Such a silly question, right. But how many remotes does it take to watch your TV. I was recently at someone's house over the holidays and it took 3 different remotes to watch TV, one to turn on the TV, one to turn on the cable set top box, and one to turn on the receiver. Hit a wrong button, change the wrong remote's channel button and you were SOL. For our short time there, it was best to simply not touch the remote till all systems were on and working.
In our own house, we need one or two different remotes, and tend to leave the cable box on 24/7 to simplify the process. Cumbersome, but eventually habit forming. So perhaps the ultimate TV screen will be managed 100% from one device, whether a single remote, mobile app device, or physical buttons on the set. Yes, they still exist and for one TV set we still use the set's buttons.
Want to move from a cable network to on demand to a DVD to web video, one remote. Ahhh the simplicity. And perhaps that is what will ultimately appeal to the consumer, the ability to control all, without fumbling with multiple remotes. That is until, everything is 100% voice controlled: "Siri, please turn on the TV to ESPN. Thank you, Siri." Can I look forward to that at this year's CES?
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
Monday, January 7, 2013
Old TV Media Not Dying Anytime Soon
According to the David Carr article, old media, or more correctly, old video media isn't dying anytime soon. With the stock market as an indicator of performance, "the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index was up 13.4 percent, which was a significant advance, but legacy media giants like Comcast, News Corporation and Time Warner absolutely surpassed it in terms of share price." Content and distribution companies have figured out how to utilize new media. For content, it is about controlling how it is available outside TV, both in short and long form content, while protecting license fees across different distribution platforms.
And while the cost of a cable subscription is rising at an alarming rate, subscription loss has yet to make a huge financial impact given other ways they have merchandised content. And unlike the print and music business, the video business has not yet felt the impact of being displaced; rather, "New players have opened windows to sell content without cannibalizing the retransmission and affiliate fees that have turned into a gold mine for media companies." And it is that additive revenue that is helping to improve the bottom line.
And why will cable TV and old video media stay strong, by locking in content. Need an example, just look at tonight's BCS National Football Title Game between Alabama and Notre Dame. Not on the web, not on free TV; if you want to watch you will have to be an ESPN subscriber. Exclusive content continues to matter and sports on TV remains a big driver for cable. It's why DirecTv has tied up NFL coverage for all games outside the market.
And while the cost of a cable subscription is rising at an alarming rate, subscription loss has yet to make a huge financial impact given other ways they have merchandised content. And unlike the print and music business, the video business has not yet felt the impact of being displaced; rather, "New players have opened windows to sell content without cannibalizing the retransmission and affiliate fees that have turned into a gold mine for media companies." And it is that additive revenue that is helping to improve the bottom line.
And why will cable TV and old video media stay strong, by locking in content. Need an example, just look at tonight's BCS National Football Title Game between Alabama and Notre Dame. Not on the web, not on free TV; if you want to watch you will have to be an ESPN subscriber. Exclusive content continues to matter and sports on TV remains a big driver for cable. It's why DirecTv has tied up NFL coverage for all games outside the market.
Friday, January 4, 2013
B&N Next Move
Holiday numbers are coming in and while tablet sales have been brisk, Barnes and Noble has not been as lucky. As a big B&N consumer, our family must visit their store at least once a month. But we are also tablet users, specifically iPads, and use them extensively to play games, watch videos, and use other apps. Yet we haven't migrated to e-books... YET. I am sure we will, but there has always been something special about opening a book and paging through the chapters to get to the end of the book. It is hard to replicate with a device that tells me the percentage of the book that has been read. Still, I expect that we all will start buying e-books and the question will be from whom... Nook, Amazon, Apple?
So what can B&N do to rebound from a bad Q4. "Sales from stores and the website sank 11 percent to $1.2 billion, the New York-based company said yesterday in a statement. Revenue at the Nook unit, which includes devices, accessories and content, fell 13 percent to $311 million." I do not want to see B&N become another footnote, like Borders. But tablets are invading our lives and the Nook lacks what Apple and Google possess, a real library of apps PLUS the integration of these same apps across devices like tablets, smartphones, and computers. Not just books, but games, pictures, videos, music, too ACROSS devices. I believe this integration is essential.
