Widespread Demand for Online Video, IF Some Conditions are Met

Some 87 percent of U.S. consumers buy multichannel television, but 56 percent of respondents to a recent Harris Poll say they would stop buying multichannel TV and watch on the Internet if certain conditions were met.

Some 44 percent said they would stop buying cable, satellite or telco TV is all of the programs that they wanted to watch were available, for no incremental charge, online. That should come as no surprise.
"Free" is a highly-popular consumer price point.

But "day and date" issues are important as well. Some 25 percent said they would stop buying multichannel TV if they could watch online at the same time the programs were run on a subscription TV service.

Some 16 percent would do so if they could get all the programs they wanted to watch for a small fee online and another 16 percent said they would do so if it was less complicated to set their TV up with Internet.

Looking by age, majorities (59 percent to 62 percent) of multichannel video subscribers between the ages of 18 and 54 said they would be interested in giving up their cable TV if certain conditions were met.

Since it is highly unlikely, perhaps nearly impossible that content owners and distributors are going to go along with the "free or low cost" availability of popular content, video cord cutting on a massive scale seems unlikely. The most likely scenario is a shift to "get Internet access, with some restrictions, if you keep buying what you already do, and possibly pay a bit more."

That's the only scenario that would satisfy content owners and major distributors, no matter what consumers might want.

WOULD STOP PAYING FOR CABLE IF…

"Which of the following, if any, complete this sentence for you? Please select all that apply.

I would stop paying for cable television in favor of watching TV shows on the Internet if…"

Base: All U.S. adults

	Total	Age				Gender
		18-34	35-44	45-54	55+	Male	Female
	%	%	%	%	%	%	%
Have cable TV (NET)	87	85	88	88	89	87	87
Have any interest in giving up cable TV (NET)	56	62	62	59	45	60	52
I could get all the programs I wanted to watch for free online	44	48	47	50	36	47	41
I could get all programs online at the same time that they air on television	25	33	28	25	17	27	23
I could get all the programs I wanted to watch for a small fee online	16	23	20	13	10	20	12
It was less complicated to set up my television with Internet	16	14	19	19	15	17	15
Something else	5	8	5	5	3	6	5
Nothing - I have no interest in giving up my cable TV	30	20	22	27	43	25	34
Not applicable - I already gave up my cable TV in favor of watching TV on the Internet	2	3	4	1	1	2	2
Not applicable - I do not have cable TV	13	15	12	12	11	13	13

Harris Interactive: Harris Polls > The Evolution of Watching Television

TV Viewers are Distracted

U.S. TV viewers increasingly are "distracted" while watching TV, a survey by the Harris Poll indicates. Most Americans also surf the Internet (56 percent) and many do other activities like read a book, magazine or newspaper (44 percent), go on a social networking site (40 percent) or text on their mobile phone (37 percent).

Three in ten say they shop online while watching TV (29 percent). Some seven percent say they have read a book on an eReader device while watching TV while 44 percent they have read a traditional book, magazine or newspaper while watching TV.

Some 56 percent report they have surfed the Internet on a tablet computer while watching TV, 18 percent saying they have done so on their mobile phone.

Some 30 percent of respondents say they do something else while watching TV, while 14 percent say they do not do any other activity while they watch TV.

That does not conclusively suggest that TV has become less compelling, but likely more that other pursuits have become equally compelling. The availability of other convenient devices also suggests there is limited room to create "Internet experiences" on the TV. People already have lots of ways to do that without messing around with their TV screens.

TABLE 1

ACTIVITIES DONE WHILE WATCHING TV

"Which of the following, if any, do you ever do while watching TV? Please select all that apply.

While I watch television I also…"

Base: All U.S. adults

	Total	Age				Gender		Education
		18-34	35-44	45-54	55+	Male	Female	H.S. or less	Some college	College grad +
	%	%	%	%	%	%	%	%	%	%
Surf the Internet using a computer	56	68	59	55	45	53	59	52	57	62
Read a book, magazine or newspaper	44	42	41	44	47	37	51	35	50	51
Go on a social networking site (e.g. Facebook, Twitter)	40	57	47	36	21	34	45	33	44	46
Text on my mobile phone	37	57	46	38	14	35	39	28	41	47
Shop online	29	40	33	27	19	27	31	22	31	39
Surf the Internet using my mobile phone	18	30	23	15	6	20	16	10	19	29
Read a book on an eReader device (e.g. Kindle, Nook)	7	6	8	9	7	6	9	5	10	9
Surf the Internet on a tablet computer (e.g. iPad, Xoom)	7	7	13	4	5	8	6	6	5	11
Something else	30	32	26	28	30	26	33	26	33	32
None	14	8	12	16	20	18	11	19	12	10
Not applicable - I do not watch television	3	5	3	2	2	4	2	3	2	4

Harris Interactive: Harris Polls > Distracted TV Viewers

LightSquared Deal with Sprint: Possible Strategic Implications?

