Internet TV will be a viable platform when more than 15% of households have a TV with an actual Internet connection. I have no interest in seeing Conan do a face plant for the sake of being Revision3's IPTV pioneer.
I'm admittedly in the "young kid just out of college" demographic, but I'm not sure I know anyone who doesn't just use their TV as a big monitor, or has an AppleTV with Boxee, or doesn't own a TV and watches Hulu on their laptop.
And isn't this Conan's core fanbase anyway?
I'm not saying it wouldn't be a risky move, but history rewards the bold.
I don't do any of those things and I'm only 5 years out of college. Does that mean I'm old?
Either way, I think there's still something to be said for just watching 'tv' in the historical definition. My guess is that you and your acquaintances are still in a very small minority (though I'd be happy to be proved wrong as I'm not entirely happy with my cable service provided).
just watching 'tv' in the historical definition is a massive waste of time. I have multiple lifetimes of content already tagged and queued. I have no time for bullshit old school network control and manipulation. I made my own network.
time and effort yes. At this time my collection of web services is basically an organism that feeds my mind. It took time and effort to start the feedback loop but now the loop provides more than I can consume.
IPTV is not part of my vocabulary. Bittorrent is a pain. I use netflix, ted, fora.tv, youtube, vimeo and whatever else percolates into my spectrum of social content aggregators, google reader, facebook.
re: small minority. Yesterday I was sitting in a dark old-timer bar in MT and heard two of the old salts telling some younger guys (mid-40s) about the wonder of Netflix. I am experiencing this more and more with people. Just a short matter of time.
Obviously, in Conan's case NBC has proven that they're not willing to wait for any reasonably short time period when trying out new things. I'm betting the reason that's the case is because advertisers aren't either. Until the advertising dollar moves onto the Internet, it's not going to make sense for a Conan to do the same.
I agree that it's a matter of time before we stop talking about IPTV as something new or separate from TV, but that timeframe isn't going to be determined as much by consumers (your old salts) as it is by the advertisers.
You are in a very small minority. I think the better question is: do your parents? I'm ten years out of college, and while I am able to connect my computer to my TV to watch Hulu, etc, it isn't a permanent setup. I have the cables in place to just plug things in, but only on the TV in my living room. My bedroom TV is capable, but I don't have the cables in place.
Conan has a pretty broad fan base. He's been doing this for years. So, unless you can sell me on the fact that 85% of his target audience has this type of setup, it's a bad idea.
Not only that, but the setup has to be permanent and drop-dead simple. So, unless you are a 100% Hulu kinda person, we're talking about a dedicated device attached to the TV that could tune in his show from a remote control. Access to the show would have to be as ubiquitous as a traditional TV. This is the only way to keep the numbers in the range that advertisers would demand.
My parents don't have cable. My dad watches Steeler games, my mom watches Dancing with the Stars, and they occasionally watch the morning news. That's it. The friends I speak of range from 18-35.
> Not only that, but the setup has to be permanent and drop-dead simple.
I'm not sure what's hard about Boxee, Netflix over the XBox, or even just having a computer hooked up to a television in general. It's not like there's a difference between them now, other than size.
I'm not sure what's hard about Boxee, Netflix over the XBox, or even just having a computer hooked up to a television in general. It's not like there's a difference between them now, other than size.
Definitely agree about Boxee and Netflix. They are designed around providing a simple user experience, and all the consumer needs is familiarity.
Plugging in a computer is another matter though. There's a mental barrier there that people will just never overcome. Computers are complicated, and people use them for other things (okay maybe only web surfing and email). They don't want to plug it in and start a program, no matter how simple it is. Even if the program was henceforth telepathic and let you watch any content instantaneously in HD it would be a hard sell.
> I'm not sure what's hard about Boxee, Netflix over the XBox, or even just having a computer hooked up to a television in general.
It's not hard, it's just that most people (ie. NBC's giant[1] audience) already have something that works for them in the plop-on-the-couch-surf-with-remote area. They aren't yet looking for ways to watch internet video on their TVs. And even if Conan's fan base is setup for IPTV, advertisers haven't yet bought into the small engaged audience as a viable demographic.
One reason for Conan (and anyone with similar status) not to switch to the internet is that on mainstream media competition has a high entry barrier - very few people get a show on NBC, or a column in the NY Times - while online a PR piece by Revision3 can get published on a major news website like any other content.
If you're a newcomer who wants to compete with Conan O'Brien, the web can be a good starting point. If you are Conan O'Brien, the web is suicide.
