Comcast Sets Subscriber Bandwidth Limit

How much is 250 Gigabytes/Month? To me, its like asking how much Electricity do you consume per month or how many gallons of water you use. What if those companies limited you to an amount. If you don't know how much you currently consume, how can you know whether it is enough or not. And how would you measure your usage so you don't run out before the end of the month. And what would happen if or when you exceed that amount.

Comcast is painting the picture that it represents more than enough. "To hit the 250-Gbyte ceiling, a customer would have to do any one of the following, according to Comcast: send 50 million e-mails; download 62,500 songs or 125 standard-definition movies; or upload 25,000 hi-resolution digital photos." It is made to sound impossible to hit, doesn't it. So then why that number? If its so unreachable, why worry.

Clearly, Comcast is most concerned with who they describe as bandwidth hogs. More typical users are meant to feel that it won't affect them. But I look at these heavy users and see opportunity for Comcast, not a problem. These are your best customers, consuming your product at a high rate. "If a customer uses more than 250 Gbytes, he or she may be contacted by Comcast to notify them of excessive use, the company said. 'At that time, we'll tell them exactly how much data per month they had used,' Comcast said. 'We know from experience the vast majority of customers we ask to curb usage do so voluntarily.'" Could their be a way to monetize and manage that important customer base without causing such bad pr. It's almost like you want to drive them away to your competitors. And I'm sure Verizon would love to take them!

To Comcast's credit, they are trying to support the speeds to the many, by limiting the heavy user fews. But today's heavy users will in the near future become the majority. As more of us utilize the web and grow increasingly more comfortable with large file downloads, more of us will be affected by these download limits. It is a bandaid cure to a much bigger problem. A better solution is clearly needed.

More Comcast Systems to Get Tivo

I have both a Tivo connected directly to cable which receives unscrambled signals for my bedroom and a DVR/settop box for my family room. I have a unique opportunity to watch both recording devices perform and frankly the Tivo is the clear winner. Why? For those that have never worked with a Tivo, your DVR is a capable, a "C" student. Tivo, however, is at the head of the class. Its remote is better, its controls easier, its search capability more preferred, and its trick features much better. It understands the viewing experience and even makes suggestions to watch at a later date. Yes, I love my Tivo!

"Comcast, after expanding the availability of its TiVo service in its New England market with limited trials to customers in Connecticut, plans to “light up” a full marketing campaign around TiVo in September and is preparing rollouts in additional markets before the end of the year." I cross my fingers for it to come to my house. Now if they can make it easier to capture the programs I have already recorded on my old DVR and transfer the ones I still want to keep to this new device, then sign me up today.

TV Tomorrow: Navigation and Recommendation

TV continues to be more crowded as new channels emerge through different distribution paths. We need better navigation and recommendations to help the average person find the "stuff" that most appeals to them. We need a weblike experience on the TV set to better move through the myriad of options in front of us. And at the same time, helps to lead us and present to us content and advertising better targeted to our interests. As long as we are okay with the notion that Big Brother may be watching and our viewing patterns are no longer anonymous, our choices may become more "personalized". That should not be a problem as we are already going down that slippery slope and our web surfing patterns are already be watched.

"Forrester lays out a decade-long evolution that will ultimately result in most programming delivered on-demand with targeted ad messages based on location and behavior, along with community functions. This "Personal TV," as Forrester calls it, would also deliver a Web-like experience for consumers, with a portal-like menu of programming options and search functions." Why a decade of change; with so many companies vested in their infrastructure, change to an open architecture where all are welcome to join may take some time to gain full commitment. As an example, Verizon is unhappy with cable's version of an open settop box through its Tru2way platform. Cable's idea of open may not be Verizons.

Beyond better personalization and navigation comes recommendation. Tivo is already on that path, providing suggestions it records for its members of content they might like to watch. Its most recent announcement, a partnership with Entertainment Weekly of its top choices to watch. I, for one, appreciate the suggestion box and the help to find interesting content to watch. "The partnership is part of a growing push by TiVo to differentiate itself from DVRs offered by cable and satellite companies, which have managed to find a bigger audience even though they lack many of TiVo's bells and whistles." It continues demonstrate to me why Tivo is such a better product than the cable DVR today.

