Actors reach tentative deal with studios

Finally after so many months of infighting, backstabbing, and political fights, SAG may have finally come to terms with the AMPTP. Per the article, SAG lost its leverage and got less than they bargained for. If they had only played it smarter, followed the lead of AFTRA , and recognized quickly from the writers strike and bad economy, that they were not in the position to demand. Well, better late than never.

Deal Brings TV Shows and Movies to YouTube

The future of online video is professional content and though You Tube is best known for user generated uploads, the money lies with advertising against branded content. Recognizing that need, You Tube has entered into partnerships with TV and movie studios, and the space that Hulu has found an important grasp. "The agreements with the studios, which include Sony, Lions Gate, MGM and others, are significant because YouTube dominates online video. Nearly two-thirds of all video views in the United States occur on YouTube, according to the measurement firm Nielsen. Last month the site had more than 90 million visitors, 10 times as many as the next biggest site, comScore said."

In addition, there is finally the recognition that broadband, like cable, requires multiple revenue streams to survive, advertising and subscription. Whether it takes the form of transactional or monthly, You Tube will likely follow the Apple iTune strategy of charging for downloads or streaming.

Despite this plan to seek more revenue sources, You Tube says it is not leaving its bread and butter, amateur videos; "In an interview, Eric E. Schmidt, Google’s chief executive, said that YouTube would continue to embrace content created by users, even if it was not easy to earn revenue from it, because that content was essential to the popularity of the site." As the leader in online video, Google and You Tube have the deep pockets and the knowledge of the marketplace; what will define their success in building synergy with other content partners. Perhaps one day we will see Google owning a broadcast/cable network.

3.6 Million Homes Still 'Completely Unready' For DTV Transition: Nielsen

June 12 is the current date for digital transition and despite the granted delay from February, 3.6 M homes are still not prepared. Coupons are going out, stores are stocked with digital converters, cable operators are broadcasting ads with offers to cheaply switch to cable to not lose TV signals. But despite all the news and offers, a number of homes will still go dark. The news from Nielsen does show homes switching over. "Nielsen said that Albuquerque-Santa Fe remains the least ready market at 9.13%, while the most prepared is Hartford-New Haven, where "everybody" is ready. Nielsen's survey numbers are based on field staffers in 35,000-plus sample homes -- all of its metered households." The NAB remains critical of the research. According to David Rehr, NAB President, these numbers are overstated.

Should there be another digital delay; I doubt it. Some people just like to wait till the last minute; hello tax filers! At some point you just got to pull the trigger and June 12 will be that date.

The most likely groups that will be hurt are the elderly and poor. Technological change is never easy and while the government coupons help, connecting the converters and resetting the antenna to find the digital signals remain issues for this group. Will cable come up with a marketing program to provide low cost, white glove service to this group; it could just be a great public relations opportunity!

Time Warner Cable Postpones Internet-Billing Trials

Plans to expand the internet usage test into additional markets has been put on hold as public outcry has caused big consumer push back. "Time Warner Cable had planned to initiate usage-based billing trials in Rochester, N.Y., and Greensboro, N.C., in August, followed by San Antonio and Austin, Texas, in October." Besides local politicians getting into the discussion, even their telco competitors used it to their marketing advantage in the two test markets. Who wants to go from an unlimited plan to a usage plan raise your hands? Anyone? Anyone? Really, no one likes the idea. Once the cat is out of the bag it is hard to catch him.

Until Time Warner and other broadband companies can prove that more people benefit with a usage plan with lower bills, it will be hard to gain much support. And as more web sites become more graphic, add more videos and gaming, they will naturally become heavier users. And as consumers recognize their increased reliance on the web for information and entertainment, they will only use the web more. So why would the consumer agree on changing over from an unlimited plan to usage. It makes no sense. Hence the public and governmental outcry.

Remember When Cable Networks Were Niche Programmers

Once upon a time, the premise of cable networks was that each one individually would showcase niched programming, skimming away at the broadcast channels who showed very general shows. Cable would compete with broadcast because the aggregate of these individual channels would enable advertisers to reach effective interest groups at a more efficient CPM. The sum of the parts being greater than the whole.

In the beginning, cable networks brand name told you what they were: Arts & Entertainment (now A&E), American Movie Classics (now AMC), Music Television (MTV), and Entertainment and Sports Programming Network (ESPN), to name a few. As cable nets broadened their programming, their names became initials.

This recent review of a brand new TV show on TV Land struck a chord. TV Land was once the place to find the classic black and white TV shows. Over time, new colorized shows appeared. But now, it is the place for movies and original series. It certainly is not your grandfathers TV Land.

But TV Land is not alone in this shift from niche network to "broad" cable network. Bravo was once the cultural arts channel; now it is reality and "pop" culture. AMC was classic black and white movies; today it is the home to original series Mad Men and Breaking Bad. And I am sure you can say the same thing for most other cable networks. The mighty ad dollar has led them down a slippery slope to broaden its niche to grow the ratings. And where does that lead the consumer. Ultimately to new distribution sites including IP TV and the web.

So while I am not making a judgement call about any network, I personally miss when they each were truer to their niche and I could tell what channel I was looking at by watching its show. Now I can't tell the difference unless I see the bug constantly appearing on the corner of the picture. Don't get me started on that!

Boston's Local NBC Affiliate WHDH Will Air Leno At 10 p.m.

NBC was quick to put its foot down and the Boston affiliate acquiesced. And just like that, Boston will get the Jay Leno show this Fall at 10 pm. While this must be a huge sigh of relief to NBC, it also quickly signals to its other affiliates not to follow Boston's lead. And while the threats worked, one must wonder what was agreed to. Was there incentive money involved? Additional local commercial time given? Or perhaps a short term truce to wait and see and give the show 30, 60, or perhaps 90 days to prove that it will deliver a high enough rating and be a profit performer.

And don't be surprised if every other NBC affiliate is reading over each line in their contract to see just what their options are. This fight may be over, but there may still be a bigger war brewing.

N.Y. Congressman Plans Bill Banning Internet-Usage Billing

Ahhh government! Always there to interrupt free market. Not that I think internet usage billing is a great idea; rather, that I think it provides competitive differentiation to let market forces impact its success. Through technological innovation, change will occur. Usage issues can also lead to a whole new type of internet, more efficiently run. Bad ideas lead to failure and business losses, good ideas to innovation and new leaders.

"A New York Congressman wants to make it illegal for Internet service providers to charge subscribers based on the amount of data they download." While politics should be in play to maintain that people play by the rules, they shouldn't force companies, especially those that have competition, to operate a certain way. Cable companies,unlike water and electricity companies, are not utilities. They should have the freedom to set their prices and let the consumer decide who they want to do business with.

I may not agree with usage pricing, but government intervention is not the answer, competition is. Let in more competitors into each community and let the consumer decide which broadband provider they want.

Time Warner Cable Tweaks Bandwidth-Billing Plans

We pay for our usage of electricity, water, even cell phone minutes, why not broadband usage. That is certainly what Time Warner believes; especially as broadband pipelines get clogged up with heavy graphics and video. More users, more usage slows down the pipe, a traffic jam that can slow down speeds and aggravate users at the same time. Usage pricing puts the higher cost to the heavier user, but under the Time Warner plan, grants them faster speeds.

So what is a consumer to do. Well, if you just use your broadband for email and web surfing, probably nothing. Time Warner contends "that about 30% of customers use less than 1 Gigabyte per month", and would be charged a lower rate for service. The MSO will show customers what the usage has been to let them know what package may best serve them. "The MSO also will offer a 'gas gauge' tool to show subscribers how much bandwidth they've used up in a given monthly period."

As for the heavier user, Time Warner's plan is probably more costly. Unless Time Warner can demonstrate that their is more to gain with faster speeds for a higher price, the other option is to switch vendors. And that could prove better news for competitors like Verizon and AT&T. Unless of course they follow a "me too" strategy and move to a usage model, too.

Time Warner says that other countries follow a broadband usage model. But the all you can eat model has been around here for a while so may prove difficult to gain acceptance. Most may find it a convenient reason to switch. The question to Time Warner might be are heavy users highly correlated with being triple tier customers; that is, are you risking losing your best customers, who are already paying you top dollar, with even higher cable bills. If this research proves true, then perhaps it is not worth the risk of losing this best consumers to your telco competitors.

Magna: DVR Use Will Grow 70% By 2014, VOD By 60%

Just because the web is hot for content doesn't mean that other types of distribution is declining. Television continues to be an important device to the home. The rise of HD, bigger screen TVs, and content when you want it, all makes TV a good business to be in. But with that being said, linear viewing, scheduled at their time, not ours, is not what matters. Magna research shows that on demand viewing, whether through the DVR or VOD channels, will continue to grow at extraordinary rates.

"Magna forecasts that in five years, DVR usage will grow more than 70%, to 51.1 million U.S. TV homes Magna estimates this will reach 43% of all U.S. TV homes in 2014, up from 27% as of the end of 2008...Video on demand, a more mature digital TV product than DVRs, will grow by 61% in five years to 67.2 million households -- about 56% of U.S. TV homes. Currently, at the end of 2008, there were 41.7 million VOD households, or 37% of U.S."

That increase in on demand viewing will absolutely lead to declines in live linear viewing of TV. Still, TV should invest in good content, knowing that the viewer will consume it in different forms, at the scheduled time, DVR at a later date, or picked off the VOD menu. That the advertising continues to get viewed and the eyeballs recorded, will mean that the programmer will continue to get paid.

The DVR device is friendly to the local affiliate because it retains their local ads; the VOD and internet are the enemy of the local affiliate because their local ad does not run. Ultimately, both the DVR and VOD rely on strong content to satisfy viewer interest. For their usage to grow as predicted, the content must remain interesting to the viewer. Why set the DVR if the show has no appeal.

And for VOD, consumers don't have to rely on setting up a recording in advance; they can catch up on their favorite shows on demand. And content doesn't need to be on a linear broadcast or cable channel to be available on VOD. VOD offers the consumer libraries of content not accessible elsewhere. Smaller programmers can distribute their libraries of content without building a 24/7 linear TV schedule. These offerings may range from a few hours to many, but are typically refreshed either weekly or monthly with newer content to enjoy. More choices to satisfy different interests.

As viewers continue to get comfortable with their DVR and VOD boxes, they will start watching on their schedule, not the programmers. And except for news or sports, on demand viewing lets you watch what you want, when you want, fast forwarding, pausing, and rewinding to catch all the dialogue and all the action. To me, it is the ideal way to watch TV!