Global iPlayer, Thanks Auntie!

[Brad]

This is what I've been waiting for, BBC will launch a subscription based, global iPlayer:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/mar/02/bbc-global-iplayer-app

Top Gear anyone?

Also, I'm wondering if we are getting a glimpse of the future in media distribution here, one in which we don't need DVD's, broadcast or cable?   Actor @NathanFillion has been musing about buying up the rights to the defunct TV series "Firefly" and producing new episodes but distributing them online instead of via traditional networks.  Can they cut out the traditional hierarchy of middle men? Can they make money at it?

[dougs]

iplayer is huge in the uk......awesome product. Having just been to the states I am happy I downloaded stuff on iplayer:) So I would pay

Spotify just signed 1 million paid up member...

Doug

[rcjordan]

I hate to piss on your campfires, but while it might work for UK users (where you are already used to paying for TV) I don't think paygates have much of a chance in the US.  To clarify, I do think that a good number of US consumers would sign up for a subscription BUT only if it is relatively cheap.  Like the print media have learned before them, the costs of the existing TV production infrastructure are too high to be sustained by cheap subscriptions.

[4Eyes]

the costs of the existing TV production infrastructure are too high to be sustained by cheap subscriptions

BBC isn't affected by this - it is funded by the Government (via our TV licence fees) - so the revenue issue is somewhat different.

With the exception of any reduction in programs bought by US stations as a result, and the overheads of setting the system up, it would mostly be clear profit.

[dogboy]

These assclowns in tv will never get to the next level of profitability as long as they keep showing me tampon ads and wonder why I haven't bought any in 40years. Go figure.

Ads should be personalized to the user, or to the group if more than one is watching. But the days of a whole family sitting around a 4' cube in the living room is over IMO. Just look at the shows. They are very specialized and 500 of them. Back when there were 12 and they played generic family shows, it was different.

Now when you login tv you should have it personalized to you... Including the ads.  If I'm watching racing on a Sunday, show me an ad for a new push mower. Not because it's contextual, because I need one and I'm interested in buying one. So if I'm going to watch 15 mins of ads, show me something I want to buy.

If more than one logs on, divide things up, overlap interests, but dont show the SAME ads to EVERYBoDY and expect to make money showing me ads I will never act on. Sucks for everyone involved.

Just personalize the ads and the revenue will jump by at least 20%

[Gurtie]

well I presume that the iplayer won't be takling ad based revenue anyway? the BBC works on a pure subscription model (albeit enforced subscription, but the licence fee is pretty good value form money imho) and they look to be taking the subscription route for international iplayer.

More generally yes targeted ads are hugely better converters, much more than 20% in many cases. There are issues with that model as well though - Jason might have some of the answers to that with Pzyche but combining everything so it works perfectly is quite some way off yet for anyone I think - especially for news sites which tend to have a hugely broad demographic of visitors in the first place.

[PaulH]

Having just spent 10 days in the USA i've been converted to loving the BBC licence fee. So many frigging shitty ads/commercials made it impossible to watch anything - felt like the TV was spamming me. News channels were just as bad, seemed to consists of nothing but lunatics shouting at each other - and the weather men must be on crack or wired up to the mains.

Though these days i only tend watch a few programs on 40d or the iplayer when its convenient.

[Brad]

Well there is a limit to what I would pay as a subscriber for an app that streams TV.  The proposed $10 per month is about at the upper limit for me.  If others come in with their own streaming apps they could soon add up to the cost of cable.

I'm wondering how long it will be before others try to emulate the BBC iPlayer either as a subscription or as a pay per episode means of distribution?

I know a couple of F1 racing fans around here that would pay for streaming the races.

[dogboy]

I pay to watch motogp online when I can't see it on tv.

But personalization isn't all that hard. Start with gender. Just that right there will have a profound affect on my ctr. Next my age. Marital status. Sexual preference. The same sh## they have been asking for years. It's no coincidence.

I am a 39 yr old straight single male. Show me ads with almost naked women and I am absolutely captivated and will at least consider what they have to say. But do not show me ads targeted toward 60yr old married women because I am fundamentally not interested in those types of ads.

...they don't need to be too smart. All they need is opensocial login and theyd have all the marketing info they need.

[dogboy]

Oh... And when I couldn't watch motogp on tv I subscribed for $100/yr. But then when I found it on Speed channel, I didn't renew, eventhough I miss out on all the behinds the scene action. But I said screw it I'll just watch the races.

So factor that type of mentality into the fee structure debate as well. Availability and relative quality of the alternative.

[rcjordan]

>BBC isn't affected by this - it is funded by the Government (via our TV licence fees) - so the revenue issue is somewhat different.

Right. I'm mostly talking about the US market.  That said, when I travel in EU I see a crapload of US-generated content on your channel selection guides so there's a component of our infrastructure costs being sold second-hand in your market.  How big that component may be, I have no idea, but my hunch is that it's significant.

>So many frigging shitty ads/commercials made it impossible to watch anything - felt like the TV was spamming me.

It is a huge issue here from the consumer's perspective.  But, given the current system, the media execs are more-or-less forced to make short-sighted revenue generating decisions (more commercials. lesser quality). That will continue until the system implodes, just as print media has already done.  Who'll pick up the pieces? Hard to say. But with the new/disruptive wide distribution methods available via the internet there's no reason to think that it has to be the Old Dogs ...or even US-based.

Back to subscriptions... within the US market subscriptions for viewing current production has a HUGE competitor that I haven't seen addressed much. They are competing against their previous creations, i.e., their reruns.  If you have access to Netflix (and just this month, Amazon Prime) you have a massive inventory available for cheap viewing. More, literally, than you have time to watch.  From what I'm observing, viewers are massively time-shifting by actively deciding NOT to watch a current ad-supported program knowing that it will likely fall into the Netflix/Other streaming inventory within a year or less.  There, it will be stripped of ads and available on demand.  In the meantime, they already have more than they can watch so there's plenty to occupy them while they wait.  This doesn't work for sports. And Dogboy can't get his weekly fix of "American Idol" (yet). But for the lion's share of tv entertainment, yeah, it works and it's cheap.

[Brad]

> If you have access to Netflix (and just this month, Amazon Prime) you have a massive inventory available for cheap viewing.

Yes. This does compete against subscriptions. However both subscriptions and ala carte purchase compete against the networks, cable and conventional distribution.

>time-shifting

This is really big.  You get spoiled having things available on demand digitally and, at least for me, it is now hard to be in front of my television at a certain time every week just to watch a show.

[rcjordan]

>hard to be in front of my television at a certain time every week just to watch a show

And when you do force yourself to be present in real time you are literally bombarded by advertisements that suck away 25-30% of your time.  I'm witnessing viewers recoiling from the ads and retreating to commercial-free, on-demand.  Even those who could tolerate the ad barrage a year ago are now more angry about the intrusion as they are now becoming accustomed to streaming their entertainment.

[Gurtie]

do you not have TV services in the US that pause programmes or fast forward the ads (in 'realtime' tv)?

[Brad]

The ads are rough.

So when does traditional TV implode like the music and newspaper industries?  I think we are seeing the beginning of it right now.


Gurtie: Such a device might exist, but I'm a Luddite when it comes to TV these days.  I've got everything working, even though I have to use 6 different remotes, and I'm not attaching one more thing - ever - to my TV.