Is Facebook In Trouble?

Yesterday, Facebook announced that its teen demographic is using Facebook less.  The once shiny toy has perhaps lost its luster, partly because older demographics have been embracing Facebook for casual gaming, picture sharing, and commenting on political and social issues.  The author speculates that a number of reasons have led to this decrease including, parents as friends, permanence of their posts, and seeing their "Facebook’s mobile app as bloated".  Still the news that teen usage was declining caused the stock market to sell the stock.  But is Facebook in trouble?

Certainly, the Facebook company saw competition coming to steal this core audience and as a result it acquired Instagram.  I find it likely that those Facebook teens as well as new users are finding Instagram as a preferred alternative.  The author agrees.  "Compare this to slimmer services like Snapchat and Instagram where it’s obvious what you’re supposed to do — view and share photos and videos."  For my own children, early teens, I prefer them having Instagram over Facebook.  Its simplicity allows me to see what is being posted and commented on.  While some argue Snapchat quickly deletes posts, it is not as temporary as some teens and their parents would like. 

Is Facebook in trouble; not really.  Facebook made the right move in buying Instagram; its two products now seem to reach different audiences and offers more revenue opportunities.  Still the shiny new thing may only be temporary as the next new social app emerges.  The one thing we know, teens are a fickle animal, likely to move on to the next shiny object.  But for Facebook, the real revenue opportunity, the 25 - 49 year old, remains strong and should serve Facebook for years to come. 

Could Intel Media Merge with Verizon And RedBox Instant?

Unfortunate as it might be, Intel is having a difficult time getting major content companies to agree to carriage deals on its new streaming platform.  Broadcast and cable networks don't want to risk their current relationships with cable operators that already pay them substantial license fees.  Intel Media is not alone; Apple has been trying the same strategy with little or no movement either.  So with a major investment in technology and a brand new set top box, what is Intel Media to do?

Well, according to All Things D, Intel is in talks with Verizon to sell or create a partnership with its Intel Media division.   "People familiar with the talks say the two companies are in advanced negotiations."  For Verizon, Intel Media comes with a new set top box that may be seen as more desirable than FIOS' current one, offering access to both linear and streaming video content, including Verizon's partner, Redbox Instant.  And Verizon's marketing muscle could help to deploy the Intel Media service, using their "OnCue" or another new brand name, beyond the FIOS wired footprint. 

But is the Intel built set top box enough for Verizon?  It comes with no big content deals or subscribers yet, it is a pure start up.  Where is the value that Verizon thinks it can unlock?  And if it is the box, would other boxes, like the new TiVo box, which essentially does linear and streaming like Intel, as well as DVR functionality, be an easier and better fit?  Certainly questions being asked in these high level negotiations. 

As a fan of streaming platform services being created by folks like Intel Media, Amazon, Samsung, Apple, and others, the key to success continues to be strong content.  The networks are not likely to risk their current revenue model with a disruptive technology that could hurt their revenue line.  OTT success is in distributing original content and exploiting highly valued content that may become available, like potentially the NFL Direct Ticket that DirecTv currently offers.  It will be only after streaming providers become more prominent that cable networks will crave the chance to be added to their service. 

Netflix Picks Up Dexter

When HBO's signature series, The Sopranos, left the premium channel, it found its next window of airings on basic cable on A&E.  The rise of streaming video has opened a new platform of distribution with Showtime announcing its deal for making available all seasons from Dexter on Netflix.  "A Netflix spokesman said it is an 'exclusive, multiyear' deal."  But certainly, once this deal expires, basic cable could be its next home.  But no longer is basic cable the next stop after pay channels.

The rise of video streaming with competition from Amazon, Hulu, and Netflix has created a new syndication window that has bumped cable and other windows down a peg.  How lucrative this window is for content makers and distributors remain to be seen.  Certainly, given the demand for streaming content, strong shows like Dexter, "set a ratings record for Showtime, averaging 2.8 million viewers", are important for demonstrating value that Netflix is delivering to its current and prospective customers.  Certainly we should expect future syndication deals coming to Hulu and Amazon soon.  And it continues to justify the notion that content is king.

