[opendtv] Re: PR: Majority of New HDTVs Powered By ATI
- From: "Gary Hughes" <ghughes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:36:55 -0500
> -----Original Message-----
> On Behalf Of Craig Birkmaier
> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 12:02 PM
> To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [opendtv] Re: PR: Majority of New HDTVs Powered By ATI
>=20
>=20
> At 4:46 PM -0500 11/23/04, Gary Hughes wrote:
> >There will always be a split between content that makes=20
> sense to store=20
> >centrally and content that is better stored locally. And you, the=20
> >consumer, need not know where. If you select to watch the copy of=20
> >Sopranos that you
> >'recorded' (which may be no more than setting a flag in a database at
> >the
> >head end) does it matter if it is a bitstream recorded live=20
> on your disk
> >or
> >the SVOD version prefed to the headend?
>=20
>=20
> Absolutely.
>=20
> The cable company will charge you each time you look at the episode=20
> on their server, and they must compensate Viacom for the right to put=20
> that asset on their server, most likely sharing any revenues that are=20
> generated.
>=20
That is most certainly not the case today. If you have a digital STB
and a premium service, you get that premium service OD at no extra cost.
The metadata that accompanies the package when it arrives at the headend
indicates it is a $0 transaction. The headend counts requests but does
not
even generate a billing record for that class of content.
You should really look at the business models behind this before
pontificating.
> NONE of this applies if the episode is cached on a PVR in your home.
>=20
> >
> >> 1. People will want to cache their favorite programs,=20
> rather than=3D20
> >> paying a small premium to watch them on demand from a=20
> remote server.=20
> >>=3D20
> >The reality today is that the "premium" is the $1-2=20
> incremental cost to=20
> >have access to VOD. At least that is what Comcast charge me.=20
> That gives=20
> >me access to the 'non-premium' VOD content. If I paid for=20
> regular HBO I=20
> >would get HBO content OD. And so on.
>=20
> So there is an incremental cost in this case as well. But in this=20
> case you are already paying the monthly fee for HBO content - this is=20
> not the same as paying for a specific PPV event.
OK, I guess I have to spell this out. I'm charged $7.25/mo for an HD
set top (which was primary motivator; I still get 'regular' programming
via DirecTV). The cheapest digital programming package is $4.95/mo
for a few channels I don't care about, but it turns on the on-demand
services. This gives me access to, for example, BBC, PBS and various
Anime channels on demand AT NO EXTRA CHARGE. Zero. Zip. Nada. No
transaction
fees. (It also gives me a couple of extra linear HD channels)
If I were to add, say, HBO or Starz, I would also get access to the
related on demand service. Again with no extra fee. I could probably
ditch the package I currently get (if I could figure out Comcast's rate
card again :-) ) So for the average mid to high end cable viewer, who
already had one or more premiums and a digital STB, SVOD is a free
upgrade.
> >The jury is still out on this one and anyone who claims to have THE=20
> >answer is either a fool or a liar. SVOD revenues and costs=20
> are handled=20
> >very differently
> >than VOD, BTW. Unfortunately, legal issues may override=20
> technical issues
> >here.
>=20
> Clearly there are differences, but the bottom line is still the same=20
> - you are paying something additional for the content, be it a VOD=20
> event, or an SVOD package.
>=20
The price delta between HBO and HBO with HBO-On-demand is $0. The same
model is being used by other premium content providers.
> >
> >> 3. MUCH DEEPER on-demand services will be offered directly by=20
> >>content=3D20
> >> owners more cheaply via the Internet as broadband speeds=20
> increase.=3D20
> >> Ironically, the cable companies are providing the broadband=3D20
> >> infrastructure to bypass their own entertainment networks.
> >>=3D20
> >It is already starting in cable space as content providers are=20
> >beginning to make back catalogs available via SVOD. Cable=20
> systems may=20
> >act as a mix of content providers, content brokers (I can get it for=20
> >you wholesale) or carriers.=3D20
>=20
> Don't you think this is just a transitional situation? Once the=20
> content owner can go direct to the consumer, why would they want to=20
> split the revenues with the cable company. And then there is the=20
> reality that many content owners are not dealing with the cable=20
> guys, and many others cannot get or afford access to cable.
>=20
No, not really. There are already on-demand channels that could not
exit in a purely linear channel environment. These guys weren't dealing
with the cable guys until this form of distribution became available.
There is still certainly the possibility of 'over the top' services, but
if the cable guys are smart they'll offer to make 3rd party content
available on their servers (for a fee of course) and take care of the
billing, encryption/copy control etc. And it is to their advantage
to cache popular content, of any sort, and keep traffic within their
network.
>=20
>=20
> >
> >> Integration of services is CRITICAL in the STB (or receiver) when=20
> >>we=3D20
> >> start to talk about the evolution of digital media=20
> appliances. In=3D20
> >> order to sell STBs with PVR capabilities you need the=20
> traditional=3D20
> >> STB functions (tuners), an electronic program guide, and =
cache=3D20
> >> storage.
> >>=3D20
> >Absolutely. The winners may well be whoever figures out how to=20
> >integrate the various navigation and searching functions, along with=20
> >related information sources. 'Live' content, on demand and cached=20
> >content, rental content, personalised news or sports=20
> magazines... one=20
> >interface to unite them all.
> >
> >If anyone is attending SCTE's Emerging Technology '05 conference,=20
> >come=3D20 along and heckle when I present "The Headend in the=20
> Basement"=20
> >:-)
>=20
> Yup. Now dovetail this with the notion that many players are vying to=20
> build components of your Headend in the Basement. Some will try to=20
> own/sell you everything. Others will try to build "OPEN" systems to=20
> which you can add components from multiple vendors. And some of us=20
> will try to roll our own.
>=20
No argument there. My mantra is to build this to open, well defined=20
interfaces and let the market have at it.
> Given the fact that we are just beginning the process of networking=20
> all of the smart appliances in our homes, I would say that the=20
> marketplace will remain volatile, at least as long as the market for=20
> PCs has been volatile. Over time, the most popular features will be=20
> adopted by all of the companies vying for your business.
>=20
I hope we don't have to live through a few years of artificial barriers
first.
gary
Gary Hughes
Director of Media Engineering
Broadbus Technologies, Inc.
ghughes@xxxxxxxxxxxx
v: 978 264 7919
f: 978 264 9108
--------------------------------------------------------
This email message and any files transmitted with it contain =
confidential information intended only for the person(s) to whom this =
email message is addressed. If you have received this email message in =
error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or email and =
destroy the original message without making a copy. Thank you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
