When broadcast television networks were told that they had to convert their analog signals into digital ones, it opened up new distribution opportunities on network "subchannel" frequencies. NBC Owned and Operated Networks experimented with news and weather, creating a network called NBC Nonstop. But when that went nowhere, it was rebranded as Cozi TV, a collection of old classic shows and cheap original programming. The ABC O&Os tried a similar path. Their network, called Live Well, a health and lifestyle channel, existed on the ABC sub channel frequency, and like NBC was also carried on cable TV, mainly where its O&O had negotiated channel space with the cable operator. And while both Cozi and Live Well had distribution, they were usually on harder to find channel positions.
For Live Well, the end is near. The network will cease operations the beginning of 2015. Given the growth of other channels, like Me-TV negotiating for carriage and living in the subchannel space, this might offer opportunity for them to expand. Smaller cable networks, like Veria Living, a health and wellness network, have also tried to increase distribution through sub channel carriage. But as Live Well and I'm sure Cozi have found, it is extremely difficult to get discovered, yet alone viewed. Live Well had the national ABC network to offer promotional marketing support, yet it failed to grow in stature. Cozi needs the constant promotional support of NBC for it to stay around, too. Its hard to expect another network to pay for carriage in the subchannel marketplace and attract the necessary eyeballs to charge enough ad dollars to cover all its expenses.
So a fond farewell to Live Well Network. I never actually watched you or knew what channel number to find you on, or what shows you carried, but with so much choice out there, its harder and harder to grow this fragmented audience into a real ratings powerhouse.
Tuesday, June 10, 2014
Monday, June 9, 2014
Apple More Affordable For Small Investor
Unfortunately, perhaps, for many lovers of the Apple brand, it was more expensive to own 1 share of Apple stock, then an iPod, iPhone, or even a iPad. But today, the small investor, who likes owning shares of companies that they are passionate about will be able to own Apple, too. With the 7 for stock split, the price for a share of Apple stock goes from just under $650 to just over $90. Given the interest in future Apple wearable products plus a dividend rate of about 2%, an investment in Apple likely means a better rate of return than a savings or money market account and hopefully a continued growth in the share price.
While nothing is guaranteed, the small investor might be thrilled. Of course these are the same kind of investors who like to purchase share of Tesla because of the appeal of the car or Microsoft because of the Xbox. Perhaps they buy shares in Lulu because they like the clothing. It may not be smart investing all the time, but many put their investments where their brand engagement is concerned.
While nothing is guaranteed, the small investor might be thrilled. Of course these are the same kind of investors who like to purchase share of Tesla because of the appeal of the car or Microsoft because of the Xbox. Perhaps they buy shares in Lulu because they like the clothing. It may not be smart investing all the time, but many put their investments where their brand engagement is concerned.
Saturday, June 7, 2014
Please Don't Call It An iWatch
Although there is no formal release from Apple regarding the sale of a wearable device, there are numerous reports indicating that a Fall release is likely. Should it come in October 2014, the device, expected to be called an iWatch, is expected to become a huge Holiday hit.
But I beseech you Apple, don't cave in and call it an iWatch. Given all the news from your recent WWDC event, the operating system being developed and integrated across Apple products, is meant to do so much more. From health monitoring to communication, the potential seems enormous.
Yet the term watch, even though the cute little "i" is before it, seems to keep it old school. Brands need to be future focused and a watch is very old school. Just look at how a brand name limits. Example one, Boston Chicken needed to rebrand to Boston Market because consumers didn't know they sold more than just chicken. Example 2, Radio Shack is stuck in retail hell because the "radio" label limits what the want to sell. Example 3 and more, every cable network has replaced their name with initials to broaden their appeal. AMC is no longer American Movie Classics, Arts & Entertainment is now A&E, and The Learning Channel is TLC. The list of brand names that needed changing is a long one.
Brand names matter when focusing on future growth. A name that is too limiting often hurts the long term appeal; some can be easily changed and rebranded, others cannot. To limit the forthcoming Apple wearable devices with a brand name that combines old school with interactive may be cute but there must be more appealing alternatives that better capture the full brand value that you intend to sell to the consumer. Since most of your brands use an "iP" (iPhone, iPod, iPad), how about "iPulse" or "iPlus". Surprise us please with a brand name that makes your release of a new generation of wearable devices that much more appealing. As to iWatch, I say it should not be considered.
But I beseech you Apple, don't cave in and call it an iWatch. Given all the news from your recent WWDC event, the operating system being developed and integrated across Apple products, is meant to do so much more. From health monitoring to communication, the potential seems enormous.
Yet the term watch, even though the cute little "i" is before it, seems to keep it old school. Brands need to be future focused and a watch is very old school. Just look at how a brand name limits. Example one, Boston Chicken needed to rebrand to Boston Market because consumers didn't know they sold more than just chicken. Example 2, Radio Shack is stuck in retail hell because the "radio" label limits what the want to sell. Example 3 and more, every cable network has replaced their name with initials to broaden their appeal. AMC is no longer American Movie Classics, Arts & Entertainment is now A&E, and The Learning Channel is TLC. The list of brand names that needed changing is a long one.
Brand names matter when focusing on future growth. A name that is too limiting often hurts the long term appeal; some can be easily changed and rebranded, others cannot. To limit the forthcoming Apple wearable devices with a brand name that combines old school with interactive may be cute but there must be more appealing alternatives that better capture the full brand value that you intend to sell to the consumer. Since most of your brands use an "iP" (iPhone, iPod, iPad), how about "iPulse" or "iPlus". Surprise us please with a brand name that makes your release of a new generation of wearable devices that much more appealing. As to iWatch, I say it should not be considered.
Friday, June 6, 2014
Microsoft Fails Barnes & Noble, Samsung Succeeds
Despite an investment in Barnes & Noble, Microsoft seems to have done nothing to support its investment. No connection between the Surface Tablet and Nook and no retail presence; its a wonder Microsoft got involved at all. So it comes as a small surprise to see another tablet maker, Samsung, actually create a significant partnership opportunity with B&N. "The device will be a 7-inch Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 co-branded as a Nook
with Nook's digital reading software already on it. The tablet will be
available at Barnes & Noble's 700 U.S. stores in early August." A terrific idea for both companies. In fact, with such a large retail footprint, I hope that Samsung and B&N extend their partnership to include all Samsung products.
Yet I am somewhat surprised that the news is about Samsung when Microsoft actually put real dollars toward working with B&N. It can only be described as a real missed opportunity for Microsoft. With Samsung now on board, I suspect that Microsoft is a lost cause. And I am excited to see how the Samsung and B&N partnership expands.
Yet I am somewhat surprised that the news is about Samsung when Microsoft actually put real dollars toward working with B&N. It can only be described as a real missed opportunity for Microsoft. With Samsung now on board, I suspect that Microsoft is a lost cause. And I am excited to see how the Samsung and B&N partnership expands.
Aereo Keeps Pushing Forward
Aereo continues its rollout even as the Supreme Court of the United States decides its fate. As broadcasters argue that Aereo has been stealing and reselling its signals, Aereo maintains that it simply lets consumers use its antennas to access free, over the air signals. A negative court outcome could spell the collapse of the company, but Aereo is not slowing down.
Their latest move, availability in the markets the serve, on the Google Chromecast device. "The move adds another significant Aereo player to a lineup that includes browsers for Windows PCs, Linux PCs and Macs, iOS devices, Apple TV and Roku set-top boxes." At the same time, Aereo must be eager to continue its geographic rollout as well. A favorable outcome will provide them with a ton of PR and brand awareness to drive subscriptions ahead. And that ruling could come soon.
Their latest move, availability in the markets the serve, on the Google Chromecast device. "The move adds another significant Aereo player to a lineup that includes browsers for Windows PCs, Linux PCs and Macs, iOS devices, Apple TV and Roku set-top boxes." At the same time, Aereo must be eager to continue its geographic rollout as well. A favorable outcome will provide them with a ton of PR and brand awareness to drive subscriptions ahead. And that ruling could come soon.
Thursday, June 5, 2014
Merger Mania Adds Another Pair
The FCC will have a busy Summer and perhaps the rest of the year too. Not only do they get to review the Comcast Time Warner Cable and ATT DirecTv deals, they may also get the proposed Sprint T-Mobile merger as well. Quick, hire more staff, the FCC will have their plate full. They may have seen their webaite explode after the John Oliver call to write them regarding net neutrality. And should a cable network consider announcing a possible acquisition target, the FCC might have to throw up their hands in defeat.
But back to the proposed plan for Sprint to acquire T-Mobile. Facing a communication and wireless industry industry dominated by two major players, Verizon and ATT, the number 3 and number 4 players were no match. Yes, they created choice for the consumer, but couldn't match for service and coverage. And while a merger reduces the number of competitors, it actually helps to make them a more formidable competitor as a much larger number 3 wireless provider. And frankly, they need all the help they can get.
Both ATT and Verizon offer more capabilities; ATT with a DirecTv and their U-verse product, have a firm cable and broadband base and Verizon with FIOS has the same. Neither Sprint nor T-Mobile bring that business to their mix; they benefit only by increased size. One might hope that a future partnership with Dish could then set them up nicely and make it an even stronger competitive option.
Some are concerned that the FCC won't like this Sprint T-Mobile pairing but I believe it is in the interest in the economy that it be approved, as should each of the above deals. The industry has always been an oligopoly; size continues to matter to make these business able to continue to compete.
But back to the proposed plan for Sprint to acquire T-Mobile. Facing a communication and wireless industry industry dominated by two major players, Verizon and ATT, the number 3 and number 4 players were no match. Yes, they created choice for the consumer, but couldn't match for service and coverage. And while a merger reduces the number of competitors, it actually helps to make them a more formidable competitor as a much larger number 3 wireless provider. And frankly, they need all the help they can get.
Both ATT and Verizon offer more capabilities; ATT with a DirecTv and their U-verse product, have a firm cable and broadband base and Verizon with FIOS has the same. Neither Sprint nor T-Mobile bring that business to their mix; they benefit only by increased size. One might hope that a future partnership with Dish could then set them up nicely and make it an even stronger competitive option.
Some are concerned that the FCC won't like this Sprint T-Mobile pairing but I believe it is in the interest in the economy that it be approved, as should each of the above deals. The industry has always been an oligopoly; size continues to matter to make these business able to continue to compete.
Music Is The New Black
With all the buzz of video streaming and platforms like Netflix competing rigorously in the media space, audio has been pushed aside a bit. Well, it seems it may now be their turn given the recent acquisition of Beats by Apple. Now music streaming is the hot commodity and competing in this space the place to be. While downloading music is nice, the cost to own can add up; a music subscription service on the other hand provides a steady diet of new and old music at a low price.
For Apple, the Beats subscription service may not be the largest, but it had a cache and pool of talent that Apple wanted to own. According to reports, Google is also interested in owning a larger piece of the music streaming business. "Some folks speculate that Google’s best option would be to snap up Spotify, which has a $4 billion valuation, 10 million paying subscribers — and a rapidly growing business. It is said to be on track for a fall IPO." Of course there are other competitors to consider including Pandora and Rhapsody. Perhaps Sirius would like to extend itself further away from the automobile through acquisition as well. And Apple may not be done acquiring; music has been a key attribute of their iPod and iPhone brands.
Where the audio industry, most known as the world dominated by radio, has appeared mature and flat, the rise of digital streaming has fanned the flames of interest. The iHeart radio app, while free, offers an ad supported way to enjoy your favorite music on these same streaming devices. Choosing which service to use becomes the consumers challenge. Download, subscribe, stream, are all options. For now, music is the hot commodity.
For Apple, the Beats subscription service may not be the largest, but it had a cache and pool of talent that Apple wanted to own. According to reports, Google is also interested in owning a larger piece of the music streaming business. "Some folks speculate that Google’s best option would be to snap up Spotify, which has a $4 billion valuation, 10 million paying subscribers — and a rapidly growing business. It is said to be on track for a fall IPO." Of course there are other competitors to consider including Pandora and Rhapsody. Perhaps Sirius would like to extend itself further away from the automobile through acquisition as well. And Apple may not be done acquiring; music has been a key attribute of their iPod and iPhone brands.
Where the audio industry, most known as the world dominated by radio, has appeared mature and flat, the rise of digital streaming has fanned the flames of interest. The iHeart radio app, while free, offers an ad supported way to enjoy your favorite music on these same streaming devices. Choosing which service to use becomes the consumers challenge. Download, subscribe, stream, are all options. For now, music is the hot commodity.
Tuesday, June 3, 2014
Net Neutrality And John Oliver
On last Sunday's HBO series Last Week Tonight, host John Oliver, fresh off a successful turn at The Daily Show, took on the cable industry and net neutrality. It was a very funny description of the monopolistic tendencies of cable distribution and the potential loss of free and equal broadband speed. Unfortunately, as Oliver points out, the FCC is now chaired by Tom Wheeler, former lobbyist for the cable industry. A move that clearly stacks the deck for cable operators to control who gets best of class service. If you have a moment, enjoy the segment from the show:
Now John Oliver's show is shown on HBO, a Time Warner company, along with TBS, TNT, and other networks, on these same cable operators. So to talk about changing the name from "protecting net neutrality" to "Preventing Cable Company Fuckery", he is certainly biting the hand that feeds him. And whether his asking his viewers to visit the FCC website, FCC.com/Comments and raise their voice may soon determine the kind of social power John Oliver can create.
His points are valid. His insights on the lack of competition resulting in less service is illustrated by the chart he shares that ranks our download speed 31st in the world, below countries like the UK, Israel, and even Estonia. Yet the cost for speed is higher than most other countries. The compelling reason for net neutrality is not just that all services are treated equally; rather, that when some are given preferential lanes, the speed for the rest falls further down.
So enjoy the video and if you feel compelled after watching it, let the FCC know.
Now John Oliver's show is shown on HBO, a Time Warner company, along with TBS, TNT, and other networks, on these same cable operators. So to talk about changing the name from "protecting net neutrality" to "Preventing Cable Company Fuckery", he is certainly biting the hand that feeds him. And whether his asking his viewers to visit the FCC website, FCC.com/Comments and raise their voice may soon determine the kind of social power John Oliver can create.
His points are valid. His insights on the lack of competition resulting in less service is illustrated by the chart he shares that ranks our download speed 31st in the world, below countries like the UK, Israel, and even Estonia. Yet the cost for speed is higher than most other countries. The compelling reason for net neutrality is not just that all services are treated equally; rather, that when some are given preferential lanes, the speed for the rest falls further down.
So enjoy the video and if you feel compelled after watching it, let the FCC know.
Monday, June 2, 2014
The Next Media Merger
From the cable operator side, the road to savings and distribution lies with mergers. The Comcast - Time Warner Cable and AT&T - DirecTv announcements may only be the tip of the iceberg. Does Cablevision finally see the writing on the wall and decides to finally sell its Long Island franchise? And what about Cox Communication and their cable future?
The same thoughts on media mergers should also look to the other side of the table and the cable networks and all their programming. Yes, NBC and all its cable networks are a powerhouse as is ABC and its handful of mainly sports networks. But what about the other networks? Does consolidation and merger help them when dealing with these new operator behemoths? Is it time for Discovery Networks to look around and what about Scripps, AMC Networks, Time Warner, Inc, and Viacom. Are they buyers or sellers? Sure the Fuse sale to NuvoTV was minor, but it did help them to grow their subscriber reach. It seems the pressure to gain distribution and retain license fees is growing and smaller networks could use the power of larger multichannel networks to promote and pursue full basic distribution.
The FCC may have their hands full with the two recent merger plans, but that may make the timing of a network merger that much more necessary. So don't be surprised to hear of more media changes. The pressure to compete is mounting.
The same thoughts on media mergers should also look to the other side of the table and the cable networks and all their programming. Yes, NBC and all its cable networks are a powerhouse as is ABC and its handful of mainly sports networks. But what about the other networks? Does consolidation and merger help them when dealing with these new operator behemoths? Is it time for Discovery Networks to look around and what about Scripps, AMC Networks, Time Warner, Inc, and Viacom. Are they buyers or sellers? Sure the Fuse sale to NuvoTV was minor, but it did help them to grow their subscriber reach. It seems the pressure to gain distribution and retain license fees is growing and smaller networks could use the power of larger multichannel networks to promote and pursue full basic distribution.
The FCC may have their hands full with the two recent merger plans, but that may make the timing of a network merger that much more necessary. So don't be surprised to hear of more media changes. The pressure to compete is mounting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
