Cable Consolidation Confirmed For Charter

Three weeks ago, I mentioned in my blog that Charter Cable was kicking the tires on Bright House Networks.  Today it has been confirmed that Charter will acquire Bright House with a combined subscriber base exceeding 7 million homes.  Bright House parent, Advance-Newhouse will own about 25%, and Liberty about 25% of the new MPVD.

Most interestingly, this acquisition is contingent on the Comcast acquisition of Time Warner Cable.  Should that not happen, this deal could likely be kaput.  Bright House has benefited from their current relationship with Time Warner through a programming partnership that enables them to get the same license fee rates as TWC.  That programming deal would likely expire when or if the Comcast deal is approved.  Combining with Charter post approval would create a larger entity that could likely retain those better licensing terms.

So just to count all the cable acquisition deals in front of the FCC to date, we have Comcast and Time Warner Cable, AT&T and DirecTV, and now Charter and Bright House.  Three and counting...one can only wonder who the next likely target will be. 

Can TV Everywhere Help The Cable Industry

Today's Variety poses an interesting question, Is Cable's 'TV Everywhere' Strategy Finally Poised to Take Off?  According to an Adobe Systems' study, viewership doubled from the previous year to reach 20% of all pay households.  That is to say that 20% of all cable subscribers were authenticated to watch TV programming away from their cable box across other streaming devices.  Reasons for authentication included streaming Olympics coverage as well as World Cup Soccer.  And come this next football season, the NFL has agreed to stream a regular season football game.  Whether that also involves authentication remains to be seen.

I've had the pleasure of downloading network apps that require my cable email and password for authentication.  I've read reviews from others that have downloaded and used apps from Xfinity to NBC to CBSN.  As for ad supported networks, a number of the reviews are unkind.  Examples include gems like this, "I do not usually write reviews but the duplicate, redundant, and excessive amount of ads thrown at me while watching a single episode ..." Or this one, "This app is hopeless streaming to Apple TV."  Or "The commercials are loud and so repetitive".  Some are more positive, "Easy to operate. Wish for less commercials."  Clearly there is need for improvement.

That consumers are using these apps and are so passionate indicates to me how valuable they can be.  Technically, more can always be done to improve the viewing experience, assuring no glitches or freezing, and an easy interface to choose and watch content.  The other issue is commercial load and how much the consumer will watch before they turn away to commercial networks, continue to cut the cord to cable, and focus exclusively on subscription services like Amazon, Netflix, and Hulu Plus.  If part of the goal of TV Everywhere is to drive value for cable TV, both on and off the cable box, then don't kill the golden goose before it even has time to fully hatch.

Clearly consumers are increasingly using these authenticated apps to enjoy their TV programming on their other devices, from iPads to iPhones to Roku.  And enabling access to live network linear feeds as well as on demand viewing benefits the authenticated viewer with a better, more personalized viewing experience.  But like any good business, it is so important to listen to the customer.  Rule One, the customer is always right.  Rule Two, when the customer is wrong, see rule number one. 

Will Apple And Beats Gain Edge In Streaming Music

Apple sure has a lot on its plate with the release of the Apple Watch, a planned Apple TV subscription service, and a refreshed Beats streaming music service.  The NY Times article talks about what Apple is able and not able to do to compete against Spotify and Pandora.  According to the report, "Apple recently tried but failed to persuade record labels to agree to lower licensing costs that would have let Apple sell subscriptions to its streaming service for $8 a month — a discount from the $10 that has become standard for services like Spotify, Rhapsody and Rdio."  But does Apple really want to play the low cost angle to compete?

It may be telling that Apple has not tried to undercut its iPhone or iPad price to gain an edge over Android or will use a low price strategy for its Apple Watch release.  So why start now.  If history is a guide, what Apple does exceedingly well is create demand by focusing on unmet needs and delivering uniquely a product or service that works simply and efficiently.  So in the case of the competitive music streaming market, Apple and Beat's success must deliver unique benefits that consumers will desire. 

