[opendtv] Re: Why Apple and Comcast Need Each Other to Reinvent TV
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 08:05:11 -0400
On Apr 9, 2014, at 10:03 PM, "Manfredi, Albert E"
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote
>
> Apple shouldn't worry about that. Apple is an equipment manufacturer. It
> should only worry about providing access to any and all sites that DO have
> those licenses.
Apple is far more than an equipment manufacturer Bert. 10% of revenues come
from non hardware sales. As reported here:
http://www.macrumors.com/2014/02/11/itunes-google-fortune-500/
> Apple's iTunes/Software/Services division grew by 34 percent year-over-year
> after taking into account the 70% Apple pays to developers for App Store
> purchases.
>
> Dediu estimates that Apple's gross revenues from the iTunes/Software/Services
> group are almost $7 billion per quarter, with a total of $23.5 billion for
> 2013. This includes growth categories such as third-party content (+46.6
> percent), Services (+37 percent) and apps, which grew 105 percent
> year-over-year. This division is remarkable when compared to rival Google and
> other Fortune 500 companies.
This is half the size of Googles search business. The total revenue for Netflix
last year was $4.4 billion.
As for providing access to sites that do have licenses for content, it is not
just a question of providing a link, something easy to do with a full function
browser. Apple TV has a very simple App based interface optimized for use with
a small remote with only a few buttons. It does not currently let you surf the
web, but you can do this with an iPad or iPhone and then hit Airplay to get
video content to the TV. I expect Apple to significantly improve on this with
the next release of Apple TV, which will likely support third party apps like
the other iOS devices. Rumors suggest this will happen at the Apple Developer
Conference in June.
> Instead, by continuing their attempts at collusion, Apple will continue to
> block 99.9999 percent of the Internet from its Faithful. And it will help
> perpetuate the old walled garden model.
Please stop this crap Bert. Apple does not block anything, although it does
provide some parental controls in its browsers that allow parents to block
sites. iOS devices do not support Flash, so there are a few sites that have yet
to catch up with reality - most offer h.264 now.
I already demonstrated how easy it is to get content for which there is no
Apple TV app onto the TV, like WITV. But you trash the approach of using a
tablet or phone as a "remote."
> Of course, that's true. Comcast isn't worried about Apple, nor should it be.
> It's instead worried about the other portals, such as Amazon and Netflix,
> which would be their legitimate competition. As many have said, Apple doesn't
> have much to offer Comcast, other than the "caché," as you call it.
More bull Bert.
Comcast is not worried about ANY of these OTT services - they license content
TO THEM, and they provide broadband to the cord cutters as well. NOBODY can
license the content in "the bundle" except for the MVPDs. And Comcast already
has a huge VOD library that competes with the OTT services.
Remember the story about people using the network portals to watch or catch up
with current shows? It was the post when you complained about the length of the
ad breaks. On most of these services you cannot acces new shows for several
days after they have run on the network (for Netflix it can take years). Here
is a rather interesting statistic that points to the reason so many people
still subscribe to Comcast MVPD services.
http://www.multichannel.com/news/content/advanced-ads-40-comcast-vod-viewing-c3-window/356054
> Roughly 40% of VOD viewing on the Comcast platform is in the “C3” window, Rob
> Holmes, vice president of advanced advertising for video at Comcast, said
> Thursday afternoon during a keynote interview with Multichannel News
> editor-in-chief Mark Robichaux. As tracked by Nielsen, C3 refers to the first
> three days following the debut airing of a TV program.
So with a Comcast subscription you can watch this stuff immediately, and 40% do
in the first three days. It's all about getting content when it is "hot."
>
>> 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?
>
> And well-publicized cases where collusion between DoD and suppliers was
> shown, and people went to prison. Exactly.
This is rare. The collusion between the congloms and politicians is completely
LEGAL. This is why companies pad the pockets of the politicians to get
favorable treatment. It's anti-competitive, anti free market, all wrapped up in
stifling regulation. It is how the politicians stay in power.
>
> BUT, more to the point, if there's are cases where this might go "unnoticed,"
> it is collusion between the CUSTOMER (the DoD) and the supplier. If there's
> collusion between SUPPLIERS, as is the case here with Apple and Comcast,
> Craig, I can assure you that there would be no looking aside or hesitating to
> throw people in prison.
What collusion, and what are they doing that is illegal? Comcast buys STBs from
a variety of companies. I have no idea who is manufacturing the X-1 box, but
it is perfectly legal. And if Comcast does a deal to buy boxes from Apple, that
would be perfectly legal as well.
Apple is asking to buy a service from Comcast, a service they likely already
use for the X-1.
If this happens, it is likely that it would be reviewed by the FCC to determine
if it is anti competitive, or raises network neutrality issues. This is not
collusion Bert, it is business as usual. We all would prefer to have unlimited
broadband that does not choke; we are a long way from being there.
> Attempting collusion with Comcast is the subject of this thread. Not merely
> creating limited boxes like AppleTV.
No Bert this thread was an opinion on why Comcast and Apple need each other,
and why it won't happen. You are the one who sees collusion behind every door.
There is plenty of collusion out there, but it is primarily between the
politicians/regulators, the MVPDs, and the content owners, who are well down
the path to moving these oligopolies to the Internet, not to mention
controlling the pipes as well.
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:
