[opendtv] NAB Redux - was Mobile TV $2 billion

At 10:33 AM -0400 4/19/08, John Shutt wrote:



Of course, the question is an unfair one.  Multicasts aren't carried on
cable, and in many markets, digital transmissions are only now being folded
into Nielsen numbers.  Without numbers, getting any money is difficult at
best.
Presumably, any new mobile service won't be carried on cable, either, so if it is predicted that mobile ATSC will provide $2 Billion in additional ad revenue, it is fair to ask if multicasting has provided anything close to that figure thus far.
The most popular multicasts ARE carried on cable. We have two here in Gainesville, The CW is a sub-channel on the ABC affiliate and MY TV is a sub-channel on the CBS affiliate. Our market may be unique, as we have fewer broadcast channels than the broadcast networks that need to be carried.
Multicasts may draw a larger audience after the analog shut-down, assuming that a significant portion of those who still use antennas will STILL use antennas. It is NOT well understood among the laggards that they will get more choice if they switch to digital.
As for the $2 billion in additional ad revenue, I am highly suspect of the number. Ad revenues are now in decline with broadcasters as the wheels start to come off the broadcast business - something that was HIGHLY evident at NAB this year. There might be a shift of ad dollars to a mobile service, but the money could very well come out of other budgets, such as the primary TV service which is now in decline.
To get more ad revenue, broadcasters will need to provide evidence that more people are watching. They might pick up a few more viewers with the mobile service, but it is going to be a hard sell to charge more for a simulcast, when the overall ratings are declining. 

And then there is the issue of content viability for a mobile service.
There was a great deal of optimism at the Open Mobile Video Coallition breakfast; it bordered almost on religious belief, but the religion that this is based in is the same one that has driven "broadcast arrogance" for the past two decades. 

The litany went like this:

We have the best spectrum for a mobile service;

We have the infrastructure in place to rapidly deploy a mobile service;

We have content.
One got the impression that they were saying that this is a slam dunk for broadcasters... 

i.e. arrogance!
But the optimism was built atop something more akin to religious belief rather than evidence of real business viability.
Some of this comes from the arrogance - i.e. we are broadcasters, so people will watch us.
It was said that mobile TV is taking off and there have been many successes in Europe - just the opposite is true with only a few limited successes. Japan and Korea were mentioned, but the successes there may be cultural. It was said that there is strong interest in mobile services in the U.S., but the take-up on mobile video services, where they have been launched, has been lackluster at best.
A friend summed it up very well, speaking to the fact that the OMVC may represent the first time that broadcasters have actually worked together to do something to to save their industry. 

In essence he said, "What would you do...
We're all treading water and the sharks are beginning to circle, and somebody throws you a life preserver..."
He noted that the street and the financial institutions have given up on the broadcast industry. The days when they could go to the bank and get a loan to expand their business are gone. There is no growth strategy, only concern about how much longer things can be stretched out.
This concern formed the basis for the keynote by NAB President David Rehr, which sounded more like an inspirational sermon than the usual gloating about how important the broadcast industry is to the United States.
One came away with the impression that the industry leaders think the only thing wrong is that people don't understand how important broadcasting is to their lives... 

From Rher's keynote speech:
"If we don't believe in ourselves, how do we promote our future? How do we promote our business and our valuable content?" 

About radio Rehr said:
"But, we do have challenges and we have to address them. We learned from our research that many listeners acknowledge that they take radio for granted precisely because it's so pervasive. The public's love of radio is still there, they just need to be reminded of it. We need to reignite that passion." 

About DTV Rher said:
"A moment ago, I mentioned the explosion of possibilities that will result from the DTV transition, so let me say a bit more about the door that is opening. NAB is aggressively moving to get digital TV on cell phones, iPods, TV screens in cars, portable video players, laptop computers and more.
"That's live TV on upwards of 345 million devices. That's your favorite morning show live on your handheld device on the bus to work.That's the baseball game keeping your boys quiet in the back seat of the car. That's not missing a college basketball game during March Madness, because you can catch it on your cell phone."
That's blind optimism about a future that is not bending to the tremendous power that the NAB has been able to exert over the years. Optimism about content controlled by oligopolies that no longer need broadcasters to survive and grow. And arrogance about having the best content, even if it is only viewed by 30% or less of U.S. homes.
I attended every session and press conference I could find that had anything to do with mobile DTV and the DTV transition.
The mobile DTV test drives were very interesting. A variety of screens were used from cellphone to LCD panels. I came away with the sense that the mobile handset opportunity has been tremendously overstated.
There is an opportunity here to push service to these handsets, but the broadcasters have little experience developing and delivering such services - this is the domain of the "pull" Internet, not "push" broadcasting. And there are some significant barriers to getting the cellphone manufacturers to include MPH chips in their devices. Perhaps the biggest issue is the need for a fairly large antenna (4-6 inches) - even larger if you are trying to receive VHF. This will not be a barrier for in-car systems, and probably won;t be a major barrier for notebook computers. But the power drain and antenna requirements make this a questionable proposition for cellular, not to mention the fact that the telcos want to offer their own services in their new spectrum. 

I do see three potential markets that could be significant:

1. Express card/USB receivers for notebook computers;
2. In-vehicle systems, both dashboard and the current flip down "car theater" systems. 3. Portable TVs with screens 7" or larger (and big batteries to allow them to work for the length of a football game.
And Kudos to Harris for understanding the importance of data broadcasting. They demonstrated an EPG that puts the ATSC PSIP supported guides to shame - it even will pull data from all receivable channels and consolidate it into one guide. And they used some screen real estate to make this easy to navigate. They also used screen real estate for out of picture banner ads, and links to other services, and to run a crawl, which they customized with the names of the people on the bus during each trip. 

The A-VSB demo also included an EPG.
At the A-VSB press conference they talked about the silicon they have developed for the prototypes seen on the bus ride. I asked if there was enough in common in this chip with the software radios that are starting to show up in cellular handsets. Apparently not.
I also asked if the chip could receive standard 8-VSB broadcasts, as most laptops now have near HD resolution displays? Apparently they had never thought of this. 

:-(
When I brought this up, however, they noted that the training signals added for the MPH features could be used to improve 8-VSB reception. There is an obvious synergy here for a replacement for the traditional portable TV, not to mention USB sticks that can be used in a hotel room or office.
I guess this is what happens when you tell a bunch of engineers to solve a problem - i.e. missing the forest for the trees.
And then there is the reality that many people are time and space shifting today, moving cached content to mobile devices for consumption when trapped during a commute. I spoke with a friend who is now back in NYC running a post facility. He caches the evening news, moves it to his iPhone, then watches in on the commute to work.
I bought a movie and rented two more from the iTunes store so I could be entertained on the flights to and from Las Vegas. I had planned on watching them on my iPhone, then realized that it would be far more enjoyable to watch them on the near high-def screen of my laptop. Frankly, the main reason I put any video on the iPhone is to show-off.
Last night I hooked the laptop up to the Big screen via DVI, and my wife and I watched the movie I had bought. The file is about 1/4 the size of an SD-DVD file - the quality was about equal. And this file plays across the iPhone, MacBook Pro and, 50" HDTV screens. 

IMHO, watching a movie on the iPhone would require a real sense of desperation.
But there is a real possibility that we will soon see tablet computers using OS-X from Apple and other touch-screen interfaces from Microsoft and others. With a screen size in the 7"' to 10" range, and the ability to design in more powerful batteries, these devices could be a viable portable TV, web browser, et al.
The world is moving forward rapidly, while the NAB and its broadcasters try to stay relevant. 

Me thinks this is a great time to start a brewery!

Regards
Craig







----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org 
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts: