This will fundamentally change the TV-contract led conferenc

Jul 16, 2012, 9:38 AM

realignment talk.

The debate between DirecTV (a provider) and Viacom (a "content" creator) is about finding the right price that providers should pay for content that most people don't watch. That's where bundles are useful. They disguise the price of things we don't use. But with pay TV growth slowing, we're at the edge of a revolution. "DirecTV thinks video streaming is eating away at the ratings of channels like MTV and Comedy Central," Jeff Bercovici writes at Forbes, and the company has "demanded that Viacom give consumers the right to select channels a la carte."

The Aereo story is different. It's not about cable. But it is about distributing broadcast networks online. Once sports fans can get the Olympics and NBA and other shows without a cable package, whenever they want it, it could serve alongside Netflix, Hulu and other services to replace the cable bundle.

The Internet is ruthlessly efficient at stripping cross-subsidies and allowing content to shine on its own. (As Jim Fallows has pointed out, newspapers once paid for international coverage with classifieds and cars. Now, if you want classifieds and cars, you go to a classifieds site or a cars site. Bye-bye, cross-subsidy.) Devices like Aereo combined with cases like Viacom's could be leading to an a la carte model for television. The question isn't really if the Internet's unbundling revolution will visit the television industry but when.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

cable or satellite providers and content providers. With internet distribution growing in its quality and influence to where it now rivals traditional delivery, the carriers are finding it more difficult to charge its consumers the fees like it used to - packaging, bundling networks, etc. The biggest impact this looks to have will be on new networks that now come onto the stage and how they go about getting cable and satellite coverage. It's no secret that the Longhorn Network is floundering about in its home state trying to land carriers.

Cluckers, for instance, like to tout how the new SEC Network is going to generate uber millions more per year per team just by being available. But where do these uber millions come from? There's not a football fairy out there that just rains down revenue - it has to come at the expense of either other cable networks and programming, or a premium charged to subscribers. The carriers are in a position now where they can't simply add programming and up fees accordingly, and are in fact looking for opportunities to cut fees on the current programming it does have. Add in the rising cost and growing use of mobile technology and this battle for consumer dollars increases yet again.

At the end of the day, this shift in carrier business strategy is a blow to the incentive to expand simply on the basis of geography according to new states and their populations, as the actual access to these populations via the media is becoming less certain and not at all a guarantee, especially when having to factor in additional splits in league revenue.

This will fundamentally change the TV-contract led conferenc

Does this mean that I will be able to buy ESPNU

I like how CLOO isnt availble on Comcast cable

Re: I like how CLOO isnt availble on Comcast cable

So how is this changing the tv-contract conferences? What

It illustrates the sea change that is going on with

Thanks! I know I have completely changed and I spend

I had a similar exchange with the editorial staff of the

Re: This will fundamentally change the TV-contract led conferenc

Isn't a bit ironice that a DirectTV banner about viacom is

I dream of the day I can buy channels a la carte

TigerBoard POTD