Ok While he talks up that Cable Companies want to have the content everywhere "3 Screens" if you will. He tosses the blame on the Content/Distributors that they cant because of licensing. What he fails to add is that most would be ok with it being viewable everywhere......for a fee, which the Cable Companies balk at, they feel that they should pay once for the rights to use the content/stream and then use it how they seem fit, via On Demand, "Live" Airing, View on Xbox, View on Mobile Devices/Phones, ect. Fact is the content people their stuff to reach as many people as possible. What they don't want is it being paid for by one person, who then shares that with everyone he knows "illegally".
Cable companies then try to reach a middle ground with things like HBO Go, requiring you to sub to HBO to access, and having that app phone home to make sure you didn't just sign up for one month then cancel and still have access. Price it the same as HBO monthly sub and now its a matter of HBO getting the whole fee vs the cable co taking a cut, and that's why they wont do it. Lets say it cost TWC 10/month to offer HBO, and we get charged 15/month, TWC is the one blocking you having HBO as a stand alone product bc they want that 5/month profit, while HBO is like sweet we just made 5/month more and don't have to deal with uplink issues at the cable company.
Re: This single line...
said by The Limit:Agreed. They need to just become the dumbpipes they truly are.
"Time Warner Cable and Comcast have to go into the content market"
No they don't.
| |The LimitPremium
Re: This single line... The fact of the matter is "nothing to see here". We've already heard these words before by other "experts" in the field.
Palo Alto, CA
Re: Elephant in the room It was bad enough that while he was FCC commish, his idea of competition was one cableco, one telco, and one satco, and those were all the American consumer needs for "healthy competition". He was a joke then and is a joke today. He's probably an embarrassment to his dad.