Distributors might think channel unbundling is a good thing. But it doesn't matter. Programming networks think unbundling is a bad idea, and they control the programming people mostly want to watch. Distributors might think sports programming costs are exorbitant. Program networks do not.
Some video distributors are willing to consider letting consumers buy channels one at a time. Few networks would do so voluntarily.
It isn't so clear how much leverage video distributors actually have, with one interesting exception, namely the efforts by Aereo and Aereokiller to disrupt the broadcast TV distribution system. What makes that a structurally different situation is that cable, satellite and telco providers, plus ISPs such as Google Fiber and others, must have direct contractual relationships with the programming networks.
Aereo and Aereokiller are trying to pioneer a way to deliver video without the need for a direct business relationship with the broadcaster. That's different, way different, in terms of the structure of the relationship.
In a sense, Aereo and Aerokiller operate much as any third party application on the Internet, with no direct business relationship with an access provider.
To be sure, there always is the theoretical possibility of government intervention to force unbundling, but that seems unlikely.
But Aereo and Aerokiller conceivably could provide a breakthrough of sorts. Assume for the moment that the concept survives legal challenge (whether or not either firm emerges in the end to take advantage of the opportunity).
Assume Aereo, Aerokiller or others can then amass a content offering including local TV channels, plus some other popular "cable channels," but without sports networks which drive much of the cost of traditional video subscription packages.
That could create a huge opportunity for lower-cost video services, and that in turn would increase pressure on programming networks to make some accommodations with distributors. Perhaps challenged by potential new lower-cost services, major programming networks would become more flexible about the ways they allow distributors to sell content, possibly including some forms of a la carte access.
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Can Distributors Force Video Channel Unbundling?
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Directv-Dish Merger Fails
Directv’’s termination of its deal to merge with EchoStar, apparently because EchoStar bondholders did not approve, means EchoStar continue...
-
We have all repeatedly seen comparisons of equity value of hyperscale app providers compared to the value of connectivity providers, which s...
-
It really is surprising how often a Pareto distribution--the “80/20 rule--appears in business life, or in life, generally. Basically, the...
-
One recurring issue with forecasts of multi-access edge computing is that it is easier to make predictions about cost than revenue and infra...
No comments:
Post a Comment