Apple's Cash Problem, What To Do

With Apple's quarterly earnings report expected at close of day, investors wonder what Apple should do with all its cash. In fact, Carl Icahn has been pushing hard for more stock buyback to drive up share prices.  But like the author of today's WSJ article, Farhad Manjoo, I believe that is a short sighted move.  As a very small Apple shareholder, I want to see Apple us its funds to remain innovative in a fickle, changing digital marketplace.  Manjoo has some great suggestions for other uses of these dollars from building a Google search engine competitor to buying a cellular network.  Of his ideas, I like the latter better.

Apple has always prided itself in owning the complete product, hardware and software; the rise of the iPad has meant that introduction of third party apps, but they follow a rigorous approval process.  The piece that Apple lacks is the connection between consumer and device.  Buying or building a cellular/broadband network to best run its devices, from the Apple TV to the iPhone, would close the loop and prove a complete consumer solution.  Consumers need a network that can drive our wireless connectivity and assure our video streams and communication paths get to all our devices.  It is why Google is testing out its Google Fiber program in a few markets.  And why Apple should be in this space too.  A short term rise in the stock price; why bother.  I want more innovation and growth.

Cable Operators NOT Likely To Follow Aereo Model

While recent reports have emerged that DirecTv, Time Warner Cable, and other cable operators are considering a similar Aereo approach, using tiny antennas to obtain broadcast signals, the likelihood of this occurring is remote.  While it could result in operators not paying license fees for broadcast signals, they would be overpaying elsewhere.

Why is that the case?  ABC owns ESPN, Disney, ABC Family, and others, NBC owns Bravo, USA, MSNBC, and much more, CBS owns CBS Sports, Showtime, and an owner with ties to Viacom Networks, and FOX owns FX, FXM, Fox News, and more.  Each of these broadcast networks has too much to risk from losing license fees from broadcast.  And they would indeed use that leverage to keep license fees intact or raise their rates on their cable nets to recoup any losses.  It is the consolidation of broadcast and cable networks that will prevent the cable operators from following the Aereo business model.

Of course, this depends on broadcasters still owning affiliates.  Speculation that ABC would consider selling their O&O networks has been heard, too.  Aereo's continued success could hurt the valuation of such a sale.  Broadcasters have also rumored changing from broadcast status to cable status to stop the Aereo model from moving forward, too.  That latter move seems to have more viability.

Cable operators still have the upper hand.  They bundle broadband access with cable so that consumers end up paying much more for broadband only without a cable subscription.  Once consumers find alternative sources for broadband to the home, the cable operators' business model will be at most risk.  Until then, they are better off strategizing new packaging and pricing models and better service, like TV Everywhere, than emulating the Aereo business model.

Is It An Ad Or Editorial Or Both?

These days as we troll the web and glean content from our favorite sites, we are being exposed to ads in every form, from banner ads to pre-rolls, vying for our attention and our click.  But many users may not realize that some of those articles or highlights we click on may not be editorial but rather a paid advertisement.  Some might still call it an advertorial, but for many in the digital world it is known as native advertising.  "How to define native advertising exactly is still up for debate, and it can be defined quite broadly — as in: any advertising that integrates fully into the content within which it is placed."  And its goal is to blend advertising seamlessly among the content that we consume.

The results of using native advertising indicates that it does a better job of driving clicks than traditional banner advertising.  "Native advertising is being heralded as the savior of digital publishing, but as marketers' content treads increasingly on editorial ground, one of the big questions is: How should it be regulated?"  Or should it be regulated at all?  As users of the web, does the long time notion of "buyer beware" still hold true or should websites do a better job of clearly identifying sponsored content from independent editorial.

Some native advertising is not specifically about driving a brand message; rather, it is used to drive viewership to other sites that may provide additional content discovery and valuable editorial content.  Other native ads may drive to transition pages, only to be exposed to more native content before a second click to the intended web site and content.  And other native ads click to a website of pure advertorial content.  It costs the user a click or two, it drives analytics, but is it harmful?  I might contend that it also leads to a smarter web surfer; click me once shame on you, click me twice, shame on me.

The blending of editorial and advertising is not a new phenomenon.  Both print and video sites have been selling advertorial sections for as long as advertising has been around.  What may feel unusual on the digital platform is that the signs indicating that it is native advertising is either not expressively stated or hidden on the page.  According to "Ogden Publications CEO Bryan Welch. 'There will be no need to identify it,' he said. “I see everything blending.”  And that of course leads to my original thought, that the user or buyer beware.

Newspapers Continue To Show Red Ink

According to Gannett, the newspaper industry will lose 1 billion dollars in revenue this year.  Gannett, owner of USA Today and other newspapers also says that the rise of digital advertising is not enough to offset the losses of the print business.  But this loss wouldn't mark the first year of billion dollar losses.  "Data from the Newspaper Association of America shows that print advertising in the newspaper industry has been decreasing for about seven consecutive years, losing $1.8 billion in 2012."  So while the total loss in 2013 is less than the prior year, it is still a major hit. 

Gannett attributes some of those losses to it being a non-Olympic year, as well as to a slow economy.  The article fails to elaborate on what the effect of digital advertising is having and how fast that side is growing.  One would expect that the two revenue lines will eventually cross and it would be interesting to see the rising slope of digital to print and the steepness of the tend.  The print world will only continue to fall as tablets become an ever increasing part of our world.  New releases by Apple of its iPad line, new Microsoft and Nokia tablets, and of course Amazon's Kindle all rely on digital content and print content distributors need to better strategize their business model to build new subscription and advertising models that best offset these print losses.

Yahoo Knows That Content Is King - Hires Couric And Pogue

First came the announcement that David Pogue is leaving The New York Times to start a new chapter at Yahoo.  Now comes news that Katie Couric is coming on board as well.  "Sources said that Couric is now close to completing a deal to put a Web interview show right on Yahoo’s home page."  As CEO Marissa Meyers continues to put her stamp on Yahoo, it has become clear that she too regards content as king.  Original, exclusive content that drives viewership and grows ad revenue.

That established old media stars like Katie Couric (broadcast television) and David Pogue (newspapers) are moving to digital platforms follows a path of using branded content to attract users to new platforms.  Last month, Walt Mossberg announced that he too was leaving the printed world of The Wall Street Journal to start his own website.  Perhaps Meyers can convince Mossberg that his talents can best be merchandized with the backing of the Yahoo brand.

Using content to drive adoption and usage is an important strategy that demonstrates just how important content is to a platform's success.  It is not just that you build a site but that you house it with meaningful content that consumers will seek out.  And branded, well known, credible content is far easier to market than unknown, untested content.  Certainly, both can survive and prosper, but branded, established content potentially comes with a built in base of consumers that will follow the path to a new platform.  And that is certainly what Yahoo expects to happen.

David Pogue Leaves New York Times

After 13 years writing a column for the New York Times, David Pogue has accepted a position at Yahoo, writing articles and creating videos for the web.  A big loss for print, a big gain for Yahoo. 

From his blog, "Leaving The Times is a big deal. My years there coincided with the explosion of just about everything important in today’s tech — the Web, social media, e-books, smartphones, tablets, duck-faced selfies. It’s been an amazing ride...." 

Will Broadcasters Drop Their Over The Air Signals?

As Aereo disrupts the broadcast platform, it poses a potential threat to long term retransmission fees.  The more Aereo wins court cases, the more cities it populate, and the bigger the threat to the revenue model.  If Aereo can retransmit broadcast signals for free, why can't cable operators.  And that possibility concerns broadcasters. 

In the past, Fox Network threatened to move from broadcaster to cable programmer, and now we learn that ABC Network considered it as well.  "A cable network doesn’t broadcast its signal over the air like broadcast networks, preventing Aereo from taking the signal and re-transmitting it online to paid subscribers, as it is doing with the broadcast networks in certain markets."  Of course we have also heard other rumors that ABC/Disney parent would consider selling all their owned and operated affiliates as another possibility.  Clearly, Aereo's disruptive approach has gotten the broadcasters to reexamine their current revenue models.  Aereo's approach could also quickly deflate the valuation price of any affiliate sale, unless all affiliated stations converted from broadcast to cable. 

