Prediction about cable TV and Direct TV

[Jeff C]

It just occured to me that these overpriced delivery mechanisms for TV content might be coming to an end.

With high speed internet and better than ever video streaming, the need to getcontent from Direct TV and Cable will go away at some point in the near future.

With Hulu (I hook it up to my TV all the time to watch movies, it streams through my wireless router)

I just watched the masters par three competition streamed live from the masters site. Frankly it looked pretty good.

I see it going this way:
1. Network shows will have full ability to live stream network shows
2. Premium channels will have some sort of monthly fee, probably far lower than cable or DirectTv
3. Equipment providers will make a easy to set up streaming router that hooks directly to your TV. Even wireless routers that are built directly into your TV
4. Your TV will have components built in to navigate to websites to "click" on content. Maybe the channel changer will double as a mouse.

I would love to get rid of cable, I only have it to get reception for local channels anyway.

That way you could get your content ala cart and ONLY pay for what you actually use, not all the bundled crap that cable and direct TV makes you buy.

Instead of paying $100+/month for crap you do not use 80% of the time, you end up spending $25-$50+-

If it is easy to use, people would gobble that up in a heart beat.......

Am I onto something here?

 

[shortstop20]

You are absolutely right, I have been predicting this for a few years now. Cable and SAT TV as we know it is becoming obsolete. In the future TV will be broadcast solely over the internet(known as IPTV, or Internet Protocol TV), in the same way that your computer connects to the internet. Every TV will have an IP address and you will be able to choose which channels you want and which you don't. There will be no more "buy this package or that package". It will be really nice for people who only watch 4-5 specific channels(like myself) and cheaper as each channel will have a monthly cost if you want that channel. LAN's are going to be a commonplace in every home in the coming years, much like how almost everyone has a TV or computer now, which will easily allow IPTV to be implemented. The major TV networks have already alluded to and are making plans to implement IPTV already, it's only a matter of time.

TV as we know it is going to be revolutionized in the next 10 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPTV

 

[decarls]

You could certainly be on to something but the real problem here is the networks; ESPN, CBS, NBC, ect... What they charge your local telephone/catv company per customer is what drives the price up so insainly high. I hate to say it but I don't think they are going to make it any cheaper for the individual to stream into their home.

I hope your right, I work in this industry and I'd still like it to go that way. We don't make any money on CATV anyway, equipment & programing costs are too much. If we could just maintain the network for I.P phone & internet I think costs would not be climbing at the rate they are. Also, the best part, no more calls on the evenings or weekend.... "our cable is out!!!!!"

Am I close MTdream??

 

[Ollie]

Another problem.
Band width and availability.
There is way too many people that can't get high speed internet (me being one of them).

 

[decarls]

Good point, don't quote me on this but I belive it takes 6-8M per HD stream.

 

[snowmobiler]

we ditched our cable tv and watch hulu and others

 

[Jeff C]

This might help solve any broadband limitation issues

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/FCC-gets-going-on-national-apf-14883567.html?sec=topStories&pos=4&asset=TBD&ccode=TBD

 

[Jeff C]

Think of all the costs cable and sat providers have.

1. Satellites
2. Cables to run and maintain
3. Cable booster stations
4. People to fix all the physical cable issues


If you have internet provided content, as long as you can get to the content and bandwidth is big enough, costs HAVE to be much less than sat or cable.

I love Hulu, watch it all the time through my TV. Not first run movies by any means but there are some older movies on there that are fantastic. Every 10-15 minutes it gets interuppted by a 15-30 second commercial, but heck that is not nearly as bad as the network commercials.

 

[Beels]

Another problem.
Band width and availability.
There is way too many people that can't get high speed internet (me being one of them).

That's the big one.

 

[MTdream]

You could certainly be on to something but the real problem here is the networks; ESPN, CBS, NBC, ect... What they charge your local telephone/catv company per customer is what drives the price up so insainly high. I hate to say it but I don't think they are going to make it any cheaper for the individual to stream into their home.

I hope your right, I work in this industry and I'd still like it to go that way. We don't make any money on CATV anyway, equipment & programing costs are too much. If we could just maintain the network for I.P phone & internet I think costs would not be climbing at the rate they are. Also, the best part, no more calls on the evenings or weekend.... "our cable is out!!!!!"

Am I close MTdream??

ROFL, called out on this

The ESPN's and CBS etc. are learning that they are nothing more than content packagers...i.e. they dont own the content...big example...NCAA final Four was streamed live this year in its entirety...WAY cool...So is the MAsters!!!!

the REAL content owners are LOVING the streaming of live content online...it is more than a trend...

studies show that between 20 and 30% of people are ditching cable for content online... if you havent checked them out...check out things like:

hulu.com
joost.com
even the networks own sites...allow you to download their primetime shows...

at the heart of it, this is exactly what the writers strike was about last year...they felt they were getting cut out of online distribution...

 

[Zachcreek]

Yep, Microsoft is one of the leaders in this segment. Go figure. 3rd world countrys are building infrastructue to support the world of communications. Fiber, Wireless. Thats right boys and girls, the 3rd world counties are ahead of us in technology infrastructure.

As Ollie said though, bandwidth will be an issue. Larger cities that have fiber to the home that can deliver a 2m stream will be ok, if not and you try to watch it without the bandwidth it will be like watching Max Headroom. OK, am I dating myself? Also the wiring in your home will determine the final delivery to the tv router. Cat 5e or Cat6.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzxHDqUz8Sk&feature=related

 

[MTdream]

Good point, don't quote me on this but I belive it takes 6-8M per HD stream.

Here is a rule of thumb chart...

http://www.icf.at/uploads/pics/BFDTV_01.gif

remember compression, and screwing with things like i-frames and less frames per second can be done, and reduce the bandwidth demand considerably...

Additionally, the majority of the video customer segment is happy with anything better than rabbit ears, and fuzzy screens...true videophiles care about things like 1080p and de-interlacing, but most of the world just wants to know what happened to JR....

 

[Snowlover]

March madness MMOD was awesome. Watch any game live, or go back and rewatch one you missed. I do not even have a functioning tv (My plasma blew and will cost $4800 to repair) so the only TV I see is on my iMac. You can watch HD versions of most big time series the day after they are broadcast. I did not even know about the LOST series until last year and I have watched every epsisode, for free on my own schedule.

That is where TV must go and the sooner the better.

I also watched almost every bball game from my alma mater, thanks to some video piracy and justin.tv!!!

 

[Blu Du]

as soon as the kids are out of school i think we will cancel cable and internet. it's a ripoff

 

[CarvinMarvin]

Never had cable or satelite....antena broatcast TV, which is FREE. Just can't force myself to PAY for tv and especially 40+ dollars a month. OUCH!!!

Love Hulu, ABCFamily.com; AOLVIDEO.COm, you can watch most any espisodes of most shows you can think of......for FREE!!! Lots of oldies, but goodies with the homosexual themes out there too like Flipper, Wonderwoman, I Dream of Jeannie.

 

[Snowizard]

I only have local off-air stations at the moment. I do have a decent antenna setup on the roof, with preamp.

I used to have an excellent C-band satellite system. (BIG 10 ft. dish) Well, it's still here, but my Norway pines got too tall and cut off signal to the 10ft diameter dish.
I'm not willing to cut those trees down, and really have nowhere else on the property to locate the dish. It's on the garage roof.

But what was neat with C-Band is I only had to pay for the channels I wanted to subscribe to... and it was cheap. I paid about $6.00 / month for the five channels I wanted.
Speed
Discovery
History
TLC
A&E
maybe one more, don't rmbr.
If I wanted to watch something special on another channel not currently billed, I just called an 800 number, and in minutes that channel was active to watch for as many hours or days I wanted.

Was cool setup. C-Band is still in use, and is digital now. I'd go back on there in a minute if I had a sight-line again.

 

[Jeff C]

Does either the Discovery channel, history channel, or speed channel stream video?

I would love it if they did

 

[SAWYER]

I hope it stays the same. TV is simple. Relax, lay down, one button goes up, one goes down.

 

[Jeff C]

I hope it stays the same. TV is simple. Relax, lay down, one button goes up, one goes down.

Ultimately that will not change

What will change is how the content reaches your "clicker"

 

[MtnDoo]

Follow the $$$ and you'll find out a lot.

YoBama doesn't want to provide you with HDTV over IP or make GlueTube faster. He wants visibility into your activities/habbits on the ISP side of the equation and votes. Hence a 7.2B give-away to large providers - Verizon, Qwest, Comcast, etc... You're not going to pay your HDTV subscription to ObamaHDTV.gov any time soon. But you may have much less anonymity as things move along. He campaigned on extending broadband reach, but now he's talking about funding WildBlue, etc.. which are pipe dreams.

The challenge with deploying advanced services (HDTV, 100+mb data, etc) is density. Southeast Asia, Europe, NYC, SanFran, etc.. have dense housing - multi-dwelling units. Everyone lives in a little crackerbox, and that makes it easy and cheap to provide fat pipes to each home, and justify the common head-end infrastructure for advanced services. Think how many residences are in 1 sq mile of NYC or Chicago, or London or Singapore.

In the US, Canada, etc.. for the most part people live in single family homes where developers have nicely sliced up large swaths of countryside on the periphery of a metropolitan area. Phone companies and CATV companies use 40+ year old technology to serve these homes with the minimal services they can provide to justify the build and still turn a profit. That's why a Bell Comapny can amortize a build over 22 yrs!!

Now comes the Internet, and more reliance of data and interaction and content. This forces companies to re-purpose existing infrastructure - CATV and phone lines for data services. The result are mediocre at best. DSL sacrifices speed for reliability, Cable Modems sacrifice stability for speed. Fixed wireless sacrifices both when it's foggy and Satellite services sacrifice everything(just google "FAP").

There have been an increasing number of FTTH (fiber) deployments, but overall they amount to very little of the entire footprint. Phone and Cable companies are very slow to change - due to training/culture/economics.

A great example is Brittish Telecom - they have two war'ing factions - the telephone guys and the data guys. The telephone guys have won so far, as that's where the $$$ come from in their world. They honestly think the internet is a fad. The data guys want to rip out all of the copper plant and build higher margin fiber networks but can't get their friends w/ the $$$ to write the check. The UK customer is loosing the battle.

Anyways, enough about delivery. The other challenge is content rights - HULU is great and it's a start. But the primary content providers are very reluctant to allow transmission over IP. The old execs are still reeling from Napster & RIAA fears.

The technology is there, and can be made to work, but the challenges are more economic. The death toll for "Broadcast" television is ringing louder.

Like ZachCrack says - on a greenfield builds (i.e. 2nd & 3rd world countries) companies often go with fiber 100% of the time. The exception is if there's no $$$ in the country, they simply rely on cell service + slow-path data, then they deploy GSM and deny other services all together due to cost. It's tough to deploy fiber to the tent or mudhut in some places - but they do like their iPhones!

Hope this helps!

MtnDoo