This article suggests lots of M&A activity will be occurring. Not a very earth shattering proclamation. Already, we have the planned merger of Sirius and XM Satellite, the sale of The Weather Channel, Bebo's sale to AOL, among those known. So what of the rumors...is Charter for sale and will Time Warner and Comcast split the subs. Is Hallmark off the block or just waiting for a better offer. Is Comcast still interested in buying Disney or another programmer. Is CBS looking to add to its assets. And what of all the new media sites, financed by venture capital, and obviously looking for a payout. Merger mania, no, simply normal business transactions.
Media mergers is not new; big fish buy little fish. It is the natural order.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Thursday, March 13, 2008
DirecTV to Start On-Demand
Talk about changing the media landscape, VOD was an important differentiator between cable and satellite. With this news, satellite services like Direct TV and Dish are working to close those differences. Still what keeps the two services separate are satellites inability to provide broadband service and its ability to provide phone. Direct also demonstrates the value of content by pushing their ability to provide more Hi Def linear channels than their competition.
Most interesting, what is required for a Direct customer to get VOD content is a broadband connection and per this report, half of all their customers also have a broadband connection. But from where? Are these customers also taking hi speed from the cable provider and perhaps basic service on one TV in the home as well. Could this mean that the cable operator has not truly lost this subscriber, they may have simply downgraded to fewer services.
Or are these connections with telcos like AT&T. As AT&T rolls out its own version of cable called U-verse to more and more homes, do they try to convert these subs away from Direct to AT&T? How do these two businesses remain friendly in communities where they also compete with one another.
Technology continues to make more and more things possible and I am sure the ideal situation for satellite is interactive communication, not the one-way transmission they currently use with a phone connection for the return. One day, that should be economically feasible. But perhaps the electrical outlet can provide another source to harness interactive possibilities. Competition is good for business and Direct TV continues to demonstrate that they know how to compete. Today broadband is the bandaid approach to VOD and interactivity, tomorrow, who knows.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Online Distribution Can Help All Audiences Grow
Robert Iger clearly embraces new media and recognizes that it doesn't replace TV but enhances its value.
“More mature platforms can still generate a lot of value, including the big-screen movie experience in the theater,” he added. “That value actually grows because of new media, because what you do is you introduce it to the world on a traditional platform and you use new media to reach more people and create more dimensions.”
The younger demo is embracing the entertainment value of the computer, but it can co-exist with the "old media" TV experience, especially with the advent of High Definition. Disney has been buying social networks like Club Penguin and successfully taking its content and merchandising it across multiple platforms. With 2 small kids watching Disney and playing online and listening to their songs, we have become a Disney family on all platforms. And don't think we won't be going to the movies when High School Musical 3 is distributed, too.
The distribution platforms may shift and change, but the content, if it is compelling, will continue to be consumed.
“More mature platforms can still generate a lot of value, including the big-screen movie experience in the theater,” he added. “That value actually grows because of new media, because what you do is you introduce it to the world on a traditional platform and you use new media to reach more people and create more dimensions.”
The younger demo is embracing the entertainment value of the computer, but it can co-exist with the "old media" TV experience, especially with the advent of High Definition. Disney has been buying social networks like Club Penguin and successfully taking its content and merchandising it across multiple platforms. With 2 small kids watching Disney and playing online and listening to their songs, we have become a Disney family on all platforms. And don't think we won't be going to the movies when High School Musical 3 is distributed, too.
The distribution platforms may shift and change, but the content, if it is compelling, will continue to be consumed.
It's Hulu, not Hula
What's in a name. I can't tell you how many people have found my blog because they mistyped Hula instead of Hulu. Will this help or hurt this new venture, I don't know. But I will continue to link to the correct site so that you are able to see what all the news is about.
Enjoy the shows, access to old as well as to new series. Catch up during your lunch time, when you have the time to watch TV in your office. For those of us with kids, time in the evening to watch TV gets shorter and shorter, so online viewing gives another opportunity to watch those shows we miss. At the same time, it clearly impacts worker effectiveness at their desk. Some might argue that it simply replaces other distractions like online games, personal phone calls, and other non-productive activities.
Advertising is what pays for this accessibility. But will it also kill the golden goose. Will viewers put up with the mix presented or will they avoid these sites for others whose ads are less intrusive. And can these ads be shown in ways that don't destroy the experience or have some interest with the viewer. Blinkx believes it has the technology as do other companies like Overlay.tv. How tolerant will the user be?
How will big business react to Hulu as the increased bandwidth affects servers at the office. Will their be backlash. While it is too early to tell, it will be fascinating to watch this cause and effect.