LightSquared reportedly has reached a 15-year deal with Sprint Nextel Corp. to share network expansion costs and equipment for the planned wholesale LightSquared Long Term Evolution network.

The deal, valued at as much as $20 billion, would provide revenue for Sprint, a faster buildout for the LightSquared national LTE network, and also makes Sprint a wholesale customer of LightSquared as well. Early reports had suggested that Sprint would receive both cash and capacity on the LTE network as part of the deal. Sprint deal.

Beyond the important tactical considerations (revenue for Sprint, faster buildout at lower cost for LightSquared), there are potential strategic angles as well. The deal immediately confirms that Sprint will migrate at least some of its services to the LTE air interface.

But that also raises more questions about the fate of its Clearwire investment and strategy. Sprint consummates LTE  deal with LightSquared

There is some growing speculation that Clearwire is getting ready to sell itself in any case. So what might that mean? Would Sprint abandon Clearwire and work with LightSquared instead? Would Sprint acquire the remainder of Clearwire it does not already own?

Sprint owns about 54 percent of Clearwire already, and if it acquired the rest of Clearwire, Sprint would have all the spectrum it needs to build a new Long Term Evolution network, in addition to the rights to use some of the LightSquared spectrum.

Some of us have been puzzled by the LightSquared plan to use satellite backhaul for LTE traffic. The satellite latency would not be an issue for some applications, but voice and other real-time applications would suffer, without some possibly-expensive processing operations.

Would it make sense for LightSquared to use its satellite capabilities for remote locations, while using Sprint's optical backbone for voice and real-time services? And is LightSquared a way for Sprint to separate itself from Clearwire? See Sprint, Clearwire tensions

Or would Sprint simply allow another buyer to get the Clearwire spectrum? That would raise cash for Sprint, but obviously create another national 4G network.

LightSquared faces some immediate buildout pressures. The Federal Communications Commission has required Harbinger build out its network to provide coverage to at least 100 million people in the U.S. by the end of 2012, 145 million people by the end of 2013, and 260 million people by the end of 2015.

Credit Suisse analyst Jonathan Chaplin estimated earlier this month that LightSquared has about $1 billion of cash on hand at present and would have to pay Sprint about $10 billion over eight years for the right to ride on its network. Clearwire cash needs.

Also, is there a viable way for Sprint to leverage both Clearwire and LightSquared to create a bigger presence in the wholesale part of the mobile business? Both Clearwire and LightSquared have formal wholesale business plans, while Sprint arguably has been the most willing of the national mobile carriers to explore wholesale business models.

If the AT&T acquisition of T-Mobile USA succeeds, Sprint will face two formidably larger competitors and will have incentives to try something a bit more daring. Sprint has in the past been the national wireless provider most willing to work with cable operators and other competitors, for example.

Might Sprint once again try to become the carrier of choice for "all the rest of us?" Historically, wholesale offers lower operating costs, if also lower margins. But the overall broadband access markets are likely to see significant revenue changes in coming years, and the wholesale segment could grow.

So will new revenue models, including any number of services crafted by third parties and business partners. That would seem to create more room for wholesale to work. Will Sprint try?

What is Valuable to a Brand "Fan" on Facebook?

Product news and information, contests, prizes, sales, coupons and other offers are among the top reasons consumers become "fans" of brands on Facebook, according to a study sponsored by the World Federation of Advertisers.

http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/29305.asp?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ImediaConnectionAll+%28iMedia+Connection%3A+All+Stories%29

Why Marketers Shouldn't Waste Their Time With QR Codes

Overuse of a new technique or technology in the marketing business is nothing new. New technology tends to follow a predictable path from discovery, to overuse and disillusionment, and eventually, a proper or right level of use. But not every innovation proves to be highly valuable, on an extended basis. Some think the QR code is one of those questionable long-term innovations.

Quick response code, those two-dimensional bar codes you see on magazine pages relatively frequently, are one way an offline media can incorporate online content and interaction. That's a good thing.

But some would argue that the problem is that consumers don't much care, while marketers do care. The issue isn't whether tools to introduce more online interaction are a good thing--it is a good thing--but whether this is the right, or "best" approach.

"QR codes can actually impede the conversation," some would argue. First, you have to assume not everyone knows what they are, so you have to explain how they work. Then, you just hope people are willing to download the app and go through the hassle of getting it to work.

Then and only then will they be exposed to whatever brilliant website you have put together. And the majority of the time, this process neglects the critical issue of why someone would want to do any of this in the first place. Right now the answer to that seems to be, "Because marketers thinks it's cool."

Why Marketers Shouldn't Waste Their Time With QR Codes