HBO considering offering HBO GO w/o cable

[ChicosBailBonds]

A big disruption could be coming within a year or a little more, if the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear the Aereo case. If they don't hear it, then the slower disruption continues.  Aereo rebroadcasts network TV over the internet, with each subscriber having their own unique antenna. From a legal point of view, it is a very interesting case.

If the U.S.S.C decides in favor of the broadcasters/cable companies, it slows the disruption down.

A win for aereo could really speed things up as far as cord cutting.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-12/aereo-urges-u-s-supreme-court-to-hear-broadcast-tv-case.html

The secret to the Aereo case isn't the content, it's the antenna....just wait until the antenna gets exposed.  Their argument is that there is a unique antenna for each customer, thus they are not violating any rights.  This is not what the broadcasters are fighting them on, but it's the silver bullet for them in my opinion.  From an engineering standpoint, what they claim is impossible.  What they are actually doing is using many antennas together to form an array, that's quite different than what they claim.  The engineers have been laughing about this for quite some time.  On the business side, it's great for distributors because they have to pay the networks a ton of money to carry them.  So if Aereo wins, you'll see the distributors buy Aereo or license their technology (or something similar) in their own boxes and not have to write enormous checks to Fox, CBS, NBC, ABC.  Win win.  Of course, CBS and FOX have already said if they lose in court, they will simply go all cable and take their networks off the network air and be treated just like ESPN.  A threat?  Maybe.

It is interesting, will be very interesting to see how it goes.  The friends of the court briefs against Aereo have been very interesting. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

I agree on Aereo - except I don't expect them to win.

I use a Roku for Netflix and also have access to hundreds of channels. Like Cable TV most are junk but there are about a half dozen decent ones besides Netflix. If it wasn't for Sports I would cut cable completely.

But back at the turn of the century record execs were adamant that you got the whole album or nothing - they only changed when enough people chose nothing. THEN, the changed their sales model - something they said they could never do and still survive.

Cable can afford to lose 500,000 - 1,000,000 customers a year for a few years, but if the number starts to go where they are losing 2% - 3% a year, they will 'suddenly' figure out that there are new innovative sales models to use.

Sigh.  Hands are tied.  If ESPN requires they be distributed in 90% to all subscribers, then there isn't a whole lot of "new innovative sales models"....that's been the beef for many years. 

[brandx]

Sigh.  Hands are tied.  If ESPN requires they be distributed in 90% to all subscribers, then there isn't a whole lot of "new innovative sales models"....that's been the beef for many years. 

Appreciate your input, Chicos. You certainly have access to more inside info than Lenny or I and I tend to agree with you on the aereo case. I'm sure in a couple years we will look back at this and someone will be able to say "told you so".

[ChicosBailBonds]

This excerpt I always found interesting from an article on the subject:


"Last fall I had an interesting conversation with an influential player in the TV and movie production business, who explained the fear and loathing with which Apple is viewed in Hollywood.

Part of the problem, he told me, is that the video guys all saw what happened to the music guys after they got in bed with Apple. But also, "Steve Jobs came down here and did meetings in Hollywood, talking to people who've been in this business for 25 years, and he told these guys, `You're all a bunch of idiots. You're dinosaurs.' The response from the Hollywood guys was, `Go f@ck yourself.'"

As far as Hollywood is concerned, "Apple is scary. Steve Jobs was scary. There's a fear of empowering Apple. No one here has a vested interest in helping to build that up. It's a scary time, and do you really want an 800-pound gorilla controlling your pricing?"

[The Lens]

@GOO

How in the world do you watch MU basketball?  If you're a big enough fan to participate in a fan forum I cannot believe you are content to not watch games.

[brandx]

This excerpt I always found interesting from an article on the subject:


"Last fall I had an interesting conversation with an influential player in the TV and movie production business, who explained the fear and loathing with which Apple is viewed in Hollywood.