Enjoy the shows, access to old as well as to new series. Catch up during your lunch time, when you have the time to watch TV in your office. For those of us with kids, time in the evening to watch TV gets shorter and shorter, so online viewing gives another opportunity to watch those shows we miss. At the same time, it clearly impacts worker effectiveness at their desk. Some might argue that it simply replaces other distractions like online games, personal phone calls, and other non-productive activities.
Advertising is what pays for this accessibility. But will it also kill the golden goose. Will viewers put up with the mix presented or will they avoid these sites for others whose ads are less intrusive. And can these ads be shown in ways that don't destroy the experience or have some interest with the viewer. Blinkx believes it has the technology as do other companies like Overlay.tv. How tolerant will the user be?
How will big business react to Hulu as the increased bandwidth affects servers at the office. Will their be backlash. While it is too early to tell, it will be fascinating to watch this cause and effect.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Hulu to officially launch
Tomorrow should be the official opening day for Hulu. For those that have been following Hulu in beta mode, you have had access to its site for quite a while. It offers a terrific player with great audio and video quality. At the same time, it is filled with commericals, whether you are snacking on clips or full length episodes. And it tends to show only a couple full length episodes of a series at a time. Missed last Saturday's SNL, sorry, you only get 4 clips of the show. Can't get access to Hulu, don't worry, its also on NBC.com. The site also gives the fan additional backstage videos and a chance to comment.
So should Hulu do a better job of linking the content of each show back to the core site. And how can these sites help to push users back to watch the show on TV. We seem to be scratching the surface with the potential of the web; still its ability to interact with its audience and create ways to push and pull them to other sites is still missing. For example, place a contest on the web site to count the number of times a certain performer appears or says a certain phrase on the next show. Push them to watch. or add a link after the parody of the Bravo show to the actual show. It may help drive new viewership.
So should Hulu do a better job of linking the content of each show back to the core site. And how can these sites help to push users back to watch the show on TV. We seem to be scratching the surface with the potential of the web; still its ability to interact with its audience and create ways to push and pull them to other sites is still missing. For example, place a contest on the web site to count the number of times a certain performer appears or says a certain phrase on the next show. Push them to watch. or add a link after the parody of the Bravo show to the actual show. It may help drive new viewership.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Serving Up Television Without the TV Set
Terrific article in today's New York Times looking at the growth of online video usage. One of the most interesting stats, that one in four internet users watched a full length show on the web over the last three months. percentages were slightly higher fir the 18-24 demo at 39% although I am surprised that these numbers are not higher, given that the group is internet users and the question is not, what percentage of TV viewers watch a full length episode on the web. And while it is interesting to note the percentage that have watched, i would also be interested in knowing when and where they are viewing full length episodes on the web. Is it primarily in the office or at home, during the day or at night.
Quincy Smith of CBS Interactive makes an interesting comment in the article, "The four and a half billion we make on broadcast is never going to equate to four and a half billion online.” In a separate article, he made this point: developing interactive programming for the Web is not about migrating shows to tv, he pointed out. It’s about designing smart programming for a new type of medium.
I love this comment. The web should not try to replace TV, it should enhance the experience. CBS has invested in sites like Wallstrip and Moblogic to provide more content to increase the value of the space. And while they can and should offer current and older tv programming, it should not alone define their web and tv 2.0 strategy. Cross platform synergy and interactive experience becomes their goal.
And while no one has come up with the right answer yet, it appears that CBS has successfully reached the user so far. As broadcasters have the deep pockets, it will be fascinating to watch the moves they make to make online profitable.
Quincy Smith of CBS Interactive makes an interesting comment in the article, "The four and a half billion we make on broadcast is never going to equate to four and a half billion online.” In a separate article, he made this point: developing interactive programming for the Web is not about migrating shows to tv, he pointed out. It’s about designing smart programming for a new type of medium.
I love this comment. The web should not try to replace TV, it should enhance the experience. CBS has invested in sites like Wallstrip and Moblogic to provide more content to increase the value of the space. And while they can and should offer current and older tv programming, it should not alone define their web and tv 2.0 strategy. Cross platform synergy and interactive experience becomes their goal.
And while no one has come up with the right answer yet, it appears that CBS has successfully reached the user so far. As broadcasters have the deep pockets, it will be fascinating to watch the moves they make to make online profitable.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Do Online Video Clips Impact TV Viewership?
Do clips of TV shows lead to higher ratings? So many people assume that the promotional value of clips on you tube, hulu, and other video sharing sites provide users with the snacking to then become long form viewers of the show.
How many of us have seen the Jimmy Kimmel/Ben Affleck clip and the Sarah Silverman/Matt Damon clip. Both first aired on the Jimmy Kimmel show on ABC, but has it turned non fans into fans; that is, have these and other clips of the show increased the overall ratings for the show. Some have told me that no relationship exists. And from my own experiences, while I have watched these clips, I have not been converted into a viewer of the show.
