Interesting People mailing list archives
more on IP-Based TV Will Revolutionize Entertainment
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 16:41:52 -0400
------ Forwarded Message From: Bob Frankston <Bob2-19-0501 () bobf frankston com> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 16:02:03 -0400 To: <dave () farber net>, 'Ip' <ip () v2 listbox com> Subject: RE: [IP] IP-Based TV Will Revolutionize Entertainment I keep writing about the need for a utility model -- if you follow this story you find that real IP TV means that owning the facilities is a liability and those who don't have a compelling advantage. The business wire story is just a press release without any insight at all. First, I'll just note that the "this revolutionize entertainment thing is nonsense" -- it's a clone of CableTV. What will revolutionize entertainment is unfettered peer distribution of new sources of content. This is a separate topic including what happens when controlled distribution is no longer viable with most old content on DVDs and only a little doled out in other channels at any time. Getting back to connectivity business models, as I've pointed out in the past we need to be very careful in translating this story. VoIP is an internal technology of the Telcos and it's a generic edge technology. There is essentially no relationship between the two. Faux Telephony companies like Vonage and just about all "names" confuse the issue. Skype, Free World dialup and others are edge-defined. When we apply this to IPTV we find that it's the opposite of the Internet -- it's more a spat over whether the glass fiber is lit up one way vs another. This is extremely important within the Regulatorium. It's also about the closed world of Tellywood in which content providers had to fork over equity to get distribution. The carriers are trying to wrest control from the CableCos in a life and death struggle within their world. It's all about who will own us rather than any thought of liberation. The real question is why I can't just to go to HBO and others and subscribe directly or even indirectly. There's a special exemption for those who own six foot dishes but not for the rest of us. Look at http://www.akimbo.com -- use the Internet as a transport but have a Set Top Box as a destination. That should satisfy the DRM requirements -- it looks and feels like a CableCo but they don't have the overhead of owning facilities so should be far more efficient. But they have little interesting content. Why can't they do what the CableCos do and just offer the same channels? Hmmm. The reasons seem obvious -- the real puzzle is why there is no anti-trust action? If you follow this one step further you come to a very stark conclusion -- those who don't have their own infrastructure have a major advantage over those that do. If we do not allow collusion between the content providers and the transport providers then owning the facilities is a major competitive disadvantage. We've seen this in VoIP but the large capital expenses and cellular income has kept this stark reality from being too obvious. I do note that Comcast has announced that their Internet service is very profitable in its own right but how can you sustain a major price advantage with commodity transport? You can't. You can't recover the costs based on the value of the transport because the value is external. I keep comparing it to charging for garbage collection on the resale value. Again, I'm talking about IP transport, not about services like TV. Just the transport by itself. IP connectivity is one of the purist commodities. You can't differentiate yourself except by selling more, you can't afford any fine grained billing and even then can't assure the packets won't accidentally ride a competitors infrastructure and we need it as a public good. Is there an alternative model? -----Original Message----- From: owner-ip () v2 listbox com [mailto:owner-ip () v2 listbox com] On Behalf Of David Farber Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 14:51 To: Ip Subject: [IP] IP-Based TV Will Revolutionize Entertainment ------ Forwarded Message From: Monty Solomon <monty () roscom com> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 09:43:27 -0400 To: <undisclosed-recipient:;> Subject: IP-Based TV Will Revolutionize Entertainment IP-Based TV Will Revolutionize Entertainment; SBC calls for ``light-touch'' regulatory approach to ensure consumers receive new technology quickly 20 April 2005, 10:02am ET SAN ANTONIO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 20, 2005--IP-based television will change the way consumers watch TV while opening a new competitive choice for millions, said Lea Ann Champion, senior executive vice president of IP Operations and Services for SBC Communications Inc. (NYSE:SBC) at a U.S. House Energy & Commerce Committee hearing about the future of new technology. Champion demonstrated the capabilities of IP-based video or IPTV for lawmakers and urged them to avoid imposing incumbent obligations on new entrants in the video services market that would discourage deployment of the new system. ... http://finance.lycos.com/qc/news/story.aspx?story=200504201402_BWR__BW5581 ------ End of Forwarded Message ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as BobIP () Bobf Frankston com To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ ------ End of Forwarded Message ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- more on IP-Based TV Will Revolutionize Entertainment David Farber (Apr 29)