In the retail space, B&N has begun to diversify its product line, adding toys and gifts to its merchandising efforts. But more diversification is necessary to succeed. People still love to leave their home to shop and B&N can continue to be a destination. What products to add, perhaps bring Game Stop into the mix. And make Microsoft a bigger presence, selling not only Xbox but also their line of phones, tablets, and accessories too.
As to the digital side of the business, with competition fierce, an expanded partnership with Microsoft may be the solution to the issue of integration. Tying in more closely to a Microsoft App store that gains credibility and expands the usefulness of the product line. The Nook product line may be ranked superior for its hardware, but it is in the usefulness and ergonomics of the software with the hardware that I believe matters most to the consumer. Getting the consumer to see that value may be most important.
So what can B&N do to rebound from a bad Q4. "Sales from stores and the website sank 11 percent to $1.2 billion, the New York-based company said yesterday in a statement. Revenue at the Nook unit, which includes devices, accessories and content, fell 13 percent to $311 million." I do not want to see B&N become another footnote, like Borders. But tablets are invading our lives and the Nook lacks what Apple and Google possess, a real library of apps PLUS the integration of these same apps across devices like tablets, smartphones, and computers. Not just books, but games, pictures, videos, music, too ACROSS devices. I believe this integration is essential.
In the retail space, B&N has begun to diversify its product line, adding toys and gifts to its merchandising efforts. But more diversification is necessary to succeed. People still love to leave their home to shop and B&N can continue to be a destination. What products to add, perhaps bring Game Stop into the mix. And make Microsoft a bigger presence, selling not only Xbox but also their line of phones, tablets, and accessories too.
As to the digital side of the business, with competition fierce, an expanded partnership with Microsoft may be the solution to the issue of integration. Tying in more closely to a Microsoft App store that gains credibility and expands the usefulness of the product line. The Nook product line may be ranked superior for its hardware, but it is in the usefulness and ergonomics of the software with the hardware that I believe matters most to the consumer. Getting the consumer to see that value may be most important.
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Buying A Cable Network No Guarantee For Distribution
Al Gore's cable network, Current TV, may have reached near 60 million subscribers, but few tuned in and the network lost both on-air personalities and a following. Those results have led to the eventual sale of the network. And of all those companies seeking entry onto cable line-ups in the US, the buyer is Al Jazeera, owned by the government of Qatar.
But as anyone knows who has worked with contracts, changes in ownership, are but one factor that can make a contract null and void. In the world of cable, format changes, programming changes, and other issues can also terminate an agreement. And as cable operators look at their contracts with Current TV, they are now pondering what to do, renegotiate or drop.
Time Warner Cable has already decided that they will not carry the former Current TV, now to be named Al Jazeera America. Will other operators follow suit or will they leave the channel on? Is there even an audience for the network or a concern that the viewpoints will not be well received by a US audience? Current TV had its own troubles competing against bigger cable news networks including CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, BBC, as well as the news arms of our broadcast networks. Given the niche that Al Jazeera brings, it is hard to believe that they will succeed but stranger things do happen. Plus, given the desire of cable operators to lower programming costs, the dropping of the former Current channel adds some economic relief. Who else drops the service from their line-up remains to be seen.
But as anyone knows who has worked with contracts, changes in ownership, are but one factor that can make a contract null and void. In the world of cable, format changes, programming changes, and other issues can also terminate an agreement. And as cable operators look at their contracts with Current TV, they are now pondering what to do, renegotiate or drop.
Time Warner Cable has already decided that they will not carry the former Current TV, now to be named Al Jazeera America. Will other operators follow suit or will they leave the channel on? Is there even an audience for the network or a concern that the viewpoints will not be well received by a US audience? Current TV had its own troubles competing against bigger cable news networks including CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, BBC, as well as the news arms of our broadcast networks. Given the niche that Al Jazeera brings, it is hard to believe that they will succeed but stranger things do happen. Plus, given the desire of cable operators to lower programming costs, the dropping of the former Current channel adds some economic relief. Who else drops the service from their line-up remains to be seen.
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
iPhone iWatch
For Apple, that could be the iWatch. Easy to access, easy to wear, connectable to other Apple devices. And perhaps add a "self winding" type mechanism, a device that is able to stay charged through movement. Will people be willing to give up their smartphone or will this simply augment and improve the experience of using one. One thing is clear, the iPad Mini proved consumers love devices in multiple sizes.