I have been surprised to hear that this video snacking, regardless of the shows they come from, have not significantly impacted the ratings for the show on TV. So if the promotional factor doesn't impact ratings, is the buzz factor enough to matter. Or do these online clips need to exist distinct from their linear counterpart and require their own monetization model to maintain their existence.
I was initially surprised to learn that users aren't flocking to watch the Daily Show or SNL because they liked the highlights that spring up online. I would have thought that it would encourage viewership because of the buzz factor. And while the online hits grow, there appears to be no synergy to the linear platform. Still, it does create news and may have an indirect impact on viewership.
The bottom line is ratings and revenue; if online can at least expand the reach of the audience and incremental revenue can be built, than the long term value will remain; else these clips may start to appear behind walled gardens to maximize the return.
How many of us have seen the Jimmy Kimmel/Ben Affleck clip and the Sarah Silverman/Matt Damon clip. Both first aired on the Jimmy Kimmel show on ABC, but has it turned non fans into fans; that is, have these and other clips of the show increased the overall ratings for the show. Some have told me that no relationship exists. And from my own experiences, while I have watched these clips, I have not been converted into a viewer of the show.
I have been surprised to hear that this video snacking, regardless of the shows they come from, have not significantly impacted the ratings for the show on TV. So if the promotional factor doesn't impact ratings, is the buzz factor enough to matter. Or do these online clips need to exist distinct from their linear counterpart and require their own monetization model to maintain their existence.
I was initially surprised to learn that users aren't flocking to watch the Daily Show or SNL because they liked the highlights that spring up online. I would have thought that it would encourage viewership because of the buzz factor. And while the online hits grow, there appears to be no synergy to the linear platform. Still, it does create news and may have an indirect impact on viewership.
The bottom line is ratings and revenue; if online can at least expand the reach of the audience and incremental revenue can be built, than the long term value will remain; else these clips may start to appear behind walled gardens to maximize the return.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Mobile TV, Set Free
Europe seems to understand what consumers want from their mobile device. They want to combine their mobility with the opportunity to stay current with what is on TV. User generated video may be fun to watch on the pc, but I see that usage short lived. Its greatest opportunity is the chance to receive live video signal for on the go viewing.
According to the Wall Street Journal, "Cellphone makers and service providers are looking for new sources of revenue and see platforms like television as a lucrative and fertile territory. In the U.S., TV is available on so-called third-generation phones, but DVB-H is still in the trial phase." Sounds so much better than what Verizon currently offers.
Big fan of The Today Show, watch it live on the commute to work. Sitting in the stands watching the game and getting commentary and closeups on the phone. Working late with American Idol delivering results live to you. Breaking news available in video on your phone. If I were a broadcaster, I would be bullish on delivering my content through mobile for a number of reasons: more potential viewers to count, lessens the dvr issue, increases ad rates, and you can enable more interactive opportunities more easily through the mobile device. And cell phone makers will sell new generations of phones and charge small access fees to get the service. The only thing left to do is build a better battery to handle all this increased usage!
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Is It Now The Actors Turn To Strike?
Hollywood has yet to learn its lesson. Freshly off a protracted writers strike that cost billions in exchange for pennies, comes the SAG union, eager to strike to prove their power. And while the deadline is months away, June 30, little is being done to start the process early.
The problem is that the folks that want to strike are the veterans with residuals coming in, regardless of the outcome. They can walk the picket line knowing that another check is sitting comfortably in their mailbox. Literally, getting paid to strike! For those without the resume and for the economy at large, that works around these strike makers, the cost is far bigger than the return.
If the writers strike proved anything, it is that the strike didn't lead to a better deal. The DGA got their deal without creating a nasty confrontation. Healthy negotiation is important, but it doesn't need the hostility of a strike to accomplish the end result. So SAG...stop threatening strike, start working on your new deal TODAY, and be considerate of the effect your actions have on others. Learn from the oh so recent history of the writers strike, and the more proactive, positive dealings from the DGA, and choose the smarter path! Yes you deserve to be treated fairly, but it means treating others fairly in return.
The problem is that the folks that want to strike are the veterans with residuals coming in, regardless of the outcome. They can walk the picket line knowing that another check is sitting comfortably in their mailbox. Literally, getting paid to strike! For those without the resume and for the economy at large, that works around these strike makers, the cost is far bigger than the return.
If the writers strike proved anything, it is that the strike didn't lead to a better deal. The DGA got their deal without creating a nasty confrontation. Healthy negotiation is important, but it doesn't need the hostility of a strike to accomplish the end result. So SAG...stop threatening strike, start working on your new deal TODAY, and be considerate of the effect your actions have on others. Learn from the oh so recent history of the writers strike, and the more proactive, positive dealings from the DGA, and choose the smarter path! Yes you deserve to be treated fairly, but it means treating others fairly in return.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
