3 ms·

I don't understand how the writer supposes Intel can acquire unbundled content and sell it per-channel or even per-show. Yes, that's the consumer's dream, to b

by fernly 14y ago

I don't understand how the writer supposes Intel can acquire unbundled content and sell it per-channel or even per-show. Yes, that's the consumer's dream, to be able to subscribe to and pay for only one's preferred channels (or even shows), but that well-known desire has been consistently opposed by the cable and satellite systems. And content producers have, I believe, always cooperated with the cable and satellite providers in this. It's one more item for negotiation: "we'll charge less for our material if you'll bundle us with a popular group of channels", etc. Hulu, iTunes, et al only get to rebroadcast single shows only as reruns, so providing a trickle of secondary income but never threatening the main cash cow. So it seems highly unlikely that even Intel could acquire the right to broadcast first-run material in competition with other systems. Also the cable and sat providers have plenty of pricing elasticity acquired from years of semi-monopoly, and could easily compete on price if they wanted to.

apinstein 14y ago
This is what I was wondering, too. It's basically the critical step in being able to make TV a viable product for any* company (cable companies included). The only thing I noticed the writer saying along these lines was that Intel offered billions in long-term commitment to the industry while Apple/Google only offered tens/hundreds of millions. I am not sure I buy it; both Google and Apple know what that market would be worth if tapped (20-30% * enormous number) so I don't think it was a lack of money at the negotiating table. Rather I think the TV is going to be stuck in neutral for a long time due to the complexity of making that work. In music and mobile phones, the N in the N-party negotiations for acquiring a critical mass was much smaller than in the TV business. Unlike the music and mobile industries, there are many more exclusive and long-term contracts that make it hard to maneuver around. The TV problem is certainly not a technology, bandwidth, or market-size (available devices) problem as of the last 2-3 years. Is it possible Intel cracked this nut? Yes. Likely? No.
wmf 14y ago
The only thing I can think of is that they're going to sell TV below cost to get people to switch, then try to renegotiate later.
drakaal 14y ago
Xbox and amazon both offer show subscriptions, why is it hard to believe that Intel can't get the same deal? Channel by Channel is the only "new" thing, and while it might be hard to believe Scripps would unbundle all their channels, it would not be hard to believe that BBC, and Nick, and Disney would be VERY happy to have their channels not muddied with the offerings of "lesser" channels
- fernly 14y ago
  Looking on Amazon I see you are correct in part, you can order a season pass for the current season of, e.g., CSI NY. However, "TV episodes are delivered as soon as possible after the episode is aired by the network (usually the following day)" (Amazon's about-TV-passes page). That's not at all the same as watching it in its "proper" time slot on CBS via DirecTv or Comcast. If Intel offered show subs only on the basis of a 24-hr delay they'd be at a big disadvantage. They could make up some of the difference by offering a really smart dvr-type system with a clean interface (pay for all the Tivo patent licenses and go beyond them), so their set top box knows what you want and gets it automatically with no fuss -- but they'd still be selling yesterday's TV today. And the cable and dish providers can play the smart dvr card as well, with current content. And in any case, there are times when you want this minute's content this minute: news, commentary, sports. When Intel gets a contract to resell ESPN or Fox Sports Net, live, I'll be a believer.

by fernly 14y ago

apinstein 14y ago

This is what I was wondering, too. It's basically the critical step in being able to make TV a viable product for any* company (cable companies included). The only thing I noticed the writer saying along these lines was that Intel offered billions in long-term commitment to the industry while Apple/Google only offered tens/hundreds of millions. I am not sure I buy it; both Google and Apple know what that market would be worth if tapped (20-30% * enormous number) so I don't think it was a lack of money at the negotiating table. Rather I think the TV is going to be stuck in neutral for a long time due to the complexity of making that work. In music and mobile phones, the N in the N-party negotiations for acquiring a critical mass was much smaller than in the TV business. Unlike the music and mobile industries, there are many more exclusive and long-term contracts that make it hard to maneuver around. The TV problem is certainly not a technology, bandwidth, or market-size (available devices) problem as of the last 2-3 years. Is it possible Intel cracked this nut? Yes. Likely? No.

wmf 14y ago

The only thing I can think of is that they're going to sell TV below cost to get people to switch, then try to renegotiate later.

drakaal 14y ago

Xbox and amazon both offer show subscriptions, why is it hard to believe that Intel can't get the same deal? Channel by Channel is the only "new" thing, and while it might be hard to believe Scripps would unbundle all their channels, it would not be hard to believe that BBC, and Nick, and Disney would be VERY happy to have their channels not muddied with the offerings of "lesser" channels

fernly 14y ago
Looking on Amazon I see you are correct in part, you can order a season pass for the current season of, e.g., CSI NY. However, "TV episodes are delivered as soon as possible after the episode is aired by the network (usually the following day)" (Amazon's about-TV-passes page). That's not at all the same as watching it in its "proper" time slot on CBS via DirecTv or Comcast. If Intel offered show subs only on the basis of a 24-hr delay they'd be at a big disadvantage. They could make up some of the difference by offering a really smart dvr-type system with a clean interface (pay for all the Tivo patent licenses and go beyond them), so their set top box knows what you want and gets it automatically with no fuss -- but they'd still be selling yesterday's TV today. And the cable and dish providers can play the smart dvr card as well, with current content. And in any case, there are times when you want this minute's content this minute: news, commentary, sports. When Intel gets a contract to resell ESPN or Fox Sports Net, live, I'll be a believer.