge, but just like electricity, you’ll watch them when you need to and you’ll be bale to see over time your usage patterns, favorite channels and genres and in turn the TV will become smarter because we’ll make it smarter (and make it a very personal experience) to watch, just as its always been.

Now, let me set my ‘soft’ DVR for ‘The Walking Dead’ tonight on AMC. The only time I watch AMC all month is for this show, so I’ll be billed for about 4hrs. a month for AMC during the ‘Walking Dead’ season. And I’ll be happy to pay that bill!

Advertisements

Update*

I’m now writing for SiliconAlley.com. You can see my latest article.

http://siliconalley.com/blog/2013/06/www-and-the-holy-grail

 

Silicon_Alley

Look Ma no more cable TV! Aereo + Nimble TV + Apple TV + YouTube = Cable Be Gone

AppleTVMarch2012_35160082_04_620x433         NimbleTV

Finally consumers have choice – at least those that have the technical knowledge to take advantage. Want to get out of cable but still have cable channels plus broadcast TV? Your prescription is as follows:  Apple TV, iPhone or iPad, Aereo for $8.00 month, Nimble TV for as little as $24.95 month. No contracts, you can add a virtual DVR and then simply launch a browser on your phone or tablet, login and throw the signal through the Apple TV onto your TV. The combo of Aereo + Nimble will cost no more than $32.00 a month (unless you want more than channels than the minimum) and you’ve got TV. Cable TV channels and broadcast. But more on this in another pub shortly.

(UPDATE:  Aereo is on a roll, with plans now to bring its streaming TV service to Atlanta. The Atlanta launch is scheduled for June 17, the company announced Tuesday. The capital of Georgia will be the third city to get the Aereo service, following New York and, from Wednesday of this week, Boston.  source:  CNET. 5/15/2013

aereo_logo         url4

There are really some other very cool non-cable broadcast channels coming out. I’d them term them ‘off Broadway’ TV channels. Some call them online channels. But they are as good as some cable channel programming offerings and maybe some are even better.

cable-cord-cutting-study-slide1

YouTube’s rumored subscription-plan offering is now a reality. The video site is rolling out a pilot program that will allow “a small group of partners” to offer paid channels on YouTube, with subscription fees starting at $0.99 per month. Every channel has a 14-day free trial period, with many also offering discounted yearly rates.  Some partners include:

The Jim Henson Company is launching an ad-free channel online with full episodes of Henson’s kids and preschool titles like Sid the Science Kid and Fraggle Rock. The channel will be available for $2.99/month or $24.99/year. The company is also launching a Spanish-language channel, which will be available for $1.99/month or $17.99/year.

Sesame Street will also offer full episodes on its paid channel when it launches.

National Geographic Kids’ channelwill be available for $3.99/month or $29.99/year, offering long and short-form videos aimed at kids ages 6-12. It will include a mix of library and original content.

Acorn TV, a streaming service focusing on British classic TV programming, is also launching with a channel that’s available for $4.99/month.

B-movie film director Roger Corman will launch a paid channel this summer called Corman’s Drive-In. It will offer more than 400 feature films that have been produced or directed by Corman. These include Grand Theft Auto (Ron Howard’s directorial debut), The Cry Baby Killer (Jack Nicholson’s first film), and Fire on the Amazon (Sandra Bullock’s first film). The channel will also serve as a potential distribution outlet for new films in production. We love Roger Corman!

UFC’s channel will feature classic fights and full versions of older UFC pay-per-view events. It’s available for $5.99/month.

Then there’s Entertainment Studios, which has launched eight paid channels on YouTube, spanning a bunch of different verticals, from cars to comedy, pets, recipes, and entertainment news/pop culture. One of the eight channels, which is titled Smart TV offers “best of” programming from the other seven networks for $9.99/month.

HuffPost Live will arrive on AXS TV, a network backed by Mark Cuban, CBS, Ryan Seacrest Media, AEG, and CAA, on May 13. The interactive streaming news network will run for six hours a day, from 10am to 4pm.

Yahoo unveiled partnerships including a brilliant the deal with NBC Entertainment and Broadway Video to become the exclusive US home to all Saturday Night Live archival content, and a similar agreement with World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE).  This is especially key now that Seth Meyers is taking over for Jay Leno – the repeats should garner some heavy online traffic that advertisers should eat up.

The Cheap Life with Jeff Yeager, an original how-to show on AARP’s YouTube channel, has topped 1 million video views. The show focuses on providing tips on spending smart and enjoying life at a fraction of the usual cost.

And finally there is the Jerry Seinfeld show Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee. The meaning of something, of course, is relative. show features Seinfeld just cruising along with friends such as Seinfeld co-creator Larry DavidSeinfeld co-star Michael RichardsRicky GervaisAlec Baldwin and Colin Quinn. That covers the comedians in cars; presumably, the getting coffee part will come a bit later. The show debuts on Crackle July 19th.

All in all I’d say online programming is growing up. The cable operators will soon take notice – more than likely too late.

The WWW and the Holy Grail

Adolph Ochs in 1896 put his slogan on a newspaper, “All the News That’s Fit to Print”. It still survives. Only just barely.

Sound arrived to movies in the late twenties, the silent-film industry and the Broadway theater industry were both broadsided. They never saw it coming. It was a running joke to them.

Radio was king for years. No one thought it would be overcome – there was a radio in every home throughout America.

radio

Then television started to gain traction in the late forties. Radio scrambled to adjust to the newer media – TV. Then, TV began to replace the radio in homes. Orders for TV sets were up 400 percent in 1949, many of them sold by the most popular shows of their time, (i.e. Milton Berle). Supply could not keep up with demand. Free television was for decades considered an American right, rabbit ears, ghosts and all.

images-5

Then broadcast TV scrambled to adjust to newer media – cable TV. For a while during the reign of ‘Free TV’, “Pay TV” was a joke.   Americans now pay for 24/7 foreign news networks in their cable and satellite packages, news, weather, sports, movies, etc. That which used to be free on broadcast TV was no longer free.

images-6

Then the hammer dropped for everyone. The Internet dawned, the digital revolution.  The Holy Grail of media. This was a change as great as the invention of electricity and the construction of transcontinental railroad. It was large, transformative and caused massively sweeping changes. No one was prescient enough to gauge even remotely how big this change was upon the whole planet.

images-7

The recording industry became the first to fall in the digital pipeline. They thought by suing Napster in court they could stop their declining bottom line.  Movies and DVD’s became next to fall in.

images-2

And then 2 large social media behemoths came along; Facebook (2004) the more social of the two and Twitter (2006) the most current up-to-the-minute form of news delivered to us not by a news anchor but by a neighbor.  Twitter made CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX ancient delivery mechanisms of news overnight.  We don’t select publications anymore, we select links.

images-8

An ecosystem of “group journalism” in which consumers with a cell phone eyewitness reporting of the news submitted by ‘US’ rather than actual reporters in the field, changed everything. Witness Captain Sully on the Hudson river. The proliferation of the Internet made every publicly available source of information in the world openly available to everyone. This change in and of itself has altered the landscape for everyone forever. The NYT’s and CNN no longer have a lock on exclusive. Exclusive is old news – we are now the prevailing ‘exclusive’.

images-1            images-3        images-4

Within all of this history of media, the largest companies, the ones we can name by brand have been caught sleeping by transformative change. From newspapers and magazines to Hollywood, aging media executives resistant to technology became overnight ostriches.  It was easier to take a paycheck, stick their heads in the sand then risk being ‘wrong’ about how future technology could transform their own business. Status quo was ‘safe’ harbor.  A herd of dinosaurs.

The decline and the fall of old media. It was inevitable and unavoidable. Casualties were and are in print, TV and soon cable channels. Yes, even cable TV will be falling (cord cutting: Aereo TV and Otoy). Old media will scramble to adjust just as before, but it will not be enough. The fall of old media is unavoidable.

And for us the consumer, the ‘hippie’ stage (freemium) of the Internet is over.  We will pay for more for media then ever before – not in print but whatever form it comes in. The trees will love us once again. However, the cost for this will be higher than it once was.  What is less talked about are the adjustments that consumers have to make. Paying for media that was free or easy to access is now the norm.

images-9

And still only 65% of the country has broadband Internet access. What Google fiber offers is just a beginning and will become the norm. Google fiber speeds will knock cable TV off its legs.  We wont need coaxial cable – just access to the Internet.  And it won’t have to be coming from the white coaxial cable coming into your home – it will be wireless.   TV channels will be become specific apps downloaded on a phone or tablet.  Bundles will be forgotten. The ‘triple play’ of a phone, cable and the internet that we all familiar with for $ 150.-200 a month will soon be broken down.

Perhaps even the app store will disappear too. The potential disruptiveness of Otoy (http://goo.gl/aQZSl ), as a breakthrough streaming service could, in the near future, could end the need for app stores and computer upgrades.

Advertising will never ever again subsidize any old-media news organizations in the style to which they (and their audiences) have been accustomed.

News organizations used to be able to overcharge and under-deliver in their deals with advertisers; the pizza place and the car dealership had nowhere else to go, and no one knew how many people saw, or acted on, a given ad anyway.  Not anymore. Nielsen, one of the old guards struggles to stay relevant – even if they purport to have new measuring technology. There are at least the 10 other companies who are in the process of eating their lunch.

We are in for years of re-adjustment. Transformation from print and paper to digital – cable TV to Internet TV, YouTube, social apps and the like. Consumer adjustment will take time. But less than you think. Our kids are growing up ignoring cable and television, without radio and traditional print media. The norm:  downloading of apps, mobile phones, tablets and no desktop computers. It’s different and disconcerting for the parents. It’s happened before – it just happened without the Internet. How we used to do things in the seventies, eighties, and nineties is no more – change is good.  Breath in – breath out.

The Unraveling of Television

Much has been written lately about the unbundling of cable TV. But its more than that. Way more.  First, a little history. In 1933 RCA introduced an improved camera tube and this was dubbed the ‘Iconoscope’. In 1941, the United States implemented 525-line television.  By 1947, when there were 40 million radios in the U.S., there were about 44,000 television sets (with probably 30,000 in the New York area). Commercial color television broadcasts began on CBS in 1951.

