[opendtv] Re: CMO: ADI: TV Everywhere Consumption Shifting To Connected Devices
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2016 00:15:49 -0500
On Feb 27, 2016, at 8:10 PM, Albert Manfredi<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Nothing about the article surprised me. On the contrary, the article explains
to legacy thinkers why the STB plan the FCC is putting forward is a waste of
time. People are already migrating to IP boxes or to TVs with built-in IP
front ends, and as the article explains, they are using Internet TV to TV
sets, increasingly. The article also explains that service providers need to
be aware of this trend, to optimize the ad experience.
I think you missed the point.
TVE is rarely used instead of the STB for live TV - in the cases where a TVE
App offers the live stream of the network, that stream is already being
delivered via the MVPD umbilical - in other words it is redundant. For some
networks like ESPN, there are cases when the TVE App offers live streams that
are not available from the MVPD, but this is the exception, not the case for
The reason MVPD subscribers are using TVE apps on the same screen served by a
MVPD STB is to catch-up with current programming they may have missed or to
access library content on demand. As I explained in the previous message, in
essence the connected TV device replaces a DVR and in-band on demand services.
That being said, it is a relatively small step to using TVE Apps as the front
end for IP based live feeds from the MVPDs, or as Charter and TWC have done, to
create an in house App to access in-band IP versions of the QAM channels.
My problem is your seeming lack of understanding of what TVE actually does, and
your recent change of heart about it. For many months you have had nothing good
to say about TVE, decrying the fact that it is tied to an MVPD subscription. I
have repeatedly told you that it enhances the value of a MVPD subscription, as
this article clearly verifies.
Now TVE suddenly makes sense...
You tell us: "This is how transitions happen. TVE used increasingly in place of
the legacy STB."
As I've been trying to get across to you for months, this is how the congloms
are making their transition to the Internet - the walls are not crumbling, they
are moving to a new pipe.
Since I need to belabor, there is no need for the FCC's STB program. In
effect, the standards-based STB, and others that require collusion but
already exist anyway, is already fact.
I said exactly the same thing in several recent posts, as did Larry Thaler. And
now it seems that, in this case, the collusion you claim exists for the little
devices you love to hate is preferred to the collusion the FCC seeks.
The TVE aspect helps this transition. As I already explained many times, TVE
can be leveraged to make this transition happen quickly. It is already in
place, continues to do a "let's make believe that the legacy MVPD garden
walls still exist," so it's a quick way for existing MVPDs to support IP
streaming devices. Without even needing a change to MVPD culture.
I think you are correct that it helps. But it does not solve the problem.
There are no TVE Apps for many of the networks in the MVPD bundles. More
networks are creating TVE Apps, so this issue may disappear over time; or many
of the rerun channels offered today may just go away, as I have been suggesting
And even Charter and TWC are not delivering in band Pay Per View and on demand
services to Roku boxes...yet.
It makes no sense to access the live streams from a server operated by the
network, when those streams already exist inside the (physical) walls of the
MVPDs. If everything in the MVPD plant switched over to IP immediately, it
would still be necessary, or at least more efficient, to deliver these streams
from edge servers co-located at the MVPDs. Likewise, it would make sense to
store recent programs for "catch-up" on these edge servers. Only the library
programming would be served by the remote Network TVE servers.
The type of Apps being built by Charter and TWC to access in-band channels
would appear to be the most desirable solution - these are NOT TVE Apps.
Together these apps provide a comprehensive approach to accessing subscription
content both via the MVPD umbilical and the Internet. And yes, this approach
can employ third party boxes.
And as an aside, the article also explains that watching Internet TV on tiny
screens is losing its appeal, but that use of Internet TV on big screens is
more than making up for it.
The article did say that the share of TVE access from iOS devices has declined
by about 20%. But it also said that TVE access from all devices increased 102%
YOY. Without seeing the Adobe report it is not possible to say with certainty
that iOS usage has declined, or that it is stable or growing at a slower rate
than other platforms. And it could be that people like TVE on their mobile
devices and decided to buy a connected TV box to access TVE on the big screen.
From my own experience, I love the fact that I can access the content I am
paying for on my iOS devices when I am mobile, but I prefer to watch on the big
screen when I am at home. Aa I mentioned, I recently cancelled my DVR service
to save a few bucks; I have started using TVE apps on the big screen in place
of the DVR. This was especially useful to watch replays of college football
games on Sunday mornings via Watch ESPN.
And the article also explained that because the Superbowl was streamed
online, ad supported, viewership of the Superbowl using legacy technology is
on the decline. The article stated that Internet viewing siphoned off
audience from last century broadcast techniques.
The live TV audience for Super Bowl 49 was 114.4 million. The streaming
audience was 1.3 million. The live TV audience for Super Bowl 50 was 111.9
million. The streaming audience was 1.4 million.
You are correct that the article said that streaming was siphoning off the live
TV audience. Unfortunately, the author of that article did not check her facts;
her bias is rather obvious...
As is yours.
All of which does not surprise me one bit, but all of which contradicts much
of what Craig claims. Even for the Superbowl, Craig, people have been
migrating away from QAM broadcast.
Better yet, why are taxpayers being forced to pay for the antiquated FCC?
That's obvious. We still need a spectrum manager.
According to Wiki the FCC has 1790 employees, with an annual budget approaching
$400 million. But wait we need another agency to manage the spectrum used by
the military and government agencies; the National Telecommunications and
Information Agency is spending nearly $40 million annually. Then there's the
Defense Information Systems Agency...
But why listen to me when you can get an expert opinion from The Masked
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts: