VideoNuze Posts

It's time to say goodbye to 2009 and begin looking ahead to 2010.

2009 was yet another important year in the ongoing growth of broadband and mobile video. There were many exciting developments, but several stand out for me: the announcement and launches of initial TV Everywhere services, the raising of at least $470 million in new capital by video-oriented companies, YouTube's and Hulu's impressive growth to 10 billion streams/mo and 856 million streams/mo, respectively, the iPhone's impact on popularizing mobile video, the Comcast-NBCU deal, the maturing of the online video advertising model, the proliferation of Roku and other convergence devices and the growth of Netflix's Watch Instantly, just to name a few.

Looking ahead to next year, there are plenty of reasons to be optimistic about video's growth: the rollout of TV Everywhere by multiple providers, the proliferation of Android-powered smartphones and buildout of advanced mobile networks, both of which will contribute to mobile video's growth, the launch of Apple's much-rumored tablet, which could create yet another category of on-the-go content access, the introduction of new convergence devices, helping bridge video to the TV for more people, new made-for-broadband video series, which will help expand the medium's appeal, and wider syndication, which will make video ever more available.

In the midst of all this change, monetization remains the fundamental challenge for broadband and mobile video. More specifically, for both content providers and distributors, the challenge is how to ensure that the video industry avoids the same downward revenue spiral that the Internet itself has wrought on print publishers.

Regardless of all the technology innovations, high-quality content still costs real money to produce. If consumers are going to be offered quality choices, a combination of them paying for it along with advertising, is essential. While it's important to be consumer-friendly, this must always be balanced with a sustainable business model. In short, no matter what the size of the audience is, giving something away for free without a clear path for effectively monetizing it is not a strategy for long-term success.

VideoNuze will be on hiatus until Monday, January 4th (unless of course something big happens during this time). I'll be catching my breath in anticipation of a busy 2010, and hope you will too.

Thank you for finding time in your busy schedules to read and pass along VideoNuze. It's incredibly gratifying to hear from many of you about how important a role VideoNuze plays in helping you understand the disruptive change sweeping through the industry. I hope it will continue to do so in the new year.

A huge thank you also to VideoNuze's sponsors - without them, VideoNuze wouldn't be possible. This year, over 40 companies supported the VideoNuze web site and email, plus the VideoSchmooze evenings and other events. I'm incredibly grateful for their support. As always, if you're interested in sponsoring VideoNuze, please contact me.

Happy holidays to all of you, see you in 2010!

Yesterday's Wall Street Journal story, suggesting that CBS and Disney may participate in Apple's planned TV subscription service, caused was yet another tremor in the already chaotic video industry. Though Apple's plans are still preliminary, when I consider the numbers the Journal reported, the company's fuzzy math suggests incumbent distributors have little to worry about just yet.

The Journal said that in "In at least some versions of the proposal, Apple would pay media companies about $2 to $4 a month per subscriber for a broadcast network like CBS or ABC, and about $1 to $2 a month per subscriber for a basic-cable network..." Let's assume the mid-points for both: $3/mo for broadcast networks and $1.50/mo for cable networks. With 4 broadcast networks (assuming NBC participates, which under Comcast ownership is itself unlikely), that would be $12 in fees/mo. Say Apple signed up 12 cable networks, that would be another $18 in fees/mo. Together the $30 in fees/mo equals what Apple is reportedly looking to charge consumers. And this package would only deliver 16 channels, which would induce few consumers to cut the cord. And by the way, there's zero chance that one of those 16 cable channels would be Disney's ESPN, which already gets north of $3/mo/sub in all of its existing affiliate deals.

Given the broadcast networks' woes, it's within the realm of possibility that they would be enticed by the $2-$4/mo, considering it's above the $1/mo/sub that is often bandied about in retransmission consent discussions. Yet, Apple is supposedly talking about delivering the programs commercial-free, which means broadcasters' total revenue per month has to equal or exceed what they're already making per month for the plan to be interesting to them. With $60 billion/year in TV advertising revenue at stake, that's a big gamble for broadcast networks to make. Even the notion that consumers would pay for broadcast programs simply because they're commercial-free is speculative. Most research I've seen suggests the opposite consumer preference (they'd rather stomach ads in exchange for free content).

An even bigger challenge for Apple is to get cable networks to play ball. Starting with my post over a year ago, "The Cable Industry Closes Ranks," I've continued to assert that, despite ongoing skirmishes, cable networks and cable operators are joined at the hip in their desire to defend the traditional multichannel subscription model. In the model, big owners of cable networks bundle smaller channels with bigger, more popular ones, and require that cable operators, telcos and satellite operators take these as a package. This is the backdrop for why consumers often grouse that there are lots of channels, but little on that interests them personally. Meanwhile, TV Everywhere is intended to preserve this model as online viewing expectations build.

It stretches my imagination to believe that big cable network owners (Disney included) are going to allow Apple to cherry-pick which cable networks they want and disrupt the traditional model, especially at a time when cable networks want more, not less control. That cable networks would be willing to put Steve Jobs in the driver's seat of their digital futures is very unlikely. Analogies to the music business only go so far: remember, music companies were already under assault from rampant piracy and reeling under financial pressure when Apple came riding to their rescue. Cable networks feel no such urgency; they've been the brightest star in the media landscape as the recession has worn on.

I've learned never to underestimate Steve Jobs or Apple. But based on what's been reported so far, Apple's subscription TV math seems very fuzzy and any service that emerges from it is likely, for the most part, to be non-threatening to incumbent distributors. And that's before getting to the issues of Apple being a closed system and requiring consumers to buy a proprietary Apple TV box to get their programs onto their TVs. In the budding 'over-the-top" sweepstakes, Apple is one to watch for sure. But there are a lot of variables in play here. It will be fun to see if Jobs has yet another rabbit up his sleeve.

What do you think? Post a comment now.

In Q4 '09, private U.S. broadband and mobile video-related companies raised at least $150.1 million according to company news releases I received and public sources I track. At least 21 private companies disclosed financings in the quarter, ranging in size from $1 million each for Howcast and Mochila to $25 million each for Dailymotion and Delivery Agent. Vevo's raise from Abu Dhabi Media Company, which was not disclosed, may well have exceeded these. Companies across the ecosystem, including services, chips, advertising, DRM, content, analytics and platforms were represented.

The quarterly total was the second best of 2009, following Q3 ($180.9 million). When added to Q1 ($74.8 million) and Q2 ($64 million), it brings the 2009 total to just under $470 million, raised by 64 companies. The relative strength of investments in the sector underscores investor enthusiasm broadband and mobile video despite the ongoing recession and credit squeeze. (Note the quarterly total doesn't include the $2 billion+ private placements that Clearwire, the 4G network provider, announced in Q4 or the $40 million raise that Chinese portal Youku just announced yesterday, nor any other international deals).

In addition to private financings, there were noteworthy deals announced in Q4 as well. At the top of the list is of course Comcast-NBCU, valued at $30 billion. Another significant deal announced in the quarter was Cisco's acquisition of Tandberg, a Norwegian videoconferencing company for $3.4 billion. On a smaller scale, there was Limelight's plan to acquire rich media ad firm EyeWonder for $110 million just yesterday, AEG's acquisition of webcaster Incited Media, Adconion buying the remains of Joost and KIT Digital's rollup of competitors The FeedRoom and Nunet.

Following are the investments that I tracked during the quarter, the date disclosed and new investors identified if applicable. Links are provided to the companies' press releases, or to relevant media coverage if none could be found (note that I haven't verified media coverage with companies themselves). If I've missed anything or you find an inaccuracy, please post a comment.

VMIX ($2M) Oct 1 - Existing investors

Delivery Agent ($25M) Oct 1 - Focus Ventures, existing investors

Howcast ($1M) Oct 5 - Undisclosed investors

Visible Measures (Undisclosed) Oct 6 - DAG Ventures

Personal Web Systems ($1.2M) Oct 7 - Undisclosed investors

ViVu ($3M) Oct 13 - Inventus Capital Partners, DFJ, Quest Ventures

Ooyala ($10M) Oct 13 - Rembrandt Venture Partners, existing investors

Vevo (Undisclosed) Oct 19 - Abu Dhabi Media Company

Dailymotion ($25M) - Oct 22 - French Sovereign Fund, existing investors

Dilithium Networks ($10.9M) - Oct 27 - Existing investors

Vdopia ($4M) Oct 28 - Nexus Venture Partners

ScanScout ($8.5M) - Oct 28 - EDB Investments

Sezmi ($25M) Nov 16 - Existing investors

Zorap ($1.4M) Dec 1 - Angel investors

VisibleGains ($2M) Dec 2 - Existing investors

Mochila ($1M) Dec 7 - Existing investors

Widevine ($15M) Dec 14 - Liberty Global, Samsung

Cloud Engines ($3M) Dec 14 - Undisclosed

Ace Metrix ($6M) Dec 16 - Leapfrog Ventures, existing investors

Jinni ($1.6M) Dec 16 - DFJ Tamir Fishman Ventures

Quantenna ($4.5M) Dec 17 - Existing investors

As 2009 winds down, in the spirit of accountability, it's time to take a look back at my 5 predictions for the year and see how they fared. As when I made them, they're listed below in the order of most likely to least likely to pan out.

1. The Syndicated Video Economy Accelerates

My least controversial prediction for 2009 was that video would continue to flow freely among content providers numerous third parties, in what I labeled the "Syndicated Video Economy" back in early 2008. The idea of the SVE is that "destination" sites for online audiences are waning; instead audiences are fragmenting to social networks, mobile devices, micro-blogging sites, etc. As a result, the SVE compels content providers to reach eyeballs wherever they may be, rather than trying to continue driving them to one particular site.

Video syndication continued to gain ground in '09, with a number of the critical building blocks firming up. Participants across the ecosystem such as FreeWheel, 5Min, RAMP, YouTube, Visible Measures, Magnify.net, Grab Networks, blip.TV, Hulu and others were all active in distributing, monetizing and measuring video across the SVE. I heard from many content executives during the year that syndication was now driving their businesses, and that they only expected that to increase in the future. So do I.

2. Mobile Video Takes Off, Finally

When the history of mobile video is written, 2009 will be identified as the year the medium achieved critical mass. I was bullish on mobile video at the end of 2008 primarily due to the iPhone's success and my expectation that other smartphones coming to market would challenge it with ever more innovation. The iPhone has continued its amazing run in '09, on track to sell 20 million+ units. Late in the year the Droid, which Verizon has relentlessly promoted, began making inroads. It also benefitted from Verizon highlighting AT&T's inadequate 3G network. Elsewhere, 4G carrier Clearwire continued its nationwide expansion.

While still behind online video in its development, mobile video is benefiting from comparable characteristics. Handsets are increasingly video capable, just as were computers. Mobile content is flowing freely, leaving the closed "on-deck" only model behind and emulating the open Internet. Carriers are making significant network investments, just as broadband ISPs did. A range of monetization companies have emerged. And so on. As I noted recently, the mobile video ecosystem is healthy and growing. The mobile video story is still in its earliest stages, we'll see much more action in 2010.

3. Net Neutrality Remains Dormant

Given all the problems the Obama administration was inheriting as it prepared to take office a year ago, I predicted that it would not expend energy and political capital trying to restart the net neutrality regulatory process. With broadband ISP misbehavior not factually proven, I also thought Obama's predilection for data in determining government action would prevail. However, I cautioned that politics is a tough business to predict, and so anything can happen.

And indeed, what turned out is that in September, new FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski launched a vigorous net neutrality initiative, despite the fact that there was still little data supporting it. With backwards logic, Genachowski said the FCC would be guided by data it would be collecting, though he was already determined to proceed. In "Why the FCC's Net Neutrality Plan Should Go Nowhere" I argued, among other things, that the FCC is way off the mark, and that in the midst of the gripping recession, to risk the unintended consequences that preemptive regulation carries, was foolhardy. Now, with Comcast set to acquire a controlling interest in NBCU, net neutrality advocates will say there's even more to be worried about. It looks like we can expect action in 2010.

4. Ad-Supported Premium Video Aggregators Shakeout

The well-funded category of ad-supported premium video aggregators was due for a shakeout in '09 and sure enough it happened. Players were challenged by little differentiation, hardly any exclusive content and difficulty attracting audiences. The year's biggest casualty was highflying Joost, which made a last ditch attempt to become a white label video platform before being quietly acquired by Adconion. Veoh, another heavily funded player, cut staff and changed its model. TidalTV barely dipped its toe in the aggregation waters before it became an ad network.

On the positive side, Hulu, YouTube and TV.com continued their growth in '09. Hulu benefited from Disney coming on board as both an investor and content partner, while YouTube improved its appeal to premium content partners and brought on Univision and PBS, among others. Aside from these, Fancast and nichier sites like Dailymotion and Babelgum, there isn't much left to the aggregator category. With TV Everywhere services starting to launch, the opportunity for aggregators to get access to cable programming is less likely than ever. And despite their massive traffic, Hulu and YouTube have significant unresolved business model issues.

5. Microsoft Will Acquire Netflix

This was my long ball prediction for '09, and unless something happens in the waning days of the year, I'll have to concede I got this one wrong. Netflix has remained independent and is charging along with its own streaming "Watch Instantly" feature, now used by over half its subscribers, according to recent research. Netflix has also broadened its penetration of 3rd party devices, adding PS3, Sony Bravia TVs and Blu-ray players, Insignia Blu-ray players this year, in addition to Roku, XBox and others. Netflix is quickly becoming the most sought-after content partner for "over-the-top" device makers.

But as I've previously pointed out, Netflix's number 1 challenge with Watch Instantly is growing its content selection. Though it has a deal with Starz, it is largely boxed out of distributing recent hit movies via Watch Instantly by the premium channels HBO, Showtime and Epix. My rationale for the Microsoft acquisition is that Netflix will need far deeper pockets than it has on its own to crack open the Hollywood-premium channel ecosystem to gain access to prime movies. For its part, Microsoft, locked in a pitched battle with Google and Apple on numerous fronts, could gain advantage with a Netflix deal, positioning it to be the leader in the convergence era. Meanwhile, others like Amazon and YouTube continue to circle this space.

The two big countervailing forces for how premium video gets distributed in the future are TV Everywhere, which seeks to maintain the traditional, closed ecosystem, and the over-the-top consumer device-led approach, which seeks to open it up. It's hard not to see both Netflix and Microsoft playing a major role.

What do you think? Post a comment now.

Following are 4 items worth noting for the Dec 14th week:

1. New pre-roll data shows format's strength - Though many in the industry still scorn the pre-roll ad, this week 2 ad networks, ScanScout and YuMe, released data showing its continued prevalence as well as innovation that's improving its performance. ScanScout said its "Super Pre-roll" unit, which allows for integrating overlay graphics on the video that viewers can engage with, is driving 350% higher click-through rates compared with typical pre-rolls. In this example for Unilever's Vaseline, note how the creative nicely reinforces the messaging. The enhanced interactivity feels like the start of a new trend; another pre-roll that offers something similar is Innovid's iRoll unit. ScanScout separately announced this week a host of new premium publishers have joined its network.

Meanwhile YuMe released its Video Advertising Metrics Report for Jan-Nov '09, which showed that, at least within YuMe's network, 90%+ of all ads served were pre-rolls, with 30 second spots generating a 1.8% overall click-through rate, a 50% higher rate than the 1.2% that 15 second spots achieved. The volume of 30 second ads also grew 50% faster than 15 second volume in Q3 '09. Kids age 6-14 achieved a 3.7% click-through rate, the highest of any group, which YuMe's Jayant Kadambi told me could be explained by the more engaging nature of child-focused ads (e.g. click to play games, etc.). Jayant believes the sizable amount of existing creative for TV ads that can be easily repurposed for online is a key reason pre-rolls continue to dominate.

2. Paramount clipping site powered by Digitalsmiths is slick - I was impressed with a demo of Paramount Pictures' newly launched ParamountClips.com site that I got this week. The site is only open to Paramount's business partners, allowing them to either choose from an existing stock of clips from over 80 different Paramount movies, or to easily create their own. Desired clips are moved into a shopping cart and released for download, per previously determined licensing terms.

The site is powered by Digitalsmiths, which indexed all of the scenes from the movies using their proprietary recognition process, and then generated meta-data for each, which makes searching a snap. The new self-service site replaces the laborious previous process of a Paramount staffer working with each partner to extract jus the scene they want. As a result, a new highly-scalable licensing opportunity has been created. Paramount is taking advantage of Digitalsmiths VideoSense 2.5 release announced last week that is focused on clip generation, for both on demand and live streams, improved asset management and more integrated reporting.

3. Thwapr launches beta of mobile-to-mobile video sharing - Continuing the buildout of the mobile video ecosystem, Thwapr, a new mobile-to-mobile content sharing platform, launched its beta this week. Duncan Kennedy, Thwapr's COO told me that although there's been a proliferation of video capable smartphones, there's currently no easy, fool-proof way of sharing videos from one device to another (e.g. from an iPhone to a BlackBerry). Enter Thwapr, which lets the user upload videos to Thwapr and then have them shared with their contacts. Thwapr identifies the receiving phone's "user agent" so that it can dynamically decide the optimal format the video should be viewed in. The user simply clicks on a link and the video plays. I can attest that it worked beautifully on my BlackBerry Pearl.

Thwapr's raised about $3 million from angels and has a very strong team, including Duncan and others who worked on Apple's QuickTime. I'm a fan of how video, social/sharing and mobile intersect to create new opportunities, though there are business model unknowns. For now Thwapr is focused on a free ad-supported model, with a particular emphasis on geo-tagging videos to make advertising especially appealing for local merchants. Still, YouTube has illustrated how difficult it is to monetize user-generated content. Thwapr also envisions a business-grade option for real estate, travel, dating type applications which sound promising. I wonder too about whether a freemium model should be explored, though Duncan said Thwapr's analysis suggested this would be a relatively small opportunity. We'll see how things shape up.

4. Next week is 2009 wrap-up week on VideoNuze - Keep an eye on VideoNuze next week, as I'll be summarizing Q4 '09 venture capital investments and deals in the broadband/mobile video space, reviewing my 2009 predictions and looking ahead to what to expect in 2010. It's been an incredibly active year and based on the pre-CES briefings I've been doing, there's lots more to look forward to next year.

Enjoy your weekend!

Daisy Whitney and I are pleased to present the 44th edition of the VideoNuze Report podcast, for December 18, 2009. This will be the last podcast for 2009, and we'd both like to say a huge thanks to everyone who's been listening in this year.

This week I start things off by providing further detail on my experience so far with Comcast's TV Everywhere initiative, Fancast Xfinity TV (or "FXTV" as I call it for short), which was released in beta to 14 million subscribers this week at no additional charge. On the whole I think it's a respectable effort, and in the big picture, is exactly what the company should be doing with online distribution. The main challenge for improving it is getting lots more content from ad-supported and premium cable networks, so that users are more likely to find what they're looking for. For all kinds of reasons, this won't be easy, but if any company can make it happen, it's surely Comcast.

Then Daisy reviews her '09 predictions and shares her "New Media Minute Awards for Excellence." She recognizes Kaltura, 5Min, boxee, Quantcast, and  number 1 pick, MyDamnChannel. All have excelled this year, attracting new venture financing, signing new deals and growing their business. Daisy is particularly proud of MyDamnChannel because it also achieved profitability this year. Listen in to find out more.

Click here to listen to the podcast (14 minutes, 18 seconds)

Click here for previous podcasts

The VideoNuze Report is available in iTunes...subscribe today!

Simon Fuller's 19 Entertainment announced a new reality series yesterday, "If I Can Dream" which will rely on streaming, mobile and social media to dramatically enhance audience engagement. "If I Can Dream" will follow five young actors as they pursue Hollywood fame and fortune. The series will be distributed on its own site and through Hulu, MySpace, Clear Channel and others.

While the show will have a traditional 30 minute television-show format, it's clear that Fuller plans to use technology to differentiate the show from the myriad other reality offerings. All of the actors' moves will be streamed live using new sensor technology and audiences will interact with the actors via text, blogs, Twitter, MySpace and other in real-time. For sponsors Pepsi and Ford, we'll no doubt see new brand engagement opportunities. Some of this has already been done with other shows, but Fuller appears to be looking to take it to a whole new level.

Hulu's role is also intriguing. I haven't thought of Hulu as having a place in broadband-only original productions, but as I consider this move, it makes sense. Though deal terms were not disclosed, Hulu is likely putting up no money, and is instead bringing its substantial traffic and promotional capabilities to the partnership. It costs Hulu nothing to give "If I Can Dream" visibility on the site, so it's in a strong position to help establish the show. With the company's reach into brands and agencies it can sell ads without bumping into broadcast networks' sales reps.

Amid much anticipation, Comcast launched its "Fancast Xfinity TV" (my shorthand will be "FXTV") service yesterday. FXTV is Comcast's TV Everywhere offering and it will initially be available only to the company's approximately 14 million "dual play" (digital cable + broadband Internet access) subscribers. Comcast is keeping a "beta" label on FXTV for now, to give it some time to work out the kinks. As a Comcast triple-play customer, I have access to FXTV and I played around with it yesterday and last night. While there's plenty of room for improvement, overall FXTV is off to a respectable start.

When dual play customers now visit Fancast they are immediately notified through a prominent pop-up that there's "Great News for Comcast Customers" about online access to over a 1,000 new shows and movies. "Get started" prompts the user to enter their Comcast.net email address and password, then a 17.5MB download begins which includes the Move Networks player and an Adobe Air application. After naming your computer (you're allowed up to 3 devices to access FXTV), the site reloads with the new FXTV Beta branding. All of that worked fine for me.