0*xS4SeKoVBoTmmG4s

Here is where it really gets interesting. In 1951, TV broadcasting was free. Nobody was paid for the use of any content.  In 1957, 25 million Americans watched the broadcast of a musical version of Cinderella. Executives in Hollywood calculated that if they had received a fee of $0.25 per TV set/viewer, they would have netted $6m in one day without any distribution costs.

 

The first basic cable network, launched via satellite in 1976.  That was Ted Turner’s superstation WTCG in Atlanta. Cable is often divided between basic and Pay TV. Basic cable networks receive at least some funding through “per-subscriber fees,” fees paid by the cable TV systems for the right to include the television network in its channel lineup. The fees that the ‘basic’ channels charge have grown and increased almost every year. The size of these fees varies widely. ESPN gets $5.54 per subscriber a month (from each and every cable system that carries ESPN), while Viacom’s MTV gets 41 cents per subscriber. Niche channels get much less. MTV Hits, for instance, gets two cents. The big 4 ‘broadcast’ networks get ‘re-transmission’ fees. CBS expects to get over $ 1b in fees over the next few years alone.  Ironically, cable television in the United States in its first twenty-four years was used almost exclusively to relay over-the-air commercial broadcasting television channels to remote and inaccessible areas.

 

So, cable operators faced with increasing fees every year had to ‘bundle’ channels together into ‘packages’. Which is what we all now have. The question is whether a full ‘a-la-carte’ offering to consumers would be a dream or a disaster for the cable TV industry. I am not attempting to draw any conclusions here one-way or the other.

With this debate going on along comes a service that really begins to make it look like 1951 all over again. And this time its not broadcast or cable, instead its carried over the internet. And that makes it all the more pervasive and certainly disruptive.

 

Enter Barry Diller’s ‘Aereo’ TV. For $8 to $12. a month, you get over 30 channels of programming, including ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, PBS, movie channels (ION, etc.) Spanish and Asian language programming and even something for the kids, PBS KIDS (which has some excellent shows – move over Nick Jr.). You can record a program while watching another . You don’t even need a physical DVR box, your show is saved online in the ‘cloud’. There are no cables, no antennas and no set-top boxes – nothing, nada. The only thing you need is Internet connectivity. Must you watch it on line? Nope.  If you’ve got an Apple TV or Roku or any Internet connected TV, you’re all set.  Add Netflix or Amazon Prime and you’ve got new movies, VOD and pay-tv programming. Do I really need cable TV too?

 

Aereo is being sued big time by plenty of broadcasters. Its only in NYC right now but in about a month or so, 22 more major cites around the country will offer it.  So, will this cause many people to disconnect their cable TV? Will this prompt the operators to un-bundle everything. Is this the ‘cord cutter’ that’s been talked about for some time now ? I for one would disconnect my cable TV. I hardly watch it. I do want to see the 4 main broadcast networks and have some programming for the kids. Aereo provides this.

 

The unraveling of television has only just begun. Stay tuned.

Confusion Reigns Supreme with Online Movie and TV Streaming Services. Consumers are the losers.

Confusion           caution-mass-confusion  220px-Aereo_logo netflix-appletv   streamingmedia

Recent shifts in technology due to the Internet have destroyed the profitability of several industries including the newspaper and music businesses. The next business that will be made over by technology is television. The profitability of owning TV networks is being undermined by digital video recorders, internet-enabled on-demand viewing, Netflix, Hulu, YouTube, and piracy/theft.  In this post, I’m going to list many if not all of these choices currently available to you and me – and there are WAY TOO MANY. And a lot of amateur content is taking up an increasing portion of a viewers’ time online and on mobile/tablet devices. You Tube has how many new original channels?  I mean unless you’ve got absolutely nothing to do 24hrs a day other than veg in front of a computer and or TV, you can’t ingest even 10% of this content.

Consumption of network and cable content is taking place in ways that allow viewers to circumvent high monthly cable bills, avoid watching commercials, or both. The new Barry Diller backed ‘Aereo’ – https://www.aereo.com/ will indeed disrupt cable and pay-tv as never before. Every single one of these changes represents a move to a revenue model that is less profitable than the one currently enjoyed by the TV networks. It is simply a matter of time before the revenue and profitability of the major networks begins to fall seriously erode.

342529-nimbletv

Consumers are awash with the plethora choices of streaming movie services, VOD and TV/time shifting programming (between 30 to 40 and counting). There are so many choices that I defy anyone to tell me exactly what they are buying and what each of them offer, specifically how tey are different. Anand Subramanian of startup NimbleTV was even more blunt. “There’s content everywhere. It’s a mess. It’s a total mess for consumers.”