Apple may just have the products and services to achieve early gains.  The Beats music service could be pre-loaded into the next iteration of iOS.  A Beat's subscription could be included with every Apple TV video subscription.  And synergy with iTunes could help Beats push music purchases.  Content is king and building a library of exclusivity will be important to demand.  Perhaps, a unique deal with Taylor Swift, U2, and others may be a driving force.  Lastly, customization and personalization remain key to build a music subscription service that delivers unique value and enjoyment.   Can Apple Beats gain market share verse the current batch of competition.  I suspect that Apple has a plan.

ESPN Reminds Planners That Cross-Media Advertising Matters

Hopefully most media planners know that the best way to reach a broader audience is to advertise across media platforms.  It also raises awareness, interest, engagement, and hopefully intent to purchase.  Advertising on one platform, especially when consumers interact with so many different types, from print to TV, pc and mobile, billboard to coupons, limits the reach and frequency one hopes to achieve. 

But I guess ESPN wants to remind us of that.  In the Wall Street Journal article in the CMO Today Advertising section, the headline screams, ESPN Urges Advertisers to Hit All Devices.  In it, their research reaffirms "that the key to effective ads is getting in front of viewers across all their devices."  Did this group finally realize that?  That new research was needed to quantify what has been known for years seems silly.  If we get to the gist of what I can only consider as pure PR, ESPN wants its advertisers to spend advertising dollars across all its platforms to assure that it best reaches a male skewed demo.  Yes, integrated marketing clearly works to reinforce brand messaging and well known for decades. That given the rise in new media platforms, like mobile, hasn't seemed to change this fact.  Still, given the start of upfronts, something ESPN found important to reaffirm. 

Could Streaming Network TV Boost Advertising

With the planned release of Apple's TV subscription streaming service, networks might just be greeted with an advertising opportunity, the ability to dynamically insert commercials to specific households.  Thus one commercial spot could be sold to reach a certain household based on relevant data while the same spot could be sold again to a different set of households.  Advertisers would pay a premium but would have more certainty that their ad was reaching a relevant audience.  And networks could sell the same ad spot multiple times.  In addition, different ads could be served based on the device being used to watch the program, one for the Apple TV box, another to the iPad or iPhone.  Ads could be dynamically inserted on linear as well as on-demand and DVR programming.  The likely results, higher engagement, higher viewership, and more revenue. 

Do Cord Cutters Care About Linear TV

The desire to capture a digital friendly audience begs the question, do they even care about linear TV, either broadcast or cable channels.  Many that are cutting the cord to cable tend to be Millennials that have found that they can watch most of their shows free, without paying a subscription fee.  From clips to full length episodes, consumers can watch on You Tube, Crackle, and many more as well as on a slew of pirated sites.  And those willing to pay a small monthly fee per month have access to tons of shows and movies on Netflix, Hulu, and even Amazon Prime.  Borrow a friend or parent's passcode and you get HBO GO.  For those that don't need to watch shows on a linear network can eventually get these same shows on other sites.  It begs the question, do these cord cutters, these Millennials, even need linear TV?

Sling TV, PlaystationVue, and now Apple TV seems to think that this audience will pay for content offered via their platforms.  That the content can be streamed to any device, saved for future airing, and watched when, where, and how the user wishes may drive a value that isn't currently being offered.  And access to some live programming, like sports and events, that needs to be watched as it airs may be a driver to purchase these OTT platforms.  It is the cost/value proposition that will ultimately determine if the Millennial audience sees value to purchase. 

Comcast Leadership Threatened By Disruption

As the leader in the industry, Comcast is facing the same kind of threats that have faced other leaders for years.  Whether a technological change, environmental, external, internal, or even a change in consumer demand, businesses are challenged to retain its core business or risk losing core revenue to drive new revenue growth.  It is why some well known leader brands are no longer around.  They fought so hard to retain their business model while consumer fled to new competitors.  Examples include Sears, Radio Shack, Prodigy, just to name a few.  Feel free to add to the list.  It is an epic reminder of the classic business novel, Who Moved My Cheese?.

Some companies have successfully adapted to change.  Netflix was a DVD mailing company who was able to change to be the streaming content leader.  Apple was willing to let the iPod decline to introduce the iPhone.  And they did it again with the larger iPhone, a possible killer of the iPad mini.  But change is constant and to stay relevant these and other brands must continually look to adapt and change.

Cable operators face those same challenges as a result of the growth of streaming and the launches of new competitors, including PlaystationVue, Sling TV, and Apple, as well as HBO Now, CBSN, Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu.  Consumers can now leave cable, cut the cord, and get a smaller package of relevant content, at a hopefully lower price, and on any device they choose.  It is the cord cutting nightmare driven by a TV Everywhere approach.  So what to do?

For Comcast and other cable operators to compete in this ever changing entertainment landscape, they will have to reassess how they are delivering their content to the home, what business they want to be, a pipeline or a content aggregator/distributor, and how they want to differentiate to maintain a healthy and profitable subscriber base.  The loss of cable subs means a loss of a monthly subscriber revenue stream as well as a loss of ad revenue from a declining base of users.  As more and more streaming services appear, each building packages of broadcast and cable networks and other programming, more and more consumers will be siphoned off.  The percentage of cord cutters continuing to grow.

To compete successfully, it is time to throw out the old cable boxes.  For Comcast, to push out the IP enabled X1 box, or to offer a TiVo box solution, and enable all programming to be authenticated and offered across all mobile devices, on and off the TV set.  Update your packaging model to encourage consumer choice.  Some homes will always want to buy all programming at one price, but others want to pick and choose their package of service.  Market the availability and accessibility of choice, with online access to quickly pick and choose the networks you want for your personalized package at variable price points.  Let consumers change within their package at a moment's notice or upgrade or downgrade at will.  Make Choice, Accessibility, Variety, Availability, and Simplicity your mantra.  Could CAVAS become the next buzzword?

If consumers are choosing Apple TV over cable TV it will be because Apple enabled consumers to buy a smaller package of content and the choice of where, when, and how to watch.  Comcast can do the same if it wants to save its cable business model and be the ultimate aggregator and distributor of all content.  Or it can become a dumb broadband pipe provider.  More competitors are coming to take your cable business away.

Apple's Subscription Platform A Disruptive Force

Given the Apple infrastructure of retail, a full line of products from Apple TV to Apple Watch, plus its iTune interface and AirDrop capability, it is no wonder that the news of it's entry into an online cable subscription service has created quite a stir.  From traditional cable operators, like Comcast, to other technological rivals, like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft, Apple has challenged their current business models.  How?  Let us see.

Comcast may be concerned on a number of fronts.  While NBC is currently not in the mix for services on the new Apple subscription platform, they may be forced to launch based on their agreements with the FCC.  According to the NY Post, "As part of Comcast’s deal to acquire NBCUniversal in 2011, the cable giant agreed it would make its content available to online video distributors on a “comparable” basis to its rivals."  For Comcast, the debut of Apple TV could cause a rash of cord cutting as consumers decide they prefer the TV Everywhere advantage of Apple, the simplicity of use across all their devices, and the mobility.  They also undercut Comcast with lower subscription fees for a scaled down but desirable list of networks.  Add HBO Now and Netflix and consumers mayjust prefer the Apple TV box or iPad or iPhone over a cable TV box tethered to a single television set.  How does Comcast compete?  With an Apple launch scheduled for the Fall, they have about 6 months to build a new business and marketing plan.

As to the other streaming networks, Apple will compete with Sling TV and Playstation Network.  Amazon may feel they have lost a step.  They have the smart phone and tablet devices, but don't have the broadcast nets and most of their streaming is tied to their Prime subscription model.  Microsoft has XBox, but they have already disbanded the content side of that business to concentrate on cloud computing.  Building an infrastructure of content partners and a streaming subscription service may not be part of their current focus.  And Google has concentrated on building out fiber in limited markets.  They have Google Play and can reach outside the Apple closed infrastructure through the open Android platform.  But by being open, it may lose some control.

Still, the speed of change has increased greatly and mass adoption continues to occur at a quicker and quicker rate.  All of these technology companies have the ability to commit to change and focus on driving digital consumption.  And moving off of cable boxes and onto personalized devices delivers richer data about who is watching, when, where, and how, coupled with the same users using these same devices to make purchasing decisions.  Apple's infrastructure and usage base could potentially give them a huge edge in capturing a sizable subscription audience and rich data to drive advertising revenue. 

Apple To Become Online Cable Operator

For years it has been speculated that Apple wanted to get into the television viewing business.  But in the last few years, the word television has changed its definition.  Watching content, whether on cable TV or through Netflix, whether on a big screen set or on a mobile device, all seems to fall under the umbrella of television viewing.  Rumors that Apple wanted to build big screen sets or a cable friendly set top box have all been bandied about.  The latest news might just be the direction Apple has decided to take.

The Wall Street Journal says that "The technology giant is in talks with programmers to offer a slimmed-down bundle of TV networks this fall, according to people familiar with the matter. The service would have about 25 channels, anchored by broadcasters such as ABC, CBS and Fox and would be available on Apple devices such as the Apple TV, they said."  Like Sling TV and Playstation Network, announced at the CES, and other aggregators, Apple hopes that its Apple TV device, recently reduced in price from $99 to $69 is the means to drive adoption.  Under the Apple ecosystem, subscribers of the service would be able to view content on any of its devices, from iPod to iPhone, from iPad to Apple TV.  Truly a TV Everywhere approach!

Interestingly, the one content provider not included at the moment is NBCUniversal, home of the NBC broadcast channel, Bravo, Syfy, USA, CNBC, and others.  Also NBCU is owned by Comcast, the largest cable operator, soon to be larger with the acquisition of Time Warner Cable.  While the new service is not planned to launch till later in the year, so too is the approval of the cable operator merger with the FCC.  Could this issue add an extra wrinkle to the approval process?  We must wait and see.

For consumers seeking a cheaper alternative with a smaller set of channels but access to content anywhere and everywhere, and additive premium content from Netflix and HBO Now, this new subscription service could be highly welcomed by the millennial audience.  Ideally this online audience would prefer to pick and choose the nets it wants within the package.  The concern over time will be as more nets do deals to be on the subscription service causing Apple to need to raise its monthly fees.  That is one of the issues that led to cable cord cutting.  That, and the inability to watch content away from home.  With this new online subscription service, TV Everywhere becomes a true reality. 

What Do Millennials And Generation Edge Want

I saw an interesting stat posted on Twitter from an article in the Wall Street Journal:

While it took 75 years for the telephone to reach more than 50 million users, Facebook took only 3.5 years, and Angry Birds only 35 days.  With each generation becoming more and more tech savvy, early adoption can grow quite steadily into mainstream usage.  A successful product, like the iPhone, becomes a global must-have product, Google Glass still seeks to prove its value in order to achieve mainstream adoption.



By understanding the Millennial and Generation Edge audiences, their current consumption habits and future desires, companies can better deliver products and services that they desire.  In today's Wall Street Journal, researchers focused specifically on Millennial online activities and habits.  "The three most popular digital activities among the survey respondents were checking and sending email (72%), keeping up with what friends are doing (71%), and streaming music, TV, or movies (68%)."  Connectivity has become more and more crucial to our lives.  Authorized sharing has become very important while privacy becomes an issue for controlling who we let in to our circles. 

For the younger generation, being part of what is cool and trending has weight, especially, when our circle approves.  Shows on Netflix, new apps, products and services all get discussed and reviewed and approved or disapproved.  Gaining that buzz and affirmation, especially from this younger generation will drive future growth. 

Happy Pi Day

March 14, 2015 or 3-14-15, for math geeks a once in a blue moon chance to honor Pi, 3.1415

So how about a video or two to celebrate...

More Cable Consolidation In 2015

With Comcast buying Time Warner Cable and AT&T buying DirecTv, the cable oligopoly continues to grow smaller.  The latest acquisition plan comes from Charter Communications.  There is speculation that they will bid to acquire Bright House Networks, a mid-size cable operator with about 2.5 million subscribers.  That could potentially bring Charter to over 6 million subscribers as well as increase the size of its footprint. 

Putting another cable operator in play also brings up the notion that other cable operators could be buyers or sellers.  Of those, the biggest question mark is Cablevision Systems, with over 2.5 mm subscribers, mainly in the New York DMA and a highly desirable market.  Cox Communication, with over 4 million customers and systems spread across the US, from New England to California, could also be of interest.  There are still a number of smaller cable operators with more regional footprints that might finally decide to seek a buyout partner.

While the FCC still mulls the fate of the two big acquisitions above, as well as work with new net neutrality rules, their plate could only get fuller.  Cable and broadband infrastructure across the US requires size to gain efficiency.  These deals only seek to build larger footprints to capitalize on cost efficiencies and revenue gains.

 

Commercial-Free Streaming Services Hurting Cable

We have watched as cable television has, almost purposely, tried to kill itself.  Money seems a powerful aphrodisiac and the desire to squeeze as much of it as possible has turned consumers away.  Where broadcast TV offered viewers free content in exchange for watching ads, cable TV existed on a diet of both subscription fees and ad dollars.  Broadcasters became jealous and moved from must carry status to retransmission consent in exchange for license fees too.  Cable then found more ways to add revenue from adding more ad spots per hour to squeezing content together to open more ad time.  Everything from running end credits and opening credits simultaneously to now speeding up actual content of shows.   Unfortunately, greed is not good.

What started as a slow erosion of cable subscribers off television has led to alternatives that deliver content, complete, unfiltered, and without interruption.  Technology has helped to disrupt the TV game and homes are increasingly changing their routines.  Per the Nielsen results in the NY Post,

• "The amount of time US viewers spend watching live TV has plummeted by 20 minutes a day since 2013;
• Homes with subscription streaming services are watching 50 minutes of TV a day more than those without;
• Subscription video services are now in 40.3 percent of households"

According to the research, since 2012 cable operators have seen almost 5 million households drop their cable subscription packages.  Broadband connections are now more essential to the home than cable.  And as more content finds its way to streaming services, viewers will find more reasons to devote more time to streaming choices. 

Could Cable Network Drops Become Permanent?

The cycle of cable network drops with license fee negotiations leading to eventual relaunch could soon be over.  The threat of cord cutting, the high license fees imposed by cable nets, and the desire to keep subscription prices in check could lead to cable operators dropping cable nets from their line-up, permanently. 

Viacom's networks, MTV, VH1, Comedy Central and others were dropped from Suddenlink in October, almost 6 months ago, without the cable operator losing a significant number of subscribers.  Given the savings and limited loss of revenue, Suddenlink may be in no hurry to relaunch Viacom networks.  The latest news is that Verizon's FIOS systems have decided to not renew The Weather Channel, replacing it with a more inexpensive weather service.  Should FIOS find this move to be financially successful, it too could appear to become permanent.

Given the rise of streaming services, the accessibility of network programming outside its TV line-up, and the need by cable operators to create lower priced, smaller packages of cable networks to limit cord cutting, some cable networks may be at risk of also being dropped from cable systems.  If Suddenlink and FIOS can demonstrate that they can drop nets, maintain their subscription penetration, while improving their net profits, the cycle of launch, negotiate, drop, re-launch may have finally be broke.  Should cable network drops become permanent, don't be surprised to see these same networks follow the HBO Now strategy of offering streaming subscription packages outside the cable line-up universe. 

HBO Not Worrying About Cannibalization

Yesterday, Apple formally announced an exclusive partnership (albeit only 3 months) when HBO Now will be offered strictly on Apple devices.  HBO's new streaming service will be offered to all consumers regardless of whether they are authenticated cable customers or not.  And like Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu Plus, HBO Now hopes to capture the consumer desiring content on their digital devices.  But unlike these other streaming services, HBO is risking their current subscriber revenue stream.  Or are they?

The threat of cord cutting, the rise of the millennial audience, and perhaps a lucrative revenue model might just make this new approach by HBO a win-win scenario.  Its corporate owner, Time Warner, no longer owns a cable operator so there is no loss of synergy.  Cable operators are unlikely to drop HBO on their own cable platform as it is the most popular, highest purchased of the premium tier networks.  And the pricing model may just protect HBO regardless whether a customer purchases through a cable operator or through iTunes.  At $14.95 a month for HBO Now, and only a 30% share with Apple (per reports), HBO Now's net could potentially be higher than the net revenue per cable sub per month.  If that is true, cable customers that cut the cord but buy HBO No could give them a net revenue gain.

I don't expect cable customers with HBO to be motivated to cut the cord because of this new streaming service.  They already enjoy HBO on their mobile devices because of HBO GO, its authenticated streaming service.  This added value product has been accessible to cable customers for some time.  Rather, HBO Now is more focused on the 10 million or so non cable, internet customers seeking more online content, specifically exclusive content that HBO offers.  The new season of Game of Thrones is one such example.

How will HBO Now do?  Millennials, whose parents have cable with HBO, are likely using mom and dad's access to get HBO remotely.  But for those that aren't and see incremental value with HBO content may be eager to purchase.  For HBO, the launch of HBO Now seems to be all positive with limited downside risk.  

Will Apple Convince Us We Need An Apple Watch?

In just a few hours, Apple will unveil its latest product to the public.  Other than product refreshes, Apple hasn't released a new product since the iPad.  With today's press conference, we will finally learn about all the new features, functions, and benefits of the Apple Watch; and most importantly, the Apple Watch will reach its retail stores and the general public will be able to more closely see and feel them.

A number of questions come to mind as the Apple watch is released.  Will it deliver a uniquely different experience than other smart watches out already?  Will it do more than current health trackers like the Fitbit, Microsoft Band, Vivofit and others?  Will watch wearers replace their current watch with an Apple Watch and will non-watch wearers want to start wearing a watch?    Is the price point a stumbling block or a non-issue?  Can Apple convince consumers that the Apple Watch is a must have product?

Stumbling blocks for me are first and foremost the price.  Second is the utility and value that would drive me to need it.  And third is the battery issue.  If the Apple Watch can't last a full day without a recharge, then a dead device on one's wrist has no vale whatsoever.  If Apple can convince the public that they can't live without it and that it lasts the whole day, then they likely have another win on their hands; if not, it may be a major miss for Tim Cook and his team. 

TiVo Claims Better Solution to Comedy Subscription Service

A few days ago, NBCU announced plans to create a comedy subscription service for streaming users to enjoy programs like The Tonight Show, Saturday Night Live, and more.  With a proposed monthly fee of between $2 and $4 dollars, viewers without access to the broadcast channel can enjoy these shows.  The problem is they already do, on You Tube, on Yahoo Screen, and in the SNL 40 app.  Why pay for the cow if the milk is free?

Obviously, once these agreements expire, NBCU could make a case for exclusive access but aren't these online tools helpful in building subscriber loyalty and moving them to want to watch the latest shows.  Could advertising dollars suffer in trying to start a subscription service? And aren't there alternative ways to watch these great shows.

TiVo thinks so and is touting their aggregation marketing plan that brings comedy programming from all the broadcast channels to your digital devices.  Per Fox Business, "The 'Comedy Collections,' culled from ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC, will be customized by TiVo subscribers into bundles of favorite sitcoms and late night shows. According to Rogers, the cord cutters -- or TV viewers who get content over the air (OTA) without paying a cable company -- will be able to easily do their bundling as well, thanks to TiVo's Roamio OTA (Over the Air) device."  With a digital antenna and a DVR box like TiVo or Slingbox, anyone can achieve the same kind of collecting and viewing.

The challenge for cord cutters and any of us that use a DVR to record and playback later is that we have to plan in advance to record certain shows.  With a streaming service, we simply have to check that a show is available then click to watch.  No advance planning or set up required and that has been the beauty and simplicity of streaming content services. 

Content Networks Chasing The Cord Cutters

Cable operators and content networks have always had a difficult relationship as buyer and seller.  In the early days of cable, their relationship was more harmonious with launches coupled with marketing activities to assure that subscribers saw value from the network and networks built awareness and hopefully ratings.  But the proliferation of cable networks, a loss of brand as niche networks began looking more and more like UHF channels, and a price only mentality have turned these negotiations bitter and untrustworthy.  The result has been broadcast and cable network drops, followed by ads telling subscribers how horrible the other side is behaving, and then finally a relaunch.

Consumers are changing too.  No longer do they seek content simply from a cable operator; now, they can watch TV shows and movies via a broadband connection.  And while broadband subscription rises, cable subscription is dropping.  Cord cutting is a fact.  Recognizing that the cable operator is not the only distribution platform anymore, content networks are constructing deals on OTT platforms.  Most recently, it was announced that AMC, IFC, and Epix are joining the Sling TV digital platform.  For as little as $20 a month, subscribers can get these nets as well as ESPN, HGTV, TNT and a few others.  Less networks than a cable operator subscription package but at a lower cost to the consumer.

HBO has also announced that it too will offer its network without the requirement of a cable operator.  Tentatively titled HBO Now, it helps them to compete in the same new world that Netflix, Amazon Prime, and others compete in.  With cable nets building alternative avenues for access, the pressure for more cord cutting will only continue to mount.  And as negotiations with cable nets lead to drops on cable systems, the likelihood that these networks will relaunch may become a distant memory.  Networks can simply advertise an alternative way to get the networks they love without the cable operator as the middleman.

Cable operators have done little to compete in this changing media environment.  TV Everywhere is not available to subscribers for all its nets; rather only certain networks offer authenticated carriage, some only inside the home, and with no aggregated way to easily search across a line-up.  Cable boxes remain clunky and hard to navigate unlike IP devices.  New packaging is not being created to drive down the subscriber price point to enable stronger retention.  Rather, prices continue to go up to keep revenues stable.

What does the future hold?  I see cable operators dropping cable networks that don't perform.  Smaller packages of cable networks but at lower price points.  I see operators needing to invest in new generations of cable boxes, embracing the TiVo type boxes that access both cable and internet content and bring it to the TV screen.  And I see the emergence of a la carte pricing where a home can buy a particular network through their cable box for access across all their devices.

Connectivity Brings Le Freak Out

The issues of security and privacy will not go away; as long as there exists devices to stop unwanted entry, there are people destined to break in.  The latest security breach is called "Freak" and affects mobile devices including iPhones and Android, as well as Mac computers.  So get ready to Super Freak, to Get Ur Freak On, to Le Freak, or simply Freak Like Me.  Okay, enough song title references.

According to re/code, "The vulnerability in Web encryption technology could enable attackers to spy on communications of users of Apple’s Safari browser and Google’s Android browser, according to researchers who uncovered the flaw."  Once discovered, corrections are being made and software updates will follow.  But it is only a matter of time till another bug is discovered, another flaw exposed, and folks with dishonesty on their minds will seek to take profit from it. 

This cycle of hacking to exploit data for nefarious means will never end.  The more sophisticated the encryption, the bigger the challenge and drive to try and expose it.  Never ending, we will be faced with stories like these for many, many years.  Think The Imitation Game but with bad individuals hacking into our personal and financial information.  Perhaps The Matrix is right, we might need to consider getting off the grid. 

Will Wearable Devices Create More Security and Privacy Breaches?

Next week, Apple plans to unveil their Apple Watch with availability in April.  Already out in the market are other wearable devices including Fitbit, Pebble smartwatch and others.  In the meantime, we have become more and more tied to our smart phones and tablets and see opportunities for being connected to other devices as the next best thing.  But are there also risks and concerns?

The opportunities for wearables are tremendous. From collecting health information to replacing physical credit cards.  Apple Pay is a great new feature that makes purchasing more convenient.  Adding that functionality to its watch enables an even better experience.  But the idea of wearable devices can be extended to multiple applications.  It could unlock and even start a car as we get near it, unlock our front door without scrambling for our house keys.  Houses with alarms enabled could recognize the device and instantly disable without the need to punch in a code.  Heck, a wearable device could make physical keys a thing of the past. 

But what about privacy and security?  Are we opening up additional risk that these kinds of locks could be more easily opened with other sophisticated technology?  Will our health information, like our bank and credit card data, be at risk as well?  Is there something to be said for a physical lock as opposed to a digital one?  These seem like huge challenges that have not been fully addressed.  As more and more consumers suffer from credit card fraud, are we opening Pandora's box?

A lost key can be replaced.  It may be on a keychain but it tends to lack personal information that tells the name of the owner, where they live and how to reach them.  A smartphone or smartwatch could be a different issue.  These devices aggregate all our data with the possibility that once unlocked, could be very dangerous to our privacy and security.  Could we be possibly be opening ourselves to too much risk?

The risk verse reward balance of connecting our devices to the environment we move around in is a serious one.  How we can protect ourselves from stolen data, fraud, and possible invasion and theft is one that has to be baked into the technology.  And marketed in a way to allay our fears and demonstrate how much grander the rewards can be.