Competition for your Digital Connection

So who should you connect with; who is your provider for phone, cable, hi speed? Are you working with one provider and taking the triple play discount or are you picking a little from each? Interestingly, the decision is being made by what is most important for you and your household based on a number of factors. And cable, telco, and satellite are doing their best to prove that they have the competitive edge.

Cable's edge today is the triple play, offering a discount my purchasing all three platforms from one provider. In addition, cable touts its VOD choice and is starting to push that advantage with HD VOD as well. That technological edge for them is also leading them to more advanced services like start over and look back, supporting the benefit of "what you want, when you want it". Lastly, cable brings strong local content, particularly with news channels, like NY1 from Time Warner in NY and News12 on Long Island from Cablevision. Channels not accessible to consumers on their competitor's platform.

Satellite continues to push HD linear channels as their strength. Some consumers even believe they get a better HD signal from satellite than cable. For Direct TV, it pushes the content edge with the NFL package, offering out of market games to the true NFL fan. But Direct TV may kill this golden goose as they charge more to the package to upgrade it to an HD feed of these games. Satellite sees the risk from VOD and has now found a way to enter this business with a competitive product. Whether the consumer is satisfied with its method for delivering or technology can improve the ability for satellite to become 2 way remains to be seen. It also affects their way to offer hi speed and has caused them to partner with telcos to offer a triple play like package.

Telco was feeling the heat from the loss of hard line phone and needed to enter the cable business to keep customers from switching. As cable becomes more adept at marketing to the commercial telecom business, telco revenues will be even more hurt. Telco has entered the cable and hi speed game with fiber to the home and tout a higher download and upload stream at a lower price. Consumers that need high bandwidths, whether for business or personal reasons, see this as a competitive reason to become telco triple play customers. With the exception of local content, telcos are offering similar VOD and HD choice as cable and seem to also play the price advantage in their marketing campaigns.

So content choice (local, sports, HD, VOD), speed, and price seem to be the three major factors determining which service is chosen by customers. And like any business that involves customer relationships, exceptional service matters, too. Because while it may not be easy to switch providers, bad service can become the impetus to make that change.

Do Content Owners Need Content Aggregators Anymore

It seems that content creators can bypass the middlemen and get to the consumer directly. Digital technology has lowered the barriers of entry so that films and shows don't need to find distribution platforms, they can do it themselves.

When Showtime/CBS and Viacom/Paramount split, many argued that this would unlock the value of both companies and enable each to more fully realize their potential. But the nature of this deal means that the Viacom side can simply create its own distribution arm and not rely on its former partner. So the split of companies also signified a split of synergies.

What is not being discussed is that their still requires a marketing skillset to enable content to break through the clutter and get noticed. Content aggregators can coordinate distribution schedules, provide a single shop experience, and be a known landing page for the consumer. But the case can be made for aggregators and content creators to be vertically integrated, both making video content and distributing it. NBC Universal has shown that ability to produce a film, send to a theater, show it on USA, air it on Hulu and digitally sell it.

It may get to a point that distribution windows will disappear. A film leaves the theater and goes to every possible distribution vehicle simulaneously. The old methods of selling exclusive windows may be over. A film would be available for dvd, VOD, digital download at the same time. And content owners can maintain their profits by managing the distribution windows themselves, using their own networks, and technology to control the digital rights to their content. Maybe Viacom and Showtime should think about coming back together!

New York Times swings to loss in first quarter

Some interesting highlights from the article:

First-quarter revenue at the company's newspaper properties fell 5.7%, to $719.7 million.
Ad revenue fell 9.2%, while circulation revenue rose 1.9%.
Classified advertising, traditionally the prime source of revenue for newspapers, plunged 22.6%, reflecting declines in help-wanted, real estate and automotive ads.

Print advertising is declining and circulation rose in the quarter. Also, About.com, a subsidiary of NYT saw growth as well. "While online revenues are rising, that growth isn't coming nearly fast enough to offset losses in print advertising and circulation."

But don't think that they are not a meaningful business, in the first quarter of 2008, revenue was still $747.9 million.

Their business is about getting readers to consume their brand across all platforms. They are a content producer and need to push the envelope more on the value of the opinions and news they present; otherwise, alternative outlets, including Murdoch's many brands (WSJ, Fox, NY Post, etc.) and even the internet publication Huffington Post , the Drudge Report , and others will eclipse the New York Times as the go to page for news and opinion.

Is this quarterly report the wake-up call the New York Times needs to become even more aggressive in this new media space? Or are they too late? Do other print or web publications replace your need to use the NYT for your daily news fix? Let me know.

Is network-based DVR an IPTV savior?

Cablevision recently talked about providing a network based dvr. And were successfully stopped from proceeding. Time Warner has made some subtle changes to the model and presented it as Start over and Look Back, with early success.

Technology is turning the distribution model on its knees and once the cat is out of the bag, it is hard to put him back in again. Such has been the case with the dvr and commercial skipping. The appeal of IPTV delivered programming is that it enables more flexibility in viewing and more interactivity between the user and the content. No matter when you view content, the material can be updated to remain relevant and interesting to the viewer.

The hurdles remain are high. Content ownership and syndication; technology allows the owner of the content direct sell through to the user without selling access to different windows. Can content owners make up the revenues lost from selling access to different windows ( North American rights, premium rights, VOD rights, etc.) to other partners and get higher returns from direct access to the viewer. Can Turner Classic Movies survive as a network if Sony can sell its films directly to the home. And how far will it go. Will AMC Network give up its cable license fee to get ubiquitous distribution as a stream. Do cable companies end up as simple content delivery networks, managing communication lines like the phone company once managed their phone business. How this data is managed and moved, both at the set top box and at the network level will determine how these businesses will evolve.

These licensing models have been around for a long time; technology and IPTV delivery changes the business. “We have to make sure the business models intersect, for service providers and content owners,” said Enrique Rodriguez, corporate vice-president of Microsoft TV, in an NAB interview. “We need to establish a set of discussions.”

More Than 10 Billion Videos Served

Numbers for online video usage rose in February and that's without counting the launch of Hulu and itunes. Wow! There is an insatiable desire for online viewing, and more is coming. But is this a false high, and the numbers will settle down once the newness goes away, or is this the inevitable direction for all video usage? The vast majority of those views are from You Tube. It will be interesting to see where Hulu emerges on the list in next momths report. I have found Hulu to be a very satisfying viewing experience for professional content, where You Tube offers more viral content.

As noted in the article, "consumers may have more options for watching TV shows on demand and for watching content on TVs that's currently online-only." I have found that first hand. I recently put our Tivo on a wireless network and used it to download video from Channel Frederator. While I enjoyed the experience, I didn't season pass it; I'll continue to watch those shows on my computer, and leave my Tivo for longer form content.

To me, the end game is not the length of the content, but where and when I choose to watch it. I want the flexibility to watch it on my terms. And for me, the small screen is ideal for short form content, the big screen for long form.

Can You Enjoy a Book on a Cellphone

Today's article really asks what will the device look like that consumers will embrace and will finally lead to a switch from print and paperback to digital reader. Is the blackberry or cellphone a preferred size to read more than emails. Are the Kindle or Sony Reader the right sized devices that people will prefer. On my recent airline trip, no one around me was using a reader. Most still had old fashioned newsprint. And in my travels, I have seen only one Kindle being used and no Sony Readers. They have not captured the consumers attention like the ipod and iphone.

But I believe that these digital devices are a natural progression. Perhaps it is price point, perhaps it is the mindset of buying and discarding the paper that has to be changed, but clearly, this generation is more concerned with saving our natural resources and a digital reader can do that as well as be the next "wow" device. I think if Apple got in the mix and created a reader that utilized the same screen touch application that the iphone does, Apple could have another winner on their hands. That is clearly what Amazon is afraid of, and Apple should see digital print as another avenue for growth.

Is Mobile TV the Next Frontier For Revenue Growth

When over the air TV was good enough, investors wondered if consumers would buy TV programming when it was already free to see. The answer was a resounding yes and cable has becoming a profitable business. With cable programming, the value was quickly felt, better signals, more niche offerings, and a higher volume of shows. Sirius and XM Satellite asked the very same question about free radio signals, and the answer today is mixed as Sirius is set to purchase XM. Other devices like ipods, cds, and back seat dvd players offer alternative entertainment options for the car.

The opportunity to reach video fanatics away from their couch, has value to people who need to stay connected to content. To me, the value of mobile video is in direct proportion to the immediacy of its information. Need to watch a live sporting event but have to car pool the kids, mobile tv keeps you connected to the action. Breaking news being delivered while sitting at a little league game, now you can be in 2 places at once. But missing 30 Rock, or any non-live show, I am not confident that it will be highly desired. Especially when these shows are easily recorded for later viewing or accessible via online from your pc. There is no rush to watch most TV shows at their linear airing date.

Still, the value of live sports and breaking news may be enough to lead people to purchase a video package on their phone. Per this article, "TV stations could earn an additional $2 billion annually within four years by sending their programming directly to millions of consumers toting mobile handheld devices, National Association of Broadcasters president David Rehr said here Monday."

But what will the business model look like? Will it be through subscription, advertising, e-commerce through the phone, gaming? And even more important, will consumers buy programs from their local TV broadcast channel, or buy directly the show they need to watch. Will WNBC benefit or MLB; WABC or Disney/ESPN? Will consumers want to buy channels with 24/7 availability or on a PPV basis?

Should cable companies be worried? Can mobile channels lead consumers to replace one device for another? Today's younger generation no longer has a hard wired phone, using their cell phone exclusively as their "home" phone number. Could mobile technology allow signals to be moved directly into the living room, bypassing the hard wire connection of cable? How many times is the consumer willing to pay more than once for the same programming but on different devices.

And lastly, will a cell phone battery be improved to last longer than a day or two on each charge? I'll let you know as soon a my blackberry recharges. :)

Will Every Home get a Holodeck?

I marvel at Gene Roddenberry's vision. As creator of Star Trek, he had come up with some amazing ideas that have become reality. What started as science fiction is becoming science fact. Everytime I open my cellular phone, I think of the Star Trek communicator. So this article confirmed that another of Gene's ideas are moving toward actual.

The Wii player manages to bring the player into a physical interactive environment with the game. Second Life seems to want to mimic not only your hands, but your whole body's movements on the screen. The next step is to enclose all this action in a room to separate movements from the distraction of the outside room.

We already have media rooms and companies paid tons of money to create theaters in our homes. Big screen TVs, surround sound, comfortable seating. I say we are only a few years away from a company announcing that they will build a first generation holodeck room, with multiple cameras that enable you to feel and interact with 3D video in an enclosed space. It seems that Linden Labs is moving that direction.

How Much Information Do I Really Want To Share

If you have a My Space account, or Facebook, or Plaxo, or Linked In, on another social network site, you know that everything you do is shared with your "friends". You took a quiz, you wrote on the wall, you watched a video, you played a game, you bought a cupcake...

And as far as I'm concerned, it literally is screaming out, YOU ARE GOOFING OFF!

So how much information do I want to share. I like that it tells people when I wrote a blog, I like that it shares my upcoming birthday (sorry you missed it), I like that it lets people know if we have common friends, I like that it tells others what I want them to know, a la twitter type message. But I want to be able to control the information. The information I am okay sharing may not be the same information you are willing to share. That choice should be explicitly made by the user.

This recent announcement of the collaboration of My Space with video content Providing this connection may make these sites even more the "home page" for each user's online experience. As more applications become possible to access, combined with the ease of sharing new online discoveries with "friends", these social nets become even more connected to our online activities.

I just want to have more control over what I want to actively and passively share. I don't want to make my life that much of an open book. I still want to retain some privacy of my actions. These sites may be fun to use but it allows others (friends, work, etc.) to track you too. Be mindful of what you are doing online and who might be seeing it.