On Demand TV "Not So Everywhere"

Comcast Cable subscribers will be able to watch popular cable television series such as HBO's "Entourage" and AMC's "Mad Men" on your computer by the end of the year without paying extra — as long as you're a Comcast Corp. subscriber watching at home.

The initiative is a starting point for Comcast, which hopes to eventually offer what some call "TV Everywhere" service: linear video programming on demand, over any broadband network.

Comcast, wanting to make sure the shows will remain off-limits to non-subscribers, apparently still is working on providing access over competing home broadband systems as well as on the go — at work, on laptops and, one day, over cell phones.

Comcast will be the first cable TV operator to unlock online access to a many cable shows and movies, aiming to replicate what's available on television through video on demand.

Comcast subscribers can initially watch shows and movies only on their home computers after being verified by the cable system. And for now, the online viewing will be restricted to those who also get Internet service through Comcast, and not on any broadband connection.

That might be helpful for Comcast consumers watching on-demand fare at home. It will not be so helpful if those customers would prefer to watch on their mobiles or any other broadband connection.

But it is a start.

Comcast to Use Smarter Phones to Enhance Wired Experience

Devices increasingly are key as service providers seek to add value to their wired and wireless experiences. "Compelling end user devices are definitely part of the story," says Chris Mairs, MetaSwitch CTO.

So it comes as no surprise that Comcast plans to roll out new cordless phones that add email and other Internet features, as Verizon is doing as well.

http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=174853&site=cdn

50 Mbps from Comcast by 2010?

Comcast will offer customers 50 megabit-per-second service, upstream and downstream, available to half its subscribers and homes passed, by 2010, DSLPrime's Dave Burstein argues. What remains unclear is how many customers Comcast or any other cable company will be able to support at those rates, in any single neighborhood of 500 homes or so, unless a very large amount of analog video bandwidth is freed up by moving them to the digital service tiers.

VoIP, Broadband Growth is Slowing

One of the tentative conclusions we might reach from Comcast's fourth-quarter results is that the broadband access market is approaching a saturation point, with slowing net additions. Comcast added about 331,000 broadband subscribers in the three months ending Dec. 31, 2007, down 26 percent from the 450,000 subscribers it added in the third quarter. That's congruent with net adds from telcos as well, and has perhaps a little to do with the economy and slower housing starts. But mostly it is simply that we are approaching the point where nearly every potential customer for broadband already has become one.

VoIP net adds are slowing as well, again confirming a broader trend seen in the consuemr segment of the VoIP business overall. Basically, significant numbers of people who are persuaded VoIP makes sense for them right now have become customers.

After adding 662,000 new subscribers in the third quarter, Comcast’s total net new voice additions dropped to 604,000 in the fourth quarter. None of this is unexpected.

Who Buys Sprint?

With its stock price now so low, it is inevitable that speculation will grow about the fate of Sprint Nextel as an independent company. There has always been some level of speculation about Comcast's possible interest in Sprint. Most likely there also will be talk of what Google might want to do with those assets. There are lots of plusses and minuses for either company.

Given the growing importance of product bundling, as well as wireless, it might make sense for Comcast to have its own wireless assets, it is argued. Comcast is a part owner of some wireless spectrum through SpectrumCo and also uses the "Pivot" offering developed by Sprint to offer a branded wireless service to cable customers.

Then there is the fourth-generation WiMAX asset Sprint could provide. But there are lots of arguments why Comcast can't, or shouldn't consider buying Sprint. Start with the WiMAX network, which obviously would operate outside Comcast's cable franchise territory. There is one big unstated "no no" among leading cable operators, and that is that one never competes with another cable operator. "I have mine, you have yours" has been the rule since the industry began in the late 1940s. Comcast would not likely want to be first to break the taboo.

Comcast shareholders also seem to be terrified that Comcast might embark on just such an expensive acquistion. The last time Comcast tried, attempting to buy Disney, the stock was pounded. Any Sprint acquisition would likely have the same effect this time, and Comcast's stock price already is beaten way down.

Comcast also says it continually monitors what is happening in the wireless industry, and one could make the observation that as crucial as wireless has been as a revenue growth engine, slowing has to occur as the market reaches complete saturation in just a few years. Nor is it clear that cable customers see wireless as a "natural" part of a bundle. That's arguably not the case for buyers of "phone service," who may well see a wireless-broadband-voice bundle as "natural" and "logical."

Google, on the other hand, might also be seen as a logical consolidator. It clearly wants mass in the wireless market, and control of Sprint's customer base would be helpful. The price tag is really low. The 4G network makes much more sense for Google than it does for Comcast, and the cost of the spectrum is already baked into Sprint's share price.

On the other hand, Google wants to work with all the major wireless carriers, and becoming a competitor doesn't help. Nor will Google want to mess with operation of three networks or Sprint's marketing challenges. Still, to the extent that ownership of a national broadband wireless network might be helpful, and if the eventual owner of the 700 MHz C block spectrum is a company like at&t or Verizon, who might drag their feet putting that spectrum into service, Google and other supporters of a mobile Web approach untethered from legacy considerations about voice might want a chance to move ahead with WiMAX using a new business model.

Perhaps Google could even work out a pre-planned buy of all of Sprint, and then immediately spin off the non-WiMAX assets, to avoid becoming a competitor to at&t and Verizon. Other scenarios obviously will make sense to people if Sprint's share price doesn't climb soon.

Verizon Fiber Gamble Pays Off?

As this Wall Street Journal graphic illustrates, shares of Verizon and at&t have outperformed the shares of leading U.S. cable companies over the past year. One suspects that a changed investor understanding of the value of broadband access is at least partly the reason.

Verizon executives, in particular, took lots of heat from the investment community for embarking on what was seen as an expensive and unproven fiber-to-home upgrade. Verizon's compatriots at at&t essentially were rewarded, at least in part, for taking a less-ambitious, less-costly upgrade tack.

The cable companies have been saying for decades that all telco fiber-to-home networks were uneconomic compared to cable's hybrid fiber coax alternative.

And though other forces are at work, investors seem to have warmed to the idea that the upgrades are value-producing, after all. If we have learned anything over the last decade or so, it is that bandwidth demand can change quite sharply, quite quickly, and always, so far, in the direction of more demand.

Getting caught shorthanded could be quite destabilizing.

Also, Verizon has shown that it is able to compete effectively for consumer dollars in the video entertainment area, while the FiOS service has drawn raves from users who have access to it. There might be nothing so churn-reducing as knowing there is one provider of fiber-to-the-home in one's service area.

The point is that Verizon executives were right to stick to their guns, despite the avalanche of criticism they received for building the FiOS network. In the competitive race with cable operators, Verizon might be positioned quite well.

It isn't that cable operators cannot push their upgrades further, by pushing fiber closer to customers. It is that they will face opposition from their investors for the same reasons Verizon got slammed. Investors get nervous every time the cable industry starts talking about the need to increase leverage to upgrade the networks in some serious way. And it wasn't so long ago that the HFC 750 MHz networks were described as "the last upgrade" cable ever would have to make.

It no longer looks that way.

Cbeyond Eyes Pittsburgh: Thank FCC

Pittsburgh is on a short list of new markets Cbeyond now is is reviewing. And the recent Federal Communications Commission decision that several Verizon markets were not yet sufficiently competitive to relax wholesale special access rates (broadband access services such as T1s and DS3s)can be credited, in part, for the interest.

The FCC ruling means Cbeyond can buy T1s at discounted rates, and that's quite helpful for Cbeyond's business model, which typically involves provision of voice and data services to small businesses over one or two T1 lines.

Cbeyond apparently has been considering Pittsburgh for some time but the FCC ruling was pivotal, Cbeyond Vice President and Corporate Counsel Bill Weber says.

"Had that FCC decision gone the other direction, in all likelihood we would have never come to Pittsburgh because it would no longer be possible for us to make money," Weber said.

Cbeyond might not begin operations in Pittsburgh, should it decide to expand there, for as much as two years. Typically a fierce competitor in the small business market everywhere it operates, Cbeyond will run into Comcast in Philadelphia as well as Verizon and other providers.

IP Multicasting Coming?

Not being a "techie," I first became aware of "IP Multicasting" in 2000, when working with some folks developing a streaming media service. As somebody who spent some time in the cable TV business, it made a huge amount of sense. Basically, the idea is that for popular content, say a TV show that millions of people want to watch, one uses multicasting to launch a single stream that all those viewers can watch, rather than millions of discrete streams. Those of you who are network engineers will appreciate the elegance of the way this conserves bandwidth, in the same way that satellites deliver a single stream that millions of viewers can watch. That's the beauty of all multicasting: highly efficient sharing of downstream bandwidth.

Carriers proved resistance to enabling multicasting, however, for all sorts of other reasons, not the least of which was the fear that control over available bandwidth would be lost. But technology journalist Mark Stephens (Robert X. Cringely) argues multicasting is the future of television. Well, at least the future for some sorts of television: the highly-viewed, synchronous sort.

Multicast was built into the structure of the Internet from the very beginning but was generally not turned on because network administrators view it as a resource hog (local storage and resources, not bandwidth, per se).

Cisco long has been a huge supporter of multicast because it requires ever bigger and more powerful routers. That might be true, but multicasting still makes eminent sense as a way to distribute highly-popular video. Sure, there are other sorts of video that have to be unicast because demand is low. But multicasting is quite efficient of bandwidth for highly-popular streams.

Stephens uses a simple example. Say a user wants to see Seinfeld episode 60, and is entitled to do so. That event gets assigned a multicast address.
When the show is made available on a server anywhere on a part of the net that supports multicast, the user receives it. All the routers between here and there look for multicast subscriptions and enable them and the episode is is cached locally.

In order to lower their bandwidth bills, ISPs are trying to take greater control of the way we, their customers, use our "unlimited" bandwidth, says Stephens. But IP multicast offers another tool to do so, and is less bothersome.

Both Comcast and Verizon are rapidly rolling out IP multicast, Stephens notes. The reason is that IP multicast remains a highly-efficient to deliver popular programming, and means most of the linear cable channels. ESPN demands as part of its contracts that much of their programming on MPEG-2-equipped cable systems must delivered at 5 Mbps to 8 Mbps, compared to the 2 Mbps used for most other channels.

Contracts are similiar for premium cable services such as HBO or Showtime.

Internal audience studies at Comcast have shown that 90 percent of the customer base watches 10 percent of the available channels.The problem is that each of use might have a different seven favorites. Also, even if few people actually are watching, cable companies can't turn them off because programming contracts with the studios require carriage.

Multicast solves this problem because it allocates no bandwidth to channels that aren't being watched. It's an interesting business issue: the signals are "carried" but maybe not "broadcast" to consumers who aren't actually "tuned" to the channel.

IP Multicast is an alternative to P2P, in other words.

Digital TV Transition: Not Y2K

In February 2009, all over-the-air analog TV broadcasting will be shut off. Some observers are concerned that consumers aren't acutely aware of the coming changes, resulting in massive disruption of the TV experience on the day of the analog broadcasting shut off.

Maybe not. The only potentially-affected customers are those who rely solely on over-the-air signal reception. Customers of cable, satellite or telco TV services won't have to do anything. To be sure, cable, satellite or telco TV providers will have to supply a new digital decoder if one is not already in place. But the point is that the providers will take care of their own customers, and that's 85 percent to 90 percent of all TV viewers.

Of those customers who have over-the-air connections, those who have bought TVs with digital tuners will not notice anything other than universally-better pictures. So the real issue lies with a single-digits number of viewers who have analog-only tuners.

By the time the transition nears, every mass market electronics retailer will have taken steps to push the sale of digital decoders. So this will not be anything like a feared "Y2K" event.

FCC Reimposes Market Share Cap

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission has voted to impose a limit on the size cable operators can reach on a nationwide basis, limiting any single company from controlling more than 30 percent of total subscribers. The FCC in the past has maintained such a rule, but the limit was invalidated by a court decision in 2001.

