Apple Siri Should Meet Amazon Echo

ALEXA...What's the weather today?  ALEXA...Tell me a joke.  ALEXA, the name we speak before asking a question is the device called Amazon Echo.  As a marketer, I am surprised that Amazon didn't make ECHO the go to word to help solidify the branding of the device everytime we use it.  Perhaps it should be renamed Amazon Alexa.

Still, the Amazon Echo is a fun device to keep in your home.  It can connect to other "connected devices" to turn on a light or change the house temperature, it can play music from a Prime account, and it is always at the ready whenever you ask it.  It may not yet be a must have device for the home, but it certainly has the potential.

So Apple, where is your Echo?  It might just be time for Siri to find itself in a standalone device that can access all the Apple devices and apps of the owner.  And given the infrastructure that Apple has already created, it could dominate the home.  With just one ask, SIRI...What is the weather today? SIRI...Call Mom.  SIRI Play Apple Music.  SIRI...What is on my calendar today or how far is the store from my house or what are my latest stock prices or what Reminders do I have for today.  And with a software tweak, an APPLE SIRI device could distinguish multiple iCloud devices within the home.  Then others could ask about their individual calendars or contacts or whatever. 

An APPLE SIRI device could extend the value of the iPhone or Apple Watch.  And because it is plugged in, there are no worries about the next recharge.  Apple, it may be time to build an APPLE SIRI device now for next Christmas.  I am confident that it will do extremely well. 

Ads Keep Slowing Down My Web Pages

My internet is running slow, not because I am streaming data heavy video content, but because with every page load, ads are being served to the page.  The latency it causes to get to the content is atrocious.  And just try to read the page when another ad overlay pops up to stop you again.  The page is reading, transferring, and mostly waiting for the ad servers on the page to decide what ads they want to serve me.  I not only don't notice the ads, I become more frustrated with the website I am on. 

Do you share my frustration?  Let me know!

Howard Stern Sticks With Sirius

Despite the possibility that Howard would leave satellite radio to be the king of streaming media, including a starring role with Netflix, Howard agreed to a new 12 year deal with Sirius radio that includes streaming video.  And I wouldn't be surprised if this is the last deal Howard does before he seeks retirement.

According to Deadline Hollywood, Howard agrees "to stay on the air for five years as part of a 12 year deal with the satellite radio company that includes its first foray into streamed video programming."  What Howard intends to create with this video deal remains to be seen.  Given the ownership of Sirius Radio, Liberty Media and John Malone, the possibilities of a competitive streaming service to Netflix could be in the works.  Howard creates unique content that will be well monetized. 

For Howard Stern fans that have followed him from terrestrial radio to satellite radio, it means they will continue to get their fix of Howard throughout the day.  The concern that his days on the air were over and he was ready for retirement may have been a few years premature.  For at least 5 more years, listeners will be able to enjoy his astute interviews, viral fan base, and an assortment of characters. 

Skinny Bundle Not In Apple's Future

While Amazon Prime has announced discounted subscription services to Showtime, Starz and others when you are an Amazon Prime customer, Apple has decided to stop pursing a skinny Over The Top streaming bundle of live video services.  According to CBS CEO Les Moonves, Apple "has suspended plans to offer a live Internet-based television service and is instead focusing on being a platform for media companies to sell directly to customers through its App Store". 

Given existing contracts with cable operators, networks would be unable to offer financial terms for Apple to create a cost effective package of interest for consumers.  While consumers like the simplicity of buying certain channels without also buying cable service, in the long run, a la carte pricing means access to a smaller number of services.  You pay less but you also get less, too.  The all you can eat buffet of 100's of channels at one price is no longer appealing as the price of the buffet has gotten so expensive.  Cable has hit the price elasticity limit and the band is breaking.

We are also willing to settle for less as consumers are now more show centric than when they were network channel brand centric.  As for Apple, their desire to build a package makes some sense for their Apple TV model.  But perhaps they should look more closely at owning a content company and then having full control on how to distribute it.  Viacom and CBS might just be options given all the news around Sumner Redstone's health.  Scripps, Discovery, AMC might also be worth kicking the tires.  If Apple wants to make an impact, that might just be in their future. 

New Content On Amazon Prime Isn't Free

The news that Amazon Prime was going to bundle additional content subscriptions into its bundle seemed like a winning partnership.  But as details emerge, it is clear that is not the case.  What has been announced is that Amazon Prime customers can purchase subscriptions to other content packages, including Showtime Now and Starz at a discounted amount. 

As Wired correctly assesses, "Whether or not these deals attract new members to Prime, the rise of more a la carte options for TV feels like yet another step toward a world where TV is truly on demand."  Given the continuing high costs for cable, that seems a given.

TV Ad Spending Falling As Digital Rises

The NY Times reports today that "TV will account for 38.4 percent of the $503 billion global ad market this year and will drop to 38 percent of the market in 2016, according to the forecast."  A minuscule number perhaps, but perhaps more a notice of an eventual trend.  Still, with the rise of digital devices, smartphones, tablets, laptops, and more, our attention has steadily moved away from the TV screen and toward the smaller devices.  Mobile is in!  And as we all know, nothing is truly free in this world and content is being paid for mainly by advertising. 

But the digital ads that we get may not be nearly as effective as the television commercials we see.  Sure both are intrusive and too, too many, but the little screens make engagement harder.  Which brings me to a second article in today's NY Times entitled X Marks The Spot.  These pop ups and overlays and screen cloggers make me hate the advertisers that rely on them.  To say they are just a nuisance would be to truly understate how frustrating they are.  No longer comfortable with being banners that rest around the content, these digital ads make getting to the content difficult at best.  Not just that one has to sit through them to get to the content, but that as the article correctly states, trying to click the 'x' to eliminate them becomes a game unto itself. 

But the worst for me is when the pop up ad takes so long to download, creating such a lenghty latency that prevents the actual content from also downloading, that I find myself clicking away from the site.  The more this happens, the more I remember which websites I now avoid altogether, a loss for both publisher and advertiser.  And as others follow on that same path, an eventual loss for the digital industry.  The influx of intrusive advertising will be the means to the industry's self destruction.

Diversification For Barnes And Noble

The new CEO of Barnes and Noble, Ron Boire, has some ideas how to reinvigorate the chain.  Perhaps he had the chance to read my blog 2 1/2 years ago on July 1, 2013 entitled Saving Barnes And Noble.  In it, I write about partnerships and diversification to enhance and increase customer engagement with the store.

Well that is exactly what Boire wants to do, increase foot traffic by expanding its merchandise.  His background with other big box stores may be useful to his revamp efforts.  As today's NY Times article shares his plans, he sees the revitalization of the brand as a "lifestyle brand" and destination.  I believe that there is a strong opportunity to re-brand and re-energize and that he can create a successful new type of retail opportunity.  I urge him to continue to look at partnerships with other smaller chains as a means to grow.  I am excited to see B&N become a must visit shopping destination. 

Hasta La Vista DirecTv?

According to reports, the brand name DirecTv will fade away in 2016.  Since being purchased by AT&T, the plan has been to create a more unified brand experience.  And as a result, the DirecTv brand name will fade away to be replaced by the much longer AT&T Entertainment moniker.

Of course, if that is the case, it is likely that the AT&T U-Verse brand will also convert to the AT&T Entertainment brand.  Such a switchover to the single name will take place over some time as new logos will incorporate both names until the full change takes effect.

Cable has worked hard to differentiate its corporate brand from its product brand.  Comcast uses the Xfinity name while Cablevision has pushed Optimum as its cable brand.  So which brand should have been kept, AT&T or DirecTv or should it have been left alone?  Let me know. 

Disney And ESPN Rocked By Cord Cutting

High subscriber fees, a decline in sports interest, more entertainment choices, and other challenges have rocked the world of cable television.  The Disney company, a bellwether of the media industry, is feeling those changes firsthand.  In the last 2 years, we learn that the ESPN Network lost 7 million subscribers, ABC Family (to be rebranded to Freeform, a mistake I believe) has lost 5 million subs, and Disney Channel 4 million.  Hard to make up those revenue losses without raising advertising fees, but a smaller base doesn't help drive big increases.  It is unlikely to expect a rebound as consumers continue to cut the cord and seek more OTT programming alternatives.  And Netflix, Amazon Prime and others are driving them to switch with huge libraries of content ad the rise of original programming too.

For a must have network like ESPN, the rise in sports license costs, higher ticket prices to attend live sporting events, and other challenges have driven away the middle class family from attending games and building fan interest.  Instead, the draw has become fantasy gambling, a short term boon but ultimately long term killer of sports, in my opinion.  Television sports interest continues to draw healthy ratings, but the future generation fan may be less interested in watching.  As fantasy sites get barred from advertising and used in certain states, we may in fact be watching the tipping point in sports value.

As for networks like Disney and ESPN, their challenges are also being faced by other cable networks like Fox, Viacom, Scripps, AMC, and others.  Declining subscriber revenue cannot be made up easily.  Increased advertising minutes have led to viewers seeking OTT choices that are commercial free. It is no longer fun to watch a show or movie that has what appears to be more ads than content.   And that influx of ads, along with high cable bills, may be the two primary reasons customers are fleeing the cable universe. 

Amazon Prime Seeks To Master The Bundle

I have been known to say that history repeats itself; for good and for bad.  And in the world of marketing, a good idea is a good idea, often repeated under various creative strategies.  One such notion is the strategy of bundling, the art of combining items into a single, larger package.  Cable television did it quite successfully, first in bundling cable channels together and offering a large selection of differentiated networks at one low price, and again in creating the triple play of cable, phone, and data at one competitive price. 

Amazon has repeated that strategy with the creation of Amazon Prime, a bundle of services including same day delivery, cloud storage of photos, special offers as well as Prime Music and Prime Instant Video, all at a low annual fee.  And while the centerpiece is free delivery, the additional pieces help to create strong added value.  And the strategy seems to be working.

But delivery alone might not be enough and the value of content cannot be minimized.  Amazon seeks to strengthen its Instant Video subscription with original shows as well, including the Emmy winning Transparent. Now,Amazon Prime seeks to expand its Prime bundle with other subscription services.  According to Variety, "The retail giant has been pitching the idea to add third-party video subscription services to its Prime subscription service to TV networks and online video services, offering them Amazon’s huge Prime customer base with its existing billing relationships as an incentive."  That might suggest that services like HBO Now, Showtime, or perhaps even Hulu could be added to their bundle.  As cable has learned, the bigger the bundle, the more value perceived, the better to attract new subscribers to the service.

But cable has also learned what can happen when too big causes the bundled price to rise and for consumers to start cutting the cord.  For cable, it has led to the new term of the skinny bundle, with a lesser number of aggregated services.  As Amazon plots its growth strategy, let it also recognize that it can sometimes get too big.  Controlled growth, meaningful value, at a competitive price.  So far, Amazon Prime continues to make itself a valuable commodity, but if it leads to price increases then it can also hurt your efforts. 

TiVo Keeps Adding Subscribers

TiVo seems to be doing what other cable boxes cannot.  With a single box to manage all cable and OTT content to the television screen and mobile devices, customers seem to like their approach.  Their latest third quarter results have them gaining over 400,000 customers in the quarter through their cable partnerships and now have almost 6.5 million total customers.  According to Multichannel, its one of their strongest quarters to date.  With the release of their latest set top box Bolt and the start of the holiday season, the fourth quarter could continue to be strong for them.

Of course this is all happening as cord cutters continue to strike at the cable operator.  It seems that offering TiVo to their customers might be a good defensive strategy to keep customers from dropping cable.  Internal pressures might also worry TiVo with current CEO Tom Rogers leaving his post in February 2016.  How that might affect the future strategy of TiVo remains to be seen.  For now, TiVo is on track to exceed 7 million homes by early next year.

Adele Has A Distribution Strategy

Whether you care for her music or not, you still must admire Adele's business strategy with the release of her latest album, 25.  If the big money is in sales, then it makes sense not to rent out the music.  And that seems to be what a streaming strategy must feel like.  Like Taylor Swift, Adele has decided to limit her initial audience to a sale only strategy, from downloading tracks or the album to selling the physical CD.  For now, streaming subscription music services like Pandora, Spotify, or Apple Music are not allowed to play her latest music.  That means that fans must purchase and so far, the strategy has worked. 

In the first week, Adele has sold 2.5 million copies of her album.  With the holiday season just starting, the album is likely to continue to sell quite well.  It seems like a smart way to maximize revenues, using a windowing type strategy to create a high demand through a particular output platform.  And certainly, as sales begin to slow, the timing might become appropriate to add new platforms of distribution. 

NY Times Virtual Reality Delivered To The Home

I admit it, I still like getting the paper editions of newspapers.  And while I also like reading breaking news on my iPad and iPhone, I most enjoy drinking that morning cup of coffee and reading the paper.  Of course, the more times the paper delivery is delayed, the more I find myself ready to pull the trigger on receiving the paper editions.

Still, the arrival of an extra gift has kept me a subscriber for a bit longer.  A couple of weeks ago, the NY Times was accompanied by a cardboard box, that when folded together, became a virtual reality machine.  Download the app and a few videos and place your smartphone into the cardboard constructed device.  Instantly you are transported into your own VR world, 360 degrees of video. Look up, look down, look left, look right and watch as the action unfurls.  When others come to the house, the device becomes one of much discussion.  It is a new toy.  We may not use it much, be we have continued to keep it on our coffee table.  At least for now it has not made it to the trash can.

What next steps does the NY Times have in store for us with this VR machine?  Will they send another with home delivery?  If anything, it did cause some buzz and for the print industry that is hard to come by. 

Comcast Says No To YES

It's that time of year again and by that I mean the time of year when cable contracts expire and the game of drops and accusations start to air.  To start the holidays, the regional sports network YES, owned by Fox and the Yankees, have been dropped by Comcast Cable as no renewal deal could be reached.  For customers in the NY, NJ, and CT region, almost 1 million customers, that means the loss of the Brooklyn Nets on television. 

According to reports, the contract has expired for some time but it has reached the tipping point today with the network dropping off the line-up.  For how long, who knows.  Like every other negotiation, it eventually will come back, whether in a day, a week, a month, or even after the start of the Yankees, it will come back on the air.  But in the meantime both sides lose.

Is it possible that the drop could be permanent?  Despite a small, but loud percentage of sports fans, sports networks are hard to drop forever.  They may have some of the highest, most expensive license fees of any basic network, but the passion for the programming is always there.  So watch as we get radio, newspaper, and TV ads telling us how bad the other side is in the negotiation.  Programming contracts are all about the money and nothing else.

As Streaming Music Grows, It Starts To Consolidate

The streaming music industry is transforming quickly.  Apple buys Beats and creates Apple Music, then closes Beats.  Jay Z buys Tidal to bring the art of the music to those with a passion for high fidelity.  And today we learn that Pandora plans to buy out Rdio.  Per reports, Rdio must first declare bankruptcy before Pandora can buy out all their assets and hopefully retain most of their subscribers.  I'm surprised that Apple was not mentioned as a possible suitor for Rdio, but such is the fast changing nature of this industry.

With Pandora and Spotify still the market leaders, one wonders if Apple sees an opportunity as a niche player in this market or a desire to buy out one of the top dogs.  And given the employee turnover at Tidal, one can wonder how much longer they will be in the mix.  As I wrote last week in my blog on free music, streaming subscription music services still have to compete with commercial radio, many that have created their own apps to provide an alternative choice.  If you don't mind the commercials, its not a bad alternative.  Heck, even Sirius, the paid car and streaming audio service has channels that include commercials too. 

As for Rdio, the ride was a short one.  You will be a footnote in the history of streaming music but not the only one as consolidation is likely to continue.  The pace of change may be quicker but it is the nature of a very quickly changing media landscape. 

The iPad Pro Goes Big

While Millennials seems to enjoy their smaller smartphone screens over a tablet, they like the larger size smartphones over the smaller screens.  So the introduction of the iPad Pro, a much larger size screen seems counter intuitive to the mass appeal audience.  Walt Mossberg, in his re/code review, doesn't see the iPad Pro as a replacement for the laptop.  I agree.  I believe the laptop is uniquely qualified to handle certain applications, and especially useful for student and business applications.

Still, I believe the iPad Pro can find a strong niche use in commercial and industrial applications.  The added value of the stylus may be appealing to some, although the shear size of the screen may be the most important feature.  Will the average consumer want to go big with the Pro?  We will have to watch the Christmas Holiday sales to see who might be purchasing the device. 

Time Warner Wants A Piece Of Hulu

Time Warner wants another streaming business and that might include a piece of Hulu.  Per Deadline Hollywood, they are in early discussions to take a piece of the pie and join the Disney, Fox, NBC partnership.  But does it make sense?

I ask that question for a number of reasons.  First, they already own HBO Now and HBO Go and have a successful platform and subscription business that they control 100%.  Second, the idea of being a partial owner in Hulu will only add to the dysfunction of running the Hulu brand.  The old adage that "too many cooks spoil the broth" means that one more owner will further handcuff the strategic growth and tactical abilities of the Hulu brand to grow.  And third, that Time Warner's other cable content brands lack enough quality content to be anything more than long tail entertainment. 

Can an investment by Time Warner in the Hulu business draw a positive ROI?  I am sure the financial analysts are asking all the same questions in determining how to best improve revenue.  There is no guarantee of success.  Time Warner only needs to look internally at some of their failed networks like CNN SI, the Sports Illustrated Network.  I am sure there are other misses as well.  That is not to say an investment in digital doesn't make sense; but, wouldn't you rather have total control in your next business opportunity then a 25% position.

What's Wrong With Free Music

The rise in premium music services shouldn't surprise me, but it does.  I grew up on AM and FM radio and enjoyed listening to everything from talk to news, pop to Dr. Demento.  In exchange for free music, I also heard ads that ultimately paid for all those stations to air.  Today, a number of these same stations offer commercial-free blocks to entice us to stay connected, but we find ourselves with more and more choices, many requiring a monthly subscription fee.

Sirius and XM Satellite, who later merged, seem to have started this game of offering a premium experience while sitting in your car.  Sirius brought Howard Stern over from free radio and many joined him in his move.  Today, fans of music can pay monthly fees to listen to streaming radio from choices ranging from Spotify and Pandora to Apple Music.  And today's NY Times reminds us that your Amazon Prime subscription includes both a video platform as well as a music platform.  And consumers seem willing to pay for the milk when it is also available free. 

Is it the greater choice, the lack of ads, the portability, the freedom to choose what to play next, the convenience?  They all come to play.  We have switched from carrying a portable transistor radio to carrying our smartphone and technology has played a large role in opening up new competition.  But I still come back to the point of free verse pay.  Commercial radio stations also present themselves online as well, as easily acceptable as any paid app.  The music industry certainly presents itself as a terrific case study in the world of content vs. distribution, free vs. pay.  How it continues to evolve remains to be seen. 

ESPN Not In Trouble, Despite Firing 300 Employees

ESPN parent company, Walt Disney, released its quarterly financials last night and let us know that the Magic Kingdom is as healthy as ever.  Profits and revenues have both grown and the media division that includes ESPN rose 27% from the period last year.  According to the NY Times, "Disney said the increase was primarily due to higher ESPN affiliate and ad revenues, partly offset by higher programming costs".  Yet, as a Christmas present to 300 employees, they received their layoff packages.

ESPN and Disney are not suffering.  In fact, their bottom line was never stronger.  No the decision to fire 300 employees was to appease investors and not the business.  I don't mean to suggest that Disney or other public companies need to be charity centers to their employees; but, couldn't ESPN do something else with these 300.  Given the diversification of the empire, why couldn't these 300 be given internal opportunities to apply to other divisions within the company.  They have already demonstrated a fit to the organization, many have provided multiple years of impressive service and their experience might be truly welcome as other lines of businesses seek sales, marketing, production and other types of support.  I doubt that ESPN or Disney even considered that option.

So ESPN laid off 300 employees only to tell us that the company and brands are "stronger than ever".  I just don't believe the two stories jibe.  Thoughts?

Digital Killed The Television Star?

If you remember back when MTV first emerged, the first music video was "Video Killed The Radio Star".  It spoke to the demise of the old media with the rise of music video.  It was certainly not true, radio did not die, although it too was changed as the result of technology.

Today, it is television that is being affected by the rise of new media, digital and streaming media.  Consumers no longer are tethered to a box; rather, the screen moves with us and we control when and where we want to watch.  It has led to cord cutting, not just because of the freedom of movement, but because the cost to access on a tethered box has gotten too high. 

We want smaller bundles at lower price points.  Netflix provides its bundle of TV shows and movies for a low monthly fee and Amazon, Hulu, HBO, and others each do the same.  And as consumers we can pick which of these services we wish to carry.  With cable television, the appeal of their large bundle of shows and movies, linear and on demand, diminished as the price of carriage kept rising faster and faster.  The biggest culprit of that rise has been sports programming and the demand to license its content has enabled more channels to carry a piece of sports.  Where a decade or more ago, sports was the exclusive home to a few nets; today, games are seen on dozens of regional and national sports networks.  And consumers paid for access to each and everyone of these nets to be accessible on basic cable.  Ultimately, consumers pay too high fees for too many networks they may not want. 

Has digital killed the Television star, of course not.  Neither did video kill the radio star.  But digital has changed the playing field so that consumers have more control to cut the cord when their primary source for video has gotten too expensive.  Lesser expensive options with a diverse supply of streaming video now makes the choice to cut the cord easier to make.  Digital has changed the playing field and it is time to rethink the cable bundle. 

Stock Market Worried About Cable Networks

When Time Warner Inc. announced lower earnings expectations in the future, the stock market responded by selling off a list of cable network stocks.  From Time Warner to Discovery, from Disney and Viacom to AMC, a consistent sell off was evident.  But what drastically changed?  Just a week or so ago, ESPN cut 300 jobs to lower costs and hopefully improve earnings.  Cord cutting has been much discussed over the last number of years; in fact, many cable operators have been posting much smaller sub losses in their latest quarter.  And content companies have been pursuing new streaming deals and other revenue lines to boost earnings.  So what really changed?

Sure, the announcement that Time Warner Inc. now expected lower earnings in the near future. But just yesterday, its premium network HBO announced it was the new home for future Jon Stewart content.  And that news was positively received.  As to the daily price fluctuations of media stocks like Time Warner, Inc., the likely means to restore earnings will be to cut costs.  Expect some layoffs from a number of these companies to boost earnings for its stockholders. 

Star Trek Boldly Goes Back To CBS

For Trekkers, or Trekkies, the news that another Star Trek series would be coming back to television was met with very loud cheers.  That it won't be seen for 15 months, not until January 2017, tempered that applause.  Star Trek, first created by Gene Roddenberry in the 1960's, has seen itself grow from TV show to movies back to TV show and back to movies with different casts embracing the sci fi drama.

CBS seems to be using this popular series in a two-fold strategy with first-run episodes appearing on the flagship CBS network and subsequent runs of the show seen exclusively on its streaming subscription app, CBS All Access.  Currently, the $5.99 monthly app offers other CBS programs including the original Star Trek episodes. Is the Star Trek universe large enough to entice more subscribers to CBS All Access?  Probably not but I would be on the look out for more deals to be announced like this.  As CBS is not an owner in Hulu, this streaming property is their own strategy to retain the CBS brand in a digital world.

As to the new Star Trek series, little is known about the series.  Its place, characters, story lines are all a mystery for now.  But for those waiting for the follow up to Star Trek Enterprise, we will boldy go where CBS takes us. 

Note:  Some are suggesting that CBS will air only the first episode on CBS with the remainder of the season exclusively on CBS All Access.  Will that encourage consumers to subscribe to the service or fail miserably?  I think it would be a mistake to all of its constituents from the TV viewer to the local affiliate, from the cable operator to the cable subscriber to not air the series first on broadcast. The greatest revenue opportunity for CBS still lies with traditional television. 

Serial Adds Another Platform

The popular podcast Serial, known for its analysis of the Adnan Syed murder trial, has expanded its distribution platform.  Previously, Serial was only available as a free downloadable podcast, but the next season's episodes will also be available on Pandora.  Good news for those that don't know how to download a Podcast.  It should continue to be available for Pandora.

As a fan of Serial, part of me would hope that they would deliver a new update focusing on what has transpired and changed since their report was first made.  It seems that may not yet be in the cards.  Some expect that season 2 of Serial will instead focus on U.S. Army soldier Bowe Bergdhal who deserted his post.

According to Polygon, Pandora will put season one on their site later this month.  The date for season two has not yet been released. 

ESPN Cut Jobs, Others Will Too

300 ESPN employees lost their jobs last week, but they are not the first media company to do so.  While content matters, employees don't, and the ultimate bottom line, when you are a public company, is to appease the shareholders.  And when revenues don't rise, costs must be cut to sustain and ideally grow profits.  As The Godfather likes to remind us, "It's not personal, it's strictly business."

Truth is, it is personal and affects many individuals as well as their families.  While content costs rise, and sports content costs skyrocket, cord cutting has led to lost subscribers and advertising dollars have shifted from TV to digital.  ESPN made those same high programming cost deals while watching its base erode.  Its parent company, Walt Disney,  demanded that ESPN cut costs to support profit goals.  And while other networks have tried to recapture lost subs by offering OTT services, including CBS, HBO, Showtime, and most recently Starz, to name a few, ESPN has not because its license fee agreements could lead to cable operators dropping the service from their cable line-ups.

Its happened to in other media.  The Daily News in NYC is cutting writers and other personnel to keep afloat, too.  The sad truth is that this trend will only continue to mount as subscribers flee, costs rise, and the easiest way to make up the difference is to cut labor.  And while ESPN may be in the news today, other networks have done the same thing in other years and will continue to announce cuts in the near future.  It is not the end of job cuts, only the beginning.  For my friends at ESPN and at other networks, I can only hope that as this door closes, other opportunities open. 

Starz Follows HBO And Showtime

It only took about half a year for Starz to recognize that the leader in the premium cable space, HBO, was on the right track.  In a classic follower move, Starz has announced that they too will offer an over the top (OTT) app to consumers seeking its content, without also buying a cable subscription.  It has become a necessary step as their cable subscribers continue to downgrade and turn them off as well as their sister Encore networks.  Per Multichannel, the OTT platform is weeks away from being released. 

At the same time, rumors continue that Starz could be an acquisition target; however, given their lackluster results, their full value may be dropping precipitously.  The hope is that they can rebound by finding new customers interested in this new OTT service.  Most likely, the overall reason for an OTT distribution stream is to become more valuable for an inevitable sale of the company. 

NY Times Likes The Apple TV

Quite an endorsement today in the New York Times for the new Apple TV set top box.  The writer, Brian Chen, speaks glowingly of this new generation box, applauding it for both unique apps and a better remote.  It may be more expensive than other OTT boxes, but Chen remarks that "Apple TV is on the path to turning the television set into a smarter connected screen." 

The price point may drive some people away, but seeing how consumers are willing to pay more for a better built product has been the history of Apple.  They have done it with their iPod, iPhone, and iPad, and have kept their price point higher with the Apple Watch and now the Apple TV. The Apple TV starts at $149 while a Google Chromecast could access OTT streams for just $35.  Given the features described for the Apple TV, the higher price point might just be justified. 

Will the Apple TV be a holiday winner?  I'm sure it will be highly touted in all the Apple stores along with Apple Watches and other products.  For Apple it could be another strong quarter. 

Apple Measured On Growth Not Absolute Size

Despite stellar sales, multiple product lines, and a meaningful cash horde, Apple gets measured more on growth increases and not on total size.  That being said, Apple released its quarterly earnings last night and continues to outperform expectations.  Its just that most analysts focus strictly on its iPhone sales and much less on its other product lines. Can Apple continue this growth trajectory?  It depends.

It depends on how often consumers upgrade their iPhones.  That seems to be every 2 years or so.  it depends on how much bigger their international release can get, and it depends on what else consumers are willing to buy.  We certainly don't upgrade our iPads nearly as fast; mine is almost 5 years old and performs quite well.  It depends on how many folks finally switch from PCs to Mac laptops and desktops and how long they hold them till it is time to buy another.  It depends on how fast consumers accept that an Apple Watch is a must have product and how many choose to become Apple Music subscribers.  And now it depends on how well the Apple TV box, just available for purchase, is integrated into the home.  Lastly, it depends on the next innovation to come from Apple, whether an Apple Car, Apple streaming TV content subscription, Apple business services, Apple advertising, or another Apple technological product offering. 

And even if Apple turns from a growth company to a value company with sustainable revenue, free cash, and a steady focus on innovation, Apple can continue to be a major piece of our daily lives.  It is much easier to fall off the mountaintop then to climb it and Apple must continue to innovate or risk technological change making them irrelevant.  If they don't, they could one day be seen as the next Circuit City, Tandy, or Casio. 

Was The Yahoo Streamed Football Game Successful?

Last Sunday at 9:30 am ET, two small market teams, the Buffalo Bills and the Jacksonville Jaguars, played an NFL football game in London.  But unlike the last London game that was seen on CBS, this game was available on Yahoo.  And the question was whether it was a success.

It is the kind of question that is filled with too many variables.  The fact that it was in London, which no NFL fan thinks makes sense, or the fact that because of the time zone, it was seen at 9:30 am in the East, 6:30 am in the West, or that it was between two small market teams, all affects how successful such an experiment could be.  The NFL at least knows not to show a big market team or air it against another broadcast game; that would be economic suicide.  Still, the question of its success matters little. 

How a game is delivered to a TV set matters much more than whether it was through cable or satellite or wireless.  The NFL fan will watch the game.  The question really for the NFL remains how do they make the most money and for now broadcast and satellite beat Yahoo streaming any day of the week.  It is only when there is no other game to watch or at an absurd time that Yahoo has a chance to own more NFL games.  Will Yahoo outbid NBC for the Sunday Night Game or will Yahoo outbid ESPN for the Monday Night Game?  When they do, they will charge as much as they can get for access to the game and for advertisers to promote in the game.

For this first experiment, Yahoo charged a fraction of what advertisers pay for broadcast.  Most likely they reached only a fraction of the audience that such a game could get if on at a regular time.  The New York Times looks deeper at the numbers and questions how successful the Yahoo game was in reaching an audience.  I did turn it on for maybe 2 minutes of the game.  It looked like any other game with all the graphics similar to what a broadcaster would do.  But watching football on the tablet or computer is not like watching on the TV.  Maybe I could have pushed it to the TV, but I knew there were better matchups later in the day at 1pm ET, 4:30 pm, and 8:30 pm. 

Will we one day watch football streamed to our TV; absolutely.  As a technological shift, it is inevitable; but, as for when we watch it, 9:30 am is way too early. 

TiVo Wants To Give Away Its TV Research

TiVo saw an interesting way to congratulate the merger of ComScore and Rentrak.  It announced plans to offer free its TV research data next year.  While consumers may not care so much, neither should research companies.  Whether this news affects any companies seems unlikely although the point TiVo is trying to make does resonate.  Per Fierce Cable article, Frank Foster, Senior Vice President and General Manager of TiVo Research states "The focus needs to be on how you connect advertisers with audiences they really want to reach, with data that can ensure that, and metrics that can verify it." 

As consumers get more and more annoyed with ads that interrupt our programming and ad messages that border on the inane, both how the message reaches us and how it builds a positive relationship with the consumer seem more important.  Does the Gecko or Flo really sell more insurance or do they push us away; does Jan sell more Toyotos or make us cringe.  And as we seek content off the TV set, do ratings really matter?

Another Paid Streaming Service Joins The Mix

If you thought that cord cutting could save you money, think again.  The rise of so many streaming digital services could find yourself one day paying more for content then you were paying for cable.  With Amazon, Hulu, and Netflix each wanting you to pay $10 a month for their exclusive content, you can add a premium version of You Tube called YouTube Red.  Priced also at about $10 a month, do we see a price point that all these services like to reach, "YouTube Red will allow users to surf the site completely ad-free, across multiple sources, from desktop to mobile. Original programming and movies will also be available to YouTube Red subscribers, beginning next year. " This according to today's Multichannel News. 

And the more content you want, the more you will pay.  Last week, NBCU announced the launch of Seeso, a digital streaming content service that will cost about $4 a month.  It will include NBC shows as well as some original comedy content.  You might also decide you need HBO Now to assure you are receiving Game Of Thrones and other HBO content.  That will set you back another $15 every month.  If you like that, you may decide to add Showtime Now at $11 more a month.  And while Disney doesn't have a pay streaming service in the US, they are just announcing one to launch in the UK, per Variety.  And while there are still a number of free video content services, it is easy to see that the more content we want, the more we have to pay for.  Sorry, no bundling in the world of digital streaming. 

So lets add up what we know.  Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu costs $30 a month for all three.  YouTube Red is $10, Seeso is $4, HBO Now is $15 and Showtime Now is $11 for a total of $70 a month for the 7 services.  Add your favorite music streaming service, Apple Music, Pandora, Spotify, and watch your dollars fly out of your wallet.  Our cable bill could one day look like a steal. 

Apple Music Singing Its Success

The three month free trial for Apple Music is ending for many early adopters and it is now time to pay the piper.  And according to Apple, 6.5 million subscribers have converted to the paid streaming model with another 6 million still under the free period.  Of course, once consumers see the bill appear on their credit card bill, they may have second thoughts.  But if they decide to remain committed to Apple Music, at about $10 a month, Apple would see a nice revenue lift of over $700 million dollars a year.  Should Apple capture more of those trial users, that number could continue to rise.

Still, it is hard to call this new streaming business a success.  With Pandora, Rdio, and Spotify still leading in users, and Tidal pushing too, Apple has a long way to go to turn this Music business into a leader.  Apple Music's options include adding an ad supported version as well as packaging it with its release with the new Apple TV box.  Bundling has worked in the past with cable and may just make sense with this model too. 

Can Apple Music become a leader?  That may depend on how aggressive they are with the business, whether they compete with pricing packages, modeling, or even through the acquisition of a rival.  And given the deep pockets and free cash that Apple has, it can take any route.  For this moment, adding $6.5 million dollars a month from Apple Music may be chump change, but it doesn't hurt either. 

Undateable Shows Live To Catch Viewers

There is something about live television that works.  Perhaps it is reminiscent of the Golden Age when TV was learning its craft and partly the notion that with live TV comes the danger of mistakes and unknown outcomes.  Live has made Saturday Night Live a better comedy show able to capture the latest news into its broadcast and deliver immediate outcomes.  And the format is being used at 8pm on Friday Nights with the show Undateable.

A serviceable comedy from creator Bill Lawrence, the series in its third season has decided to broadcast Live to create a more lively product.  The set looks like parts of the old Cheers set, and hopefully the magic pays off for Undateable.  The jokes are a bit lame but the writing incorporates the jokes of being live with breaking the fourth wall and of course mistakes from flubbing lines.  But somehow, it all seems to work.  The show is fun to watch and the cast seems to like the danger of live TV.  Music and special guests inhabit the bar to make a breezy comedy.  The hope is that the plots continue to tighten and the second bananas on the show further shine to create a more complete ensemble.  Overall, broadcasting the show live has raised the bar and the potential to becoming a better show. 

I will watch but I worry that shows I like tend to get cancelled.  I can only hope that this show is one of the exceptions. 

Netflix - How Much More Can They Grow

Netflix released their earnings this afternoon and the market didn't seem to like what they heard.  Earnings are down and costs are up and despite their plans to raise monthly subscription fees by a dollar, the market may be getting to saturated to expect more increases in growth.  Sure there is still growth but when it comes to the stock market, how much you grow matters more.  And Netflix might be leveling off.

As competition for content increases, costs to obtain more videos, either through acquisition or original content, will only continue to mount.  And given that Netflix has a one stream revenue model limits how much more they can keep producing.  Dollar increases a year may be nice but it may not be enough to offset subscription and content costs.  The stock market may not find Netflix the darling of streaming anymore until they produce a new revenue stream. 

When will advertising come to Netflix?  The push to produce is on and that strategic move might be the necessary price.  How they add advertising could also affect the subscriber base.  Commercial breaks are definitely not the solution; other ad tools are more desirable to keep its base engaged and paying.  Done well, ads will immediately boost the stock price, 

Playboy Goes PG-13

Before there was HBO or Skinemax (Cinemax), there was Playboy.  For every teenager seeking a look at a nude body, the choice was this or National Geographic.  And while Playboy can be credited for its part in America's sexual revolution, the revolution passed them as cable television and then the internet could offer even more explicit fare.

Playboy's competitor, Penthouse, tried a different approach to match changing morals.  Like the movie The Untouchables. Penthouse tried to match them, a knife for a knife, a gun for a gun.  But trying to be as explicit as cable and the web only seemed to hasten its demise.  Playboy suffered too.  But in a new approach, Playboy is trying a 360 and starting in March 2016, the nudity will go away.  Instead, the focus seems to move toward better editorial and articles.  Heck, among the things that made Playboy great, beyond the photos, were articles from such renown authors as Jules Pfeiffer.  The hope is that they find that right blend of stories and humor that will catapult Playboy to a profitable position.

Can this new strategy work?  As long as it doesn't try to dumb down its features like other, more teenage boy, magazines, Playboy may have a chance.  It may go counter to how they started but shaking up society is how Playboy first got noticed.  It seems time to do it again. 

NAB Wants To Leverage Merger To Reform Broadcast Rules

The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) hopes to gain rules reform for broadcast ownership by tying its attempt to the Charter -Time Warner Cable merger efforts.  And the NAB hopes it has some leverage to suspend merger talks till it gets its own reforms.  While the link may not be apparent, the need for new rules is.  Still, it is unlikely that the FCC will pay attention to such a move.

Consolidation in the cable industry makes sense, especially given the connectivity issues to create efficiency for wire and wireless speed and usage.  Separately, broadcast ownership rules should also be reviewed given the changing relationship between broadcaster and viewer.  The rise of broadband applications have created new opportunities that compete head on with broadcasters. 

So if the NAB feels the need to argue for more reforms given the changing landscape, they should.  But their argument should in no way be linked to what the FCC is reviewing to allow Charter and Time Warner Cable to merge. 

Remember When ... Asking Your Cable Company To Get A Channel

The good ole days!  Remember when your cable company had maybe 20 or 30 channels and networks would buy ads asking you to write your cable company and request their channel?  It led to the rise of so many channels from Bravo to Game Show Network, from Animal Planet to Romance Classics.  And some networks that have since changed their names or shortened them to just initials. 

Today we have more than a hundred channels on our cable lineups as well as thousands of on demand movies and shows.  And now those same ads are used during contract renegotiations to stop those same cable operators from dropping those channels.  But now, the real interest isn't in launching new channels, but in buying streaming subscription services. 

It seems that now the best new shows are found, not on cable, but on Netflix, Hulu, or Amazon.  But how many subscription services are we willing to buy.  In the old days, we would request our cable company to add a channel and hope that it wouldn't significantly affect the cost of our monthly subscription.  Eventually, it did but those initial adds meant pennies to us.  Buying into a streaming service could add about ten dollars per service per month.  For all the cord cutting we may be doing, our costs look to only rise as we pay more if we want to watch all the shows on all the streaming services.  Still, at least now we have the choice to buy the channel to watch it and not wait for our cable company to turn it on first. 

ABC Family Rebrands With No Clear Shape

If you have children in the house, they probably know where to find ABC Family on their cable box.  Between 25 Days of Christmas and X Days of Halloween and Y Days of Summer, ABC Family has created event programming to help package its shows and movies.  And with all the Harry Potter Films and Pretty Little Liars and other movies and shows, it is an easy channel to watch.  That is if you can handle all the commercials.  Heck, one Harry Potter Movie could take 4 hours to watch.

But not satisfied with the ABC Family brand, and others might know that before Disney purchased it from Fox, it was Fox Family, Disney has come up with a new name for the channel.  Beginning January 1, 2016, it will be called Freeform.  It seems "Family Friendly" may not be such a positive brand distinction.  To cast a wider net, the new name is meant to reflect the notion of being a "Becomer", according to Variety.

But for me, the name invokes shapelessness, without form or structure.  And while it may be trying to say that the channel will be something for everyone, such a lack of uniqueness will only make it seem like one more generic channel.  Changing the channel's name is like when news channels "refresh their set" to update their look and attract new eyeballs.  But a fresh coat of paint doesn't always work.  Can a new name like Freeform do any better than ABC Family.  I'm not so sure.  Especially as viewers have been much more directed toward shows, than channels.  At the end, it might not really matter.

Sports Has Let Gambling Enter Its Business

As Captain Renault of Casablanca once said, "I am shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on here!"  With such an advertising blitz of commercials from FanDuel and DraftKings, it must be naive not to expect that some illicit gambling has been going on.  In this case, the use of inside information to make winning sports bets.  Who would have suspected that something like this could happen.  Certainly not Captain Renault while he was picking up his winnings.

That major league sports have welcomed these two gambling businesses into their world makes one suspect that the rise of fantasy leagues and money could ultimately lead to players underperforming or trying different things to affect their ranking week by week.  Heck Pete Rose only bet on his team to win.

It is a bit unnerving and sad that the appeal of fantasy sports and the acceptance of ad money by leagues is allowed to continue.  It feels more like we are slipping down Alice's rabbit hole with little chance to remove ourselves from our fate.  The notion that gambling should have no connection with sports needs to be upheld.  Calling it a fantasy is like painting lips on a pig; it is still a pig. Somethings need to be absolute and gambling and sports should never mix. 

Facebook Doesn't Own Your Stuff

As you scroll down your Facebook feed, you might see various people posting this gem:

Now it's official! It has been published in the media. Facebook has just released the entry price: $5.99 to keep the subscription of your status to be set to "private". If you paste this message on your page, it will be offered free (paste not share) if not tomorrow, all your posts can become public. Even the messages that have been deleted or the photos not allowed. After all, it does not cost anything for a simple copy and paste

Better safe than sorry is right. Channel 13 News was just talking about this change in Facebook's privacy policy. Better safe than sorry. As of September 26th , 2015 at 01:16 a.m. Eastern standard time, I do not give Facebook or any entities associated with Facebook permission to use my pictures, information, or posts, both past and future. By this statement, I give notice to Facebook it is strictly forbidden to disclose, copy, distribute, or take any other action against me based on this profile and/or its contents. The content of this profile is private and confidential information. The violation of privacy can be punished by law (UCC 1-308- 1 1 308-103 and the Rome Statute). NOTE: Facebook is now a public entity. All members must post a note like this. If you prefer, you can copy and paste this version. If you do not publish a statement atleast once it will be tactically allowing the use of your photos, as well as the information contained in the profile status updates. DO NOT SHARE. You MUST copy and paste

As Business Insider tells us, this is a waste.  Facebook never owns what you post.  What is amazing is how many people cite a TV news broadcast that they personally have not seen.  And posting this notice does not change anything.  The only way to keep anything private is to simply not post it at all.  Of course if that doesn't satisfy you, you might try this little idea:

I'd Rather Have A Waterproof Apple Watch

The Apple iPhone 6s has just been released and already there are rumors floating that the next iPhone model will be water resistant.  To that news I say so what.  If your phone is going to get wet, it is more likely that it will get a good dunking.  Some say dropping a wet phone in rice helps to dry it out and perhaps even get it to work again, but I say don't risk it.

Instead, Apple should be developing a waterproof Apple Watch.  That means you can take it into the pool or shower or ocean and it will continue to work.  It certainly would open up new opportunities for apps to make the iWatch more useful.  And with little cause to worry if the watch gets wet, even when just washing dishes or the baby, the Apple Watch becomes a much more practical device.  Until then, you might just be safer wearing your Timex or Casio. 

Verizon Lets iPhone Users Upgrade Annually

For Verizon Wireless customers, the good news is that you don't have to wait for your two year commitment to expire to upgrade your phone.  According to re/code, "a program that will let iPhone customers upgrade to a new phone every year if they have paid off half of their device’s cost and turn in their old device." Good news for my kids who just pre-ordered their 6s and are waiting with bated breath for the phone to arrive later today.  Of course, given all the competitive offers from AT&T, Sprint and T-Mobile, this marketing move seems required if Verizon seeks to keep its customer based happy. 

And who else should be happy, Apple.  With their habit of introducing a new iPhone model every year, with new must-have improvements, making it easier for customers to purchase new phones will certainly help improve their revenue stream.  The more customers capable of upgrading, the more phones that can be produced and sold.  In our technological world of faster and faster obsolescence, we have shrunk the lifespan of the Apple iPhone down to just 12 months.

Is Apple Music Successful

Despite the high competition in subscription music between Pandora and Spotify, Apple felt that there might just be an opening for them as well.  Seeing that itunes purchases of music were at risk, Apple created Apple Music to offset the purchase revenue model with a subscription one.  Apple seems to have no problem recognizing the need to shift as they did with the entry of the iPhone, knowing it would hurt future iPod sales.

And many believe that Apple Music is already a success with 15 million users signed into the free period.  That free trial ends in 9 days and we can only watch and wait to hear how many start to pay.  According to the NY Post article, if a third convert to pay, then Apple Music is successful.  So far half of the trial base has yet to turn off the auto pay feature.  If they all convert, 7.5 million users would make this new business a very successful launch.

Content is King and Howard Stern likes to tell us that he is the King Of All Media.  That being the case, Apple Music might want to sign him up onto their subscription service.  He did wonders for Sirius and could do the same for Apple. 

Another Inane Commercial That Makes You Wonder

If you have been reading my blog, every now and then I come across an inane ad that makes me cringe.  From the 'Vacation' Infiniti ad to the FIOS ad to the silly TD Bank ad.  Well the latest one seems to beat them all so far.  It involves a dad with his young son racing a school bus to get to school.  It seems that driving a Nissan Altima can help you outrace a school bus... WHAT????? The premise not only makes no sense it defies any logic or rational thinking.  Does Nissan want us to believe that they don't think much about safety?  There is nothing aspirational, beneficial, or even informational about why a Nissan Altima would become your preferred car to drive.  And frankly, it lacks any humor to even offset the serious consequences of what they are presenting.

If you haven't seen this atrocious ad, take a look:

Altice To Buy More, Pay Less

The European telco, Altice, plans to buy more cable properties as it grows its footprint in the United States.  At the same time, they have already stated that they expect to pay less to keep costs low and margins high.  According to Deadline Hollywood, that they will pay less for channels or drop those that don't perform.  At the same time, he cites some high wage earners in the company that may not be a part of their future.

Given Altice's desire to become a bigger force in cable operations, challenging both Comcast and Charter for system ownership, more deals could come in the next year or so once the FCC approves the Altice purchase of Cablevision and Suddenlink.  That means that Cox Cable could also be in their sights, as well as Mediacom, WOW!, and CableOne. 

Consolidation might also lead to Verizon watching how well AT&T is doing with their DirecTV purchase.  If they start to see success, Verizon might want to kick the tires on Dish Network.  Of course, there is always Google and their slow fiber expansion across a few cities.  Perhaps Verizon is tired of supporting their FIOS brand and willing to get out of the wired business completely to refocus on wireless broadband. 

The media landscape looks to get more interesting given the involvement of Altrice into the mix.  And new cost structures could lead to a quantum change in channels and services being offered. 

Dolans Finally Agree To Sell

The Dolan Family sure knows how to unlock value. The question in media for a decade or more has always been when will Cablevision sell its systems.  Does patriarch Chuck Dolan need to retire or pass on for Jimmy to let go of the family run business?  But before that would happen, the Dolans would unlock the value of its holdings by spinning off both the AMC Networks and MSG businesses into two separate companies, each still controlled by the family.  And that value boost continues as the MSG company splits into two itself with media and event spaces being separately run.  The result, the empire value has grown and grown.

Today, that profitability continues as the Dolans have agreed to sell its Cablevision business, comprised mainly of  its control of Long Island cable systems as well as Newsday and News 12 cable networks to Altice, a European telco.  And they sell it at a very high premium to its latest stock price.  While Cablevision may have less than 3 million subscribers, its region of Long Island is considered a premium system with the highest household incomes.  It also faces direct competition from Verizon FIOS across the footprint.  Still Attice seems committed to enter the cable media industry.

Altice previously announced its plans to buy the Suddenlink cable properties which when added with Cablevision gives them less than 5 million subscribers.  Neither acquisition will likely bring any cost savings through synergy, unlike the Charter - Time Warner Cable merger.  Altice will likely look for more cable systems to acquire.  Could Cox Cable be next on their screen?

As to the Dolans, the sale of Cablevision might just be a great move to unlock value before the cost of cord cutting takes too heavy a toll. And with their ownership of content companies like AMC and MSG, a freedom to find more revenue generating opportunities outside of cable or fearing moves negative to the cable operations side of their balance sheet.  Rumors are already flying of AMC's plans to purchase the Starz Network.  Perhaps the cash from Altice makes that purchase easier to swallow. 

FanDuel Vs. DraftKings

My sports content is being overrun with ads from two online sports fantasy campaigns.  It seems that every game, pre-game, and post-game has one or the other as a sponsor.  Fantasy leagues have been invading the sports world for some time; we are asked to no longer root for teams but for individuals instead.  And you thought there was no 'i' in team.  Each channel that presents an NFL game seems to have either FanDuel or DraftKings as a major advertising sponsor. 

Personally, I am not a fantasy sports participant, but I do understand the appeal.  It can offer a great mathematical intrigue but lately it seems to be all about the cash.  Each commercial reminds us how much money can be made daily, weekly and annually and parades real people, not actors, enjoying their financial success in fantasy bets. 

These ads are all over every NFL show..  And the NFL seems to be embracing it, perhaps because of all the money that is pouring into the league.  But the very nature of gambling and sports getting tied so closely together seems somewhat troubling for the honesty of the game.  Will it lead to manipulation, scandal, and more?  Are we headed down a slippery slope that could cause bigger troubles?  When ads present how easy it seems to win, we should also ask how easy is it to lose.  Maybe Pete Rose needs to be asked the effect gambling has had on his career.  I'm afraid the dollars being spent to push consumers to bet will only lead to bigger problems for sports and for media. 

Thanks For The Memory

The new Apple iPhones have been announced and my kids are ready for their upgrade.  The reasons range from battery problems to the chic factor, but regardless they both want to get their hands on the iPhone 6S.  Am I made of money?  Of course not and Apple knows that too so with their latest announcement comes word that they are willing to provide my kids with annual upgrades to their phone for a monthly fee. 

So the next question is how much memory to choose and frankly, selling a 16 GB phone is a joke.  Given the number of photos taken, songs and videos, not to mention apps, 16GB is used up before we even start.  And the phone requires unused memory each time a new version of iOS needs to be installed.  Of course Apple makes more money with higher memory options and likely better profit margins as well.  So why does Apple even bother to sell a 16GB phone when they know that 64 GB is more the minimum needed; in fact it might just be time to offer a 1MB version.   Wait a few more years and even that amount of internal storage won't be enough. 

The Future Of TV Is Apps

The latest version of Apple TV was announced yesterday and with it an announcement from CEO Tim Cook that the future of TV is apps.  No longer will we ask to turn to a certain channel; now we can say switch to this app or that.  Not such a farfetched idea but Cook may be a little late to the game.  The new Apple TV will be enabled to offer both streaming content from apps like Netflix, HBO and more as well as gaming apps.  And all will be accessible via Siri as well as a new remote.

But other boxes are already in the marketplace offering both video streaming and games.  The biggest two in the space are Playstation and Xbox while others are enabled for video streaming like Chromecast and Roku.  And others like TiVo try to bridge the gap between cable boxes and streaming.

Still the release of the Apple TV and their new TV app store marks another growth opportunity for Apple.  Because as we start using devices to access apps on our TV, we open ourselves to new screens for on screen advertising, a game that Apple has yet to enter.  Still with eyeballs comes opportunity.  And it potentially could lead to possible e-commerce opportunities too.  That will be Apple's future growth opportunity...advanced advertising. 

The initial success of this new Apple TV box depends on just how cool the interface is, how ergonomic and easy it performs, how exclusive is the content that can run on it, how fast it functions, and how excited people are to try it and buy it.  That remains to be seen.  The potential is awesome.

As to the Cook comment that the future of TV is apps, I believe he is correct.  With content being enjoyed across apps like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, HBO GO, WatchESPN, and many more, content companies have already been positioning themselves for the app space.  Consumers are embracing these apps mostly because of the mobility and TV Everywhere approach that they offer.  And now we are asking what app are they watching that show on. 

Verizon Tries Again with Streaming Content

For those that recall, Verizon has tried its hand at streaming media already.  Their service was called Redbox Instant, a partnership with the grocery store red box DVD rental service, to compete head to head with Netflix.  Redbox Instant was dropped almost a year ago.  Today, another streaming service has been announced.  Called Go90, it is a mobile app for the phone to stream video content.  The 90 refers to turning the screen 90 degrees from vertical to horizontal for optimal viewing and the GO aligns itself to other streaming services like HBO GO .  But this video service is not built to compete with premium content like Netflix or HBO; rather, it seems set to offer more basic cable type of video fare. 

Also different from the Redbox Instant model, Go90 is being delivered ad-supported, with no subscription price, to to anyone with a smartphone.  While Verizon customers may get an optimal experience, others will hopefully also receive a reliable video stream.  Will Go90 be a cable killer, unlikely.  I suspect that most of the content will be older in nature.  It will certainly help those that prefer mobile viewing with more content at their disposal.  Will Go90 be a financial success; that too will remain to be seen. 

Next Generation Apple TV

Apple's big formal public announcement is still two days away, but rumor, speculation, anonymous sources, and more are providing enough fodder to keep us intrigued.  We expect another update to the iOS operating system, a next model iPhone, a slightly larger iPad (perhaps ideal for enterprise customers) and finally a new generation Apple TV set top box. 

But as we have always learned, a TV box is more than just hardware, it needs content to run it as well.  And for it to be successful, exclusive content that only works on the device.  For that, various articles, including today's NY Times, expects gaming to be that hook.  Are we expecting Pong to make an appearance, literally one of the first games for the TV set.  Or will we get something that makes wanting to play a mobile game better suited for the TV set and not the iPad or iPhone.  Certainly not Candy Crush or Angry Birds, I hope. 

Siri is expected to play a bigger part on the hardware side of the Apple TV along with a new remote.  As much as it is nice to control the TV set from your iPad or iPhone, there are times when changing the channel and using these devices are mutually exclusive.  And switching back and forth from 2 applications not enjoyable.  Perhaps not a big deal but good to have options on different ways to control the functions of the box. 

Will a refreshed Apple TV start to take market share away from Roku, Google Chromecast, or other OTT boxes?  Apple will need more than gaming and the rumor mill says they have yet to get enough content to create a subscription service to match Amazon, Netflix, or Hulu.  To this I continue to say it may be time to buy, not build from scratch.  More will be learned in just a couple days.  Perhaps we will also get some more surprises out of Apple.  And if the announcement excites many, a good Holiday Season may be in our future. 

Hulu Offers A More Expensive Ad Free Subscription Service

How do you like your streaming video, with ads or without?  Most subscribers are likely to say 'without' and Hulu seems to have finally heard that message.  While Netflix charges between $8-$9 dollars a month for an ad free service, and Amazon offers its ad free service, with free shipping, for $99/year, or approximately $8.25 a month, Hulu will now ask customers for $12 a month for its new ad free service.  Of course, if you want to save a few bucks a month, you can still get Hulu for $8 a month with ad interruptions. 

So now streamers, which video subscription service is right for you?  Of the big three above, each offers TV shows and movies and each have their own exclusive content deals; Amazon has Transparent, Hulu has Seinfeld, and Netflix has House of Cards.  And now comes word that Apple might just want to break into this group with a content offering as well.  What does a consumer do?  Buy one service or all of them?  And what about HBO, Showtime, and Starz?

And how do we search and find content that we want to watch online?  The TV Guide Magazine can no longer help us and our cable guide is a dinosaur trying to hunt and peck for linear and on demand content.  Where can I go so to find a movie starring the recently departed Dean Jones?  Who has the streaming rights this month to Love Bug or That Darn Cat or Blackbeard's Ghost?   And how do you want to watch them, with ads or without?

Amazon New Feature A Winner

The worst part of a streaming service is when there is no WIFI or when you are forced to buy it (hotel, airline, etc.)  And it is those times when you rely on it for watching a video or listening to music that the value of a streaming subscription is worthless.  Well, it seems Amazon Prime has heard those complaints and has instituted a new feature.  According to Business Insider, Amazon Prime subscribers "can now download movies and TV shows on your smartphone or tablet for offline viewing."  And it is available on any device, not just certain Amazon Fire devices.  It also means that customers on certain data plans can download content and potentially avoid needing expensive data plans on their cellular phones.  Applause, applause to Amazon for a great feature that brings tremendous benefits to its customers. 

Apple Wants Original Content

As an admitted fan of Steve Jobs and Apple, I have enjoyed watching the company and using their products.  In my blog on Aug 21, I mentioned, and not for the first time, that Apple should consider buying a content company.  I suggested the purchase of CBS, Scripps, or Viacom, but wouldn't mind them buying Netflix either.  Today's Huffington Post speculates that Apple is indeed interested in producing original content to compete in the streaming space. 

In an age of build or buy, I might re-suggest to Apple that their expertise is not content creation.  But they have the free cash to buy and purchasing a content company with both a library of content and the talent that goes with it may be the best means to jump start their entry into the content space.  I've offered a few suggestions already, but maybe another is in order.  I think that Tim Cook, CEO of Apple and John Malone, CEO of Liberty Media might consider some sort of partnership approach.  Both bring an expertise from different sides of the media space and both see a global vision to their business strategy.  A healthy collaboration of content, distribution, and technology might be the synergy that we need to affect a quantum leap in the media landscape. 

Should Apple get into the content business, absolutely!  But I propose that buying media companies and building out a partnership with Liberty might be the ultimate one-two punch to compete in the distribution space. 

The Glut of Video Content

In my blog on August 7, I suggested that there were too many cable networks, resulting in bloated cable line-us and high subscription pricing.  My suggestion, that it was time to drop cable networks, reduce the glut, and hopefully try to lower prices.  Today's NY Times takes a different direction, but sees a similar solution.  In the article, Soul Searching in TV Land, writer John Koblin finds that there is too much content on TV and notes that "Mr. Lombardo and other executives say it is harder than ever to build an audience for a show when viewers are confronted with so many choices and might click away at any moment." 

There are so many original shows being created and aired, that fragmentation leads to lower ratings.  In the Golden Days of TV, many shows may have been created as pilots, but with fewer outlets, only the best could make it to series and to air.  There is no need to wean out anymore so that many more shows make it to the screen, either on a linear line-up or a streaming service.  We are inundated with choice.  Add to that all the older series now accessible on services like Netflix, Hulu, or Amazon, "So a new season of 'Scandal,' for example, is also competing against old series like 'The Wire.'”

With so much content at our fingertips, it may be harder and harder for quality shows to get noticed and viewed.  Fragmentation of content choices also makes it harder and harder to find; we rely more on social media to tell us what is trending and where to find it.  Fragmentation has also made it harder for networks like Univision to grow even for Hispanic viewers.  With so much choice, revenue is harder and harder to increase.  The NY Times also speaks to this issue in the same edition. 

Too much, whether candy or content, leads to a tummy ache, or revenue challenges.  The economic laws of supply and demand apply to video content like anything else.  It may be time to reduce the supply to maintain the right balance for demand. 

Can Apple Ever Exceed Market Expectations?

It seems that the big worry on Apple centers strictly on its iPhone product.  Its growth, year over year, is more important than any other of its products, whether it is the Mac, iPad, or even the Apple Watch.  Financially, Apple may be doing quite well but market sentiment seems to be that it is a one product company that lives or dies on sales of its iPhone.  Still the stock market is a bit like gambling, high on expected short term outcomes, low on long term strategy.

Still, while Apple has been seen as strictly a technology company, its competitors seem to do more diversification.  We are already expecting a news conference to be announced to tell us about next generation iPhones, Apple Watches, Apple TV boxes, and more.  It's iTunes and App Store and its new Apple Music subscription service continues to grow, adding more and more revenue and profit to the bottom line.  But these are all technology platforms.

It is Apple's future plans that intrigue a number of us.  Will Apple create a self driving car or are they better suited to partner with a current company like a Tesla?  Should Apple invest in content creation and consider buying a media company.  A CBS Broadcasting Network or assortment of cable networks like Viacom and Scripps might be a smart way to diversify into content.  Is content distribution in their grasp and could buying Netflix or Hulu a means to be in the OTT space?  Or does Apple see itself as the center of IoT (The Internet of Things) and it is time to invest and partner with major appliance manufacturers or HVAC manufacturers like Honeywell to make Apple the centerpiece of the connected home. 

Time may be ripe for Apple to declare a new strategic direction to generate a buzz and declare a commitment to the future. No doubt Apple iPhone growth must slow; the Apple Watch may not be enough to satisfy the market.  It may be the right time to shake up the world again. 

Content Verse Distribution Battle Continues

The proverbial chicken verse egg is very much in play when it comes to the world of media and the question of which is more important, distribution verse content.  Today, the stock market seems to think less of content creators as those media companies, from Disney to Fox to Viacom have all suffered due to cord cutting.  For the moment, distribution, or to be more exact, the distribution disruptors, are leading the current battle.  The rise of Netflix and Hulu and Amazon, the threat of Apple entering the content subscription business, and increased usage of devices like Roku, Chromecast, Apple TV, and other OTT boxes are threatening the cable license fee model.  Consumers still want content to watch; they just don't want to pay much for it.

And so low cost distribution platforms provide content choices for less.  A Netflix subscription for under $10 a month.  An HBO subscription WITHOUT a cable subscription, Amazon Prime with free shipping and tons of content to watch.  All cost less than an annual cable subscription.  And if video content companies are getting less revenues, than profits will only drop, despite additional cost cutting. 

Of course the content v. distribution model is essentially a balancing act, one that will find a new middle ground as some cable channels fall away and we find clearer programming segments.  We no longer watch channels, we watch shows and that also affects our search efforts.  Channel surfing has lessened as broadband enables us to search specific attributes to find shows and movies to watch.  From a certain actor or actress to key word search, the need to keep pushing channel up or down is no longer necessary, especially as content goes online. 

Content is ultimately king in my book; but for the moment, broadband distribution exclusivity may be driving the bus for the moment. 

Mobile Video Ads Work Better

What is the last display ad you recall seeing?  Frankly, my eyes gloss over most display ads; they are more a nuisance than informative, clogging up the screen.  Headers, verticals, even overlays clog our screens but may not be very successful.  Well, a research report from BI Intelligence says that video advertising is the best future for mobile and desktop screens. And that trend is continuing to grow. 

As you scroll down your Facebook or other feeds, you may notice that videos start to play automatically.  And they have been successful.  "In-stream video ads, including ads that play at the start, during, and after  video content, yielded click-through rates (CTRs) that were 18x higher than HTML5 banner ad units in February 2015, according to Google's Rich Media Gallery. "

Of course prices for video ads are higher than static ones, but if they deliver more ROI, then it is clearly a better value.  Will display ads go away completely, doubtful.  But an integrated ad buy that utilizes both strategies on a page certainly should get more notice, better brand engagement, and hopefully more click throughs. 

Is this Commercial A Hit Or A Miss

While I have listed some commercials that I find truly inane to the point of channel turning, others make me scratch my head and ask if the execution of the commercial exceeded any brand metrics. Do we remember the product, does it create interest, does it break through the clutter, is it memorable for the brand, and might it drive sales growth?

Lately, I have seen the commercial for the Infinity QX60.  No, don't know it, how about if I say the one that parodies the Vacation movie with Christie Brinkley.  And that for me is the disconnect.  For a long while, I thought it was a commercial for the Ed Helm reboot of Vacation, but it is not.    It certainly reaches an audience that knows the original Vacation brand and remembers when Christie Brinkley was the one driving the red convertible.  Now she is the mom in the SUV but the commercial is not selling the red convertible.  Yikes, that car looked more interesting.  Of course the family owner might notice that the QX60 has a third row, an important feature for households needing 7 car seats.  Few other features though are mentioned.

Is the spot memorable.  Heck, Christie Brinkley looks great and the Vacation movie brings back fond memories of car road trips.  But I wonder if the Infinity car brand gets lost in the spot.  By the way, I never saw the new version  of Vacation so I have no idea if Infinity is the car used in the new movie. Here is the spot for your enjoyment.



As to the driver of the Infinity QX60, a little trivia.  He is played by actor Ethan Embry who played the role of Clark' s (Chevy Chase) son Rusty in the original film. 

But I Like To Drive

With the exception of stop and go traffic jams, I like to drive.  A rite of passage enjoyed by every teenager as they first get their learners permit and then their drivers license.  And while there are risks and dangers, operating a car can be a very freeing experience.  Over the years, there have been many advancements in driving including better materials, air bags, more advanced braking systems all to save lives.  And there are stupid drivers who still text and drive, can't stay in their lane, or generally make bad driving decisions. 

Lately, there have been a number of efforts to take drivers out of the car.  Google has been working on such a system and Tesla is developing one too.  Now comes word that Apple may be another entrant in the self-driving car.  So is there a demand for such a vehicle?  Perhaps.  A late night with too much to drink, turn on the auto pilot and let the car get you home.  Your children need to be picked up at a friend's house.  Send the car to the address to retrieve them and bring them home.  Its late at night and you risk falling asleep at the wheel; turn on the auto pilot and let the car take over.

Some day this could all be a reality.  It could also be a potential nightmare for auto insurance companies. Was someone driving at the time of the accident, does auto-pilot make insurance costs go down?  Can we trust that an auto pilot car can't be hacked and that someone could potentially cause our car to make a deadly turn?  The evolution of self driving car may take decades to truly achieve or it may be a fairy tale.  For cars driven by computers with logical decisions to compute speed, turning radius, road conditions, etc. to exist on streets along side irrational human drivers that make illogical decisions may not work.  Accidents will still occur.  Safety must still be the number one focus to assure that any accident allows the passengers inside to survive with minimal injury. 

What's Next For Apple OTT

Apple supposedly has plans to announce iPhone updates, newer iPads and perhaps a new Apple TV box, but one thing that may not be mentioned is a new OTT service.  Per Bloomberg, Apple has not been able to close enough license fee deals with content creators to create its own low cost bundle of linear and on demand channels.   Unlike the creation of a music subscription service, building a video subscription service has been a much bigger problem for Apple. 

The planned event date is September 9 so Apple still has a month to try and cobble some deals together for their big day.  It is always possible that last minute negotiations could garner a big deal.  But if not, I have an idea.  With all its free cash, its technical expertise, its well regarded management, should Apple consider buying a distribution platform.  Hello Dish Network and its Sling TV service, its Apple and I may have a deal for you. Hello Sony, its Apple, would you sell us Playstation Vue; Hello Netflix, its Apple, can we talk?  If Apple can't build it from scratch, buy one and grow it.  Isn't that the strategy your using with Beats to build out your Apple Music subscription. 

If that doesn't work, go after some cable networks.  Hello AMC, good morning Scripps, welcome Viacom.  Maybe Apple should start buying ans consolidating its own group of networks to gain some leverage over other content companies.  A solution that solves their problem and an opportunity to diversify into digital content that runs their infrastructure of products.  If any company has the financial resources to do it, it is Apple. 

Can You Tell Me How To Get, How To Get To HBO

Kids matter. Netflix has been making sure it has its share of kid programming, from zero on through teenager to adult to assure that the whole family gains satisfaction from its subscription to their service.  Shows like Arthur, Magic School Bus, Curious George and others are all meant to attract the youngest audience and their parents.  And it seems HBO is following a similar strategy. It's latest move, acquiring first run content for Sesame Street, the popular pre-adolescent series that has been appearing on PBS. 

Per the NY Times, "After nine months of programming exclusively on HBO, the shows also will be available free on PBS, its home for the last 45 years."  This financial investment is certainly good news for Sesame Workshop.  How useful it is to HBO and what other children programming it starts to acquire will demonstrate how serious they are to get into this space.  But given how streaming has become more important to the future of HBO and how quickly children are embracing mobile video, it is the kind of content that HBO needs to stay competitive with Netflix. 

Don't be surprised to watch Showtime and Starz make their own investments into children's programming too.  They have traditionally used a follower strategy against HBO.  Content is king and HBO wants to compete effectively in the mobile market against Netflix.