Part of the problem, he told me, is that the video guys all saw what happened to the music guys after they got in bed with Apple. But also, "Steve Jobs came down here and did meetings in Hollywood, talking to people who've been in this business for 25 years, and he told these guys, `You're all a bunch of idiots. You're dinosaurs.' The response from the Hollywood guys was, `Go f@ck yourself.'"

As far as Hollywood is concerned, "Apple is scary. Steve Jobs was scary. There's a fear of empowering Apple. No one here has a vested interest in helping to build that up. It's a scary time, and do you really want an 800-pound gorilla controlling your pricing?"

Interesting!!

I think Jobs was looking 5-10 years out and the studio guys were/are happy with current model. I think it ends up falling somewhere between what they each envisioned.

[Spotcheck Billy]

Sigh.  Hands are tied.  If ESPN requires they be distributed in 90% to all subscribers, then there isn't a whole lot of "new innovative sales models"....that's been the beef for many years. 

but with enough backlash could ESPN ever be forced to cave on that 90%? It's their business model that needs changing if enough foks that don't watch sports cut the cable. If that tipping comes maybe ESPN will have to eat some $ and just perhaps rein in sports costs i.e. athlete's salaries etc.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Interesting!!

I think Jobs was looking 5-10 years out and the studio guys were/are happy with current model. I think it ends up falling somewhere between what they each envisioned.

Actually, he wanted it done back then, but the video guys knew (still know), they can't create the programming people want with that model.  For every hit, you have a bunch of bombs that are enormous in costs to create.  On the music side, the risk is so much smaller.  It cost next to nothing to make an album vs making a television show.

This is why comparing the two industries is always problematic.  People want the music model, but they still want Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, Madmen, etc created.  Those two combinations are going to be very difficult to pull off in an a la carte world which Jobs either didn't understand or didn't want to come to grips with.

[ChicosBailBonds]

but with enough backlash could ESPN ever be forced to cave on that 90%? It's their business model that needs changing if enough foks that don't watch sports cut the cable. If that tipping comes maybe ESPN will have to eat some $ and just perhaps rein in sports costs i.e. athlete's salaries etc.

Sure, but it hasn't come close to happening.  People pack stadiums, watch sports, demand sports.  The issue is more from the non sports fans that don't want to pay for sports which they are forced to pay today.  The tipping point will come from them, if it comes at all.  But who is going to be the first distributor to say no to ESPN and refuse to carry it?  The first one that does is going to get hammered.  Thus the problem.

[Spotcheck Billy]

  But who is going to be the first distributor to say no to ESPN and refuse to carry it?  The first one that does is going to get hammered.  Thus the problem.

one word: collusion  

maybe we need a distributor conspiracy

[ChicosBailBonds]

one word: collusion  

maybe we need a distributor conspiracy

Yeah, illegal.   

Plus, the contracts for each distributor are not synced.  For example, DISH's came up this year, Time Warner was a few years ago, etc, etc.  Disney isn't dumb, they will make sure they do not end in the same years to prevent exactly what you are saying. 

[GOO]

@GOO

How in the world do you watch MU basketball?  If you're a big enough fan to participate in a fan forum I cannot believe you are content to not watch games.

I attend about half the games in person.  I listen to Mac and Homer over my phone ESPN app.  I actually enjoy it, as I get stuff done while I listen (household type tasks) that I wouldn't get done watching it on TV.  That being said, if I could spend 10-15 bucks a few times a year and watch a few games, I'd do so:

In the UK:
Apple has added a couple of new channels to the Apple TV for UK users. The addition of Sky Sports (provide through Now TV) makes live sports available to UK owners of Apple TV for the first time without the need for a cable subscription. Users can buy £9.99 day passes and get unlimited access to all six Sky Sports channels encompassing the Barclays Premier League football matches, cricket, F1 racing and more.
 
Now TV and Sky Sports are both owned by the same parent company BSkyB, which makes this deal possibly. Compared to a monthly cable subscription, the day-pass option is not cost-effective but it may be enticing to some people who only want to watch certain events across the year.