Hollywood-sign-900Hollywood releases maybe 10-12 ‘big’ picture events every year and all of the releases are timed by Holidays (Thanksgiving/Christmas, July 4th, Memorial Day, Halloween, and Labor Day weekends). Independent movies are released around these times and are scattered throughout the year.  Years back when DVD’s were released, those releases in the stores reinforced the theatrical releases with a barrage of marketing. You saw the same big pictures being marketed again in 6-9 months after the theaters. So, when you went to Blockbuster you had a ‘a-ha’ moment. You’d say, oh yeah, I remember that movie, I missed it at the theaters and you would rent it. It was pretty clear what you saw,  what you missed and what you wanted to see again. Then, HBO and Showtime would re-market the same movies in their PAY-TV window approximately 10-12 months after the theaters.  They’d remain there for 24-36 months sometimes even longer.

dx4zdi1spq0olohforey    showtime

When Pay-TV was in its heyday, there was a ‘pay’ content war between HBO and Showtime. Some studios had exclusives with HBO, some with Showtime. To the average consumer, this didn’t mean all too much.  No one wanted to watch a Paramount movie, they wanted to see ‘Fatal Attraction’.  Maybe with the exception of which pay-tv service had Disney movies (if you had kids).  Now, that doesn’t really matter too much as kids watch gobs of shows on basic, Nick Jr., etc.  Over the years, HBO got wise and supplemented its schedule with well produced original programming and still is. Showtime followed with its original programming and both duked it out with Sports, specifically Boxing.

Time shift forward, now it’s a war between Netflix and HBO.

121007064534-amazon-prime-resize-horizontal-gallery    Hulu-Plus  shop-itunes-store-column-browser

Its not HBO and Showtime, but Netflix – http://goo.gl/0N2No . And its not only Netflix, it Amazon Prime, Hulu plus, iTunes and a myriad of other streaming offerings.  I’ve compiled a list below. But the bottom line is how does anyone really understand what they are buying? If you subscribe to Netflix, can I see Disney movies? Will I get mega-hit from Universal like Jurassic Park, Les Miserables, and Despicable Me Part 2? Or do I need to subscribe to several streaming services? And, which ones?

And down the road very soon Barry Diller’s back Aereo TV will expand to 22 cities – https://www.aereo.com/. Why is this disruptive if it only offers ABC, CBS and NBC as the primary driver of the service? (more on this later).

abc_logo nbc-primetime-schedule CBS

Here is the list ( I hope I’ve got most included). I’ll admit I am confused as everyone else and I’m not going to buy or subscribe to more than one service especially when I don’t even know that if I do, I’ve essentially duplicated the movies and content I’ve subscribed to.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Hallmark Instant Streaming – coming Spring 2013

Amazon Prime Instant Video – The Prime Instant Video library consists of over 30,000 movies and TV episodes, which can be watched via any device the streaming service is available on, including the Kindle Fire, iOS devices, Roku, Xbox 360, PS3, and the Wii U.

iTunes

Netflix

Redbox Instant (Verizon)

Redbox in Stores – Physical DVD rentals

Roku

Boxee

CinemaNow – Best Buy’s service plus

Hulu +  – Hulu now has more than 430 content partners, offering over 60,000 TV episodes, 2,300 TV series, and 50,000 hours of total video

NimbleTV – Just like Aereo (Barry Diller venture)

Motive TV – Like Nimble and Aereo from the U.K. heading to the US

Aereo – Just like Nimble TV

Ultraviolet – Studio driven answer. Welcome to DRM land.

Bigstar.tv

Crackle – SONY/Columbia Pictures

Vudu

RedBox (physical rental)

Kaleidescape

Sony Pictures Gift Store – more SONY choices

Flixster – Gateway to itunes, amazon and vudu

IndieFlix

Popcornflix

Cable Operators VOD library ( Time-Warner 4,000 movies + Comcast, Cox, etc.)

OnDemand via cable

Microsoft’s X-Box – a Gateway to Netflix + others.

Comcast’s Xfinity – Over 10,000 VOD movies (lots of NBC/Universal content)

Starz Play

Encore Play

MoviePlex Play –  Starz Play currently offers approximately 400 film and TV titles, including 300 movies and 100 episodes of Starz original series. Encore Play offers about 900 monthly selections, while MoviePlex provides access to 200 more movies every month.

AvailTVN_LogoAvail-TVN’s View Now – ViewNow’s library of movie content includes titles from both major and independent studios, which can be delivered in MPEG-2 and MPEG-4, as well as a range of adaptive bitrate (ABR) formats, to traditional set-tops as well as internet-connected devices like PCs, smartphones, and tablets. In addition to multiplatform rights, Avail-TVN says ViewNow includes download rights on a large number of titles.

M-GoM-Go – new app that elegantly streamlines all of your media together in one place including movies, music, TV and more. Formed in 2011, M-GO is a dynamic well-funded startup sprung from the cooperation of Technicolor and DreamWorks Animation. The M-GO app will be available for download for free on all major operating systems. M-GO is preloaded on 2012 Samsung and Vizio Smart TV and Blu-ray players as well as Intel Ultrabooks, totaling up to 30 million installed devices.

Watch ESPN is now available on Amazon’s Kindle Fire and Kindle Fire HD devices. Free to download via the Amazon Appstore, the TV Everywhere app offers access to live sports and channel programming from ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU, and ESPN3, as well as ESPN Goal Line/Buzzer Beater when in season. As is the case with other WatchESPN editions as well as other TV Everywhere services, to access the content the viewer needs to first have ESPN in their TV subscription package. In conjunction with announcing the Kindle Fire app release, ESPN also revealed some end-of-the-year numbers on how WatchESPN is faring in terms of distribution and availability. The sports network says that total downloads for the WatchESPN app, which is now available in the App Store, Google Play, and the Amazon Appstore, more than doubled in 2012. It’s now available in 46 million households nationwide as six of the top 10 cable distributors also provide access to the service.

epix-hd-logo1EPIX plans to launch a streaming app for the PlayStation 3 during the first quarter of 2013, followed by an app for the portable PlayStation Vita console sometime in the spring. The apps will offer more than 3,000 titles, including blockbusters such as The Hunger Games, Thor, and Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, as well as EPIX’s lineup of original programming, which features music concert, comedy, and sports events. The apps will be available to PlayStation Network members in the US as a free download. Users will need to authenticate their EPIX TV subscription in order to watch the content.

Now about Aereo.  One of the things we all get cable for whether you realize it or not is to receive the 3 main Broadcast Networks, ABC, CBS and NBC. These are on basic cable in 100% of all cable systems nationwide. And basic cable costs at least $ 50-70 a month and 9 times out of 10 its bundled with pay-TV and a phone land line along with internet access bringing your bill to over $ 100 a month.  And generally, one has a Netflix or Amazon Prime subscription (or another streaming movie service).  There are 2 kinds of camps here or cable subscribers, one with kids and the others without kids. For the people without kids, Aereo + 1 streaming movie service (unless you are a sports nut and MUST have ESPN) would be sufficient. You’d have local broadcast TV and all the movies you could watch/stream. What else do you really need (unless you must watch ‘Honey Boo-Boo’ and then I can’t help you). For the families with kids, this is slightly age dependent. Its hard when you have toddlers NOT to want to get several of Viacom’s Kids channels or Disney’s kids channels (Nick, Nick Jr., Disney Channel, Disney Jr., etc. )  If you have older kids, teens etc. a movie streaming service with Hulu + might suffice.  For those without kids, Aereo + a movie streaming service will drastically cut your bill. Aereo I believe will charge about $ 9.00 a month, no subscription or early termination fee (take that Cox, Comcast, Time-Warner and Fios). Maybe with Amazon Prime or Netflix and your looking at under $ 20.00 a month. Yes, you will need internet access so add another $40-60.00 a month depending on your need for speed. But its definitely less than the typical bundled services. If you don’t think that Aereo has Pay-TV in its crosshairs, you’re crazy. We shall see how this unfolds as it winds its way through the courts. Yes, Aereo is being sued by the broadcasters and others, but it’s also rolling out its service nationwide this spring. I am signing up to see what its like – but it seems like an idea whose time has arrived

Television is no longer TV, its IP!

The old generation networks: ABC, NBC, CBS and FOX. The new-generation networks?  Hulu Plus, Amazon Instant video, Netflix and YouTube.

Consider this:  Microsoft recently reported that Xbox 360 owners spend more time online watching video and listening to music than playing games. The company announced 35 new entertainment partners being added to the Xbox 360 in the next year, including the NBA, NHL, Nickelodeon, and Univision. ESPN is expanding its programming on the Xbox to include live feeds of all of its channels. Microsoft is also launching a music service to compete with iTunes.

                

The Wii U, debuting this fourth quarter, will also feature Netflix, YouTube, Hulu Plus, and Amazon Instant Video.

And, Outside of games, the PlayStation Network also now delivers access to streaming content from Hulu Plus, Cinema Now, Amazon Instant Video, Netflix, NFL Sunday Ticket, NHL Game Center Live,  MLB.TV,  ESPN and Crackle TV, while users will soon have access to YouTube from the PlayStation Vita.

You’ve got wonder, how will Nielsen ever be able to count the eyeballs watching? At this point, they can’t. They are the ‘dinosaur’ technology.

When my Mom and Dad had breakfast in the mornings, they would pass the newspaper back and forth. Back then, I looked at the classifieds for things to buy second hand and they even had a classified section in most magazines and papers for the ‘personals’. Wanted to go the movies (you know the movie we saw ‘advertised’ by trailer last night during a network show on CBS, say Ed Sullivan or Mary Tyler Moore), we checked the newspaper.  Real estate listings and needed to buy a used car? Newspapers.

               

Fast forward 15 years. Now we check our mobile phones for movie trailers and times. Dating? Not in the newspapers, on mobile or a laptop or tablet. News? Forget the paper. And for many years, the papers were in denial – they kept printing tons of papers, special sections, extra editions and even tried to launch new newspapers in certain cities to compete with the entrenched and big local guys. They lost millions of dollars and saw their stock price get hammered and many folded. The bigger ones put up paywalls (i.e. NYT’s, WSJ, etc.)

Then the music CD died and the way music was listened to and purchased changed. No one could believe that there wasn’t going to be any more music CD’s nonetheless a Tower Records or Wherehouse to close their doors. But they did. And the CD has all but disappeared.

Movies? Same thing is happening and will happen. It may take longer because of the nature of the medium. Movies are different than music in that the files are way larger and with music you listen to ‘Hotel California’ or your favorite music many times over and over. Movies? How many times can you watch the same movie over and over. However, Blockbuster and stores like them are disappearing. Replaced by iTunes, RedBox, (and RedBox I believe has a limited life span even though they are going gang-busters today), Amazon Instant Prime, YouTube, IMDB (yes you can buy movies and stream them there too) and many others.  Even Wal-Mart is in the mix (Ultraviolet and VUDU).

In my generation and others behind me, its what you owned and had that was important. Today, its how you access it. No ownership. No physical ownership that is. Its just not important. When and how you get it, is.

The final frontier is the television. And it’s a big frontier. And, there is more at stake than a plastic CD in a rectangular box that will disappear. Advertisers and the big 4 networks stand to lose the most. Including producers, writers, actors and the like. Add a DVR into the mix and the new choices that the younger generation has now and you’ve got a real problem CBS, NBC, ABC and FOX.  The upfront TV buying season which some estimate generates $19 billion fuels most everything we see on TV. About $9.5 billion for network and $ 9.9 billion for cable.

Network estimates individually for 2012-2013 season are:

  • CBS: $2.92 billion,
  • ABC: $2.65 b,
  • Fox: $2.15 b,
  • NBC: $1.78 b.

So, when Game consoles, tablet makers, mobile phones and the like are all putting mainstream content up and online for consumption, someone stands to lose. Another way of thinking about this would really be a shift of dollars from Network and Cable to third screens. It won’t disappear but in ten years it’s going to look awfully different than it does today. And the way all of this is counted and rated will actually become easier than how Nielsen has done this for decades ( a diary that you write in? Really?).

A new report from Nielsen, the TV audience ratings and measurement people, shows that the number of people who watched TV at least once per month—a pretty low bar—declined from 90 percent of the population to 83 percent last year.

Proportionately, that means TV lost 8.5 percent of its audience in 2011. As many as 17 percent of people never watch TV, the survey of 28,000 consumers in 56 countries.

That’s a huge loss of interest in a medium that in industrialized nations is regarded as a standard like electricity or hot running water.

The number of people watching video on a computer at least once per month is now higher, at 84 percent, than those watching TV.  The implications are obvious.  Some not so obvious. One is that cable affiliates pay big fees to Networks for carriage. If no one is watching, no one will be paying. And, younger kids don’t care what ‘network’ its on, they care when it will be available to see on Netflix or Hulu Plus. A real shift in economics and habits. And I don’t think the TV industry is paying attention. But they will, they will have to.

Welcome to the new world of multi-screens and time shifting. TV as we once knew it not TV, its IPTV.

13 Movie Online Services is WAY too many. (PPV Part 2)

Netflix vs. Google TV 2.0 PPV (powered by Honeycomb 3.1) vs. YouTube rentals vs. iTunes vs cable PPV vs VUDU vs. Blockbuster OnDemand vs Facebook OnDemand vs BigStar Movies vs CinemaNow OnDemand vs. Alphaline ( Sears/Roxio) vs. Redbox (due 2011) vs. Flixster via Warner Bros. vs anyone else ?

What happens when the airlines have a fare war? You know, you can fly from NY to L.A. for $xx.xx and then the next thing you know, another airline tops that price by $ 20.00? Or gives you a free bag to carry on board? All of a sudden 5 or more airlines have the same special going on. Who do you fly with? Decisions, decisions… It all begins to seem and look the same to you. You get to the same destination, same approximate times, using the same type of transportation, in the air for just about the same money. Who suffers? Ultimately the carriers do.
Meet the carriers. Not the airlines, but the carriers of movies online. I count thirteen (13) of them – eleven (11) of them are live as we speak. All boasting the same movies for the most part for the same prices. All rentable at the same time for about the same amount of time. And I’m not even counting Redbox as an online rentable service…yet. What’s a consumer to do – who do you choose? And why. Do you ‘subscribe’ to a Netflix monthly or do you pick off a film on a one-off basis from another provider. More importantly, how do all of these guys begin to differentiate themselves from each other? How and where do they market themselves? Netflix is clearly the 900lb gorilla today. I guess iTunes is # 2. But beyond them, I can’t really tell who’s in third place. But more importantly, do I really care? Do I need3 or 5 or 7 similar services? On top of all this, I have Verizon’s FIOS cable service at home with thousands of movies to choose from to watch on any given day/hour.

I have licensed movies before from each of the studios and it was no easy task. Number one, its VERY expensive. Figure an upfront fee to be paid to play, maybe between $500k-$1m. That’s just for starters. Then there are the guarantees against each title licensed. Therefore as a provider of online fare, you’ve got to re-coup that fee with a certain number of minimum rentals or turns of the gate so to speak. With nearly 13 services out there plus cable choices, I’m going to take a guess here a few will not make it. Not only must you guarantee upfront cash, you also must explain how you are going to market the studios films, how you will digitally protect them from piracy ( good luck on that one) and how you will separate yourself from the rest of the online movie ‘noise’. All of this and then compete with the new ‘premium’ $30.00 a pop cable TV onDemand offering ( not that I think that’s going to be too successful – it’s the least of these companies problems).
However, the one issue I have with all these services is this: I am unable to save ANYTHING I purchase or rent for viewing later on a rainy day. If I had a ‘digital’ locker – someplace to hold what I spend my money on to see so I can view it later (more than 24hrs later), that might sway me to use that service ALL THE TIME.

A Train Wreck Indeed!

