Showing posts sorted by date for query a la carte. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query a la carte. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Tuesday, December 17, 2024

If 90% of Your Business Model is Threatened, You Must Change

It’s fairly easy to explain why cable TV programming networks face an existential crisis. Shrinking audiences attack 85 percent to 90 percent of the revenue base. 


Their revenue is driven by advertising (perhaps 40- to 45 percent of total) and affiliate fees paid by distributors (about 50- to 55 percent). The former is dependent on the volume of viewers, which is declining every year. The latter is dependent on the number of potential viewers a distributor can deliver (subscribers). 


Both are essentially “potential attention” metrics and are declining. Subscriber volume provides potential larger audiences while also making any particular distributor more or less valuable as a platform for such potential audiences. 

If subscription decline is irreversible, then so are advertising and affiliate fee revenues. By some estimates, video streaming revenue already has surpassed the level of linear video subscription revenue. 

But most content business models also have been disrupted by the internet and digital content distribution. So far, most of the angst about artificial intelligence has been on its potential to disrupt content industry jobs by automating the functions. 


Industry

Traditional Business Model

Disrupting Technology/Trend

New Business Model





Cable TV

Subscription-based service for linear channels

Streaming services (Netflix, Hulu, etc.), cord-cutting

Subscription-based streaming services, ad-supported streaming, live TV streaming

Long Distance Calling

Per-minute charges for long-distance calls

Voice over IP (VoIP) technology

Flat-rate long-distance plans, VoIP services

Local Telephone Service

Landline phone service with monthly fees

Mobile phones, VoIP services

Mobile phone plans, VoIP services

Postal Services

Physical delivery of letters and packages

Email, digital messaging, online shopping

Digital delivery of mail, specialized shipping services

Retail Shopping

Physical stores, in-person shopping

E-commerce, online marketplaces (Amazon, eBay)

Online shopping, omnichannel retailing, subscription boxes

Music Distribution

Physical media (CDs, vinyl records)

Digital music distribution (iTunes, Spotify)

Digital music streaming, music subscription services

Newspapers

Print newspapers, subscription-based model

Online news, digital subscriptions

Online news, digital subscriptions, ad-supported news

Magazines

Print magazines, subscription-based model

Digital magazines, online content

Digital magazines, online content, ad-supported content

Movie Theaters

In-theater movie screenings

Streaming services, video-on-demand

Streaming services, video-on-demand, premium video-on-demand

Home Video

Physical media (DVDs, Blu-rays)

Digital video rental, streaming services

Digital video rental, streaming services, video-on-demand


While an apt observation, it is the disruption of existing business models which will have the greater impact. It might be easy to suggest that AI will restructure many business processes in content industries. What is harder to ascertain is the ultimate impact on business models.


The mere fact that AI creates content instead of humans does not necessarily disrupt the revenue model, only changing the cost model. Distribution could be an area of greater change, though, as most content industry disruptions are founded on distribution (display) technology changes. 


Television disrupted movie theater exhibitions. Cable TV disrupted over-the-air broadcasts. The VCR enabled the home video business, the DVD improved it; video streaming ended it. Audio tape, then compact discs largely displaced the records business. But music streaming largely displaced all physical media distribution. 


Industry

Traditional Business Model Characteristics

Potential AI Disruption

New Business Model Characteristics

Content Creation

Human creators, editors, and producers

AI-generated content, automated editing, and production

AI-assisted content creation, personalized content experiences, dynamic content adaptation

Content Distribution

Traditional media channels, physical distribution

AI-powered personalized content delivery, direct-to-consumer distribution

AI-driven content recommendation systems, dynamic pricing, real-time content adaptation

Content Consumption

Passive consumption, linear storytelling

Immersive experiences, interactive storytelling, personalized content

AI-powered interactive content, virtual and augmented reality experiences, personalized content journeys

Copyright and Intellectual Property

Traditional copyright laws, licensing fees

AI-generated content ownership, copyright infringement challenges

AI-powered copyright management systems, dynamic licensing models, new revenue streams from AI-generated content

Advertising

Traditional advertising models (TV, print, digital)

AI-powered targeted advertising, programmatic advertising

AI-driven personalized advertising, dynamic ad placement, brand experiences powered by AI

Education and Training

Traditional classroom-based learning, standardized content

AI-powered personalized learning, adaptive content

AI-driven learning platforms, personalized tutoring, skills-based learning

Entertainment

Traditional entertainment formats (movies, TV shows, games)

AI-generated entertainment, interactive gaming, virtual reality experiences

AI-powered interactive entertainment, personalized gaming experiences, virtual and augmented reality content


The cumulative impact of digital media and internet distribution has enabled a shift to on-demand consumption and away from linear formats across virtually all media. That, in turn, has altered the advertising and affiliate revenue basis for linear video subscription services. 


U.S. subscriptions, for example, peaked around 2010 and have been steadily declining since then. 


source: IBISWorld 


Though there are many reasons for the lower demand for linear video subscription services, the threats to advertising and affilate fee revenue streams are the most obvious.


Challenges for Linear TV & Cable TV

Advantages of Streaming Alternatives

Rigid Scheduling: Viewers must watch programs at set times.

On-Demand Viewing: Content is available anytime, allowing flexibility.

High Subscription Costs: Cable packages are expensive and include unwanted channels.

Lower Cost Options: Streaming services offer affordable subscription plans and bundles.

Ad Interruptions: Traditional TV has frequent and lengthy ad breaks.

Ad-Free or Limited Ads: Streaming platforms offer ad-free tiers or fewer interruptions.

Lack of Personalization: Limited ability to customize programming to individual tastes.

Personalized Recommendations: AI algorithms suggest content based on viewing habits.

Limited Mobility: Watching requires a TV or cable box at a fixed location.

Cross-Device Access: Streaming is available on phones, tablets, smart TVs, and laptops.

Outdated Content Delivery: Programming is tied to fixed schedules, making discovery difficult.

Content Libraries: Vast libraries of current, past, and exclusive content are accessible anytime.

Declining Viewer Engagement: Younger audiences are abandoning traditional TV.

Appeals to Younger Audiences: Streaming platforms cater to younger demographics with interactive and diverse content.

Complicated Bundles: Bundled cable TV packages force customers to pay for unwanted channels.

A La Carte Options: Consumers can subscribe only to the services or shows they want.

Geographical Restrictions: Content availability is often tied to specific regions.

Global Accessibility: Streaming platforms offer consistent access to content worldwide.

Slower Technology Adoption: Traditional TV struggles to incorporate new technologies quickly.

Cutting-Edge Technology: Features like 4K, HDR, offline viewing, and voice control enhance the experience.


Friday, May 31, 2024

What is StreamSaver's Business Purpose?

StreamSaver is a new streaming bundle including Peacock, Netflix, and Apple TV that available exclusively to Xfinity customers, in the same way that Xfinity mobile services are only available to Xfinity customers. 


But it might be reasonable to suggest the new bundle will boost Peacock and Apple TV market share by only single digits.


Netflix, Amazon Prime are the clear leaders leaders, with Disney (Disney, Hulu, coming ESPN service) poised to emerge at the top as well. All the others remain well into secondary or tertiary roles, and the new bundle likely cannot move the needle very much.


Of course, Comcast might see the value not so much in Peacock market share growth (Comcast owns Peacock) but in the value of customer acquisition and retention for its overall subscription businesses (mobile service, home broadband, linear TV).


As with Comcast's mobile phone service, the new bundle can be purchased only by existing Comcast customers (home broadband or linear video service). So the effort is primarily to increase the value of Comcast services.


As often is the case with bundles, the value is partly the price. The advantage of product bundles for the end user (aside from the bundles of features) is almost always the lower price. Streamsaver features the ad-supported versions of the services at $15 per month, where the a la carte prices of those services cost between $6 and $10 a month each.


A reasonable question is how many accounts, and how much revenue, that new service could attract.


Perhaps the easiest assumption is that Xfinity customers who already buy Peacock, Netflix and AppleTV+ will be most inclined to switch. Perhaps next most likely to adopt are Xfinity customers who already buy one or two of those services (Netflix as the presumed anchor and leader) and who can be convinced to the other services. 


The other issue is that the new bundle can only be purchased by Xfinity customers buying either home broadband or Xfinity linear video services. And that means the bundle can likely only be considered by people living in roughly half of U.S. homes. 


The potential market issues can be illustrated by Comcast’s similar approach to selling mobile phone service. 


The context is that Comcast will only sell the bundle to its existing fixed network customers. Since the Comcast fixed network might only reach 45 percent of U.S. dwellings, that puts an upward limit on accounts. 


Then the issue is how much market share Comcast can take from the mobile market leaders (Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile) that collectively have about 97 percent of the installed base of customers. 


In the third quarter of 2023, Comcast’s Xfinity mobile service had about six million accounts, with revenue growth near 25 percent per year. 


According to the CTIA, there are 523 million mobile devices in the U.S. market with 97 percent of adults owning a mobile phone. Using a (definition of “adults” as those 18 or older, the U.S. Census Bureau estimates that in 2020, adults represented 78 percent of the total population, or 258.3 million people.


If 97 percent of those people have mobile phones and service, that implies something on the order of 250.55 million accounts. If correct, Comcast has an installed base of about two percent of the market. 


The U.S. Census Bureau estimates there were around 140.7 million housing units in the United States in 2020, about 90 percent occupied. So assume dwellings with people living in them at about 126.6 million, with an average occupancy of 2.5 people, for a total of 316.58 million potential mobile accounts. Assume 97 percent have such accounts, for an implied subscriber base of around 307 million, excluding separate business accounts. 


So the installed base of accounts might range from 250 million to 307 million. Assume Comcast’s network passed about 57 million homes (including small business accounts, that figure could reach 80 million locations, by some estimates. Assume it continues to sell exclusively to its own customers. Assume that its installed base of customers is about 55 percent of homes passed (customers buying internet access or video services). 


That suggests terminal adoption ranging from 31.4 million to 44 million locations. If each location features 2.5 accounts, that implies a theoretical terminal customer base of perhaps 78.5 million to 110 million accounts. 


Those figures are the theoretical maximum, keeping in mind that the leading mobile service providers today have installed bases in the 30 percent range each. According to Statista, in May 2023, mobile market shares were:

Verizon: 34.9%

AT&T: 32.2%

T-Mobile: 29.5%

Other Carriers: 3.4%. 


Many observers believe Xfinity therefore will not reach terminal share as high as 55 percent, even within its own service territory, as its fixed network reaches perhaps 45 percent of occupied homes. So with the present policies, Comcast cannot sell to 55 percent of the market. 


With those conditions, were Comcast to reach relative parity with any of the leading mobile service providers, it might hope to reach a ceiling of about 14 percent total market share (assuming 30 percent as a reasonable share within its sales territory, representing 45 percent of locations). 


The new streaming bundle will face the same geographic limitations as does mobile service. On the other hand the streaming market still is growing, and is not mature, as is mobile service. And, obviously, the attraction of the bundle--for Peacock and AppleTV--is the potential to increase share in a market dominated by Netflix, Amazon Prime and Disney. 


Streaming Provider

Estimated Market Share

Netflix

32%

Amazon Prime Video

22%

Hulu

14%

Disney+

12%

Other (HBO Max, Apple TV+, Peacock, etc.)

20%


But the bundle also increases the range of products and value for Xfinity customers. Right now, it is hard to say whether ultimate value comes from growing Peacock share or increasing the value of the Xfinity service overall (reduced churn, for example) or serving as a means of supporting higher revenue per account. 


It might be reasonable to assume all three sources of value will be in play. There are lots of moving parts, though, as most of the other leading or contending streaming firms also are moving to create bundles. 


The coming Disney and Warner Bros. Discovery bundle combines Disney+ with Hulu (including both ad-supported and ad-free options) and Warner Bros. Discovery Max content. 


Also, a new sports streaming service featuring content from Disney (through ESPN), Fox, and Warner Bros. Discovery, Venu Sports, also is launching. Unknown at this point is whether the coming ESPN streaming service will be available as part of that bundle. 


The differences are that StreamSaver can only be purchased by Xfinity customers. The other bundles can be bought by any U.S. consumer.  


Still, the streaming bundles seem to suggest that Netflix and Disney could emerge as the tentpoles of the business. 


China Approaches AI Diffusion as "Asian Tigers" Approached Economic Development

Among the differences between the U.S. and China frameworks for fostering widespread use of artificial intelligence are the roles of state s...