Organic SEO Blog

231-922-9460 • Contact UsFree SEO Site Audit
Showing posts with label Hulu. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hulu. Show all posts

Monday, November 08, 2010

Cable Subscribers flee, but is Internet to Blame?

Associated Press

 
TV subscribers are ditching their cable companies at an ever faster rate in the past few months, and many of them aren't signing up with a satellite or phone competitor instead.

Their willingness to simply go without pay television could be a sign that Internet TV services such as Netflix and Hulu are finally starting to entice people to cancel cable, though company executives say the weak economy and housing market are to blame.

Third-quarter results reported this week by major cable and satellite TV companies show major losses, but don't settle the question of what's causing them.

If "cord-cutting" in favor of Internet video is finally taking hold, that has wide-ranging implications. Consumers who use the Internet to get their movies and TV shows bypass not just the cable companies, but the cable networks that produce the content. The move could have the same disruptive effect on the TV and movie industries as digital downloads have already had on music.

A few weeks ago, the CEO of phone company Verizon Communications Inc. likened cord-cutting to what started happening to the local-phone companies five or six years ago, when people started giving up their landlines in favor of relying solely on their cell phones.

"The first thing when that happens is you deny it," Ivan Seidenberg said. "I know the drill. I have been there."

On Thursday, Time Warner Cable Inc.'s chief operating officer, Landel Hobbs, said the company doesn't see evidence of people dropping cable in favor of the Internet. He said the biggest subscriber losses have been among people who don't have cable broadband services; high-speed Internet - from cable or a competitor - is key to watching video online. These people seem to be going to satellite or giving up on pay TV entirely.

On the theory that college students might be among the first to drop cable TV, the company looked at changes in subscriber figures in college towns such as Austin, Texas, and Columbus, Ohio. They weren't out of line with previous years, and they corresponded to the level of student enrollment, he said.

"We'll continue to monitor cord-cutting, but haven't found evidence where you might expect to see it," Hobbs told analysts on a conference call.

Time Warner Cable lost 155,000 video subscribers in the July-September quarter, compared with 64,000 a year ago.

The only larger cable company, Comcast Corp., reported last week that its subscriber loss more than doubled in the third quarter, to 275,000. Comcast said many of those leaving had taken advantage of low introductory rates that the company offered last year when the analog TV broadcast network was shut down.

Of the satellite companies, DirecTV gained subscribers and Dish Network Corp. lost them. On a conference call Friday, Dish CEO Charlie Ergen said the Internet was making itself noticed as a competitor.

"You know, my kids think I'm crazy for being in the pay-TV business because they don't pay for TV. They don't pay for movies," Ergen told analysts.

The country's eight largest publicly traded pay-TV companies, representing about 85 percent of the subscriber total, had reported their results for the third quarter by Friday. These cable, phone and satellite companies showed a combined gain of 66,700 video subscribers, or a 0.3 percent increase at an annualized rate, about a third the growth of the population.

The figure was a slight recovery from the seasonally weak second quarter, when they gained just 12,400 subscribers. But it's far short of the 401,300 subscribers gained a year ago.

Missing from the tally is the third-largest cable company, Cox Communications, which is privately held and doesn't report subscriber counts publicly. If it lost cable subscribers at the same rate as Comcast and Time Warner Cable, the nine largest pay-TV companies had zero net gain for the latest quarter and lost subscribers in the second.

Cable companies have been losing video subscribers for some time, but they have been compensating by upgrading basic subscribers to more expensive digital tiers, as well as adding broadband and phone subscribers.

However, both Time Warner Cable and Cablevision Systems Corp. lost digital video subscribers in the third quarter. Both added record-low number of phone subscribers, as years of growth are coming to an end.

Meanwhile, Netflix Inc.'s streaming service has become so popular that it is now the largest source of U.S. Internet traffic during peak evening hours, according to Sandvine Inc., a Canadian company that supplies traffic-management equipment to Internet service providers.

A variety of gadgets can send Netflix's streams to the living room TV, including game consoles and the $99 Apple TV box. Many high-end TVs now come with the built-in ability to play Internet content.

Thomas Clancy Jr., 35, in Long Beach, N.Y., canceled the family's Cablevision subscription this spring. He said he has been happy with Netflix and other Internet video services since then, even though there isn't a lot of live sports to be had online.

"The amount of sports that I watched certainly didn't justify a hundred-dollar-a-month expense for all this stuff. I mean, that's twelve hundred dollars a year," Clancy said. "Twelve hundred dollars is ... near a vacation."

But Clancy - who has no relation to the thriller writer - is also an example of the hurdles cord cutters face. He uses an Internet-connected Blu-ray player to get Netflix movies to the TV. And he pulls a cable from his computer to the TV for Internet content Netflix doesn't have. Clancy owns a computer consulting firm and is tech-savvy enough to do all that. Most people wouldn't know how.

Cablevision wanted to raise Clancy's Internet bill when he canceled TV service. That would have made cord-cutting less attractive, but he happens to live in an area where Verizon provides Internet service at speeds that are comparable with the best cable has to offer. He got a better deal from Verizon and switched to that provider.

Most people who have the technological skills to take advantage of Internet video find that the selection of movies and shows isn't broad enough to make the jump worth it, Sanford Bernstein analyst Craig Moffett said.

On the other hand, poor people have an excellent motive to cut cable and simply replace it with an antenna or nothing at all, he said.

"The price of cable TV has risen to the point where it's simply not affordable to lots of lower-income homes. And right now there are an awful lot of lower-income homes," Moffett said. "The evidence suggests that what we're seeing is a poverty problem rather than a technology phenomenon."

In addition, high unemployment means fewer new households, as kids are probably delaying moving out of their parents' houses, or people move in with roommates. That can reduce the number of households that pay for TV.

Cable companies would like to get low-income customers back with cheaper cable packages, but their hands are tied. Content providers such as The Walt Disney Co. and News Corp. won't license their channels one by one, so subscribers have to take big, expensive channel packages, or very basic ones, which offer little beyond what's available with an antenna.

Content providers now get billions of dollars in fees from cable service providers, and they want to make sure that whatever new industry model comes along, they'll get paid. It's not obvious yet that Internet video will let them sustain their profit levels.

Six companies create the content that consumes 85 percent of U.S. viewing hours, Moffett said. "Until they get on board, the train's not leaving the station."

Tuesday, October 05, 2010

Google TV to Launch without Network Content

LA Times


Google's TV service, which will roll out this month on devices made by Sony and Logitech, will include content from Amazon, Netflix and Twitter as the Internet search giant attempts to merge Internet content with television programming.

"One of our goals with Google TV is to finally open up the living room and enable new innovation from content creators, programmers, developers and advertisers," Ambarish Kenghe, developer product manager for Google TV, said in a blog post.

The partnerships are the result of talks with the major TV networks and cable and satellite distributors. Noticeably absent from the Google announcement are the major networks ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox.
However, Google and Hulu confirmed they are in talks to bring Hulu Plus to the platform. The $9.99 monthly subscription service would include current shows from ABC, NBC and Fox, whose parent companies all share a stake in Hulu. Hulu Plus also offers an extensive library of content that includes all past seasons of such popular shows as "The X-Files" and "Arrested Development."

Among the partnerships: NBC Universal has teamed up with Google TV to create CNBC Real-Time, an application with which viewers can track their favorite stocks and access news feeds on the TV screen; HBO will have programming for subscribers on an enhanced website; and the NBA has built NBA Game Time, an application for viewers to follow game scores in real time and catch up on the latest highlights in high definition.

Google's television software, which it first announced in May, is being built into new Sony high-definition televisions and Blu-ray players and into Logitech set-top boxes that can be used with television sets. Google has pledged to make the software available to other manufacturers.

Google is banking that television will be a new venue for it to sell advertising. But to bring together television and the Internet in a meaningful way, Google must get the cooperation of media companies. And it must compete with Apple, TiVo, Boxee, Roku and other companies vying for a share of the five hours a day the average American spends watching TV.

Friday, September 03, 2010

A New Digital Battlefield

The Wall Street Journal
Amazon, Apple Rivalry Moves Beyond Music and E-Books Into TV Shows


TV shows are emerging as a new front in the war over digital media between Amazon.com Inc. and Apple Inc., amid their ongoing battles over electronic books and online music.

Hours after Apple said Wednesday that it would begin renting some shows for 99 cents per episode, Amazon cut its price on a similar set of shows to 99 cents from $2.99. And unlike Apple, which rents the videos, Amazon lets its customers buy the shows.

"When we see a competitive product available elsewhere, we make sure to match or beat that price," said Bill Carr, Amazon's vice president of music and video, in a Thursday interview. "Things are evolving rapidly."

Apple declined to comment on Amazon's pricing.

A price battle between the tech titans could help drive consumer interest in the nascent market for paid on-demand video over the Internet. But it could also drive away the media giants that Apple and Amazon are counting on to feed them with TV content. Some media executives worry low prices could eventually undermine the existing TV business.


For the past several years, Amazon and Apple have both offered services that let consumers buy or rent films over the Internet on a one-by-one basis and watch them on TVs, game consoles or portable devices. It's part of a wider race among cable-TV and satellite-TV providers and tech companies, including Netflix Inc. and Google Inc., to dominate the digital delivery of TV and movies.

That race heated up on Wednesday when Apple introduced an updated Apple TV set-top box for $99 and said it reached deals to offer rentals for a selection of TV shows from News Corp.'s Fox and Walt Disney Co.'s ABC, ABC Family and Disney Channel, as well as BBC America.

TV networks haven't presented a united front when faced with Apple, Amazon and other tech companies that want to license their content. Already, some, such as Time Warner Inc., are aligning with cable and satellite TV operators to offer some shows on the Web only for their paying subscribers, while others such as General Electric Co.'s NBC Universal put episodes from a large number of their shows online for free viewing with ads. But even those positions are changing, with some media companies pulling back how much they offer free or working on paid subscription offerings of their own.

Apple has already discovered those divisions: While both News Corp. and Disney signed on to test its 99-cent TV-show rentals, other major media companies rejected the plan. Several executives said those rentals could be a step toward a world where people see less advertising or stop paying for cable subscriptions—two principal sources of revenue. (News Corp. owns The Wall Street Journal.)

The price war could lead at least some media companies to pull existing episodes sold at $1.99 from Apple, one media executive said.

"We're happy to sit back and see how it goes," said another media executive, who also suggested that competition between the two tech giants could be a boon. That executive said a major danger media companies face is allowing one player—like Apple—to gain too much power over the distribution of content, as it did with music. Amazon could provide a welcome challenge, the executive added.

Securing affordable video content is crucial in Apple's strategy to tout the iPad, iPhone and iPod Touch as go-to multimedia devices.

The existing price of content—which can cost $2.99 apiece for a high definition TV show or $4.99 for a movie—is still a high barrier of entry when consumers can access many of the same shows free on websites such as Hulu, or as part of their Netflix subscription.

Amazon, the Web's largest retailer, has used aggressive price cuts on a variety of products to draw attention to its offerings and maintain its position as a low-price leader. The company today offers 75,000 movies and TV shows, which customers can watch on a variety of systems, from computers to TVs.

Mr. Carr declined to say what impact a price cut might have on adoption of digital video, and said it "remains to be seen" what an ideal price might be for video.

"The lower that they bring the cost, the more they will expand adoption," said David Krall, the chief operating officer of Roku Inc., a company that makes set-top boxes that play Amazon and other online content on TVs. "People compare the price to going to the DVD store to rent, and convenience of having to get in the car."

It remains to be seen whether the pricing rivalry will hurt Apple's dominate position in the space. According to Screen Digest, Apple accounts for 57% of transactions in Internet video-on-demand movies, on a number-of-sales basis, and 53% of the TV shows market, excluding sports. In contrast, Amazon is only 5% and 6% respectively.

Both Microsoft Corp. and Sony Corp., through their videogame consoles, sell more online video than Amazon, according to Screen Digest. (The estimates exclude Netflix because it doesn't offer a-la-carte sales and rentals of movies and TV shows over the Internet.)

One advantage that Apple has in these early days is that it has many products through which consumers can view the content. By contrast, on the digital book front, the competition between Apple and the online retailer is more intense in part because Amazon had Kindle, an e-book reader that it had been selling long before the iPad. Mr. Carr declined to comment on whether Amazon was interested in making its own devices for watching digital video.

"We don't believe Amazon's price cutting on TV shows will materially affect Apple's overall market share," said Arash Amel, Screen Digest's digital media research director. "ITunes rarely gets sucked into a price-war, given their position as the market-leader."

Amazon has had mixed success with its past digital media efforts. Its digital music business, in which it also uses aggressive pricing, has what analysts estimate is about 12% of the digital music market.

Moreover, the TV discounting costs Amazon because the company will continue to pay the companies the same wholesale price per episode that it paid before the retail-price cut, said media executives.

In the short run, a price cut could help Disney and News Corp., if Amazon sells more episodes while paying them each the same wholesale price. But some media executives and analysts believe the proliferation of lower prices could start to devalue electronic TV shows more broadly.

"It further ingrains in the consumers' mind the idea that a TV show is only worth 99 cents," said Evercore media and entertainment analyst Alan Gould.

Amazon is also interested in challenging players such as Netflix with a subscription service that would deliver TV shows and movies over the Internet. In recent weeks, Amazon has pitched a Web-based subscription service to several major media companies.

Mr. Carr declined to comment on the idea of a subscription service.

The entire business of selling episodes of TV shows through services like Apple's and Amazon's is expected to generate only $407 million in 2010, according to Screen Digest. Meanwhile, U.S. consumers and advertisers will spend about $143 billion on traditional TV advertising and subscriptions in 2010, according to PricewaterhouseCoopers.