Consumer groups say a strict limit on cable television system ownership is needed to prevent them from dominating television programming and Internet services and from blocking video competitors.

As a practical matter, the FCC action could affect merger deals Comcast Corp. would like to pull off, as Comcast already has about 27 percent. The rule might also affect smaller operators like Charter Communications and Cablevision , as it might rule out their acquisition by Comcast.

What's Causing Comcast Slowdown?

Comcast has cut it outlook for 2007 citing “an increasingly challenging economic and competitive environment.” Cable revenue growth will be 11 percent, off from the 12 percent predicted just six weeks ago, representing 500,000 fewer revenue generating units.

Comcast now projects adding six million to 57 million, versus previous guidance of 6.5 million additions. Cable cash flow growth will also be off about a percent from prior guidance at 12 percent.

That isn't what is so interesting. In the past, cable has claimed to be recession resistant, and analysts generally have agreed. In fact, the argument has tended to be that in a tougher economic climate, cable represents even more entertainment value for the price.

To be sure, cable now has many more lines of business, and perhaps some users will consider some of them optional. Perhaps the more advanced video services will be seen as optional if choices have to be made. Perhaps customers will consider trading down from higher-speed broadband packages to slower speeds.

But the larger issue is a matter of weighing the importance of economic and competitive factors. Is it the economy driving the shortfall or is it competition? Maybe consumers are making some tough budget choices.

But what if some of the slowdown is defections to telco services? And how much to Verizon? Is FiOS now a growing factor driving defections?

To be sure, we might not be able to assess the relative competitive impact until there is simply no question that economic softness is causing the slower growth.

Comcast Won't Bid for 700-MHz Spectrum

Some financial analysts and investors had been worried that Comcast would do so, further depressing its battered stock price.

Comcast, Time Warner Won't Bid for 700-MHz Spectrum

Google is in, Time Warner Cable and Comcast are out, at least in terms of submitting an initial bid for 700-MHz spectrum. The big issue is how many of the incumbent wireless carriers will participate in the initial round. Verizon has been seen as a certain bidder, at&t a possible bidder, T-Mobile a potential bidder as well.

Cable companies have bid for spectrum in the past, in partnership with Sprint. So far, though, financial results from the cable-Sprint collaboration in the consumer market have been disappointing, though it remains unclear how much of the sluggishness is attributable to operational or marketing issues, and how much to "core competency" issues.

Up to this point, cablers have been most successful with products that can be delivered over their own plant. Wireless is outside that realm. Wireless might also be an area where telecom companies simply have more "core competence" capabilities that force cable companies to compete where they have few natural advantages.

For the moment, cable executives seem unwilling to acknowledge that wireless services are strategic.

Consumers really don't want a quadruple-play bundle, Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt insists. "I don't think the quadruple play is a big deal," he says. "So far we've not seen a great demand for that." Comcast likewise only says it continues to study the matter of wireless services closely and continuously.

European Commission, FCC Disagree on Competition

As U.S. competitive local exchange carriers and cable companies await key decisions from the Federal Communications Commission, the quantitative tests of "effective competition" are key. And on that score the FCC and the European Commission do not see eye-to-eye. In the video arena, the FCC targets the 30-percent market capture level as denoting "effective competition." In the voice services area the test seems to be 20-percent share loss by incumbents. The EC doesn't even think 50-percent loss of market share by incumbents is sufficient.

The disparities in thinking about what marks "effective" levels of competition leaves at least some room for new thinking on what measures might be required to stimulate even more robust levels of competition. In mass markets, 30 percent quite often is the share held by the market leader.

Cable Industry to Get Clipped by FCC

In a move that will limit business opportunities for Comcast and Time Warner Cable and help independent networks, the Federal Communications Commission is preparing to impose significant new regulations to open the cable television market to independent networks, after determining that cable operators are too dominant in the multichannel video entertainment market.

Satellite and telco competitors should benefit at least in part, as the new rules are expected to force cable-affiliated programming networks to sell their content to competitors at better rates.

The new rules essentially would prevent Comcast from acquiring any other system assets, and limit Time Warner Cable's ability to make large acquisitions, shutting off a revenue growth path for both firms.

One of the proposals under consideration by the commission would force the largest cable networks to be offered to the rivals of the big cable companies on an individual, rather than packaged, basis. Up to this point cable-affiliated programmers have used the "bundled" wholesale tactic to get wider carriage for niche networks that piggyback on the popularity of major networks. In other words, to get the "must have" channels, competing service providers have to buy the weaker networks as well.

The agency is also preparing to adopt a rule that would make it easier for independent programmers to lease access to cable channels. Cable operators oppose that measure because it reduces their control over scarce channel slots.

Though consumer advocates believe the rule changes will lead to lower prices, that might not happen. What might happen is that consumers will be able to buy more targeted channels and packages without the "buy through" requirements that typically result in viewers "paying" for scores of channels they don't want.

In all likelihood, the changes will benefit a small number of viewers that really are interested in just a few channels, or who do not want to buy sports programs. For most viewers, who watch eight to 12 channels fairly regularly, it likely still will make sense to buy a broad package.

ESPN and sports programming in general is a major reason cable prices have risen so much over the past couple of decades, so opting out of ESPN carriage is one way consumers might save some money. Conversely, the rule changes could be damaging to ESPN if any significant number of consumers they can live without it.

Comcast Revs Up SME Effort

Comcast is kicking its business services initiative into higher gear. "Our total commercial revenue passed $100 million for the first time in the third quarter," says Steve Burke, Comcast COO. "We have hired and trained 750 business salespeople and trained 1,200 technicians to install and service business customers."

"Each of our 29 operating regions have now introduced Comcast business class as our commercial brand, supporting data, voice and television," he says. It will take some time for Comcast to iron out all the wrinkles, just as it took some time to fine tune the digital voice effort.

Some of you will remember a few stumbles Cisco took when it got into the IP communications business. The point is that as capable as they are, it will take some time before cable shows its ultimate skill. But it will.

Carrier Fiber Plans Accelerating?

Ofcom, the U.K. communications regulator, hasn't come to terms with BT about ways to speed up fiber to customer investments in the U.K. market. Up to this point BT has objected to earlier proposals that would have applied relatively robust wholesale requirements to new optical access plant. Perhaps there is new hope for some compromise that reassures investors, speeds up fiber deployment and yet offers some hope of a return.

Around the world, fiber to customer deployments seem poised to accelerate, but both competitive providers such as Illiad in France and Verizon in the United States have been punished by the financial community for daring to proceed with such deployments, which are costly, no doubt. U.S. cable companies have the same problem. Every time there is a hint that capital spending plans might intensify, equity values get hit. Comcast appears to be under that cloud as well at the moment.

Irrespective of the competitive elements of such decisions--obviously the providers making the investments want to keep the rewards, if they can be had--these networks can only be built by private capital. And private capital keeps making clear concern about the payback, whether those investments are made by cable companies, incumbent telcos or competitive providers.

At this point it is a simple fact that the investment framework has to reassure the capital markets. Yes, competition is desirable. But that has to be balanced against capital markets that actually loathe competition. Let's hope Ofcom and BT can thread this needle.

Skype Valued at $1.7 Billion

Skype is worth $1.7 billion, based on charges EBay has taken both for the Skype acquisition and payments to outgoing CEO Niklas Zennstrom, who has left EBay.

Since the second quarter, EBay CEO Meg Whitman has made clear its concern that Skype is not delivering financial results on the scale EBay had expected.

At the time of the acquisition, eBay and analysts trumpeted the move as a way to increase higher end auction sales by making it simple to connect buyers and sellers by voice. So far, it appears the synergies haven't materialized in any significant way.

Skype also has more competition these days from alternate providers offering calling from mobile handsets and standard analog telephones that provide a reasonable alternative for some applications.