How do you f’up the pay-per-view business? You don’t. No need to – it has been one train wreck since 1984. (Full disclosure: In 1984, I started a nationwide satellite delivered ‘A’ title Movie service called’ The People’s Choice’ alongside of Jeff Reiss’s ‘RequestTelevision’ and Scott Kurnit’s ‘Viewers Choice’). When I was in this business, Bill Mechanic (ex-CEO, Chairman of Fox, Disney, green lit ‘Titanic’) and Barry Diller were at Paramount, Jamie Kellner ( Orion Pictures who went on to run ‘The WB Network’), Hal Richardson ( President at Paramount) was at Disney/Dreamworks, Eric Frankel (President for 26yrs) and Stanley Solson along with Eddie Blier were at Warner Bros. ( close to the Steve Ross reign whom I knew well from High School days), Mike Medavoy at Tri-Star, Ned Nalle at Universal and Andy Kaplan at Sony. Most all of these people now still are around and are running their own ship BECAUSE back then, they had a some foresight and moxie. They DID agree to let the PPV at least try and get off the ground by granting PPV rights to a few nascent, early entrants in the business. At that time, there were only a few addressable homes to see the films.

Since the inception of PPV on the cable landscape, its always been a ‘promise’ business at best. Nothing really ever took off or was unbelievably successful (and I am referring to MOVIES, not the WWF, Boxing or the Adult business). Many a business and consulting firm was built around it, hardware made for it, ordering systems invented and manufactured and in the end, most went out of business. Most cable operators didn’t even understand it or what it was suppose to be, what ‘tier’ to put it on and how to promote it. Most felt it would cannibalize their existing cash cow, PAY TV.

It never cannibalized anything because it never got off the ground. No one could agree on a movie PPV ‘window’ (the timing of when a PPV movie should be allowed to be seen and ordered on PPV). Many a conference, discussion group, speech and convention sessions were had – all futile. Nothing was ever decided. The VCR’s were blamed as the culprit, then it was the movie studios, then it was theater owners, then it was Pay TV and the ‘exclusivity’ wars of the 90’s. Then the Internet crept upon us all and that was the new Darth Vadar. You can’t release a film on PPV too early because it could be copied easily and even easier become distributed by means of the internet all over the planet (meaning no more duplicating and bicycling cassettes as if my friends ever did this in mass to begin with). Now, using the Internet, movies would be all over the place, everywhere. Everyone would have a copy. Well? Do we ALL have copies of Avatar? Tootsie? As Good As It Gets? Dirty Harry? A good industry has got to know its limitations! And this one never did!

Now, theater owners are afraid of the 60 day release window. Pahleeese! Just read a few of the articles below.

http://engt.co/lWRaty

http://bit.ly/kXEgRU

http://lat.ms/kiRwwc

Theater owners and the Hollywood creative community are livid about Premium VOD, which they perceive as paving the road to cannibalizing theatrical attendance which would in turn harm a movie’s overall economics, creating a dangerous downward spiral. In addition, there’s concern that if consumers switch to watching movies on the small screen then the creative license implicit in a big screen emphasis will get squeezed. While their concerns MAY be justified, the good news for them is that Premium VOD will be lucky to achieve even minimal success.

Why? The cost is one – $ 30.00 for a poor film or film that has not done well at the theater or is released directly to DVD (or what was once called DVD) is insane. Sorry, justification by babysitter fees and popcorn costs don’t cut it. These are niche films. Avatar and other BIG films will never see this light of day through this window. But ‘Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs ‘ will (and has already, sort of). Example – first film up is Just Go With It” starring Adam Sandler and Jennifer Aniston. Ho-hum. Good cast and a flop a the box office for the most part. I’d be pissed if I paid $30.00 for this AND CAN’T EVEN KEEP A COPY IN A DIGITAL LOCKER TO SEE WHEN I WANTED AGAIN? WTF? And frankly that could be one of the keys to making this viable. Give me the ability to KEEP it as if I bought the DVD ( keep it in a ‘cloud’ locker) and I’d might buy a few films – that would help at least justify the cost.

And, as Will Richmond from VideoNuze so aptly points out, “Studios seem to believe that making movies available sooner in the home will attract demand. But the problem is that there are already so many choices for watching movies in the home – pay-TV, Netflix, iTunes, Amazon, Vudu, etc. etc., that it will be very hard to break through the noise, solely with a “sooner” positioning, which is more than offset by a ridiculously high price point. Consumers are savvier than ever; they’ll quickly realize that they can get the same movie for $4-5, a sixth to a seventh the price of Premium VOD, just by waiting a couple more months for it to appear on pay-TV or online VOD.”

So, theater owners who vow to ‘go to war’ are wasting their time and efforts. I guarantee them that the Movie studios and cable operators and satellite delivery services will win the war for them. Somehow, these guys think that consumers are not too smart. When are they going to wake up and smell the coffee? When are they going to realize that all of us don’t rush to ‘steal’ digital copies of films for any number of reasons (i.e., they are 700megs of data AT LEAST, cumbersome to store, less than perfect copies that lack subtitles at times and extra’s.) They are not MP3’s! Music and movies may both have a digital base as a common denominator but ultimately I’ll listen to Hotel California many more times than I can watch Avatar in my lifetime. And the pirates don’t make a bit of difference except barely on the streets of lower Manhattan or Tokyo where poorly made copies sell for $5.00 until those vendors get caught that day. And they on sell about 30 movies at that point – no MASS market like that that would ruin a $250m box office in the theaters or in any ancillary market I know of.

