[opendtv] Re: Why Apple and Comcast Need Each Other to Reinvent TV
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 20:08:56 -0400
> On Apr 9, 2014, at 6:02 PM, "Manfredi, Albert E"
> <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Craig, I feel no compulsion to twist the words in favor of Apple. So let's
> quote what the article actually said, and what it means. This is under the
> heading "Why Comcast needs Apple":
>
> The last part first. "... but those in-house efforts will never match the
> value of Apple's brand." What does that mean to you, Craig?
It means that the Comcast brand is in the dumper. They are generally despised,
and people are NOT looking to Comcast for an integrated solution. Or put more
bluntly, people do not want Comcast the be the content gatekeeper for OTT TV,
even if they buy broadband from Comcast.
Apple's brand has tremendous cache' and a very large number of people would be
interested in an integrated solution from Apple, although they would prefer not
to have to buy "the bundle" from Comcast.
> To me it says, the Apple Faithful will be happy to remain loyal subjects of
> Comcast, if the STB they depend on carries the Apple label. Otherwise, if
> Apple steers them more to the Internet, the Faithful will follow Apple and
> not Comcast.
I disagree. People like Apple. They DO NOT like Comcast. They would love an
integrated solution that works well. And they would prefer not writing checks
to Comcast, at least not for TV services.
But if the only way they can get content that is locked up in "the bundle," is
through Comcast, they will continue to hold their nose and write the checks.
Let's look at this a slightly different way. Let's assume the FCC uses this
merger to finally open up the MVPD systems to third party devices, not just
Apple, but everyone. You would still need to buy the bundle from Comcast, but
you could buy the "integration box at Best Buy. Apple would likely get the
premium segment of the market as they do today with the iPhone and iPad.
People would have the freedom to buy the box from anyone, but they ALL would be
holding their noses when they write the check to Comcast.
> The first point on cord cutting. Right now, the AppleTV box only gives access
> to a tiny sliver of what's in the Internet. So it's not an unfettered
> cord-cutting enabler at all ... yet. But it could theoretically become one,
> if not held under the thumb of an MVPD.
You conveniently skipped the most important part. Apple, Google, and the rest
are providing access to what they can license. Until the content congloms
decide to stop protecting the MVPDs, cord cutting will remain a relatively
small percentage of the market. Apple cannot magically let their box access
stuff that they cannot license, so Comcast is not the least bit concerned about
Apple giving people access to the content they control.
> If the AppleTV box remains exactly as limited as it is currently, but also
> behaves as a Comcast proprietary STB, then this describes the Apple box the
> article theorizes, and Comcast could control any future attempts at freedom
> that Apple may potentially be planning for this now-limited box.
>
> NOW that paragraph makes some sense. And all it's saying is, some parties get
> benefits from collusion. But usually not the customer.
The customer would benefit from a well designed, integrated box that provides
access to everything, as long as they do not lease it from Comcast. You still
think that the content owners are just going to kill the goose that keeps
laying those golden eggs. The only way this will happen if the politicians
decide that the goose is cooked.
>
> Craig, there is a reason why, in my line of work, this kind of collusion
> lands people in prison. The reason is that collusion among suppliers is bound
> to hurt the consumer. Both companies "need each other" only to the extent
> that they want to screw the consumer.
Sorry Bert but that is the funniest thing I've heard in a looooooong time.
Your line of work is not much better than this mess. You must deal with the
politicians and all of the crap that goes along with military appropriations
and purchasing. Do you honestly believe there is no collusion in all of that?
$500 hammers and toilet seat come to mind.
Remember all our arguments about natural monopolies and the collusion between
the politicians and the big industrialists that got this ball rolling?
The collusion is between the politicians and the conglomerates that enjoy the
benefits of the oligopolies that the politicians have bestowed upon them. It is
NOT between the conglomerates and the companies that seek to end this collusion.
> In reality, they do NOT need each other, **if** the consumer is to benefit.
> In reality, Comcast needs to expand its Internet capoacity, needs to compete
> against any and all other TV Internet portals, and needs to do so without
> depending on a local walled garden content monopoly.
Something we could agree on. But you are hopelessly naive if you believe they
will voluntarily give up their monopoly. They seek to extend it over the
Internet pipes that they also dominate.
> And Apple needs to quit trying to collude with anyone, and instead provide
> real Internet connectivity for TV sets. With whatever UI bells and whistles
> they can dream up.
What makes you think they are not trying to do this? Although you think it is a
poor solution, I have already demonstrated that I can do almost everything you
seek with the existing Apple TV and my iPad. There is strong speculation that
Apple will introduce the next generation Apple TV at their Developers
Conference in June, along with the developer tools needed to add the
functionality you desire.
> None of this is difficult. I don't begin to understand why you think it is.
> The government is not forcing these companies to collude.
Really?
The government is doing NOTHING to force the conglomerates to open up their
systems and allow real competition. Yet you blame Apple for trying to work with
the conglomerates to improve the customer experience, given the realities they
face.
Did the smartphone improve on the crap that came before? You can thank Apple
for that.
And thank Steve Jobs for having the will to convince AT&T that they should open
up their network to real competition via the broadband Internet access that the
telcos could provide.
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:
