Posts for 'FCC'

  • 5 Items of Interest for the Week of Jan. 10th

    Even though I was very focused this week on the CES "takeaways" series, there was still plenty of news happening in the online and mobile video industries. So as in the past, I'm pleased to offer VideoNuze's end-of-week feature highlighting 5-6 interesting online/mobile video industry news items that we weren't able to cover this week. Enjoy!

    Level 3 fights on in Comcast traffic dispute
    Level 3 is showing no signs of relenting on its accusations that Comcast is unfairly trying to charge the CDN for Internet traffic it delivers to Comcast's network. In an interview this week, Level 3 said it may use the "Open Internet" provisions of the FCC's new network neutrality rules to press its case. Level 3's challenge is coming at the 11th hour of the FCC's approval process of the Comcast-NBCU deal; it's not really clear if Level 3 is having any impact on slowing the approval, which appears imminent.

    Comcast-NBCU deal challenged over online video proposal
    Speaking of challenges to the Comcast-NBCU deal, word emerged this week that Disney is voicing concern over the FCC's proposed deal condition that would force Comcast to offer NBC programming to any party that had concluded a deal with one of NBC's competitors for online distribution. The Disney concern appears to be that the condition would have an undue influence on how the online video market evolves and how Disney's own deals would be impacted. While the FCC should be setting conditions to the deal, the Disney concerns highlights how, in a nascent, fast-moving market like online video, government intervention can cause unintended side effects.

    YouTube is notching 200 million mobile video views/day
    As if on cue with my CES takeaway #3, that mobility is video's next frontier, YouTube revealed this week that it is now delivering 200 million mobile views per day, tripling its volume in 2010. That would equal about 6 billion views per month, which is remarkable. And that amount is poised to increase, as YouTube launched music video site VEVO for Android devices. YouTube clearly sees the revenue potential in all this mobile video activity; it also said that it would append a pre-roll ad in Android views for tens of thousands of content partners.

    Google creates video codec dust-up
    Google stirred up a hornet's nest this week by announcing that it was dropping support for the widely popular H.264 video codec in its Chrome browser, in favor of its own WebM codec, in an attempt to drive open standards. Though Chrome only represents about 10% market share among browsers (doubling in 2010 though), for these users, it means they'll need to use Flash to view non-WebM ended video. There are a lot of downstream implications of Google's move, but for space reasons, rather than enumerating them here, check out some of the great in-depth coverage the issue has received this week (here, here, here, here).

    Netflix usage drives up Canadian broadband bills
    An interesting test of Canadian Netflix streaming showed that a user there might have to pay an incremental $12/month under one ISP's consumption cap. That would be more than the $7.99/mo that the Netflix subscription itself costs, leading to potential cord-shaving behavior. This type of upcharge hasn't become an issue here in the U.S. because even ISPs that have caps have set them high relative to most users' current consumption. But if streaming skyrockets as many think it will, and the FCC allows usage-based billing, this could fast become a reality in the U.S. as well.


     
  • Net Neutrality: Here Today, Gone Tomorrow?

    Though the FCC passed new net neutrality rules yesterday, the fight is far from over. Republicans immediately vowed to block the rules when they take over the House in January, and threats of industry lawsuits flew. Even liberal supporters of net neutrality were unhappy that the rules didn't go far enough. While the rules are here today, whether they will be tomorrow is very much an open question.

    While everyone agrees that a well-functioning Internet is core to American society and the economy, net neutrality's challenge from the start has been between those who believe in pre-emptive regulations because big ISPs can't be trusted, vs. those that don't see a sustained pattern of ISP misbehavior warranting proactive FCC involvement.

    continue reading

     
  • 6 Key 2011 Trends in Online and Mobile Video

    Yesterday Colin Dixon from The Diffusion Group and I presented a webinar describing our 6 key trends for 2011 in online and mobile video. Colin is one of the sharpest analysts of the pay-TV and online/mobile video industries and we had no shortage of ideas to sort through. Our list is a joint effort, and during the webinar we each presented the 3 trends we felt the strongest about. In today's post I share and explain each one. At the end of the webinar we conducted a poll asking attendees whether they agreed or disagreed with our predictions. I've noted those results in bold font. If you want to download the slides and/or hear more of our detailed discussion, just register for the on-demand version of the webinar and you'll be emailed a link.

    continue reading

     
  • 5 Items of Interest for the Week of Nov. 29th

    Following the Thanksgiving break last Friday, VideoNuze's end-of-week feature of curating 5-6 interesting online/mobile video industry news items that we weren't able to cover this week, is back. Read them now or take them with you this weekend!

    continue reading

     
  • New Net Neutrality Ad Campaign Draws in Google's Co-Founders

    When it comes to net neutrality, I've learned to expect the unexpected, as any sense of a formal process was long-ago abandoned in favor of an ad hoc free-for-all by interested parties. That was epitomized by the recent partnership between Google and Verizon which joined up to go rogue by proposing their own net neutrality recommendations in August. Though they thought they were moving the ball forward on the issue, they were promptly scorched by net neutrality advocates for endorsing vague private Internet lanes and exempting wireless from any new regulations.

    Now the latest chapter in the net neutrality battle is unfolding with an online ad campaign, featuring an online petition directed to Google's co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page, to live up to Google's corporate motto "don't be evil" by walking away from the Verizon deal. The campaign is funded by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and other advocacy groups like MoveOn and Free Press. The petition's web site states that over 334,000 people have signed on so far. Ironically the ads are being bought through Google itself, and on Facebook.

    continue reading

     
  • 5 Items of Interest for the Week of Sept. 6th

    Though it was a short week due to the Labor Day holiday, there was no shortage of online video industry happenings this week. As I've been doing each of the last few Fridays, following are 5-6 noteworthy industry stories for your weekend reading pleasure.

    Ooyala Raises $22 Million to Accelerate Global Expansion
    Online video platform Ooyala's new $22 million round is a bright spot in what's been a pretty slow quarter for online video industry private financings. Ooyala's new funds will help the company grow in the Asia-Pacific region. Ooyala said it is serving 550 customers, double the level of a year ago.

    Google TV to Roll Out World-Wide Next Year
    Even though the first Google TV-enabled devices have yet to be deployed, Google CEO Eric Schmidt said this week that he envisions a global rollout next year. The connected device landscape is becoming more competitive for Google TV given the growing number of inexpensive connected device options.

    Business Groups Question Net Neutrality Rules
    Three pro-business trade groups urged the FCC to drop its net neutrality initiative, citing the "flourishing" broadband market and concerns that regulations will curtail new investments and hurt the economy. It seems like everyone has a different opinion about net neutrality, so the consensus needed to move regulation forward is still down the road.

    ESPN, YouTube Link Up for Promo Campaign
    This week ESPN and YouTube kicked off their "Your Highlight" campaign, enticing ESPN viewers to upload their own sports clips, with the best ones to be shown on SportsCenter. Then the best of the best will win a trip to ESPN's studios to watch a SportsCenter taping. It's a great promotional concept, using online video to further invest ESPN viewers in the brand. Whoever thought it up deserves a shout-out.

    Life Without a TV Set? Not impossible
    Another interesting data point to tuck into your back pocket: according to a 2010 Pew study, just 42% of Americans feel a TV set is a "necessity," down from 64% in 2006. Pew interprets this as a loss of status for the TV, as other devices like computers and phones have become video capable. The perception of convergence is taking root.


     
  • Google and Verizon Net Neutrality Proposal Comes With Big Loopholes

    Responding to rampant rumors last week concerning a potential side-deal on net neutrality, Google and Verizon held a conference call this afternoon unveiling a "Legislative Framework Proposal" by their respective CEOs Eric Schmidt and Ivan Seidenberg. The proposal is meant to influence other net neutrality stakeholders, including the FCC. Google and Verizon insisted there's no companion business deal between them.  

    On positive side, the companies' proposal tries to break the Washington net neutrality logjam by endorsing an open Internet backed up with a sensible, transparent and non-discriminatory approach that mainly leaves it up to networks to act responsibly. However, the proposal comes with at least 2 big loopholes which until clarified, will no doubt undercut a lot of the proposal's credibility.

    continue reading

     
  • 5 News Items of Interest for the Week of Aug 2nd

    In addition to producing daily original analyses focused on the evolution of the online/mobile video industry, another key element of VideoNuze is collecting and curating links to industry coverage from around the web. Each week there are typically 30-40 stories that VideoNuze aggregates in its exclusive news roundup. Many readers have come to depend on this curated news collection to ensure they're always up to speed.

    Now, to take news curation up another level, on Fridays I'm going to test out highlighting 5-6 of the most intriguing news items of the week. In case you missed VideoNuze for a day or two during the week, you can check in on Friday to see the these top 5-6 industry stories of the week, some of which VideoNuze may have covered itself. Synopses and implications are noted. Enjoy and let me know your reactions!

    Wired to Produce Short Films For iPad
    The tech magazine recruits Will Ferrell for four short videos that lampoon inventions that failed to take off. Exclusively for its iPad app. More evidence of print pub capitalizing on video.

    Motorola and Verizon team up for TV tablet
    Enjoying success with its Droid smartphones, Motorola now looks to challenge the iPad, with its own tablet device, using Google's Android OS. A partnership with Verizon could mean new online video features for the phone giant's FiOS service. Another sign of evolution in the pay-TV business.

    Bewkes: Rental Delays From Netflix, Redbox Is Paying Off For DVD Sales
    The 28-day DVD delayed release window Warner Bros. struck with Netflix earlier this year is helping the studio gain better sales for films The Blind Side and Sherlock Holmes. The deal helps Netflix position itself as a valued partner in the midst of declining DVD sales.

    Dish to stream live TV on iPad, other devices
    Dish Network takes place-shifting to a new level with plans for an iPad app that would allow remote streaming, likely using its Sling technology. Subscription TV, mobile video viewing and cool devices converge.

    FCC Calls Off Stakeholders Meetings
    The FCC's private net neutrality negotiations are off the rails as a reported bilateral deal between Verizon and Google causes controversy. Next steps are unknown as the FCC's plan to keep Internet playing field level hits a major pothole.
     
  • With Google-Verizon Deal, Net Neutrality Uncertainty for Video Providers Rises

    A possible private deal between Google and Verizon, for how the latter will handle traffic on its wired and wireless networks, means the prospect of the FCC brokering a net neutrality consensus among key stakeholders just got less certain. The inconsistency that could result isn't good news for online and mobile video content providers seeking assurance that delivery of their content won't be affected by network operators either technically or financially.  

    To put this possible deal in context, the FCC has been trying to forge a net neutrality agreement among key parties in the wake of a recent court decision that severely curtailed its regulatory authority. The talks have been conducted in secret and the parties have pledged not to disclose their progress. The policy goal is to ensure network owners don't bias for or against any kind of traffic, so that the Internet's longstanding openness will be perpetuated.

    continue reading

     
  • Net Neutrality Takes Another Twist

    Another day, another twist in the ongoing net neutrality saga. Yesterday brought news that the FCC plans to redefine broadband transmission from an unregulated information service to a regulated telecommunications service under what's known as Title II. The FCC's move came several weeks after an appellate court ruled that the FCC did not have authority to sanction Comcast for blocking BitTorrent traffic.

    No surprise, industry groups were quickly up in arms about the policy change, concerned about the uncertainty it brings (with legal challenges surely forthcoming), plus the implications for continued network investments. Like everything else in Washington, net neutrality is now gripped by a partisan divide. Republicans are against any new regulations and Democrats favor them.

    As I've written before I continue to believe a policy of regulatory restraint, accompanied by vigilance, is best for now. The broadband ISP business is for the most part quite competitive and ISPs have huge incentives not to block certain traffic. For now I continue to think letting the market sort this out is the best approach.

    What do you think? Post a comment now (no sign-in required).
     
  • Hulu Missed Its Window for Subscription Success

    Unless Hulu has something very unpredictable up its sleeve in the $9.95/mo subscription service it's rumored to begin testing in May, the bad news for the site is that it has already missed its window of opportunity for subscription success. In a one sense it's not Hulu's fault; as a startup 3 years ago, it had to choose what strategy to focus on and execute. Hulu chose the free, ad-supported route, with widespread distribution that has made it the 2nd most-used video site.

    The problem is that the world has changed significantly since Hulu was started 3 years ago, and launching a successful online subscription service now is far harder to do now than it would have been then. Here are some of the top reasons why:

    Subscription competition - 3 years the online video subscription field was wide open, but now there's Netflix to contend with. As the company's blowout Q1 '10 results amply demonstrate, Netflix is firing on all cylinders.  By providing unlimited streaming as a value add even for its $8.99/mo subs, Netflix has muddied the waters for any would-be online-only subscription competitor, which has to articulate a value prop to prospects of why they should pay the same or more for online-only access, for what will likely be a smaller catalog initially. Netflix also has the device partnerships, 28-day studio deals for more content, well-baked UI/recommendations and deep financial resources. 3 years ago it had none of this; back then it was still imposing confusing online usage caps and pursuing its own set-top box with LG Electronics.

    TV Everywhere - 3 years ago cable operators were contemplating their navels when it came to online video delivery, now with TV Everywhere they have a game plan (though admittedly not a lot of actual success just yet). For most cable networks, preserving their relationships in the cable ecosystem is paramount. Taking a leap by licensing content for a Hulu subscription service isn't going to be very appealing. Absent cable content, Hulu will be pitching a monthly subscription to archived commercial free broadcast network programs; that's a pretty narrow value prop.

    Comcast-NBCU deal - 3 years ago Comcast was still licking its wounds from its ill-considered bid for Disney; now it has a deal to acquire NBCU, one of Hulu's original partners and a top-tier cable network owner. While Comcast will say all the right things during the deal's review process, I've wondered how long Comcast would even retain its Hulu stake once the deal is completed. Hulu's free "ad-lite" model is antithetical to Comcast's belief in subscriptions and bottom line accountability. A Hulu subscription service is unlikely to help either. Why would Comcast want another competing subscription offer in the market, much less one that would tempt would-be "cord-cutters?"

    Lack of ownership will - 3 years ago, NBCU and News Corp were full of platitudes about their new online video baby. But in addition to NBCU's changed status, News Corp has become the most vocal content provider for the paid online content model. MySpace's travails are rumored to have soured Rupert Murdoch's appetite for chasing fickle online users. Meanwhile, Disney, the last partner to the Hulu venture, is plenty interested in subscriptions, but it wants to offer them directly. Then there's Hulu's key financial partner, Providence Equity Partners. I've never quite understood their investment decision given Hulu's limited exit opportunities, but one thing's for sure - they're unlikely to be motivated to help fund the considerable development and marketing expenses Hulu must undertake to make subscriptions succeed.

    Retransmission consent - 3 years ago, the idea of broadcasters getting paid for their content still seemed like a stretch. But broadcasters are winning their chosen high-stakes battles, and given their success, are far more inclined to pursue a wholesale model (i.e. getting distributors to pay them monthly) than back a retail, subscription model. Plus, a Hulu subscription model departs from the message of free broadcast service that the broadcast lobby is using with the FCC and Congress to justify why it should retain its excess spectrum, rather than yielding it to mobile data providers under the National Broadband Plan's reclamation program.

    User expectations - As if these weren't enough to contend with, the single biggest impediment Hulu faces is likely itself. Having invested its brand heavily in the free ad-supported positioning (and computer-based viewing only) Hulu lacks what experts would call "brand permission" to now pursue subscriptions. Companies are frequently chastened to find out what their customers really think when stretching for new products or business models. Moving customers from free to paid is one of the hardest things any company can do (just ask YouTube which is attempting to do the same); trying to pull it off from a cold start is nearly impossible in my mind. Hindsight is 20-20, but what Hulu probably should have done 3 years ago is offered a "freemium" model that would have immediately conditioned its users to thinking Hulu stands for both free and paid.   

    I've learned to never say never in this business, but to succeed, Hulu has to surmount the above challenges and more. If it can do so, it will be a significant win for the company. If it can't it will be yet another reminder of how treacherous things are even for well-funded startups trying to navigate a quickly-shifting competitive landscape.

    What do you think? Post a comment now (no sign-in required).
     
  • Verizon CEO: No Mobile Spectrum Shortage, FCC Should Butt Out

    Were you as surprised as I was to read yesterday that Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg is questioning the need to reclaim broadcast spectrum for mobile data use? Instead he believes that ongoing advances in technology will address any potential bandwidth squeeze. His comments represent a weird reversal because Verizon has been (for obvious reasons) a key proponent of gaining access to this spectrum. As I wrote a few weeks ago, the bandwidth reclamation concept is one of the most contentious in the FCC's recently released National Broadband Plan.

    I'm not clear on what's going on here. The iPad's release this past weekend is yet another reminder of the infinite mobile data uses ahead. Meanwhile recently-amped up rumors that Verizon will get getting the iPhone later this year means lots of data increases from Verizon itself. Throw in the coming proliferation of Android devices as yet more evidence of mobile data's rise. So why would Seidenberg now cast doubt on the spectrum reclamation effort? Beats me. Any ideas?

    What do you think? Post a comment now (no sign-in required).
     
  • Hurray - Net Neutrality is Dead, For Now

    Yesterday's ruling by the D.C. Court of Appeals that the FCC didn't have the authority to cite Comcast for blocking BitTorrent traffic effectively kills "net neutrality," at least for now. That's a good thing and everyone who's interested in seeing continued innovation by broadband ISPs and new video competitors should be cheering the decision. I've been writing about the FCC's unnecessary net neutrality intrusion into the well-functioning ISP market for several years (here, here, here), and it's very encouraging to see this unanimous court decision.

    For those not familiar with net neutrality, it would give the FCC the ability to regulate how broadband ISPs manage their networks in order to ensure that all content is delivered without any bias. Since net neutrality advocates have lacked any sustained pattern of broadband ISP misbehavior to point to as evidence for net neutrality's need, they have instead relied heavily on the argument that pre-emptive regulation is required because ISPs can't be trusted to keep their networks open, and that potential conflicts of interest (many ISPs like Comcast are also big video providers) will inevitably lead ISPs to favor their own services over others.

    Concerns about impending, yet hypothetical ISP "fast lanes and slow lanes" have made great soundbites for net neutrality proponents and politicians. And yes, Comcast bungled how it blocked the BitTorrent traffic, and then how it explained itself. There have also been a handful of other ISP infractions. However, if the 70 million plus broadband households were asked to name a single instance where they felt their ISP degraded their access to a certain web site or video service, I am convinced that very few would be able to think of any.

    This reflects the fact that broadband ISPs maintain open networks, rightfully policing against illegal behavior or disproportionate use. The ISP business works quite well, and in most parts of America, substantial competition exists between 2 or more providers (with more wireless ones on the way). Further, new video services and devices, which depend on ever-faster, and open broadband networks continue to proliferate, suggesting ample confidence by their backers that robust network access will be available. Consider: did Steve Jobs hesitate to introduce the iPad, which is heavily video-centric, out of fear for network availability? And how about Netflix, ABC, Discovery, MTV and other video providers who quickly introduced apps for the iPad - did they balk due to network concerns? Of course not.

    Earlier this week, I calculated that at least $277.4 million was raised by early stage video companies in Q1 '10, bringing the total to at least $570.2 million over the last 4 quarters, despite the worst market circumstances in ages. As I've said many times, investors and entrepreneurs are undeterred though there are no formal net neutrality rules.

    It's also important to remember that broadband networks have been built with private capital, in the process creating tens of thousands of well-paying technical and customer service jobs, plus countless other by the content and applications providers who freely ride these broadband pipes each day. And innovation continues, with numerous announcements of 50 and 100 megabit/second services now available. Tinkering with this vibrant sector of the economy with new regulations introduces the risk of unintended consequences.

    Rather than presuming that broadband ISP will disrupt their own success formula by arbitrarily blocking supposed competitors, the FCC would be better off staying relentlessly vigilant of ISP behavior. If ISPs do misbehave - thereby offering clear evidence of the need for regulation - the Congress and the FCC should be prepared to act quickly. Until then net neutrality remains a solution in search of a problem, and Washington has plenty of real problems to work on without tackling imaginary ones.

    What do you think? Post a comment now (no sign-in required). 

     
  • Review of FCC's National Broadband Plan Begins; Questions on Set-Top Box Language Should be Asked

    The FCC's new "National Broadband Plan" is now beginning the process of congressional review, which may result in a number of changes. According to this B&C article, Republicans have concerns with proposed revisions to the Universal Service Fund and the FCC's proposed mechanism for reclaiming up to 500 megahertz of broadcasters' spectrum over the next 10 years. Separately, Republicans also object to the FCC's net neutrality proposals.

    In my "first look" analysis of the Broadband Plan a couple of weeks ago, one thing I didn't take note of was a small provision in the plan to "change rules to ensure a competitive and innovative video set-top box market" Several VideoNuze readers brought that provision to my attention, wondering what it really means. I'm not 100% sure myself, but it would seem to benefit Google's new "Google TV" Android-based set-top box, which I wrote about earlier this week. Congress should be sure to question the FCC closely about its set-top goals.

    What do you think? Post a comment now (no sign-in required).
     
  • Google's 1 Gigabit Fiber Experiment is a PR Bonanza

    I was deeply skeptical of Google's recently announced 1 gigabit/second fiber-to-the home experiment, but I will concede this: it appears to be influencing the broadband Internet access discussion and is turning into a PR bonanza for the company. Consider 2 of the latest examples: Comcast, America's largest broadband ISP, announced this week that it would make 100 megabit/second speeds available to all customers within 12-18 months and the FCC's new broadband plan set a goal of 100 million U.S. homes having 100 mbps within 10 years and that all schools, hospitals and government building should have 1 gbps access - goals that seem influenced by Google's experiment.

    Meanwhile, as my former colleague and astute industry watcher Bruce Leichtman pointed out to me this week, the press continues to lavish attention on Google's plan, giving it all kinds of free PR. Bloomberg BusinessWeek ran a long article praising the company's fiber plan as providing the impetus to other broadband ISPs to increase their speeds. And my hometown paper the Boston Globe ran a feature this week about the lengths to which towns across Massachusetts are going to be selected as one of the coveted few areas to have Google deploy its network. Though Google hasn't wired a single one of the 71.8 million U.S. homes that subscribed to broadband at the end of '09, you'd think from the goings-on that they were the dominant player driving the market. You gotta love how well the Google PR machine works.

    What do you think? Post a comment now (no sign-in required)
     
  • The FCC's National Broadband Plan: A First Look

    The FCC released an executive summary of its "National Broadband Plan" yesterday (more details are expected today), which it has been developing for most of the last year at the direction of Congress. Regardless of your political beliefs, when the government decides to weigh in on key telecommunications issues, it's important to understand its positions and their potential implications. This is particularly true given how dynamic the digital, broadband and mobile landscapes are.

    Based on my reading of the Executive Summary, here are my first reactions to some of the most important parts of the plan:

    Spectrum reclamation/mobile use - One of the most anticipated pieces of the plan is what the FCC would propose to do with spectrum currently allocated to local broadcasters. Many believe that with the shift to digital delivery, broadcasters should give back some of their spectrum for more pressing uses - mobile being at the top of the list. On the other hand, broadcasters are seeking to keep their spectrum for HD and mobile TV services.

    The FCC's proposal, to free up 500 megahertz of spectrum within 10 years, of which 300 megahertz would be used for mobile within 5 years, seems like a good starting point. It pragmatically recommends that the spectrum be freed up through "incentive auctions," with some of the proceeds going to broadcasters. This means broadcasters should be able to run business cases and economic comparisons on the pros and cons of keeping or giving back some of their spectrum, with the government tweaking the incentives to accomplish its bandwidth goals. Given the exploding interest in mobile devices and video apps (e.g. March Madness on iPhones), more bandwidth for mobile use is crucial to achieve.

    Competition/transparency - While the FCC makes a host of transparency recommendations for broadband service providers, it wisely did not include "open access" mandates, where broadband ISPs' networks would be opened up for others to use. That would have upended broadband ISPs' business models, likely leading to years of litigation and little progress toward desired goals. The FCC's recommendation for things like market-by-market price and service benchmarking and service disclosures are consumer-friendly and not onerous to broadband ISPs. To the extent that consumers gain access to the information they'll help fuel competition as well.

    Promote rural access - The FCC correctly wants to address the issue of broadband "haves" and "have nots," brought about by the hard economic realities of wiring less dense, rural communities. Much as the government sought to subsidize prior infrastructure projects like electricity and telephone service, the FCC now seeks to shift necessary money from the Universal Service Fund to support broadband buildouts in rural America. So long as the FCC policy doesn't spread to more suburban or urban markets that already have robust broadband infrastructure, this seems like sound policy.

    Expand digital literacy - A small item in the overall summary, but one which could be quite impactful is the idea of creating a "National Digital Literacy Corps" to teach digital literacy and raise broadband adoption. The practical reality is that even the fastest broadband pipes mean little if citizens on the receiving end don't know how to use a computer or a web browser. Many people today live their lives digitally, but many others still don't. Incenting some of the former group to channel their energy and knowledge to the latter group is in everyone's interest.

    The FCC understands how crucial broadband is and also articulates 6 longer-term goals (e.g. 100 million homes with 100 mbps access) which set the bar high for America to keep pace with other countries. Video delivery is already one of the key areas impacted by broadband adoption and under the new FCC plan it is poised for still further change. Overall, the FCC seems to recognize that broadband fuels further innovation in our economy and that it is important to be supportive of its continuing buildout. The Plan now has to make its way through reviews and approvals.  

    What do you think? Post a comment now (no sign-in required).

     
  • Replay of Yesterday's Net Neutrality Webinar is Now Available

    Yesterday VideoNuze and The Diffusion Group hosted "Demystifying Net Neutrality," the first in our 2010 webinar series. Our guests, Barbara Esbin, Senior Fellow and Director, Center for Communications and Competition Policy, Progress & Freedom Foundation (against) and Chris Riley, Policy Counsel for Free Press (for) did an outstanding job advocating their positions. Net neutrality is extremely complex and we had a flood of questions, which our guests did a great job of addressing.

    Though Chris made his points well, personally I'm still not persuaded that net neutrality regulations are needed now. As I wrote last fall, my core concern is that no sustained pattern of broadband ISP behavior has been proven. Colin and Chris argue that "corporations can't be trusted" and that inevitable biases will arise for the biggest broadband ISPs who are also the biggest video service providers. All of that may be true. But until it's proven, it's dangerous business to start tinkering with the well-functioning Internet. The FCC should stay vigilant, but not pursue net neutrality regulation now.

    What do you think? Post a comment now (no sign-in required).

     
  • Join Me for Net Neutrality Webinar With TDG on Thurs. Feb 4th

    I'm excited to announce that VideoNuze has partnered with The Diffusion Group, one of the leading digital media research firms, to host a series of 6 complimentary webinars in 2010. The webinars are sponsored exclusively by ActiveVideo Networks. Each webinar will focus on one specific topic key to the evolving online video/digital media landscape (suggestions are welcome btw!). Colin Dixon from TDG and I will host the webinars and we will also have 1-2 expert guests joining us each time to provide diverse perspectives and insight.

    The first webinar in the series will be "Demystifying Net Neutrality" on Thursday, February 4th at 11am PT / 2pm ET. If you're in the digital media industry, it's been hard to miss the intense recent debate over net neutrality, sparked by FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski's speech last September, which called for the FCC to impose unprecedented new Internet regulations. However, earlier this month, the DC Court of Appeals indicated it may invalidate the FCC's 2008 order punishing Comcast for blocking BitTorrent traffic, suggesting the FCC may not even have proper authority to regulate the Internet after all. Meanwhile, large and small media and technology companies have continued to heavily lobby the FCC, providing data and arguments on both sides of the issue.

    Net neutrality is so important, the argument goes, because as new over-the-top players (e.g. Netflix, Xbox, Roku, Boxee, etc.) seek to bring video services into the home, they need to be assured their services won't be impaired by broadband ISPs like cable operators Comcast and Time Warner Cable or telcos like Verizon and AT&T, who also happen to be the largest incumbent video providers themselves. Opponents essentially argue that net neutrality is a solution in search of a problem, and that the Internet has thrived until now due to the government keeping its hands off, and it should stay that way.

    On the webinar, Colin and I will untangle all of this, with the assistance of Chris Riley, Policy Counsel for Free Press, a national, nonpartisan organization working to reform the media, which is a leading proponent of net neutrality and another guest, TBD who is opposed to net neutrality. The webinar promises to be a deep-dive educational session examining all of net neutrality's pros and cons. For anyone with a stake in broadband/online content delivery, it will be a must attend session.

    REGISTER NOW - IT'S FREE!

     
  • Scoring My 2009 Predictions

    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.

     
  • 4 Items Worth Noting for the Nov 16th Week (FCC's Open Access, Broadcast woes, Droid sales, AOL cuts)

    Following are 4 items worth noting for the Nov 16th week:

    1. FCC raises "Open Access" possibility, would further government's control of the Internet - As reported by the WSJ this week, the FCC is now considering an "Open Access" policy that would require broadband Internet providers to open up their networks for use by competitors. The move comes on top of FCC chairman Julius Genachowski's recent proposal for formalizing net neutrality, a plan that I vigorously oppose. Open Access gained steam recently due to a report released by Harvard's Berkman Center that characterized the U.S. as a "middle-of-the-pack" country along various broadband metrics. The report has been roundly dismissed by service providers as drawing incorrect conclusions due to reliance on incomplete data.

    The FCC is in the midst of crafting a National Broadband Plan, as required by Congress, aimed at providing universal broadband service throughout the U.S. as well as faster broadband speeds. Improving broadband Internet access in rural areas of the U.S. is a worthy goal, but the FCC should be pursuing surgical approaches for accomplishing this, rather than turning the whole broadband industry upside down. As for increasing speeds, major ISPs are already pushing 50 and 100 mbps services, more than most consumers need right now anyway. Broadband connectivity is the lifeblood for online video providers and any government initiative that risks unintended consequences of slowing network infrastructure investments is unwise.

    2. Broadcast TV executives waking up to online video's challenges - Reading the coverage of B&C/Multichannel News's panel earlier this week, "Free Streaming: Killing or Saving the Television Business" featuring Marc Graboff (NBCU), Bruce Rosenblum (Warner Bros.), Nancy Tellem (CBS) and John Wells (WGA), I kept wondering where were these sentiments when the Hulu business plan was being crafted?

    Hulu is of course the poster child for providing free access to the networks' programs, with just a fraction of the ad load as on-air. While the panelists agreed that the industry should be dissuading consumers from cord-cutting, Hulu is (purposefully or not) the chief reason some people consider dropping cable/satellite/telco service. For VideoNuze readers, it's old news already that broadcast networks have been hurting themselves with their current online model. What was amazing to me in reading about the panel is that what now seems obvious should have been very apparent to industry executives from the start.

    3. Motorola Droid sales off to a strong start - The mobile analytics firm Flurry released data suggesting that first week Verizon sales of the Motorola Droid smartphone were an estimated 250,000. Flurry tracks applications on smartphones to estimate sales volume of devices. While the Droid results are lower than the 1.6 million iPhone 3GS units sold in that device's first week, Flurry notes that the iPhone 3GS was available in 8 countries and also had an installed base of 25 million 1st generation iPhones to draft on.

    The Droid's success is important for lots of reasons, but from my perspective the key is how it expands the universe of mobile video users. As I noted in "Mobile Video Continues to Gain Traction," a robust mobile ecosystem is developing, and getting more smartphones into users' hands is crucial. I was in my local Verizon store this week and saw the Droid for the first time - though it lacks some of the iPhone's sleekness, the video quality is even better.

    4. AOL's downsizing suggests further pain ahead - AOL was back in the news this week, planning to cut one-third of its employees ahead of its spin-off from Time Warner on Dec. 9th. The cuts will bring the company's headcount to 4,500-5,000, down from its peak of 18,000 in 2001. As I explained recently, no company has been hurt more by the rise of broadband than AOL, whose dial-up subscribers have fled en masse to broadband ISPs. Now AOL is going all-in on the ad model, even as the ad business itself is getting hurt by the ongoing recession. New AOL CEO Tim Armstrong is clearly a guy who loves a challenge; righting the AOL ship is a real long shot bet. I once thought of AOL as being a real leader in online video. Now I'm hard-pressed to see how the AOL story is going to have a happy ending.

    Enjoy your weekends!