[opendtv] Re: Marcus: TWC OK With OTT | Multichannel
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 08:02:08 -0500
> On Dec 9, 2014, at 7:45 PM, Manfredi, Albert E <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>
> First off, Craig, you are referring to the CEO of Time Warner Cable, not Time
> Warner. So, the CEO of an MVPD, not the CEO of a conglom or content-owning
> enterprise.
You are mostly correct.
He is the CEO of a MVPD conglom that owns the following content:
Local channels
Time Warner Cable News
Regional Sports Networks
Metro Sports
Time Warner Cable Sports
Time Warner Cable SportsNet
Time Warner Cable Deportes
TWC Sports 32
SNY
This is from a story on what Comcast will own if the TWC merger is approved.
Read more:
http://www.businessinsider.com/what-comcast-owns-2014-2#ixzz3LUwHHgns
>
> So sure, MVPD middlemen have their hands tied, as long as they are operating
> under that guise. That is why I've been concentrating on what the content
> owners are thinking and doing, as opposed to what they will allow their MVPD
> middlemen to get away with.
Glad you admit their hands are tied. Too often you make it sound like the
content congloms have nothing to do with the packages of channels they force
upon the MVPDs and the never ending increases in subscriber fees.
Then again, me thinks that the MVPDs are complicit in this scam, as most of
their posturing against blackouts and rate increases is little more than
"theater," to make it look like they are trying to protect the consumer.
One could question why Comcast is trying to buy TWC, after buying NBC Universal.
Are they trying to create leverage for negotiation with the content congloms or
just double dipping?
>
> The Internet, a two-way medium, many-to-many, allows the content owners to go
> beyond JUST giving their MVPD middlemen more bundling flexibility. You seem
> to miss that the monopolistic pipe model is no longer technically mandatory,
> and therefore people can think beyond it. It is when content owners enlist
> other middlemen, or establish their own portals, that we see their
> understanding of this new reality.
As the old saw goes, " Want'n' and gett'n are two different things..."
There is no question that the Internet makes new and different business models
possible. What we are debating is whether the content congloms can expand their
oligopoly to control TV distribution via the Internet, or if the Internet will
disrupt their world as it has so many other industries.
As we have discussed as nauseam, the markets for TV content have evolved and
expanded each time evolving technologies have enabled new business models. So
bottom line, what really matters is not the number of "stores," what they sell,
or the pricing, but where are the profits flowing?
You seem to believe that the Internet will liberate TV viewers from the
oppression of the content and distribution oligopolies. I believe it will just
help the consolidate and globalize their lucrative enterprise...
> And of course, the DBS middlemen, not having the parallel role of ISP to fall
> back on, are more proactive in reinventing themselves.
It is telling that Marcus is more concerned about "switchers" than "cutters..."
> “I tend to focus more on our traditional competition than I do on the threat
> from OTT,” Marcus said. “There is no question that there is some element of
> cord-cutting out in the universe, but I don’t think it is having anywhere
> near the impact that losing customers to traditional competitors has on our
> lives day to day. …
Apparently the growth of DBS subscribers is not lost on the wired MVPDs.
Regards
Craig
Other related posts:
