The rise of streaming, the challenge to increase ad revenue as well as licensing of its network to cable companies all play into the strategic mix as CBS seeks revenue growth. Certainly content matters and quality shows that generate buzz hope to find audiences that stay loyal to their plots. And building new distribution outlets to grow as a business remain relevant.
In the case of CBS, they chose not to be a partner in the Hulu streaming business. The other three broadcasters NBC, ABC, and Fox, and now Time Warner have ownership shares in the Hulu business. Instead, CBS is trying something new, its own streaming subscription service called CBS All Access. For a $5.99 monthly fee, subscribers get "more than 7,500 on-demand episodes from the current season and previous
seasons of classic shows, as well as the ability to stream local CBS
stations live in more than 150 markets across the U.S." according to Multichannel News. And following the learning curve of other streaming services like Amazon and Netflix, CBS All Access will offer original productions too, "including Star Trek: Discovery, a spin-off of The Good Wife and a new digital edition of Big Brother."
The question this strategy hopes to answer, is it better to build a new service or partner with an existing one. Is there enough content of interest to subscribers to entice them to join? Can marketing sell the value of adding another streaming service charge to the entertainment household budget? CBS is trying to make it easy to access its streaming service with Roku, Apple TV, Chromecast, XBox, Amazon Fire TV and more. Accessibility does not seem to be a problem.
But I wonder if going it alone and not with Hulu, CBS studied whether a brand name associated with the broadcast network or one without a connection made more sense. Will customers more likely embrace the subscription service because of the CBS name or feel that they should be getting this content already if they are current cable subscribers with on demand. Would it have better suited the service to create a more unique name like Carousel or Tainment or StreamCity to compete in the streaming media landscape? Was CBS All Access a better name choice to drive subscription revenue? We will watch and see.
Friday, August 26, 2016
Thursday, August 25, 2016
What Will Viacom Do With Paramount
If you haven't guessed after reading my blogs, I am a huge fan of content. But content does not live in a vacuum and the yin and yang between content and distribution, adding a dash of marketing to the mix, makes the difference between success and failure. Good content can help distribution and good distribution can help bad content; ideally, great content, easily discoverable and accessed matters.
So today we have Viacom, a media company with an ailing CEO, infighting of the relatives, a changing board, and other leadership issues struggling to fix all the wholes, from falling ratings at their cable networks to poor movie making choices at Paramount. Its latest box office dud being Ben Hur with very little box office hits to mention. What should Viacom do with Paramount, where once The Godfather, Indiana Jones, and Titanic all were released?
There has been some speculation that Viacom should sell some if not all its ownership in Paramount. But I love content and believe it is the driver to growth for Viacom. I believe selling makes little sense unless the plan is to give up and sell all of Viacom. Paramount, with the right talent on board, can make great content again. And great movies are currency to be sold over and over again across different distribution windows.
But what is in the pipeline of future Paramount releases following the awful Ben Hur film starts to question the internal leadership and the choices they are making. October is the release of the next Jack Reacher with Tom Cruise, a possible hit, but they are also banking on a number of other sequels including Transformer, Friday the 13th, and Terminator. What happened to originality? Even their latest release of Star Trek Beyond felt like an overly long TV plot rehash. If there is change to make at Paramount's film unit, it starts at the top.
As to their TV department, Paramount also produced Grease: Live, Criminal Mind, NCIS, and others. And hopefully they will have more upcoming hits to mention. With so much demand for TV content in the streaming world from Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon, Paramount should have no problem finding homes for their product, as long as the quality is there. Like my concern with movies, rehashing old series and classic movies at the expense of originality does not seem like the best route to take.
So what should Viacom do with Paramount? I say keep it. If your plan is to sell Viacom, it is more valuable as part of a bigger deal. if the plan is to reinvigorate Viacom, Paramount is a perfect complement to their media empire.
So today we have Viacom, a media company with an ailing CEO, infighting of the relatives, a changing board, and other leadership issues struggling to fix all the wholes, from falling ratings at their cable networks to poor movie making choices at Paramount. Its latest box office dud being Ben Hur with very little box office hits to mention. What should Viacom do with Paramount, where once The Godfather, Indiana Jones, and Titanic all were released?
There has been some speculation that Viacom should sell some if not all its ownership in Paramount. But I love content and believe it is the driver to growth for Viacom. I believe selling makes little sense unless the plan is to give up and sell all of Viacom. Paramount, with the right talent on board, can make great content again. And great movies are currency to be sold over and over again across different distribution windows.
But what is in the pipeline of future Paramount releases following the awful Ben Hur film starts to question the internal leadership and the choices they are making. October is the release of the next Jack Reacher with Tom Cruise, a possible hit, but they are also banking on a number of other sequels including Transformer, Friday the 13th, and Terminator. What happened to originality? Even their latest release of Star Trek Beyond felt like an overly long TV plot rehash. If there is change to make at Paramount's film unit, it starts at the top.
As to their TV department, Paramount also produced Grease: Live, Criminal Mind, NCIS, and others. And hopefully they will have more upcoming hits to mention. With so much demand for TV content in the streaming world from Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon, Paramount should have no problem finding homes for their product, as long as the quality is there. Like my concern with movies, rehashing old series and classic movies at the expense of originality does not seem like the best route to take.
So what should Viacom do with Paramount? I say keep it. If your plan is to sell Viacom, it is more valuable as part of a bigger deal. if the plan is to reinvigorate Viacom, Paramount is a perfect complement to their media empire.
Tuesday, August 23, 2016
The Profit In Data - Storing And Streaming
I'm struck by an epiphany as I watch how much data I continue to acquire. I don't mean bookshelves or albums or DVDs; they get less filled as my books, my music, my photos, my videos, my life are all now bits and bytes of data. And I see too that the cost to store and stream continues to grow as I accumulate more stuff.
Already, I have on my computer over 15,000 photos, the more recent ones requiring more memory than the ones taken in 2000. My iTunes account includes more and more downloaded books, music, and videos and my computer's memory is nearly at capacity. My Carbonite account helps safeguard these digital assets, at a cost, as I sense that I will need a new computer with more memory in the not too distant future. And Apple is gracious enough (lol) to sell me more cloud backup space for my iPhone and iPad. The costs to store will only continue to rise.
And then there are the costs to stream data. Subscription fees from folks like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon, help drive up the monthly costs. One's love of music means monthly subscription plans from Pandora, Spotify, and Apple Music. We no longer need to own when we can rent and stream as much as we want. But the costs to access also extend to the companies that sell us data plans to receive these streaming signals. The more we stream, the more we consume, the more data services we buy. Of course, the speed to receive these streams can also come with a higher cost; the faster the stream, the more we pay.
As we move further and further from physical media to digital media, the cost to access data, stream it, and receive it will only increase. And the profits will only grow. Data is our new gold and we are mining it at an ever increasing pace. It is the business to be in.
Already, I have on my computer over 15,000 photos, the more recent ones requiring more memory than the ones taken in 2000. My iTunes account includes more and more downloaded books, music, and videos and my computer's memory is nearly at capacity. My Carbonite account helps safeguard these digital assets, at a cost, as I sense that I will need a new computer with more memory in the not too distant future. And Apple is gracious enough (lol) to sell me more cloud backup space for my iPhone and iPad. The costs to store will only continue to rise.
And then there are the costs to stream data. Subscription fees from folks like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon, help drive up the monthly costs. One's love of music means monthly subscription plans from Pandora, Spotify, and Apple Music. We no longer need to own when we can rent and stream as much as we want. But the costs to access also extend to the companies that sell us data plans to receive these streaming signals. The more we stream, the more we consume, the more data services we buy. Of course, the speed to receive these streams can also come with a higher cost; the faster the stream, the more we pay.
As we move further and further from physical media to digital media, the cost to access data, stream it, and receive it will only increase. And the profits will only grow. Data is our new gold and we are mining it at an ever increasing pace. It is the business to be in.
Monday, August 22, 2016
Viacom's Future
Did Sumner Redstone win back his own company? Was former CEO Philippe Dauman not following the directions of its top shareholder? Does the 93 year old billionaire know or even care what is going on? And does forcing Dauman out give either Sumner or daughter Shari back the control they need? Too many questions as we watch a company wrestle with under performing cable networks and a movie studio shooting blanks, including its latest release of the reboot of Ben Hur. Is it possible to right this ship?
Of the many questions being asked, many wonder if this means that Viacom will combine with CBS again into one company. Many believe that it is CBS and its CEO Les Moonves that want to stay clear of this merger although Redstone may have different plans. The other more immediate question is whether to sell off pieces, especially Paramount, an idea said to be pushed by Dauman. And then there is the more nuts and bolts questions surrounding each of their cable networks that require more hands on work to regroup and regrow. Each channel, MTV, VH1, Comedy Central have lost sight of the adage that what gets you to the top doesn't keep you there. Tastes, shows, hosts, technology, etc. all continue to change and networks need to constantly adapt to remain valuable to the cable line-up. There is a lot to fix at these nets.
Certainly the leadership fighting at the top of Viacom may have led to a loss of focus at each business. With that issue finally handled, the focus can be put back onto each business unit. First things first, morale must be improved with all employees knowing that no jobs are at risk and that they are safe to suggest, challenge, confirm, and execute on strategic plans. Innovation, experimentation, thinking out of the box, and staying open to new can possibly help Viacom re-emerge as an important media player. Or it will all be merged with CBS and become another leader's problem.
Of the many questions being asked, many wonder if this means that Viacom will combine with CBS again into one company. Many believe that it is CBS and its CEO Les Moonves that want to stay clear of this merger although Redstone may have different plans. The other more immediate question is whether to sell off pieces, especially Paramount, an idea said to be pushed by Dauman. And then there is the more nuts and bolts questions surrounding each of their cable networks that require more hands on work to regroup and regrow. Each channel, MTV, VH1, Comedy Central have lost sight of the adage that what gets you to the top doesn't keep you there. Tastes, shows, hosts, technology, etc. all continue to change and networks need to constantly adapt to remain valuable to the cable line-up. There is a lot to fix at these nets.
Certainly the leadership fighting at the top of Viacom may have led to a loss of focus at each business. With that issue finally handled, the focus can be put back onto each business unit. First things first, morale must be improved with all employees knowing that no jobs are at risk and that they are safe to suggest, challenge, confirm, and execute on strategic plans. Innovation, experimentation, thinking out of the box, and staying open to new can possibly help Viacom re-emerge as an important media player. Or it will all be merged with CBS and become another leader's problem.
Friday, August 12, 2016
Cord Cutting Less Of A Worry
A CNBC story tells us that research from SNL Kagan indicates that "a flattening pace of cord-cutting and a projected broadband boost of 8
million subscribers over the next 10 years, media companies are quickly
shifting the way their content gets delivered to consumers." Truth is, the best way to stream is with broadband. The cost of data from cellular, mainly because of plans that charge by the gigabyte, makes an impact on the household. Households may not be buying higher packages of cable, but they are still getting the basic cable package and bundling broadband. With a broadband package, consumers have wireless accessibility for tablets and smartphones. And they get authenticated access to wireless outside the home. In the Northeast Xfinity, Optimum, Time Warner Cable and others have been building out their wireless platforms to support their subscribers.
Consumers have been moving toward streaming as a preferred way to view content. Streaming both cable and OTT content to watch on all their devices. NBC has just announced that they have already served over 1 billion streams of Olympic content. Time Warner Inc. made a big investment in Hulu, a streaming subscription service. And Disney/ESPN are finally looking at a streaming subscription package for their sports content.
The success of broadband enables cable companies to drive bundling packages in a way to keep households connected to cable TV as they drive broadband subscription growth. And per the report, the strategy has kept cord cutting from becoming a bigger issue.
Consumers have been moving toward streaming as a preferred way to view content. Streaming both cable and OTT content to watch on all their devices. NBC has just announced that they have already served over 1 billion streams of Olympic content. Time Warner Inc. made a big investment in Hulu, a streaming subscription service. And Disney/ESPN are finally looking at a streaming subscription package for their sports content.
The success of broadband enables cable companies to drive bundling packages in a way to keep households connected to cable TV as they drive broadband subscription growth. And per the report, the strategy has kept cord cutting from becoming a bigger issue.
Huffington Leaving Post
On the surface, the news that Arianna Huffington is leaving the company that she founded and runs to start up a new venture doesn't sound that concerning. Entrepreneurs enjoy the thrill of the start up. And with an acquisition of The Huffington Post, first by AOL and then again as Verizon bought AOL, the notion of being the big fish in a small pond gets lost as the pond becomes an ocean and you become a smaller fish relative to the size.
That Huffington is leaving to start a new venture called Thrive, a health and wellness digital site, does raise a couple questions. One, that Verizon has also just bought Yahoo and Huffington could take the health assets from this acquisition to mold her site as a venture inside of Verizon. Two, that digital health and wellness sites are already plentiful and no site has yet truly broken through. I myself have worked for a couple cable health and wellness sites, including Veria and HealthiNation, and attracting a sizable audience, either on TV or on the web, has been extremely difficult. Given all the niches, health and wellness seems to best occupy the longer tail part of viewing patterns. And third, that Huffington's new venture might have had a better distribution shot staying inside Verizon than operating independently.
So the smell taste fails me when it comes to her motivation to leave. The only argument is that she simply wants to be more independent and occupy the leadership chair in a much smaller business entity. Financial motivation may simply not be an issue for her at this time. While I wish her luck with her health and wellness venture, her best outcome for it will be its future acquisition with another site.
That Huffington is leaving to start a new venture called Thrive, a health and wellness digital site, does raise a couple questions. One, that Verizon has also just bought Yahoo and Huffington could take the health assets from this acquisition to mold her site as a venture inside of Verizon. Two, that digital health and wellness sites are already plentiful and no site has yet truly broken through. I myself have worked for a couple cable health and wellness sites, including Veria and HealthiNation, and attracting a sizable audience, either on TV or on the web, has been extremely difficult. Given all the niches, health and wellness seems to best occupy the longer tail part of viewing patterns. And third, that Huffington's new venture might have had a better distribution shot staying inside Verizon than operating independently.
So the smell taste fails me when it comes to her motivation to leave. The only argument is that she simply wants to be more independent and occupy the leadership chair in a much smaller business entity. Financial motivation may simply not be an issue for her at this time. While I wish her luck with her health and wellness venture, her best outcome for it will be its future acquisition with another site.
Thursday, August 11, 2016
Will Content Glut Reach A Tipping Point?
The rise of digital distribution has created an insatiable thirst for more content to fill the bucket. Video content is being produced not just for broadcast or cable, but for streaming services as well. We are seeing the numbers rise for both short form content, user generated content, and scripted series as well. And as Investopedia tells us, "John Landgraf said the number of scripted television shows next year
could reach 500, from an estimated number between 430 and 450 this year,
driven mainly by a rise in shows commissioned by streaming services." Landgraf, CEO of FX Network, places responsibility on the streaming media services like Netflix and Amazon. But Hulu, of which Fox Networks are an owner, could also be named as well.
The challenges of producing so much content include finding quality programs amid the morass of choice, viewers finding the needle in a haystack of endless content possibilities, and measuring success in today's overly saturated content world. With so much content choice possible to see and hear, focus becomes close to impossible and harder even to search for and find. With such a glut of content, it becomes even more important for us to use recommendation, marketing, and advanced search to help users find a match to content they would enjoy viewing.
The drive to create content is only advancing. In coming years, the numbers will only increase. Today, in fact, Turner announced an investment in Refinery29, a female skewed destination for fashion and entertainment, and one in which Scripps is also an investor, to support more content that could possibly make its way onto their channels. Content is the fuel that runs digital media distribution. Consumer thirst for more helps to drive subscription and cable revenue streams. And with advertising alongside it in some way, deliver more profit to media companies. Have we reached a tipping point? Probably not, although the challenge for creative minds is to make the content produced quality worth watching.
The challenges of producing so much content include finding quality programs amid the morass of choice, viewers finding the needle in a haystack of endless content possibilities, and measuring success in today's overly saturated content world. With so much content choice possible to see and hear, focus becomes close to impossible and harder even to search for and find. With such a glut of content, it becomes even more important for us to use recommendation, marketing, and advanced search to help users find a match to content they would enjoy viewing.
The drive to create content is only advancing. In coming years, the numbers will only increase. Today, in fact, Turner announced an investment in Refinery29, a female skewed destination for fashion and entertainment, and one in which Scripps is also an investor, to support more content that could possibly make its way onto their channels. Content is the fuel that runs digital media distribution. Consumer thirst for more helps to drive subscription and cable revenue streams. And with advertising alongside it in some way, deliver more profit to media companies. Have we reached a tipping point? Probably not, although the challenge for creative minds is to make the content produced quality worth watching.
Tuesday, August 9, 2016
Comcast Says Future Of TV Is X1
Great read in Business Insider called "How the battle for TV's future could take over your whole house". Matt Strauss, EVP of Comcast Video Services, sees TV evolving in a new way. The TV continues to be the centerpiece of the house and that smarter features out of the X1 cable box offers the user more control. "X1 is a cross between an advanced TV guide and a virtual
assistant, and Comcast thinks it will compete with the likes of
Amazon's Alexa-powered Echo and Apple's Siri-powered Apple TV." With a touch of the microphone button on the remote, the X1 box can find channels, shows, answer simple questions, and possibly more.
Strauss believes that the X1 box can be the "hub" for which the home can likely get smarter. As we tend to have TVs in almost every room, attaching an X1 box to each TV that all communicate up to the cloud and share back info, creates a unified smart home experience. And while we may not always want the TV screen to be on, the X1 box is always on. That opens itself up to a larger future.
From my own experience with X1 so far, I see the potential. The next generation of boxes will need to work on voice command without remote button push, like the Amazon Echo. One could say, "X1, what is the weather today", just as we ask Alexa. It could potentially then answer back rather than put answer on screen. Than we could say, "X1 turn TV on or off", again without a remote button push. The future possibilities are endless. Perhaps a partnership for Comcast and Apple Siri to explore.
As to the Comcast plan, As Business Insider suggests, "So for Comcast, winning the future of TV could mean winning the entire house in the process." I agree.
Strauss believes that the X1 box can be the "hub" for which the home can likely get smarter. As we tend to have TVs in almost every room, attaching an X1 box to each TV that all communicate up to the cloud and share back info, creates a unified smart home experience. And while we may not always want the TV screen to be on, the X1 box is always on. That opens itself up to a larger future.
From my own experience with X1 so far, I see the potential. The next generation of boxes will need to work on voice command without remote button push, like the Amazon Echo. One could say, "X1, what is the weather today", just as we ask Alexa. It could potentially then answer back rather than put answer on screen. Than we could say, "X1 turn TV on or off", again without a remote button push. The future possibilities are endless. Perhaps a partnership for Comcast and Apple Siri to explore.
As to the Comcast plan, As Business Insider suggests, "So for Comcast, winning the future of TV could mean winning the entire house in the process." I agree.
Facebook To Stop Ad Blockers From Working
As much as we all seem to hate ads, they are the lifeblood, the revenue, that drives the growth off many media businesses. But too many, too cluttered, too irrelevant, and they make the experience of watching or reading content less enjoyable. In the digital world, ads also tend to slow down the streaming process, as they attempt to figure out which ad to present and run on site. As a result, many users have installed ad blockers to quicken the web load refresh process and let users enjoy only the content.
Facebook says they have figured out how to "block the blockers" to help them assure that ads are seen and their revenue grows. But in an attempt to aid the user, Facebook is also offering more control on what ads to see and what ads to hide. How much more control remains to be seen and whether it is more useful to the viewing experience.
While some use ad blockers to improve the page load, others use ad blockers to improve personal privacy and protection from possible malware. Many want to be anonymous in their viewing process and do not want to be tracked. While my biggest gripe is how ads slow down the page from loading, I also believe that a number of the ads presented are simply not relevant to me. That Facebook wants to improve that experience is helpful, but more importantly, they need to improve the load refresh of the page.
Facebook says they have figured out how to "block the blockers" to help them assure that ads are seen and their revenue grows. But in an attempt to aid the user, Facebook is also offering more control on what ads to see and what ads to hide. How much more control remains to be seen and whether it is more useful to the viewing experience.
While some use ad blockers to improve the page load, others use ad blockers to improve personal privacy and protection from possible malware. Many want to be anonymous in their viewing process and do not want to be tracked. While my biggest gripe is how ads slow down the page from loading, I also believe that a number of the ads presented are simply not relevant to me. That Facebook wants to improve that experience is helpful, but more importantly, they need to improve the load refresh of the page.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