And while Aereo may be successful in building antenna farms, I am not convinced that cable operators would bypass license fees through a similar approach.  The cost of building and maintaining verse negotiating for more streaming access to broadcaster linear and on demand programs would justify maintaining the status quo of license fees for cable operators to continue to pay.  Plus, cable operators have more flexibility in building out its broadband and wireless platforms for authenticated customers with discounts for those that subscribe to cable.  Such a radical approach like converting broadcast to cable is like killing a mouse with an elephant gun; there are simpler solutions.

Aereo Launching In Its Next Market

Tuesday, October 22, 2013, Detroit DMA consumers will be able to cut their cable cord and still gain access to broadcast and some cable networks in their market without an antenna.  A broadband feed is all that is required to sign up and get Aereo delivered into your home.  And despite numerous attempts by the broadcasters to block Aereo, the courts have yet to agree and have allowed the business to rollout into additional markets.  According to reports, "Aereo says it expects to be in 22 cities this year."  The more success that Aereo has, the harder it may be to put the genie back into the bottle. 

Rather than fight Aereo, broadcasters should spend more of their effort working with their cable/telco/satellite operators to enable their signals to be authenticated for TV Everywhere.  Give consumers the value of getting their broadcast channels, not only on the TV set, but also on their mobile devices.  Increase the value by offering more on demand programs online along with the linear feed.  Consumers may just prefer maintaining their cable subscription for this added level of value.  And that minimizes the losses that Aereo might present in each market.

ABC Networks' O&O For Sale?

According to reports, Disney/ABC may be considering a sales of its eight owned and operated affiliated broadcast networks.  Although denied by the network, the timing might be right to separate the distribution side of the business from the content side.  And there may be a significant ROI, too.  "Disney CEO Bob Iger is interested in what the broadcast business could fetch now that station valuations are much higher than when the company last explored a sale in 2010." 

Of course, it was CapCities, the owners of broadcast networks that originally bought ABC, the content side.  That was prior to Disney buying the merged company.  Now with talk of unlocking shareholder value by concentrating on one side or the other, ABC/Disney may prefer to work in the world of content over distribution. They certainly aren't the first to make such a move.  Time Warner made the same decision when it spun out the Time Warner Cable business.  

Such a sale would certainly free ABC/Disney to construct interesting distribution partnership deals without having its internal businesses in a perpetual state of conflict.  It would enable more freedom to push a TV Everywhere approach for both linear and on demand streaming of all of its shows.  Still it would be hard to part with all the dollars flowing into the company from rising retransmission fees.  "RBC Capital analyst David Bank said rising retrans dollars are one reason Disney may be loath to part with the stations right now despite soaring valuations."  But if your strategists are telling you that the threat of companies like Aereo could disrupt the retrans model and future fees, it may be smart to gamble on other ventures, take your profits and concentrate on content focused ventures that better support the goals of the Disney/ABC brands. 

Certainly the rumors of a possible sale are flowing.  They will never be confirmed until the deal is consummated. Still, the timing and the opportunity to focus on content never felt more right.  To me, such a sale makes sense. 

Time Warner Cable To Bring Back Ovation Network

Despite dropping the Ovation Network the beginning of the year under the guise of controlling costs by dropping low rated channels, Time Warner Cable plans to relaunch the network the beginning of next year.  The rationale given, an increase in original arts programming on the network.  A wonderful benefit to present to the subscriber.  I am a fan of the arts and a fan of Ovation so my comments are not about the value that the network provides, especially as art programming is underrepresented on linear television.  It is simply that the original reason Time Warner Cable dropped the channel was to cut costs for little viewed programming. 

I doubt that the investment that Ovation is making in original programming will substantially change the ratings of the channel.  Other arts networks, like A&E and Bravo, ultimately moved away from high art programming for more "pop culture" shows to attract a broader audience.  I suspect that the deal was also predicated on a lower license fee cost and "marketing investment" back to Time Warner Cable.  Fine in the short run, but not consistent with its earlier "public push by the cable operator to cull its lineup of poorly rated channels. CEO Glenn Britt made much of that plan, aimed at controlling rising programming costs."  So if you start adding channels and costs, has your strategy changed?

Ultimately, low rated channels likely also have the lowest license fee costs to the operator; they would have little or no effect on the subscriber fees that are passed through to consumers.  Those higher fees tend to be tied to the highest rated cable networks and especially regional and national sports networks.  According to the article, "A Time Warner Cable spokeswoman said that the company continues to look at 'three primary factors: cost, viewership and unique content' when it comes to assessing the value of a channel."  SO will TWC start to drop other low rated channels.  It remains to be seen if we ever hear that cable operators are actually lowering their monthly subscription fees to consumers as a result of cutting costs.  Frankly, I doubt it.  And as cable costs rise, consumers will seek to shed those fees for streaming video alternatives.  And it is in the OTT platform that networks like Ovation could have the chance to shine and breakout. 

Are You Ready For More Football?

I love football.  I love the strategy, the athletics, the march down the field toward the endzone.  And there is nothing more enjoyable then a Sunday afternoon on the couch watching the game(s).  But truth be told, too much of a good thing can be too much.  So I find Sunday Night and Monday Night Football to test my enjoyable, unless of course it is my team.  And still, it is difficult to stay up to the bitter end. 

So when I read that the NFL is considering adding a second football game to the Thursday schedule, my heart sinks.  "The NFL's belief is that adding another Thursday game would generate more national interest, plus it would give the league a chance to sell rights to another round of games."  It may also be that not enough people are watching the NFL Network while in-market teams get the simulcast on a broadcast channel.  Truth is that the search for more money is what will likely find a cable network bidding for a second Thursday game.  But I believe it is also killing future fan interest in the game that I love.  Too much of a good thing can indeed be too much.

In an earlier blog, I wrote about the DirecTv agreement expiring next year and who might want to buy those rights.  I suggested that an OTT platform like Apple TV or Netflix or Amazon could afford the investment and attract additional subscribers to their base.  That kind of viewership deal makes sense, a second Thursday night game does not.  It pushes one more game off the Sunday afternoon line-up.  And as a fan, reduces the impact of watching results of games across the day.  It simply extends the game week too far.  My vote, let's limit football to Sunday and Monday.  Enough is enough.

TiVo Would Make It Easier For Cable Operators To Add Netflix

TiVo has the technology and the software ready to go to integrate Netflix with traditional linear and on demand programming.  Should it quickly be able to integrate all the content under a simple interactive search menu, TiVo could become the preferred cable set top box for cable operators.  And for those that already have a deal with TiVo, the ability to quickly support a Netflix addition to their offerings.  Certainly, a partnership between Netflix and cable operators would be a win for Netflix and consumers.  "For Netflix, forging ties with cable providers could fuel expansion by putting its Web-based programs alongside traditional TV shows" according to Tom Rogers, CEO of TiVo. TiVo would certainly benefit as well.

But like John Malone, CEO of Liberty Media, I wonder of such a deal, in the short term is good for the cable operator.  Would operators be better suited providing their own streaming video service and fully enable TV Everywhere of their current linear and on demand offerings.  For instance, why shouldn't cable operators be enabled to stream all the back seasons of Breaking Bad to authenticated viewers on any device as a result of its carriage of the parent network, AMC.  Netflix's edge would then be limited to original programming, not yet offered to cable. 

Cable operators though worry that not embracing services like Netflix could lead to full cord cutting.  Making it a choice within the cable infrastructure could result in consumers maintaining their cable subscriptions and not cutting their cable cord all together.  What should worry cable operators more is that their total cost of service is what is driving customers to drop cable.  Offering a Netflix option on the cable box works if cable customers can access without having to buy an expensive package of service. 

I would love to see some research on what percentage of Netflix customers also have a cable subscription, what percentage watch premium services like HBO, Showtime, and Starz, and what percentage has dropped premium channels or cable service completely in the past year.  Cable operators may find that Netflix is not a competitor to its business model but rather an additive choice that customers will embrace while also staying loyal to cable.  And if that is the case, Netflix should present those findings to cable operators and operators should be quick to start a partnership with Netflix.

Should Cable Operators Partner With OTT Or Syndicate Their Own?

Today's Wall Street Journal talks about Netflix's efforts to build a partnership with cable operators to place its app on the cable set top box.  For consumers it would make for easier usage; it might also lead to a more enhanced interactive menu and search screen that added Netflix programming alongside linear and on demand.  For cable operators, it could bring leverage when dealing with network contracts, offering programming otherwise blacked out on the linear network.  But there are risks too.  One that consumers bypass more expensive premium services like HBO or Showtime for a lower priced Netflix subscription.  Still if it encouraged Netflix subscribers to remain cable subscribers, cord shaving is certainly preferred over cord cutting.

But John Malone, CEO of Liberty Media has another idea.  Why partner with a competitor when we can work with our own partners to provide a streaming video service.  "Cable operators may be able to monetize TV Everywhere programming by forming a joint venture which would syndicate a product like Comcast's Xfinity TV or Hulu nationwide".  Consider too that Redbox has been in need of additional support and cable could come in as well.  There is certainly some logic to cable operators embracing a shared OTT strategy while maintaining their physical footprint for linear and on demand.  The core of such a partnership still requires a broadband line into the home and strengthens the value for the cable operators' customer base.  And the same advantages of a better onscreen search engine and simpler access across platforms can be created and offered. 

In fact, cable operators might actually have more to gain by Malone's vision of a syndicated OTT offering then by a 3rd party partnership.  Not that Netflix would not be well received by customers on a cable set top box, but that cable operators have more to lose.  Plus, the rise of other smart devices and TV sets already makes it fairly easy to access and watch Netflix programming on a television screen.  Malone sees a future where platforms converge.  He also sees the need for cable operators to continue to consolidate to better compete and gain further economies of scale.  And he might just be right.

John Malone Still Wants Cable Consolidation

John Malone and Liberty Media are keeping real busy.  Despite announcing more stock splits, Malone also sees consolidation.  He continues to press that a merger of cable operators like Time Warner Cable and Charter Cable makes a lot of sense.  Of course Liberty owns a sizable chunk of Charter stock and Malone constantly seeks opportunities to increase the returns on his investments. 

According to Malone at their investor meeting, he was "touting the benefits of consolidation to bring the industry together to solve its high cost and over-the-top competitive problems."  As Charter is smaller in size than TWC, a merger would see them benefiting from TWC better licensing agreements, the ones that lower the per sub cost for exceeding subscription benchmarks.  Of course, a potentially larger MSO could get better rates for the TWC systems too.  And while Malone likes to talk about his own companies, other cable operators like Cablevision could also benefit from merging with Time Warner Cable, a deal TWC has been wanting for quite some time. 

John Malone seems to have the knack for unlocking value from its properties.  He continues to grow businesses, then split them off as tracking stocks and then independent companies.  He announced at the same meeting plans to spin out QVC and other businesses from the Liberty Interactive company.   So keep your eye on Liberty and John Malone.  He continues to be a force in the economics of cable.

Aereo WIns Another Federal Case Ruling

While other OTT companies have been unable to retransmit broadcast signals over broadband, Aereo continues to succeed.  In the latest Federal court case, "Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton said Hearst had not proven that Aereo would cause 'irreparable harm' to the broadcaster's business and thus could continue to operate in the Boston area."   And so, Aereo continues to notch court wins to continue to operate its business.  Of course, all these issues regarding the resale and use of over the air signals will eventually need to be heard by the US Supreme Court.  For now, Aereo continues to have the right to resell broadcast signals for broadband reception. 

See It, Buy It Through Twitter

While Twitter mulls a stock offering, their business strategy continues to progress.  Just announced, a partnership with Comcast to connect Comcast services with Tweets.  "In the first step of the partnership, Comcast engineers created a new feature called “See It” that will give millions of Xfinity TV customers the ability to instantly access TV shows, movies and sports directly from a Tweet."  other opportunities include the ability to one click to services like Fandango to purchase movie tickets.  In addition, "The companies also announced an advertising partnership with NBCUniversal in Twitter’s Amplify program which drives awareness of TV programs by embedding sponsored, real-time video clips in tweets."  Should users embrace these new features, Twitter will indeed have found a whole new set of revenue monetization opportunities to enhance future shareholder appeal.  Get the whole article here. 