Chicos, thanks for the info on Aereo, if they can't  distribute content from a certain antenna to a certain recipient, it would seem to be a hugh hole in the case for Aereo and an easy way for the courts to distinguish this case and rule against Aereo.

[jesmu84]

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130118/17425221736/cable-industry-finally-admits-that-data-caps-have-nothing-to-do-with-congestion.shtml??

again, the problem is much MUCH bigger than the cable companies.

having said that, shocking news here!! the cable companies are doing things that are pretty scummy overall

[ChicosBailBonds]

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130118/17425221736/cable-industry-finally-admits-that-data-caps-have-nothing-to-do-with-congestion.shtml??

again, the problem is much MUCH bigger than the cable companies.

having said that, shocking news here!! the cable companies are doing things that are pretty scummy overall

I have no problem if they clamp down on them....especially since I don't work for a cable company.       However, from what I understand from the engineers that do handle this stuff, if you don't tier it and put artificial barriers in place (through price controls), you will cause a problem as people overly stream like crazy.  There's a reason why the more water you use, the highered tiers kick in.  Same for electricity, you go through various tiers with higher usage.

[brandx]

I have no problem if they clamp down on them....especially since I don't work for a cable company.       However, from what I understand from the engineers that do handle this stuff, if you don't tier it and put artificial barriers in place (through price controls), you will cause a problem as people overly stream like crazy.  There's a reason why the more water you use, the highered tiers kick in.  Same for electricity, you go through various tiers with higher usage.

Sounds like you might be one of their lawyers   

[jesmu84]

I have no problem if they clamp down on them....especially since I don't work for a cable company.       However, from what I understand from the engineers that do handle this stuff, if you don't tier it and put artificial barriers in place (through price controls), you will cause a problem as people overly stream like crazy.  There's a reason why the more water you use, the highered tiers kick in.  Same for electricity, you go through various tiers with higher usage.

Water and electricity have to be produced for people to use them. So, the more you use, the more you should pay. With data? No. This is just like when cell companies were charging for texts, when they didn't need to.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Sounds like you might be one of their lawyers   

LOL.  I'm now going to kill myself.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Water and electricity have to be produced for people to use them. So, the more you use, the more you should pay. With data? No. This is just like when cell companies were charging for texts, when they didn't need to.

That is true, but they physics of delivery don't change for the cable guys.  There are only so many packets they can deliver at any time, and if the request for packets of data increases to the point it degrades their ability to deliver, that is a problem.

Ever try to get a network signal, or even 3G or 4G in a stadium?  Very difficult because everyone is pulling at the same time.

This is why the delivery over the internet of video is still such a huge problem for single based events.  We actually brought down HBO Go last year (us, DISH and Charter) for Game of Thrones because they did a preview of episode 2 right after episode 1 on Go only.  It crashed their system because too many people at one single point in time it couldn't handle.  That's just a specific example, but there are other broader examples that the cable guys are worried about in terms of performance metrics and what the network can truly absorb.

[jesmu84]

That is true, but they physics of delivery don't change for the cable guys.  There are only so many packets they can deliver at any time, and if the request for packets of data increases to the point it degrades their ability to deliver, that is a problem.

Ever try to get a network signal, or even 3G or 4G in a stadium?  Very difficult because everyone is pulling at the same time.

This is why the delivery over the internet of video is still such a huge problem for single based events.  We actually brought down HBO Go last year (us, DISH and Charter) for Game of Thrones because they did a preview of episode 2 right after episode 1 on Go only.  It crashed their system because too many people at one single point in time it couldn't handle.  That's just a specific example, but there are other broader examples that the cable guys are worried about in terms of performance metrics and what the network can truly absorb.

i'd buy more into this if the cable guys ever actually worried about "performance metrics". a large majority of the time, people aren't receiving the bandwidth they pay for anyway. joe schmo wouldn't really notice much difference, but he's not getting what he paid for most of the time anyway.

[mu03eng]

i'd buy more into this if the cable guys ever actually worried about "performance metrics". a large majority of the time, people aren't receiving the bandwidth they pay for anyway. joe schmo wouldn't really notice much difference, but he's not getting what he paid for most of the time anyway.

The analogy to electricity is app.  Electricity has a limiting factor, the generation of it.  Very expensive to build new generation capability, but you have to account for the "worst" case scenario.  As an example 5% of the energy generation capability in the LA region is used less than 50 hours per year, but they had to spend millions to have that 5% available.

Same goes for data, there is a physical limit to how much data they can push through the infrastructure as well as move with the servers.  You have to have infrastructure and servers to support the worse case from a customer satisfaction standpoint but you have to have some way to pay for that.

[ChicosBailBonds]

i'd buy more into this if the cable guys ever actually worried about "performance metrics". a large majority of the time, people aren't receiving the bandwidth they pay for anyway. joe schmo wouldn't really notice much difference, but he's not getting what he paid for most of the time anyway.

This is true, but I think they say "up to X Mbps" for that reason.  They can't predict necessarily the load on their networks which is why at times if the load is heavy, they won't be able to deliver the same throughput then say at 3:00am.

[jesmu84]

Nothing to with a la carte. Or anything of that ilk. But an interesting article nonetheless. I wonder if netflix, hulu, espn3, etc think the same way?

http://bgr.com/2014/01/20/hbo-go-login-sharing-policy/

[ChicosBailBonds]

Nothing to with a la carte. Or anything of that ilk. But an interesting article nonetheless. I wonder if netflix, hulu, espn3, etc think the same way?

http://bgr.com/2014/01/20/hbo-go-login-sharing-policy/

It's funny, I read a similar article about 8 months ago and again 3 months ago.  I was with HBO a few weeks in New York and I point blanked them if they truly support what is in these articles, because if they do they have a major problem.  They told me at basically one level below the CEO they do not support this and they are trying to curtail it.  

So, number one I thank you for sharing this article because I'm getting ready to send it to their #2 right now and ask again WTF?  They are concerned about subscription revenue and having everyone bust their arses for this stuff and they make statements like this.  Not good.  Decide what you want (you meaning HBO).  They say it doesn't impact business, they're in denial.  Of course it does.  I have the data to prove it.

Thanks for sharing....I truly mean that.

[jesmu84]

It's funny, I read a similar article about 8 months ago and again 3 months ago.  I was with HBO a few weeks in New York and I point blanked them if they truly support what is in these articles, because if they do they have a major problem.  They told me at basically one level below the CEO they do not support this and they are trying to curtail it. 

So, number one I thank you for sharing this article because I'm getting ready to send it to their #2 right now and ask again WTF?  They are concerned about subscription revenue and having everyone bust their arses for this stuff and they make statements like this.  Not good.  Decide what you want.

Thanks for sharing....I truly mean that.

So their CEO is saying one thing, and the rest of the company (executives) believe something totally different? Probably not the best atmosphere there...

[ChicosBailBonds]

So their CEO is saying one thing, and the rest of the company (executives) believe something totally different? Probably not the best atmosphere there...

Well, because the part of the company I deal with is responsible for selling it so when they hear their CEO say that kind of stuff they're like WTF.  I have data surveys of millenials and others showing absolutely it impacts business.  We have several former Netflix employees on the team now, and they know for a fact in has impacted Netflix subscriptions.  I don't know why this guy is saying this...I know he would like to believe that people borrowing a login will magically say I want it myself.  The reality is that people that borrow the login want to keep on borrowing the login.  No different than people here wanting a free stream for a MU game, they have no intention of paying for it.  

EDIT:  Just fired off my email.  I normally sit on that stuff, reread it, make sure I'm saying the right thing.  Not tonight, off it went.  Again, appreciate the article.  Likely would have had it tomorrow morning as our research team pulls all of this stuff daily, but glad I got it tonight.  Take care.