A prominent window at the top of the page promotes 4 current TV shows, but FXTV misses a big opportunity to immediately demonstrate its value by oddly showcasing just 1 program (TNT's "Men of a Certain Age,") that's not sourced from Hulu. Savvy users will know the rest are already freely available there. Why not promote 4 programs that are only available to FXTV users? And why not include messaging like "Exclusively for FXTV Users!" to remind users of the payoff for having just gone through a download process?

On the positive side, below this window, FXTV promotes programming from premium channels HBO, Starz and Cinemax. As a non-subscriber to Cinemax, when I clicked on "Juno," which had a little key icon, FXTV's authentication process kicked in, prompting a message to subscribe to Cinemax to watch. However, when I clicked "Learn more" my popup blocker interceded which meant I needed to disable it and then reload the page. The Cinemax promotional page that loads is generic from the Comcast.com web site, featuring a graphic of "Gran Torino" and promotions for 3 other movies. Comcast has a golden upsell opportunity when FXTV users click on premium content. It would no doubt improve its conversion ratio if the landing page were customized to load a graphic of the original movie or show selected at FXTV, well merchandised with trailers, clips and other information. A special offer/reward for FXTV users would also help.

Back on the FXTV site, below the premium channel promotions is an area for Full Episodes, categorized by "Celeb News," "The Hot List," "Dramas," etc. Once again, many of the thumbnails link to content that is freely available online and to all other Fancast users. Once again, I'm surprised that Comcast isn't doing more to promote programs that are only available to FXTV users, making it more explicit what's special about FXTV.

I clicked and watched parts of a number of shows and in general my experience was positive. I've read other reviews describing buffering delays, but I didn't experience any issues, or at least anything different than I typically do when starting videos at other sites. One thing Comcast disclosed on the press call yesterday was that FXTV would be available to dual play subscribers outside their homes. Recall that in the 5,000 person trial, users could only access the service from within their homes, so this is a major step forward. I haven't yet tested FXTV remotely, but will do so while in Florida next week.

The biggest challenge FXTV faces is content availability, particularly from the ad-supported cable networks. For example of last week's top 10 rated cable shows, only TNT's "The Closer" and "Men of a Certain Age" are available on FXTV. Among the top 10, there are no sports (football or WWE) or kids shows like "Sponge Bob" (Nick) or "Phineas and Ferb" (Disney) available. Even for #10 show "Keeping up With the Kardashians" the most recent episodes are from Season 2, back in May 2008 - and this is a show that's on E! Entertainment, a channel that Comcast itself owns! There are no episodes offered of my favorite cable show, AMC's "Mad Men."

The content selection on the premium channels HBO, Starz and Cinemax (note Showtime is not yet available on FXTV) is better, but not eye-popping. For example, the only episodes of HBO's "Entourage" that are available are from Season 2 in 2005, despite the fact that Comcast's CEO Brian Roberts specifically demonstrated and highlighted the idea that all episodes of Entourage would be available when he showed the service at the Web 2.0 conference less than 2 months ago. For some reason HBO must have pulled the rights to Entourage in this time.

A lot of the questions on the press call Comcast conducted yesterday focused on content availability and it's clear that obtaining the rights to distribute the full slate of cable programs online is devilishly complex. To be sure, Comcast has made progress, saying it has 27 networks are supplying programming, totaling 12K titles. There's no distributor in a better position to make online distribution happen than Comcast, yet as I wrote last week about Nielsen not yet being able to collect and then synthesize online viewership, Comcast (and other TV Everywhere providers) are subject to forces beyond their control.

Yet another complicating factor is how advertising in FXTV will work. Comcast said that for now, while "nobody really knows what works best," each network will be permitted to experiment with ad loads. It's not clear how long this will go on, nor what role Comcast will play to guide networks to a certain load. In the meantime though, the downside is that the user experience is inconsistent from one network to another. For an offering that's free to subscribers that's not a big drawback, but the lack of consistency does chip away at least a little bit from the overall experience.

Taken together, Comcast deserves credit for getting FXTV out the door just 6 months since announcing it this summer, which is light speed in cable TV terms. There are lots of ways it can and will be improved upon. Gaining credibility with content providers, so that FXTV can beef up its library is priority #1. As I've been saying for a while now, conceptually FXTV is right on all fronts - it preserves the paid consumer model for content providers, offers users enhanced value and helps Comcast and other providers defend against cord-cutting. Hopefully Comcast and other providers will sufficiently invest in these services to let them reach their full potential.

What do you think? Post a comment now.