Another Month, Another Apple Event

Wasn't it just a month ago that Apple held an event to announce new models of the iPhone.  Well, its a month later and Apple is expected to announce another "Event" to highlight upgrades to its iPad lineup of products.  "People familiar with Apple’s plans tell AllThingsD that the company will hold its next invitation-only event on Tuesday, October 22. The focal point of the gathering will be the latest updates to the company’s iPad line, but the new Mac Pro and OS X Mavericks will likely get some stage time as well, I’m told."  Will we ever hear news about new product launches, like an iWatch?  Or do we have to wait till next month for that announcement and the month after that for announced upgrades to Apple TV.  Frankly, to many "Events" just come across as too many.

Samsung Watch Ad Impresses

I haven't had the chance to see the new Galaxy Gear watch by Samsung, but I have seen plenty of print ads and watched the new TV commercial.  Talk about breaking through the clutter, the ad evokes great memories and harkens back to the time when we all wished we had a watch phone.  Check out the ad below:


Whether consumers embrace their watch and paired phone remain to be seen, but the advertising absolutely hits the right chord.

To Apple TV And Others - How To Win The OTT Box Wars

For OTT Set Top Box companies that work with cable operators, TiVo, XBox and some others, their key has been enabling authenticated viewing for cable customers to enjoy their cable TV programming.  Most still rely on a CableCard to authenticate users.  But the challenge for Apple TV, Intel Media, Roku, Amazon (and their recent announcement of their intent to build a set top box) and others, remain gaining access to content.  Content is King.  But so far, offering Netflix, Amazon Prime, You Tube or other content hasn't been enough to gain considerable market share.  Gaming boxes like Microsoft, and TiVo have done much better it seems in offering other content options to the value proposition.

So how can Apple TV, Intel Media, and others find content to make their boxes indispensable when cable and broadcast networks have been reluctant to deal given their current license fee agreements with cable and satellite companies.  They should look no farther than how cable got its foothold with the basic tentpoles of content: sports, news, and music.

For some of these OTT companies, price is no issue, and so it is time to think big.  Regarding sports, I would recommend reaching out to the NFL.  For football fans, the DirecTv Sunday Ticket has been most desired by the cable companies.  They would love to take the deal over from DirecTv.  Apple, Intel, Amazon, and Microsoft all have the resources to compete for this contract.  And the football fan has proven that they will pay for access to these games.  Plus offering it in a stream allows these companies to bring added features including multiple camera angles, box in box, and other viewing options. 

As to news, it is time to build a national news network.  The model worked well for CNN when it first started out.  Offer young reporters a chance to be discovered, invest in regional coverage, and follow the Ted Turner blueprint to create a news network.  While certainly CNN didn't have the same competition when it started, there is an advantage in streaming and offering across all platforms.  Build loyalty through a TV Everywhere approach and be aggressive in news gathering and reporting. 

Music was the earliest to embrace streaming and an OTT set top box may not be able to reinvent this wheel.  Still, enabling ease of access, offering more concert coverage, and pushing new ideas is a great start.  That You Tube is developing its own music awards show to compete with MTV and others demonstrates that kind of creativity. 

So for streaming OTT box companies, there is in front of you a tremendous opportunity to compete with cable operators for consumers and users to your platform.  Content is king and I believe that acquiring special content like the NFL and building out tentpole programming will drive further acceptance of your devices and subscription services.  Major Cable Networks may be reluctant to work with you now, but other great content may still be worth pursuing.

Amazon Wants Its Own Set Top Box To Send Its Content

Its one thing to have the content and another to have the distribution.  While Netflix has relied on third parties to distribute its subscription services, Amazon has taken a more technological approach.  Like Apple, Amazon built its own tablet to run its content.  And like Apple and its Apple TV box, Amazon now wants to distribute a set top box to stream to the television set.  "The device is code-named "Cinnamon," and will have apps for playing games and streaming video and music from other companies, not just Amazon, according to the WSJ. It will be released for the holiday shopping season." Certainly there are other devices already streaming Amazon content to the TV, but Amazon has hgad a strategy of selling devices at near cost to drive usage.  I suspect an Amazon set top box will also be priced cheaply (definitely below Apple TV's retail price of $99) to encourage new consumers to enter the marketplace.  And by pairing its Kindle with its new set top box, Amazon customers get an integrated usage experience sure to please the user. 

