Comments on: Split Decision on Paying for TV Everywhere

By: r4ltman

r4ltman — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 16:18:08 +0000

whatever, they are horseless carriage-in’

they can’t absorb the internet’s rebuttal, they can only be a repackaged content portal, essentially an app for their brand that while everywhere is less dynamic and static

By: Paul Sweeting

Paul Sweeting — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:58:46 +0000

Can’t say I would disagree when any of those predictions, Michael. See my earlier post on Hulu (http://pro.gigaom.com/2009/10/hulu-and-the-end-of-free-tv/).

By: michaelmcnabb

michaelmcnabb — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:01:28 +0000

Four predictions:

1) TV Everywhere is available as an add-on to your basic cable subscription and free for premium subscribers;

2) Hulu goes behind a paid wall;

3) Cable programmers significantly restrict availability of free content in return for an increase in affiliate fees;

4) Free to air Networks agree not to increase re-transmission fees in order to participate on new On Demand networks – including network DVR’s.

Net result – continued shift from linear to On Demand model leaving linear channels as “barker” channels for on-demand platforms.

By: Kevin C. Tofel

Kevin C. Tofel — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:37:46 +0000

TV Everywhere doesn’t need the top-rated cable networks to guarantee success. While “content is king,” time and place to enjoy content are becoming just as important.

By: Liz Gannes

Liz Gannes — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:09:56 +0000

TV Everywhere has the marketing power of your own MSO behind it, so any incremental content could be noticed. But if it’s just another Hulu with a more stringent log-in system and a plug-in to download, consumers will stick with the free and easy content they’ve already become accustomed to. That’s why you always hear Comcast using the Entourage example.