Theater owners should rejoice that soon this whole business will be in Netflix’s (or some other digital distributors) capable hands and not the studios. (Apologies to those friends of mine at the studios now – its not your fault, it’s just the ‘economics’ to blame and perhaps a few at the top thinking we are still in the DVD/VCR age). Make the business consumer friendly – give us a copy of what we buy and allow us to watch it whenever we want for our money that we spent. After all, I can do this with new music released, why not new movies released?

Netflix vs. YouTube and TV on the Net.

Time to delve back into the world of video. Oh, and don’t forget to watch SharkTank on ABC this friday at 8pm/7pm 🙂 ..

It has taken some time but Netflix and Youtube have each taken their position in the video entertainment world and I get the feeling that Youtube is not too happy about it.

On Youtube you can maybe change the world. On Youtube you can be discovered and help discover the next Justin Bieber. On Youtube, if one of your videos goes viral, you can make tens of thousands of dollars, and if you can replicate the feat of popularity, you can make hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. Those are real commission dollars .

But wait, there is more good from Youtube. Any one around the world can get Youtube to subsidize the cost of hosting their family/wedding/team/business/class/personal videos. Hopefully perpetually. These are unique, honorable,impactful and expensive roles that Youtube has chosen to under take.

But if you want to veg out and watch a TV show or movie, the vast majority of people just turn on the TV. About 11mm people turn on Netflix..

The lines of division between Youtube, Netflix and traditional TV have become crystal clear.

Traditional TV is where you get entertainment in real time. Live major sports, the latest movies on VOD, original episodes of your favorite TV shows, all in the highest, no – buffering quality available to your TV. Plus they have smartly opened the door to TV EVerywhere and in home tablet streaming so that there is a pay once, watch anywhere opportunity for their content.

Netflix is where you get streaming access to a growing library of thousands of TV shows and movies, and soon, a smattering of original content as well. Netflix has done an extraordinary job of being available easily on any and every device known to the internet. 11mm (those streaming, not all netflix users) or so users have happily paid Netflix $7.99 per month for this service and it shows no signs of slowing down.

Youtube is the counter-balance to Netflix and Traditional TV. Youtube is where you know 99pct of what is on the site is pure junk that has no relevance to you. It’s like walking through the bargain bin at Walmart hoping to find something that might interest you, knowing the price is right. Youtube is Community Access Television for the world.

Remember back in the day when Cable had A and B sides of the set top box ? You got all the good channels on the A side, and all the community access stuff was on the B side ? Youtube is the aggregation of every B side of every cable system in the world. That is not a knock on Youtube. It just ain’t what it ain’t.

The B side of cable was community driven. The B side of cable was an open door for anyone with access to a video camera. The cable company would let you schedule shows and put them on their schedule . Like Youtube, back in the day, there were shows that would break out and create mainstream opportunities.

I can’t help but include this paragraph from the history of Public Access TV in Manhattan

“Public access has a fundamental PR problem, which one producer summed up with this rhetorical question: “If anybody can do it, who would want to?” I don’t think there is any particular personality type that is drawn to public access; as with anything, it attracts good, bad, and ugly. But these people (each of whom I met by chance through the help of someone else I interviewed) have some things in common. All are creative, and all seem to have a thick skin and a high threshold for frustration. None were paid for their shows. Most actually shelled out their own money for studio time. Three admitted to suffering career setbacks later as a result of appearing on public access. They approached their work in television with a level of intensity and passion that only exists in the realm of avocations and came away with uniquely philosophical perspectives on the nature of television.”

The same thing could easily be said about Youtube producers today. And that is a business problem and social opportunity for Youtube. They have become Community Access for the Internet. That is a brilliant opportunity if you are trying to change the world or create huge communities . That is a huge challenge if you are trying to maximize earnings per share for your parent corporation. People won’t pay a subscription fee for any of it and most of it will never pay for itself with advertising because most of it will never be seen. It is the B side of the content world.

Which is exactly why I believe Youtube is channeling 1998 and gearing up to do quite a bit of live streaming. They don’t like being the third entertainment option . They don’t like being the “b or c side of content””. They are hoping live streaming can change the standings.

Offering everyone in the world the opportunity to stream whatever they want, live to the rest of the world, could actually change the world. But it won’t change the content stratification challenge Youtube is facing now. It won’t change how people see Youtube relative to traditional TV and Netflix.

The reality is that both cable/telco/sat distributors on your TV and Netflix are moving faster in terms of the introduction of technology (TV Everywhere/Remote DVR/IPad and multi device suuport) and the introduction of new and original high value content than Youtube. I think Youtube is hoping that live streaming will change that. It will be interesting to see if it does.

Personally, I’m not optimistic. But hey Youtube, call me. I’ve been there , done that and I can help you out.

Guest post by Mark Cuban. 4.12.2011 via blogmaverick.com