Will the quality of the content keep up with the quantity? Probably not. But perhaps it offers a better opportunity to revisit some long forgotten shows from your childhood. It's all out there to be watched again and again.

Preferring the Web Over Watching TV

Kids like the internet. What the telephone was to past generations for social networking, the internet and wireless is to this generation. And while internet usage is growing, I don't necessarily believe it is a zero sum game, where tv viewership needs to decline as a result. Kids have become increasingly masterful at multi-tasking, watching on one medium as they simultaneously surf on the other. But we did it too, watching TV as we did our homework.

So the data may suggest..."For children ages 10 to 14 who use the Internet, the computer is a bigger draw than the TV set, according to a study recently released by DoubleClick Performics, a search marketing company." But is their really a high correlation? I also believe that the internet remains the hot new toy these days. Its the superhighway that allows us easy access to content, research, information and all kinds of stuff. We can rent or buy, consume to our hearts content. And there appears to be a lot of risk taking on the web. From gaming to user generated videos, it is all new, exciting, and still somewhat unknown.

With the exception of the Olympics on TV the past 2 weeks, linear television viewing has been a bore. Yes, the Fall TV season is fast approaching, but there are few shows generating buzz and nothing exciting to capture on the DVR. Blame the writers strike on some of that problem. So far 2008 has been a bust for TV programming. Until broadcasters start to take some risks, we will continue to see a dumbing down of programming and more reason to escape to other media choices. Perhaps that is the real reason viewership is declining and why children are gravitating more to the internet.

AT&T Wants To Set Up TVs, PCs

Very few of us are tech savvy. Most VCR owners seemed incapable of programming the correct time on their machine. We rely on experts and help to advise and teach us on how things work. At the same time, technology has realized the need to build plug and play devices, suitable for the masses to master.

The rise of HDTV, wireless networks, shared devices, and for some, even downloading, can make one's head spin. Companies that work in this new media world that provide full service and true expertise build brand preference and loyalty. Circuit City touts its Firedog service, Best Buy brands its service as Geek Squad. Service matters. Service at a fair price matters more. In my own home, Comcast has been here when DVRs stop working and modems stop blinking. Sometimes getting them in a timely manner is problematic, but they have corrected the problems and have not charged for their service. When Comcast uses their own employees, rather than outsource, the results have been positive. Building on that consistency and touting service support for customers that bring new devices into the home will bring Comcast even greater brand preference and loyalty.

I say this because the article from Multichannel does a disservice to AT&T. "AT&T’s computer and home-network installation services start at $99. TV and home-theater services like flat-panel TV wall mounting and home video installation start at $149. In-home PC repair service, including parts and hardware replacement, begin at $179." Charging customers for service, especially if you are getting them to switch from a competitor to your product, seems problematic. A fee may be necessary for non-customers, but to satisfy and grow your customer base, this pricing model seems excessive.

Comcast to Slow Internet Service at Times to Its Heaviest Users

So let me understand this bit of news, Comcast is going to slow down their download speed to all customers as a cure to reduce congestion on the web. "Top Internet speeds for the heaviest users will be reduced for 10 to 20 minutes to keep service to other users flowing, said Mitch Bowling, Comcast’s senior vice president and general manager for online services." And this will make their customers happy? I think not. As downloads and internet usage soars, web speed equates to consumer satisfaction. The more times the user is exposed to latency in their on-line experience, the greater the consumer will seek out alternatives to the current situation.

As consumers, we don't tend to change our products or services if they provide adequate satisfaction. We are in fact creatures of habit who like to maintain our current way of doing things. We change when it is forced upon us, when we can experiment with new things at a low cost, or when we encounter a bad experience. Bad experience at a restaurant, don't go back. Free sample at the store, test and switch brands if we like it. Slow internet speed, switch providers. And as more consumers are finally getting a choice of providers, cable or telco, for our hi speed service, a bad experience may be the final straw to make a switch.

