| Subscribe via RSS

Does IP-TV Have a Future

November 10th, 2006 | 3 Comments | Posted in IP-TV, Main Page, Media

I've always been puzzled by IP-TV. Despite all the talk - and Microsoft's huge investment to get into the market - the prospects for IP-TV seem, at best, modest. It's not like consumers are clamouring for another way to receive television programming. And it's like the cablecos and satellite-TV service providers are dropping the ball in terms of new services. According to a recent In-Stat report, the cable industry is enjoy strong growth around the world as consumers demand for TV programming, as well as voice and data services. In-Stat found that of the 1.2 billion TV households around the world, 355 million are cable customers. This includes 106 million in China and 69 million in the U.S. The question is how the carriers are going to establish a foothold with IP-TV other than using lower prices than cablecos. Maybe the triple or quadruple plays will help them build some market share but attacking the cableco franchise seems like a Don Quixote-like exercise. In Canada, it will be interesting to see how well Bell Canada and Telus do with their IP-TV offers. Bell is still in "testing" while Telus has launched an IP-TV service on a selective basis in Calgary and Edmonton. The challenge is differentiation so there's a compelling reason for consumers to go with IP-TV rather than cable. Other than price, it may come down to services such as programming-on-demand in which every television show is stored on a server and available if and when the consumer wants it on a pay-as-you-go or subscription basis.

Related Posts

In TV 2.0, What's the Future For Cable?

October 24th, 2006 | 1 Comment | Posted in IP-TV, Main Page, Web 2.0

There's an awful lot of chatter today about the future of television - what with Jeff Jarvis writing a long post in response to a keynote made by a BBC executive, who referred to a column Jarvis wrote in The Guardian; rumblings about the Venice Project's launch (the new TV service from Skype's Nikas Zennstrom and Janus Friis; and Steve Gillmor suggesting "TV is dead". But what about the cableco? They have oddly not been a big part of the discussion, which is strange given they are one of the main distributors of TV programming. You would think that if the TV industry is poised for major changes, the cablecos will be impacted along with broadcasters, content producers and advertisers. It may be that cablecos are in an advantageous position because they have two key strategic assets: a ubiquitous (at least in North America) delivery platform for traditional television, and high-speed Internet networks to deliver next-generation programming/TV 2.0. If the traditional delivery model continues to thrive as people migrate to PVRs, video-on-demand and pay-per-view, the cablecos will thrive. On the other hand, id the Web starts to become a way to deliver programming through streaming video, downloads, etc., the cablecos could do well by leveraging their high-speed networks and customer relationships. Another angle to the cable story is my theory on targeted TV watching vs. couch potatoes, which is based on the idea people are watching fewer television shows but building a stronger relationship with those shows through the PVR, time-shifting and blogs. Even though more people are becoming more selective about what they watch, these programs are spread across the cable spectrum. Some shows, for example, will be found on basic cable, while others such as The Sopranos and ESPN are part of higher-tier packages. What it means - at least until pay-as-you-go TV packages emerge - is consumers will continue to pay for multiple cable packages even if they are watching less television. All in all, I would aruge it's good to be a cableco right now.

Related Posts

Truly, the Year of Video

July 18th, 2006 | 1 Comment | Posted in IP-TV, Main Page, Uncategorized

It's impossible not to buy into the idea this is the year of video (much like 2004 and perhaps 2005 were the year of VoIP). Today, there were three different events that hammered home this reality home. First, YouTube is delivering a staggering 100 million videos a day, according to Hitwise. Then, IP Democracy reports more than $600-million has been invested in video start-ups such as YouTube, Slingbox (a personal favourite) and MobiTV in the past year. Finally, Montreal-based cableco Videotron said its Extreme high-speed Internet service will be boosted to 20Mbps from 16Mbps, which will enable consumers to do, what else, watch video.
   Of course, there's lot of excitement but plenty of questions. YouTube, for example, is still working on the details on how to turn 100 million videos a day into a business. In many ways, MobiTV's success is dependent on whether millions of people are willing to watch videos on a small screen. Slingbox is selling lots of cool units for $250 a crack to watch your TV while away from home but there are still questions about the size of its potential market and whether there is revenue/life beyond selling something once without any kind of recurring revenue. Meanwhile, Videotron is betting consumers are willing to pay C$79.95 for an ultra-fast broadband connection. No doubt, the excitement will carry on but there also has to be some not-so-good developments as some players fail to keep pace.
Update: In response to Videotron's claim to be the fastest gun in the North, Primus Canada touched base to point out it launched a high-speed service last month that offers speeds up to 22Mbps.

Related Posts

YouTube & Big Pipes

July 6th, 2006 | 1 Comment | Posted in IP-TV, Main Page, Microsoft

Ready for something else other than Rocketboom? In other news…..eMarketer had a story earlier this week looking at YouTube's explosive growth over the past year. According to comScore Media Metrix, YouTube's unique visitors jumped to 12 million in May from 58,000 in August 2005, whle Nielsen//NetRatings suggests YouTube had 20 million unique visitors in May, more than half of whom were between the ages of 35 and 64. Of course, success comes with a price. Apparently, YouTube's server and bandwidth costs are $1-million a month, which is being funded by a $8-million of venture capital raised earlier this year. YouTube has talked about rolling out AdSense-like advertising but it's still talk rather than walk. Speaking of video, Bell Canada is rolling out a new service called Optimax, which guarantees 16Mbps of high-speed residential service for $80 a month and 10Mbps for $65. Naturally, this prompts one to ask about Bell's IP-TV plans but the company declined to bite the bait. Either Bell's IP-TV service, which involves Microsoft, isn't ready yet or the carrier doesn't want to tip its cards yet. It's probably a combination of the two. For more, check out Jon Arnold's blog.

Related Posts

The Slingbox Rules!

June 21st, 2006 | 4 Comments | Posted in IP-TV, Main Page, Media

So you'ren a five-hour train ride from Toronto to Ottawa with a burning desire to watch the World Cup. What do you do? Well, if you're Stuart MacDonald, you fire up the laptop, connect to Via Rail's Wi-fi network and watch the Holland-Argentina soccer game using a Slingbox. How cool is that?!
   While the Slingbox is wonderful technology, the nagging question is how broad its appeal can be. I used to think the Slingbox was a no-brainer for road warriors and people able to watch TV at work but the more I see it used, the more I think it's a relatively inexpensive (one-time expense of $170 to $250) tool to give you even more control over how, when and where you watch TV. For anyone who spends a few thousand dollars on a big-screen TV, why not spend a few more bucks on a nice-to-have feature.

Related Posts

Telus Takes TV Plunge

May 4th, 2006 | 4 Comments | Posted in IP-TV, Main Page

For all the talk about IP-TV, it's taking plenty of time for the hype to become reality. That said, Telus plans to roll out TTV (creative name, eh!) in the coming months. For $79.95 a month, consumers will receive 200 digital channels and features such as time-shifting. First impressions: it seems expensive but ROI and rational pricing are the name of game in the Canadian telecom and cable markets these days. The big challenge facing Telus and other carriers around the world is convincing people IP-TV is better than what they already receive from cable. Why switch when cable gives you everything you need (VOD, PPV, HDTV, PVR, etc.) And while IP-TV has been touted as the service that will provide carriers with the much-desired quadruple play, there are still signs its widespread launch is being held back by technical and scaling issues. BCE Inc. is a good example of promise vs. reality. Originally, BCE was going to launch IP-TV (using Microsoft software) in the first half of 2006. But during a conference call yesterday, Bell Canada's 6'7″ president and COO George Cope madly tap-danced around a question on the carrier's IP-TV launch plans - citing the need not to tip off the competition (aka Rogers, Videotron, Cogeco). Truth be told, it will not be until some time next year before Bell is ready to go. A key issue is Bell's decision to adopt VDSL2 and MPEG 4, which means Bell will have to wait until the technology is ready for prime time.

Update: Infonetics Research has issued a new report that suggests the number of IPTV subscribers globally will jump to 53 million by 2009, while $26-billion of capex will be spent on IPTV infrastructure. Infonetics equipment equipment sales to soar to $6-billion by 2009 from $400-million in 2005.

Related Posts

What About a "LadyBag" for Men?

April 24th, 2006 | 3 Comments | Posted in ILEC News, Analysis, IP-TV, M&A, Main Page, Wireless

The Discovery Channel has a story about a new purse - the Ladybag - developed by researchers at Vancouver's Simon Fraser University that uses RFID technology to alert the owner if they leave the house without their wallet or keys. "We came up with the bag because we thought that all of us would use it," said Ginny Mesina, one of six women who worked on the Ladybag's creation. What about morphing the technology for a men's wallet? It would be amazing if the same technology could be used to locate missing wallets and/or keys - solving an age-old problem that has put tremendous stress on relationships around the world. Can you imagine no longer having to say "Have you seen my wallet?" or "Where are my keys". Now that would be very cool!

Related Posts

Slingbox: Cool But Set-Up is Challenging

April 23rd, 2006 | 3 Comments | Posted in IP-TV, Main Page

My brother, Sean, finally came over to help set up the Slingbox. The installation process, which included upgrading the SlingPlayer and the firmware, took about 45 minutes and required far more brainpower than what's normally available on a Sunday afternoon. In other words, the Slingbox is not for the Luddite or people with an aversion to anything that isn't plug-n-plug. But once you finish, the Slingbox is totally impressive. It really evolutionizes the TV-watching experience - much the same way the remote control did. I just wonder about my productivity at work now that I can watch my TV and access the PVR with all those unwatched episodes of The Sopranos. The Sunday shift, which can be very, very quiet, may never be the same!
    Perhaps the biggest issue/challenge facing Slingbox is the size of the potential user base. The device is a natural for road warriors who want to watch their home TV from a hotel room, airport or airplanes; it's got potential for people who want to watch TV at the office but how big is that audience?; and there's probably a market among people who want to watch TV on their laptops at home - although how many bosses would tolerate and/or promote it? But are there enough users within these groups for Slingmedia to create a viable business that sells 100s of thousands of Slingboxes? That's an awful lot of hardware at $249 a pop but the VCs who recently gave the company $46.6-million must think otherwise. So how will Slingbox generate enough revenue to give its investors the ROI they want? Will it be hardware or will it also be about delivering content over the Web?
Update: For more on setting up the Slingbox, check out sMorty71. Time Europe has a story on the Slingbox, highlighted by a delicious lede “Tivo? That's so last year”, while USA Today's personal tech columnist Edward Baig has a story recounting the technical issues he experienced while setting up the Slingbox (He also enthusiastically raves about the service.) Jim Courtney also weighs in on being interviewed by a CBC reporter, who read his blog post on watching the Winter Olympics from a Starbucks in Palm Springs.
Update II: Perhaps the “killer app” for the Slingbox is the ability to remotely program your PVR. Say, for example, you forget to set up the PVR to record American Idol; the Slingbox makes it easy to do it from work. Amazing!
Tags: ,

Related Posts

Kevin & Mark Podcast #2 (a.k.a We Need a Better Name!)

April 13th, 2006 | 1 Comment | Posted in Google, IP-TV, Podcasting

Given it's Easter this weekend and most people aren't working tomorrow, we did our second podcast today. We're hoping to have a weekly guest, and we started close to home by dragging the Financial Post's retail reporter, Hollie Shaw, into our “studio”. We thought it would be insightful to have someone not drinking the high-tech Kool-Aid every day to provide us with a woman on the street view of the world. We started the show by talking about the growth of cable telephone customers in Canada; then moved on to whether people will actually watch televison on their PCs and mobile devices, before closing with a discussion on - surprise, surprise -  Google Calendar.
Addendum: This week, we recorded the podcast using software called Propoganda (hat tip to Tris Hussey). Propoganda has all kinds of neat bells and whistles, which I plan to experiment with this week…probably after I decipher the instructions for the Slingbox that I'm hoping to review. We also signed up for Libsyn, which was packaged along with Propoganda.

Related Posts

Crossing the Web 2.0 Chasm

April 7th, 2006 | 3 Comments | Posted in IP-TV, Main Page, Web 2.0

YouTube.com's $8-million cash injection earlier this week from Sequoia Capital has put the spotlight yet again on cool Web 2.0 companies with uncertain or no business models. As much as YouTube is extremely popular (more than 100 million page views a day), it really hasn't got a business model yet - other than plans to cautiously introduce relevant-based advertising. The key question facing YouTube and other popular Web 2.0 services is whether they can cross the chasm from free to fee. In other words, can they convince enough of their free-loading customers to actually purchase premium services and/or accept advertising. In any event, I've using YouTube's financing as the basis for my column in today's National Post looking at the free-to-fee challenge and why far too many Web 2.0 start-ups will fail to cross the chasm.

Related Posts




  • Wikio - Top Blogs - Technology