What apps and other video streams will be featured on the new Amazon box?  No word yet but I would doubt that other subscription services would be made available.  Perhaps free OTT like You Tube or even Vimeo or Crackle could be a possibility.  With so many OTT boxes for consumers to add, including their own cable TV box for now, Apple TV, Roku, new Smart TVs like Samsung and certain blu-ray players, and gaming consoles like XBox and Playstation, is the consumer ready for one more.  Certainly Amazon benefits by pairing this new box with its own best selling tablets, but other devices do the same thing through apps installed on tablets already.  The market is quickly becoming more crowded and consumers will have to decide which set top box or how many boxes they wish to connect to their TV set; or perhaps the answer is none as Smart TVs will be enabled to do all the work. 

Amazon Adding More Original Streaming Content

Amazon knows that to keep its streaming customers happy, you must continue to grow your video content library.  Syndicated content is great, especially titles with high perceived value.  But the key to superiority is not just having the most content to stream, but also original exclusive content.  Netflix has done it quite well with House of Cards and Arrested Development and Amazon wants the same notoriety. 

And so Amazon has formally announced three new comedies for 2014 including Mozart in the Jungle, The Outlaws, and Transparent.  Also according to Deadline Hollywood, unofficially Amazon has a couple dramas for streaming.  They include Bosch and The After.  Competition for viewers away from the TV screen is only getting more intense. 

With the growth of more streaming shows, viewers will have to decide whether to watch broadcast, cable, or streaming shows.  The more choice open to them away from cable, the more consumers will question whether it is time to star cutting the cord.  Amazon, Netflix, Hulu, and others are starting to make their inroads for greater share of market. 

Hulu Plus adds A New Distribution Outlet

While we all enjoy watching our favorite videos on our personal laptops, tablets, and smartphones, there is a reason why we buy big screen TVs.  We like to watch our shows on big devices, too.  In the competitive world of streaming subscription services, the easier it is to watch your shows across multiple devices, the better to market its value and ease of use.  As Hulu strikes out on its own, no longer being primed for acquisition, it has turned its attention to new ways to improve.  Thanks to a new partnership with Google and its Chromecast service, "Instead of watching video content from the online provider on an Android smartphone, tablet or Apple iPad, folks can shoot Hulu Plus to an HDTV."   

This kind of announcement is good news for both Chromecast and Hulu, making each a more valuable service to market to customers.  For Chromecast, it represents an important video partner to its stream.  For Hulu Plus, it puts them on equal footing with its competitor Netflix on the device.  But access alone is not enough of a reason; Hulu Plus also needs to keep pushing its exclusive content and library of available titles to keep growing its subscriber base.  Additional distribution platforms help but content remains king. 

More Broadcast Networks Go Dark On Cable

While the current word may be that a short term agreement has prevented ABC/ESPN Nets from going dark on Dish Network, another broadcaster failed to stay on.  Media General's 18 broadcast networks got shut down at midnight when no renewal was reached with Dish Network.  "Media General's retrans agreement originally expired in June, but Media General extended negotiations for 90 days."  So Dish consumers in those markets are now without their stations during the most important time for broadcasters, the Fall season. 

Who is to blame?  Frankly, the blame should be shared among all parties, Dish, Media General, and even the FCC for enabling broadcasters to charge for broadcast networks and the use of over the air spectrum.  This fight between operator and broadcaster continues to repeat itself endlessly.  And while Dish and ABC may have put into place an extension, it may still end up with networks being dropped off Dish.  It was only last month that Time Warner Cable faced this same issue with CBS; it will only happen again.  Broadcast networks should not be enabled to charge; if they want to then free up the airwaves and become cable networks. It is time for the FCC to intervene.