So it seems counter-intuitive to hurt your current users with a purposefully bad experience. And at a time when both Verizon and AT&T are knocking on the front door and offering a very competitive package; bad cable service will only push the consumer to more quickly switch. And if proved a better experience, news will spread quickly and more users will switch.

Not a smart move for Comcast. But perhaps they expect different results. "A heavy Comcast Web user being impeded would have Internet speeds equivalent to “a really good DSL experience,” Mr. Bowling said. DSL, or digital subscriber line, is an Internet service offered by telephone companies. After a slowdown ended, Comcast would return Internet service to normal." Perhaps they believe that most users won't even notice that a significant slowdown occurred. We never know if our telephone is working unless we constantly check the ring tone. When it is in the cradle, we simply assume it is still working properly. Comcast may believe that this slowdown will have similar results. Most will simply assume that their internet service is working fine. That is to say, most Comcast customers won't notice a measurable slowdown at all.

Still, this seems like a bandaid cure for Comcast. It may work in the short run but over time, more consumers will require more bandwidth for significant file downloads and sharing. A better solution is needed by Comcast to handle this inevitability. Traffic will only keep growing and an improved infrastructure may be needed.

Suburbuzz Announcement in The Item of Millburn NJ

Local women create a 'buzz' with their Web site

Check Suburbuzz out!

Wall Street Journal Goes Mobile On Your Blackberry

In what is sure to be the first of many similar announcements, that Wall Street Journal will provide free viewing of its articles and news, tying in its various websites, and monetizing it with ads. As they test the waters, they may try to find a subscription model, but competition from other news organizations may prevent that model from building. WSJ is not the first to announce a mobile relationship. "Earlier this year, The Associated Press launched an ad-supported service with more than 100 member newspapers to make news stories available on Apple Inc.'s iPhone and other mobile devices."

WIll users prefer reading their news on a blackberry screen? Will this deal be content exclusive to blackberry? Or will users start to carry other devices like the Kindle for their full reading enjoyment? Regardless of which device ends up getting the market share, the direction remains clear. Readers are switching from subscriptions to web and mobile for their news. This is where the WSJ needs to be.

No More Mike and the Mad Dog - Sirius Gets More Branded Content

Mike and the Mad Dog, sports radio fixtures for nearly 19 years, have split up. When I first heard them, I was intrigued and captivated. Their chemistry was so entertaining, it made for great radio, whatever they were discussing or frankly arguing about. Not many duos have had that kind of appeal and energy. Most people have compared them to comedy teams like Martin and Lewis and Abbott and Costello. But for me, their chemistry and banter reminded me of Siskel and Ebert. Divergent opinions on everything! And great radio, too.

But like most teams, egos and personalities don't always mesh. This "marriage" lasted far longer then most expected. They may have initially disliked each other, but they also recognized the power their relationship caused in the media and the audience that grew. It made economic sense to put aside differences for the successes that would come. At the end of the day, pocketbooks matter more.

And for that same reason, Chris Russo has decided that he should make that next financial leap by going solo. And Sirius Radio agrees with him. Sirius's strategy, branded exclusive content, is to differentiate to make the decision to purchase their product a necessity. Can the Mad Dog deliver that same impact? Martin and Lewis broke up and each found individual fame; but Abbott and Costello could not. And when Gene Siskel passed away, their film critic show with Richard Roeper as co-host was never the same. That magic in the bottle was hard to replace.

So the jury is out on how Chris Russo will do as a solo sports talk personality. It's one thing to talk New York sports, but can he do it on a national basis. And will he need to find a partner to bounce off of? "The show will run every weekday from 2 p.m. to 7 p.m. and will be the first original program to air on both Sirius and XM, which combined in July." For Sirius, his acquisition makes perfect sense. Exclusive content is the way to compete against free radio and the iPod. It seemed to work when Howard Stern was brought on board, and now it is Chris's turn. It may be sad to see Mike and the Mad Dog divorce, but it was inevitable.