Can Intel Change The Face Of Cable?
Intel may be trying to do what Apple hasn't so far, build a new cable mousetrap that offers consumers their choice of programming, via the web, at a lower total cost. How? According to stories, they are building their own set top cable box that connects to broadband and delivers cable programming to the TV set. It's called XBox, I mean Apple TV, sorry Roku; actually, it has no name yet.
But here is the problem, those best networks offering their TV shows are the same ones already getting license fees from cable operators like Comcast and Time Warner. And these same networks may just be reluctant to upset the apple cart. Why leave a guaranteed model which places you on the largest bundle of service for the chance to be picked a la carte by the individual consumer. What is the win, a larger fee per user at the risk of less than 80% choosing your network. And on top of that, these same top networks have second and third level networks that they also get license fees and carriage for distributing. That's right, mixed in the purebreds are some possible mutts. For these same programmers are doing what cable operators are doing, bundling their networks to assure fees and distribution. Because once they are on the line-up they can begin to get additional advertising revenue billed as well.
Can Intel construct a deal to get programmers to come on board? For smaller networks with little to lose, of course; but for the big guys, the ones that get the highest ratings, the opportunity is doubtful. And that Intel can do a deal while Apple has been hard pressed to get more going with their own Apple TV box, let alone an Apple TV set seems a stretch for me. Yes an Intel cable box could be in their pipeline; I just don't believe they will gain more channels than what is already accessible on other over the top devices.
But here is the problem, those best networks offering their TV shows are the same ones already getting license fees from cable operators like Comcast and Time Warner. And these same networks may just be reluctant to upset the apple cart. Why leave a guaranteed model which places you on the largest bundle of service for the chance to be picked a la carte by the individual consumer. What is the win, a larger fee per user at the risk of less than 80% choosing your network. And on top of that, these same top networks have second and third level networks that they also get license fees and carriage for distributing. That's right, mixed in the purebreds are some possible mutts. For these same programmers are doing what cable operators are doing, bundling their networks to assure fees and distribution. Because once they are on the line-up they can begin to get additional advertising revenue billed as well.
Can Intel construct a deal to get programmers to come on board? For smaller networks with little to lose, of course; but for the big guys, the ones that get the highest ratings, the opportunity is doubtful. And that Intel can do a deal while Apple has been hard pressed to get more going with their own Apple TV box, let alone an Apple TV set seems a stretch for me. Yes an Intel cable box could be in their pipeline; I just don't believe they will gain more channels than what is already accessible on other over the top devices.
Friday, December 28, 2012
DirecTv Follows Dish With Price Increase
Just one week after Dish announced their plans to raise their subscription fees to consumers, DirecTv has followed suit raising their rates as well. "On Thursday, the satellite service announced that beginning Feb. 7, it
will boost monthly subscription fees by about 4.5%. The hike is a
response to an 8% rise in carriage fees demanded by cable channels
included in DirecTV’s service, Reuters noted." So costs for programming are rising 8% but as consumers we should be happy because DirecTv is only raising their rates 4.5%. Regardless, both are rising too fast.
But here is the problem, inflation is not rising that fast and consumers are not seeing their salaries rise that high either. And worse, the "fiscal cliff" may be here soon and consumers will also face higher taxes resulting in less disposable income. So what is a DirecTv customer, or a Dish customer, or any cable customer going have to do as they watch their costs for service continue to rise?
The choices are pretty obvious and the rate of increases (4.5% by DirecTv as an example) continue to push more families to look at alternatives. There is cord shaving, cutting back on premium channels, taking lower levels of service, to lower their monthly costs. Some might give everyone in the family their own cellphone and drop their hard line phone bill as well. More drastically, families will be more inclined to completely cut the cord and drop their cable service all together. With Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, and others offering compelling content, consumers will pay less while being more selective in their viewing choices.
The facts are clear. Rates for cable are rising faster than inflation and income declines and higher taxes may only exacerbate the cord cutting phenomenon. Fiscal cliff... we are inching closer to the cable cliff.
But here is the problem, inflation is not rising that fast and consumers are not seeing their salaries rise that high either. And worse, the "fiscal cliff" may be here soon and consumers will also face higher taxes resulting in less disposable income. So what is a DirecTv customer, or a Dish customer, or any cable customer going have to do as they watch their costs for service continue to rise?
The choices are pretty obvious and the rate of increases (4.5% by DirecTv as an example) continue to push more families to look at alternatives. There is cord shaving, cutting back on premium channels, taking lower levels of service, to lower their monthly costs. Some might give everyone in the family their own cellphone and drop their hard line phone bill as well. More drastically, families will be more inclined to completely cut the cord and drop their cable service all together. With Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, and others offering compelling content, consumers will pay less while being more selective in their viewing choices.
The facts are clear. Rates for cable are rising faster than inflation and income declines and higher taxes may only exacerbate the cord cutting phenomenon. Fiscal cliff... we are inching closer to the cable cliff.
Friday, December 21, 2012
Can Blackberry Rebound?
With Apple taking a majority of the US Smartphone market and corporate IT departments and employees embracing the iPhone, the Blackberry continues to lose customers and market share and "says it lost subscribers for the first time in the latest quarter, as the global number of BlackBerry users dipped to 79 million." And while actual numbers were better than analyst estimates, Blackberry is clearly moving in the wrong direction.
Blackberry is scheduled to release its latest smartphone, but can they win back customers? Certainly design is critical and everyone is emulating the touch screen approach, but also important are the applications that run and how how is the functionality of the phone is to use. For personal use, I have an iPhone; my company cell phone is a Blackberry Bold. Functionally, the Blackberry is a brick to me. Confusing buttons, functionality that is not easy to understand, and a temperamental touch screen. I can see why people are switching to Apple and Android devices.
Will the new Blackberry attract users back to the fold or is it too little too late? The Blackberry image from its older models may be hard for consumers to except a new look and a new approach. Current Blackberry customers may be set in their ways with their current phones, ones that they have mastered over time, and not appreciate that the newest phones may be more clone-like than consistent with the brand they have grown up with. What is clear is that Blackberry was once the leader and has been thrown off the top of the hill. They must now fight with the new leader to retake the top and that requires continual innovation and imaginative marketing.
.
Blackberry is scheduled to release its latest smartphone, but can they win back customers? Certainly design is critical and everyone is emulating the touch screen approach, but also important are the applications that run and how how is the functionality of the phone is to use. For personal use, I have an iPhone; my company cell phone is a Blackberry Bold. Functionally, the Blackberry is a brick to me. Confusing buttons, functionality that is not easy to understand, and a temperamental touch screen. I can see why people are switching to Apple and Android devices.
Will the new Blackberry attract users back to the fold or is it too little too late? The Blackberry image from its older models may be hard for consumers to except a new look and a new approach. Current Blackberry customers may be set in their ways with their current phones, ones that they have mastered over time, and not appreciate that the newest phones may be more clone-like than consistent with the brand they have grown up with. What is clear is that Blackberry was once the leader and has been thrown off the top of the hill. They must now fight with the new leader to retake the top and that requires continual innovation and imaginative marketing.
.
Hulu - Free or Pay, Successful or a Loser?
Hulu seems to have a problem; it doesn't know what it wants to be. With multiple owners with different ideas of Hulu's strategy, they are going nowhere fast. Perhaps the biggest question posed by it's owners, should Hulu be a free website or subscription. According to the Wall Street Journal, Disney wants Hulu to be a free service, getting revenue through advertising; Fox/News Corp wants a pure subscription model.
Operating as a mixture of both has perhaps limited their ability to eke out a profit. The result has been that Hulu remains dwarfed by competitors like Netflix, Amazon, and You Tube. Less video views, less unique viewers, and less paid subscribers. And Hulu is not only losing money, it is asking its owners to pony up additional dollars to invest in more content. But is there enough incentive by its owners to want to work together to build out a business that eventually cannibalizes on the revenue they get from cutting their own deals with cable operators and others? Why share your content's revenue when you can keep it all for yourself.
It may be a no win situation. "The fact is, (CEO Jason) Kilar has, in a couple years, built a Web brand that you have heard of. " But with multiple owners with different, competing interests, it seems necessary for Hulu to find a single owner and a committed strategy to compete effectively.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