PC-based calling remains the Skype mainstay, despite the availability of Skype-compliant phones, as probably had to be expected. There's nothing wrong with that. But the consumer electronics industry has proven the difficulty of getting mass adoption of specialized appliances of all sorts.

Then again, unified communications and messaging now have the attention in the business space, while video and audio get the attention in the consumer space. VoIP also is a victim of its own success. Now that it has become a mainstream product, it is, well, just a product.

Also, beyond obvious cost savings in the enterprise, small, medium business and consumer spaces, it might be hard to argue that VoIP has had the impact of text messaging, instant messaging, simultaneous ring, visual voice mail or "presence." True, some of those features are enabled by or enriched by VoIP, but the value is harder to convey in a marketing message, at least in the North American market.

We seem to have moved beyond the simple "cheap calling" stage and into a much more complex "new capability" stage in some sense. But that's a harder, more complex sell with a longer adoption cycle.

On the other hand, the market for IP-based replacement of voice lines is quite large, in comparison.

In its most recent quarter, Skype booked $90 million in revenue. Assume Skype does not worse than that for a whole year, generating $360 million in revenue. Attributing just $20 a month in revenue for U.S. digital voice accounts, and assuming just four million U.S. subs, the U.S. cable industry is earning $960 million a year selling VoIP services.

Even beleaguered Vonage, at its present pace, will book revenue of $784 million over a year.

Internet Phobia?

BT wants to find out why some people, even living in homes with broadband connections, resist using the Internet. About 39 percent of U.K. households do not have Web access. Fear of technology might be one reason, BT theorizes.

To acquaint them with online life, four subjects have been given a broadband link, a laptop, webcam and a digital camera. A two-month training plan has also been developed that will introduce them to what they can do on the Internet.

Writ large, that's one way to deal with any lingering short term "digital divide." Long term, I don't think there's a problem. There used to be a joke several decades ago in the U.S. cable TV industry about "resisters." Basically, the punch line is that the "resisters" are dying. There was a clear shift in the character of demand for television that now has fully established itself, as tough as it might have been to get the new behavior established in the first place.

The same thing is going to happen with broadband. Demand simply is shifting. All of which suggests BT ultimately will move beyond its fiber-to-cabinet; copper drop strategy and move ahead with a full fiber-to-customer upgrade. Like any other tier one service provider it is going to hold out for the most favorable deal it can get from regulators. But there's not much doubt about the long term outcome.

Bandwidth consumption is going to outstrip anything all the wireless networks together can provide, which makes the fiber connections an essential part of the future bandwidth story.

U.S. cable operators used to "diss" switched digital video" as well. Now they're starting to embrace it. They still say in public that fiber-to-home networks are way too expensive, and are unnecessary, from a cable standpoint. That's not necessarily what executives think privately, though.

Nor is it the case that resisters stay that way forever. Those of you with grandparents, who are grandparents or who have pre-baby boomer relatives know that mobile phones, PCs, cable and Internet connections frequently are used daily by people who might be prime "resisters." And the people who move them into the "connected" camp are friends, children and grandchildren. So BT might consider a "friends and family" program that enlists other family members in providing training and support for resisters. That's the way it works anyway.

Verizon FiOS Getting Ready to Blow Down Doors

Readers of ComputerWorld might not be "typical" U.S. consumers. Neither might members of the ChangeWave Alliance, as both will skew much more heavily into the technological savvy end of the customer spectrum. But there's growing evidence that at least for these lead elements of the technology-buying and influencing market, Verizon's FiOS is poised to take significant share.

Not that "satisfaction" is any guarantee of loyalty, but FiOS customers seem significantly happier than Comcast cable modem customers, for example. And on the "I'm going to switch" front, limited FiOS availability, like limited iPhone stock, has depressed sales. That will change, if ChangeWave member sentiments are any indication.

In fact, of users who say they are going to change video providers, the percentage of users who say they intend to switch to FiOS or another fiber-to-customer service is 300 percent higher than the percentage of users that say they will switch to cable for TV service.

So Verizon and at&t simply have to get their networks in front of more customers.