Cord Cutters Rejoice In Competition

For those that have cut the cord to cable TV, a new competitor may be trying to woo you back.  The acquisition of DirecTv by AT&T has opened up a new streaming service of cable channels called DirecTv Now.  And with an introductory price of just $35 a month, subscribers will get access initially to 60+ channels; spend a little more and get more packages of services.  Of course there is the added fee of broadband access and AT&T is offering its customers no data charges to access the service.  That is a huge win for AT&T Wireless and DirecTv Now customers. Data streaming costs could potentially add to customer spending should they choose these streaming services over cable. 

DirecTv is the latest entrant in the streaming business for live channels.  They will be competing with Dish Network's Sling TV and Sony's Playstation Vue.  If live isn't important and on demand is what you care about, then you can always continue subscribing to Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, and others.  But should live streaming become a lucrative business, expect these services to try and build out their business to include access to live channels, too.

Can cable television operators like Comcast and Charter find subscribers coming to them or fleeing for these streaming services?  It depends on what low cost packages they offer to retain their value proposition.  Unfortunately where I live, Comcast has announced plans to raise fees for its various services.  Comcast and others will have to rely on its other businesses to grow.  What affect this cable price increase has on its subscriber base will be seen next year in its quarterly earnings statement.  I fear they may be hurt as streaming services like DirecTv Now take a bigger and bigger bite from their cable business. 

DirecTv Now isn't taking their new business for granted.  Reaching out to younger demo audiences, they have created an exclusive channel around pop music star Taylor Swift.  Expect more content exclusivity to be announced across all competitors to woo customers to subscribe and retain their respective services.  Competition will be good news overall for customers.

The Demise Of Cable TV

The threat of cord cutting is affecting many cable operators and networks.  Nielsen just announced that ESPN lost 621,000 subscribers in just a month.  And other networks are feeling similar losses of subscribers and the fees they receive.  Many attribute cord cutting to the high costs of a cable subscription but there may be other influences.

In the early days of cable TV, many homes were lucky to get more than 35 channels delivered to their cable box.  They included your local broadcast channels, and nets like USA, ESPN, MTV, and CNN.  Over time, more channels were created and technology was pushed to add more channels to the home.  Each new channel tried to offer something new to the mix.  Unfortunately over time, as channels proliferated, they stopped looking niche and different and started to morph into general entertainment.  Bravo once represented a high arts and culture channel, MTV was short form music videos, and TV Land was classic TV shows.  Not anymore.

The NY Times wrote of another channel that has made the same switch from its core programming to general entertainment.  SundanceTV, once known as the Sundance Channel, a showcase for independent film and documentaries, will be presenting a daily daytime block of classic TV shows including All In The Family, The Mary Tyler Moore Show, and M*A*S*H.  Shows already found on other broadcast nets as well as other cable nets like Me-TV and Decade.  Shows that once were the staple of the TV Land channel, but no longer as they have delved into new original programming.  This is not to criticize these particular channels since every other channel is doing similar moves to broaden their appeal with general entertainment style programming to appeal to the widest audience and drive ratings and ad dollars.  But it leaves viewers dissatisfied. 

As The NY Times correctly states, "The truth is that a day is about 20 hours too long for many cable channels to sustain a coherent identity."  And so they fill the majority of their day with programming that could be placed on any other channel.  Channel brands get lost as they all start to look alike.  No longer is AMC a movie channel, no longer is A&E high arts and entertainment, no longer is CMT country music.  They have become generic wannabees of each other without focus.  The industry let too many channels to form with similar formats and once they got tired of competing within their niche went forward to compete with every other channel. And to do that they needed to broaden their reach with general entertainment shows. 

Add to that a bigger load of commercials every hour and the TV viewer has become disenchanted with cable television and network brands.  They all look alike and so our search for something to watch has become purely program based and not channel based.  And it has opened the door to subscription services like Netflix and Amazon that let us pick particular shows to watch with no commercial interruption. 

Cable networks have lost their way.   The move by Sundance to add a classic TV programming block is just one example of what they are all doing.  A move from a focused genre to a "broadcast" mindset.  Too big, too many, too vanilla. It is no wonder that viewers keep pushing away from cable TV.  And it may be too late for the industry to fix itself. 

Why Apple Should Buy A Content Company

In a world where a box is just a box and distribution needs original and exclusive content to drive growth, media is big business.  And given the insatiable appetite for content affecting every consumer, content drives usage and multiple revenue streams.  Content can be purchased, it can be rented, it can be advertised; it can be downloaded and streamed and provide rich, measurable date about the user and usage.  And Apple should invest more in the business.

It is true that Apple has been dabbling in content with a trove of downloadable content on its iTunes platform.  And it has been build out a music streaming business.  But there is much more room to grown and acquisition may be the means to building a bigger better business model.  I have suggested a bid for Time Warner for its cable programming and theatrical distribution business and I have suggested other cable networks as a stepping stone into the media production and distribution universe.  Business Insider thinks that Apple should make a play for Netflix.  In the article, Stratechery analyst Ben Thompson says ""If Apple wants its usual ownership of end users it needs to buy its way in, and that means buying Netflix." With original and acquired content, Netflix's streaming model could enhance the Apple Music value, enabling packaging scenarios to drive further adoption of both models.  And it could also add value to the Apple TV business. 

Is Apple even looking at Time Warner, Netflix or other content creators and distributors?  The worry is that Apple is not innovating enough, not driving further adoption, not expanding, and facing increased competition from those eager to push Apple off the top of the mountain.  Maintenance and remodels of current products are not enough to remain a leader; rather, it says that you are treating your business more to maintain value than drive growth.  Beyond any possible plans to create a new technological product, Apple should look at content makers like Netflix to grow its business. 

Netflix Outperforms!

If the worry that Netflix has reached saturation and needed to spend more to stay even, then you guessed wrong.  Netflix just released quarterly results and they beat forecasts as well as Netflix's own guidance.  Both domestic and international subscription growth was up and both earnings and revenues are soaring. 

Is it the original content that they create?  Shows like Stranger Things and Orange Is The New Black continues to garner praise.  Is it the volume of TV shows and movies that they offer each and every month?  Is it the exclusivity that they maintain that draws users?  All these things seem to be contributing to their success.

But the market also measures future potential and how Netflix can continue to grow the base and increase its profitability.  The market certainly likes what it sees today but what is up Netflix's sleeve to further their expansion? 

Netflix For Sale?

While no official word, the market is speculating that Netflix is for sale and that Disney is interested in acquiring them.  Of course, there is nothing yet to prove that Netflix is ready to be taken over or that Disney is ready to make an offer; still, it raises the question, is it a good fit or better for another company. 

Disney certainly is a content and distribution powerhouse with the capabilities to both produce and distribute great TV and film content.  With ESPN, they also bring a sports component to the mix and with the theme parks, another way to market and appeal to consumers.  But in building their brand, the House of Mouse has a particular identity. 

Netflix, on the other hand, streams content from everyone and creates unique content, some extremely graphic, that is not consistent with the Disney brand.  Netflix is Switzerland, not beholden on any particular cable network or studio, free to deliver content across all genres and all interests to all interested subscribers.  It seems to me that a Disney ownership has the potential to restrict that freedom and change Netflix to an identity that caters more to streaming Disney content.

Should Netflix be up for sale, I would suggest other companies could make a fit.  Apple and Amazon are the first two to come to mind.  Each would bring strong synergy to the mix and each could further grow the Netflix brand.  Others that might want to think about entering the streaming content fray include Microsoft, Intel, AT&T and Verizon.  For the longer term future of Netflix, I see these choices a better fit than Disney.  We will have to watch and see how serious this current rumor is. 

CBS's Newest Revenue Stream

The rise of streaming, the challenge to increase ad revenue as well as licensing of its network to cable companies all play into the strategic mix as CBS seeks revenue growth.  Certainly content matters and quality shows that generate buzz hope to find audiences that stay loyal to their plots.  And building new distribution outlets to grow as a business remain relevant.

In the case of CBS, they chose not to be a partner in the Hulu streaming business.  The other three broadcasters NBC, ABC, and Fox, and now Time Warner have ownership shares in the Hulu business.  Instead, CBS is trying something new, its own streaming subscription service called CBS All Access.  For a $5.99 monthly fee, subscribers get "more than 7,500 on-demand episodes from the current season and previous seasons of classic shows, as well as the ability to stream local CBS stations live in more than 150 markets across the U.S." according to Multichannel News.  And following the learning curve of other streaming services like Amazon and Netflix, CBS All Access will offer original productions too, "including Star Trek: Discovery, a spin-off of The Good Wife and a new digital edition of Big Brother."

The question this strategy hopes to answer, is it better to build a new service or partner with an existing one.  Is there enough content of interest to subscribers to entice them to join?  Can marketing sell the value of adding another streaming service charge to the entertainment household budget?  CBS is trying to make it easy to access its streaming service with Roku, Apple TV, Chromecast, XBox, Amazon Fire TV and more.  Accessibility does not seem to be a problem.

But I wonder if going it alone and not with Hulu, CBS studied whether a brand name associated with the broadcast network or one without a connection made more sense.  Will customers more likely embrace the subscription service because of the CBS name or feel that they should be getting this content already if they are current cable subscribers with on demand.  Would it have better suited the service to create a more unique name like Carousel or Tainment or StreamCity to compete in the streaming media landscape?  Was CBS All Access a better name choice to drive subscription revenue?  We will watch and see. 

The Profit In Data - Storing And Streaming

I'm struck by an epiphany as I watch how much data I continue to acquire.  I don't mean bookshelves or albums or DVDs; they get less filled as my books, my music, my photos, my videos, my life are all now bits and bytes of data.  And I see too that the cost to store and stream continues to grow as I accumulate more stuff. 

Already, I have on my computer over 15,000 photos, the more recent ones requiring more memory than the ones taken in 2000.  My iTunes account includes more and more downloaded books, music, and videos and my computer's memory is nearly at capacity.  My Carbonite account helps safeguard these digital assets, at a cost, as I sense that I will need a new computer with more memory in the not too distant future.  And Apple is gracious enough (lol) to sell me more cloud backup space for my iPhone and iPad.  The costs to store will only continue to rise.

And then there are the costs to stream data.  Subscription fees from folks like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon, help drive up the monthly costs.  One's love of music means monthly subscription plans from Pandora, Spotify, and Apple Music.  We no longer need to own when we can rent and stream as much as we want.  But the costs to access also extend to the companies that sell us data plans to receive these streaming signals.  The more we stream, the more we consume, the more data services we buy.  Of course, the speed to receive these streams can also come with a higher cost; the faster the stream, the more we pay. 

As we move further and further from physical media to digital media, the cost to access data, stream it, and receive it will only increase.  And the profits will only grow.  Data is our new gold and we are mining it at an ever increasing pace.  It is the business to be in. 

Will Content Glut Reach A Tipping Point?

The rise of digital distribution has created an insatiable thirst for more content to fill the bucket.  Video content is being produced not just for broadcast or cable, but for streaming services as well.  We are seeing the numbers rise for both short form content, user generated content, and scripted series as well.  And as Investopedia tells us, "John Landgraf said the number of scripted television shows next year could reach 500, from an estimated number between 430 and 450 this year, driven mainly by a rise in shows commissioned by streaming services." Landgraf, CEO of FX Network, places responsibility on the streaming media services like Netflix and Amazon.  But Hulu, of which Fox Networks are an owner, could also be named as well.

The challenges of producing so much content include finding quality programs amid the morass of choice, viewers finding the needle in a haystack of endless content possibilities, and measuring success in today's overly saturated content world.  With so much content choice possible to see and hear, focus becomes close to impossible and harder even to search for and find.  With such a glut of content, it becomes even more important for us to use recommendation, marketing, and advanced search to help users find a match to content they would enjoy viewing.

The drive to create content is only advancing.  In coming years, the numbers will only increase.  Today, in fact, Turner announced an investment in Refinery29, a female skewed destination for fashion and entertainment, and one in which Scripps is also an investor, to support more content that could possibly make its way onto their channels.  Content is the fuel that runs digital media distribution.  Consumer thirst for more helps to drive subscription and cable revenue streams.  And with advertising alongside it in some way, deliver more profit to media companies.  Have we reached a tipping point?  Probably not, although the challenge for creative minds is to make the content produced quality worth watching. 

I Upgraded My Comcast Cable Box

As much as we would love all our devices to work without extra boxes on top, the added features and benefits that a cable boc can bring might just offset working directly from a smart TV.  Of course, that depends on the frequency in which devices automatically upgrade and improve their features and benefits.

For now, my TV viewing requires a cable box to watch cable programming, a DVD to watch certain videos, and a Google Chromecast to stream Netflix and other videos.  I have yet to add the Apple TV, waiting either for a better price or some wow feature to make me want to buy it.

I did upgrade my Comcast cable DVR box to the new X1.  I like the added memory by storing DVR content in the cloud and I like the ease of recording and search.  And mostly, I like the voice control on the remote to access and switch channels.  Just press the button and say NBC and the box switches the channel.  Say the name of a show and it will find it for recording.  Overall, I am happy with the upgrade.

But there is still work to be done to improve the X1 more. There is still a long latency switching channels and certain features are cumbersome to access.  I wouldn't mind a quicker way to delete a watched show and an undo button if you accidentally erased something (although it may be possible to recover a deleted program).  The TV Guide is not as clean as it could be nor easy to navigate smoothly.  And the remote still has too many buttons that can make finding the right one to hit a chore.  Still, the voice feature is a real winner and one that makes me glad to have upgraded. 

Is Time Warner More Appealing To Apple

Time Warner released its quarterly earnings and the news seems to be well received.  With future earnings expected to rise, the content business is growing.  At the same time, Time Warner announced plans to buy a 10% stake in Hulu, a streaming competitor of Netflix and Amazon.  HBO continues to operate outside the Hulu platform with its subscription service HBO Go.  That service is also growing.  And lastly, there are rumors that Hulu plans to build a streaming platform to offer live feeds of cable nets.  Adding services like CNN, TBS, and TNT to Disney and Fox sounds like the start of a compelling OTT competitor to cable. 

Does this make Time Warner a more interesting asset for Apple?  To own HBO, cable nets and a piece of Hulu could be a real get for Apple.  And it would instantly propel Apple into the video streaming space with major content players.  Add to that the Warner Bros studio and Apple could apply its influence into more immersive theatrical film experiences. 

Apple Products Stall As Services Rise

It seems that consumers are keeping their devices longer and that the need to upgrade iPhones or iPads too frequently is not necessary.  That's not to say that people aren't buying Apple products, they are; rather, that innovation hasn't been enough to cause consumers to change out their device. And as a product company, Apple can no longer rely on their present product line to deliver the growth that the market demands.  On the other hand, its service side continues to grow as theses products demand more apps, more cloud storage, more content to satisfy the need of the user.  Its service size, per financial reports grew 19% in the quarter and by itself is a $6 billion dollar business.  That is not a meager amount.

But Apple is more than that. And the Apple Watch has not yet become the must have device that people expect.  It is time for Apple to tell us why we need an iWatch, the Apple TV, or some not yet named product.  Will it be an Apple car?  I would rather see Apple license its technology into every other car manufacturer. Is it a Siri clone of the Amazon Alexa?  Is it a video streaming content subscription business?  Is it smart appliances in the home? 

And how will Apple show that it is once again a growth company.  An acquisition would make sense.  What about Sirius or Netflix or Viacom or CBS?  What about Microsoft?  It seems time for Apple to reveal more of their hand.  They can no longer rely on yearly product upgrades to maintain the fan fanaticism toward Apple.  It is time to get ahead of the curve again. 

Redbox Tries Streaming Again

When Redbox first partnered with Verizon three years ago, their joint venture, titled Redbox Instant, was seen as a possible competitor to Netflix and Hulu.  It was a strategy to expand from the DVD kiosk business toward a streaming one with a partner with a great deal of experience in mobile.  For whatever reason, that venture failed and Redbox Instant died last year. 

Since then, Verizon has been experimenting with their own subscription streaming mobile service. And now Redbox has decided to go it alone too with a new venture dubbed Redbox Digital.  But rather than be a monthly license fee subscription business, it appears that this new venture will attempt a transactional model.  According to Variety, "Redbox hasn’t said anything about pricing or catalog for Redbox Digital, but one can assume that it will largely mirror that of other services that allow users to pay to rent or own individual titles, including iTunes, Vudu and Google Play. That means that streaming rentals will likely be significantly more expensive than the $1.50 Redbox customers currently pay for physical disc rentals."

Why did the Verizon - Redbox Instant partnership fail?  What did each side learn as they independently create other digital streaming businesses?    And can either of these two succeed against the respective incumbents.  The opportunity is there as long as each can learn from their past mistakes. I'd love to help.

Netflix "Ungrandfathered" Me

Hey Webster Dictionary, it's time to add a new word - ungrandfathered.  Per Netflix, it is the act of eliminating any price discount associated with being a long time subscriber and substantially raise your monthly fee to match with new subscribers.  And while Netflix may see a revenue bump, they may also face higher than typical churn rates too.  And with significant competition from Amazon, Hulu and others, Netflix can't expect rate increases to help their future. 

Of course, Netflix has more to worry about as my blog yesterday detailed.  When quarterly financials came out, Netflix failed to hit a number of metrics, including important growth numbers.  And while there was some growth, it was well short of expectations.  Churn will only erode those gains.  It is time for Netflix to actively find additional revenue streams to drive business growth.  And they must start soon. 

The Future Success Of Netflix

Nothing lasts forever.  Even Netflix knows that; they watched their DVD business erode while working to navigate the streaming world.  It was a bumpy ride along the way but the result so far has been quite impressive.  But growth appears to be declining, according to the Wall Street Journal, and international challenges and content costs aren't helping. 

In August, the remainder of the U.S. subscriber base will see its monthly fee rise to $9.99; for my household that is $2 more a month or a 25% increase.  Yet that is not enough to satisfy investors in the business seeking more future growth from the streaming giant against greater competition from Amazon and Hulu.  So what is Netflix to do as its Act 3?

Of the options to consider, Netflix might want to build out a streaming tier of live content, at an incremental cost, as a skinny bundle to drive more cord cutting. They could add more advertising to the mix, either with an ad supported option or with more sponsored content to the stream.  Netflix might consider growing through expansion; perhaps the purchase of a studio like Paramount or some cable networks.  For Netflix, standing still is not an option.  They learned that lesson from their DVD rental business.  Existing growth of its subscriber base will dry up and future revenue growth must come from other business platforms. 

Netflix And Comcast Are Now Frenemies

In a not so surprising move, Comcast and Netflix have found a way to cohabitate.  Comcast customers that have the latest set top box, the X1, in their homes will be able to watch Netflix on their TV by simply switching to the Netflix channel.  Previously, users would have to switch inputs from the set top to another box, their Chromecast, Apple TV or Xbox, before accessing their Netflix subscription.  One less step, but for those looking for simplicity, an important one.

So why did Comcast agree to let Netflix in the front door?  Perhaps they recognized that Netflix was not the reason folks dropped cable.  Perhaps by being customer friendly, Comcast sees customers take full value of their cable subscription.  Perhaps it provides a bit of revenue or maybe even some additional research into the minds of their subscribers.  And perhaps they realize that set top boxes may one day be history and best to get some incremental value before it is too late.

Regardless, the press has reacted quite positively the news.  I suspect that customers will as well. And a happy customer may just stay a Comcast customer. 

Less Commercials To Save Linear Television

We gravitate to streaming services like Netflix and Amazon Prime so that we can watch our video content when we want and how we want, without commercials.  It has been the rise in commercial minutes per hour that has hastened the departure of viewers from linear TV. But perhaps slowly, networks are recognizing that too many commercials may be a wrong play.

Starting next year, Saturday Night Live, an NBC late night staple for 40 plus years, is reducing the number of commercials by 30%.  According to Ad Age, "It will do this by removing two commercial breaks per episode, giving viewers more content, said Linda Yaccarino, chairman-advertising sales and client partnerships, NBC Universal."  In addition, it will also use branded original content to drive ad revenue.  It may not be as blatant as Jack Benny selling Lucky Strike cigarettes or Jello, but it will certainly attach a particular brand to real content.  Certainly more appealing than most of the commercials that currently air.

The article also adds that other cable networks are also considering reducing ad load.  "Viacom and Turner are also working to reduce the number of commercial minutes in prime time."  Let's hope that more follow.  And while the cost of an ad may rise, so too may be the number of viewers that stick with a linear show and continue to watch. 

Netflix Slower Growth A Challenge

Like a good multi-level marketing ploy, its hard to grow endlessly before reaching a max.  And while Netflix has exceeded 81 mm worldwide streaming subscribers, each paying a healthy monthly fee, the growth curve is flattening.  That means the challenge to keep growing at double digit rates seems no longer possible.  And it may be harder and harder to find the next new sub especially as prices rise and future customers need more incentive to join.

The future is international, but there are risks too.  Can Netflix find new revenue streams to drive business growth?  Will they need to start cutting some costs to improve profit yields?  Has the market hit some maturity that could lead to upstarts taking some of the Netflix business away? Will Netflix need to keep spending more for original content and better libraries of content to compete against Amazon and others, thus hurting profit margins?  And while current subscribers are very happy with Netflix and thus not dropping the service, can Netflix add incremental value and revenue without hurting the bottom line?

These are the challenges facing the streaming industry and Netflix in particular.  It is hard to keep growing at these previous amazing rates when the market hits saturation.  Add changing interests and other internal and external forces, and the business model is continually challenged.

Amazon Prime Has Unbundled

For those cord cutters who don't want to pay $99 a year for Amazon Prime and its entertainment video package, Amazon is offering a monthly rate instead.  For only $8.99 a month you can subscribe to the service with the ability to cancel anytime.  And according to Techcrunch, "You can also choose to subscribe to Prime for $10.99 per month. You get access to expedited shipping, Prime Video, Prime Music, the Kindle Lending Library and probably a bunch of other stuff that I’m forgetting."  If cash flow is your issue, the new Amazon offering provides a smaller monthly fee. 

But if a $99 yearly cash outflow doesn't hurt your pocket, the simple math proves that buying the annual membership is the better value of about $10 for the video only package, $32 more for the full package of Prime services.  Heck if Netflix offered an annual discounted payment, they likely would find a strong conversion by existing subscribers although a lower revenue stream. 

Will the new payment structure encourage new subscribers to try the Amazon Prime service?  There is certaily no savings if all you wanted was the video offerings.  Given the pricing, it seems like you might as well pay the higher fee and add books and music to the mix. 

I am not an Amazon Prime customer.  I don't buy that much from Amazon to see value from the expedited shipping and have yet to find a must-have show that would drive me to purchase.  I do believe the ultimate driver for Amazon Prime is geared to those that utilize them frequently for purchases.  The entertainment library is the added value to the package.  I would love to see a comparison of Amazon Prime to Netflix and Hulu for number of monthly streams and hours per household utilized to see how each service is treated among its subscriber base.  Given the proprietary nature of the business, I doubt that info will ever be shared willingly. 

Customers Are Staying With Their Netflix

When it comes to churn, or subscribers that end their financial relationship with a company, keeping customers engaged and valued assures a company a strong revenue stream.  Because once you have lost the trust of your customer, it is much harder and much more expensive to try and win them back. 

In the digital media space, churn could kill a business. And folks like Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Sirius, and HBO Now among the many others count on customers to continue to pay a subscriber fee and use their services.  Well according to a Multichannel article, "Netflix is by far the largest subscription OTT video service provider, with 52% of all U.S. broadband homes taking it by the end of last year, but it also enjoys the lowest churn rate as a percentage of its total sub base, Parks Research found in a new study focused on the over-the-top video sector."   Certainly, Netflix hopes that trend continues as they raise their monthly fee about a dollar a month. 

Many may not notice or even care.  Given the aggressive push for content aggregation and a continuous stream of original content on the service.  Tomorrow, Netflix presents a new season of Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt as one such example.  And this summer comes another season of Orange Is The New Black.  For those fans and others eager to binge on their favorite series or to watch a movie, Netflix keeps its customers from departing.  On the other hand, one out of 5 broadband homes did drop a subscription service.  How much price elasticity can a Netflix home handle?  Netflix hopes to keep their churn low while eking out more revenue.

Content Not King Confirmed By Yahoo

In last weeks blog, I speculated that content may no longer be king.  Well it seems that Yahoo also doesn't think content is king either.  They have just announced plans to shut down original content sites, including digital magazine sites covering food, parenting, travel and more, while cutting 300 jobs.  As to the original content sites they are keeping, news, finance and lifestyle, they will likely rely on more third party content sites then their own created material.  Ring the Content Is King death bell for Yahoo.

So original content costs more than syndicated content.  And proprietary content is more valuable to a site than open content.  And some combination of each makes a successful digital content strategy.  Just ask Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime.  But Yahoo couldn't make it work with its Yahoo Screen app, another killed idea by a company that is declining quickly in the digital universe.  A once promising brand with a easy to remember brand name has lost its cache and its way.  What happens next to some of their remaining "stars", like Katie Couric and David Pogue?  The hour glass indicates their time at Yahoo may also be nearing an end.