I'd say that's just the tip of the iceberg. Money and production values are just way more abundant on a television network. Even though talk show budgets are a drop in the bucket compared to scripted dramas, it's an astronomical cost for Internet publishers who can't bring in any advertising dollars.
The only way it makes sense for Conan to move his show to the Internet is by starting his own business and making a real go of it. Figure out a real business model, and yes, salaries would have to take a hit, but he could conceivably create something amazing and future-proof rather than riding the (slowly) sinking ship that is traditional network television. Signing on to try to help someone else's startup would be insane; nothing more than an act of charity. However there is an opportunity, however slim, for Conan to go big on the Internet and prove that he is still innovative and do something that's never been done before.
The only way it makes sense for Conan to move his show to the Internet is by starting his own business and making a real go of it.
Some years ago I recall reading a list of top entertainment money makers. The top two women that year were Madonna and Oprah. The interesting thing was that while Madonna grossed more revenue overall, Oprah made more money because Oprah owns all of her own businesses and almost everyone is an employee. Madonna, by contrast, did business with people who took a portion of the proceeds.
This is not to say that Madonna was doing the wrong thing. It allowed her to focus on her 'core competence.' Perhaps business is Oprah's core competence, so each might have been doing the right thing for themselves.
I would say that Conan could make a lot more "running his own show" on TV or the Internet, but only if he has a talent for it.
Sure, but there's not enough money in Internet programming right now for Conan's cut to be worth it. Hell there's not enough money probably to operate the show even if Conan takes $0.
Madonna was popularized using a very well established formula that had been honed by record companies over the previous half-century.
My point is, that at this stage in the game, Conan could innovate, but only if he can take a controlling interest. If he wants or needs someone else to be the strategic party then it's too soon. He'll need to wait 5 or 10 years for Internet programming to come into its own as an industry at which point he can be just one more chunk of content (sort of like he was for NBC).
I'm confident that an internet version of The Conan O'Brien show will be funnier, edgier, more credible and more innovative. And that will translate into more profits - both for Conan and for Revision3
It seems possible it could be more innovative and funny if it was internet based, but I am highly skeptical of this translating to more profit for Conan. How much is Conan worth to the big networks for a year of shows? 15 million? Where's Revision3 going to get that kind of money?
23 comments
[ 4.6 ms ] story [ 67.8 ms ] threadAnd isn't this Conan's core fanbase anyway?
I'm not saying it wouldn't be a risky move, but history rewards the bold.
Either way, I think there's still something to be said for just watching 'tv' in the historical definition. My guess is that you and your acquaintances are still in a very small minority (though I'd be happy to be proved wrong as I'm not entirely happy with my cable service provided).
Obviously, in Conan's case NBC has proven that they're not willing to wait for any reasonably short time period when trying out new things. I'm betting the reason that's the case is because advertisers aren't either. Until the advertising dollar moves onto the Internet, it's not going to make sense for a Conan to do the same.
I agree that it's a matter of time before we stop talking about IPTV as something new or separate from TV, but that timeframe isn't going to be determined as much by consumers (your old salts) as it is by the advertisers.
Conan has a pretty broad fan base. He's been doing this for years. So, unless you can sell me on the fact that 85% of his target audience has this type of setup, it's a bad idea.
Not only that, but the setup has to be permanent and drop-dead simple. So, unless you are a 100% Hulu kinda person, we're talking about a dedicated device attached to the TV that could tune in his show from a remote control. Access to the show would have to be as ubiquitous as a traditional TV. This is the only way to keep the numbers in the range that advertisers would demand.
> Not only that, but the setup has to be permanent and drop-dead simple.
I'm not sure what's hard about Boxee, Netflix over the XBox, or even just having a computer hooked up to a television in general. It's not like there's a difference between them now, other than size.
Definitely agree about Boxee and Netflix. They are designed around providing a simple user experience, and all the consumer needs is familiarity.
Plugging in a computer is another matter though. There's a mental barrier there that people will just never overcome. Computers are complicated, and people use them for other things (okay maybe only web surfing and email). They don't want to plug it in and start a program, no matter how simple it is. Even if the program was henceforth telepathic and let you watch any content instantaneously in HD it would be a hard sell.
Dedicated boxes are the way this will go.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Of course, there'll always be Luddites, but even my non-technical friends do stuff like this.
It's not hard, it's just that most people (ie. NBC's giant[1] audience) already have something that works for them in the plop-on-the-couch-surf-with-remote area. They aren't yet looking for ways to watch internet video on their TVs. And even if Conan's fan base is setup for IPTV, advertisers haven't yet bought into the small engaged audience as a viable demographic.
[1] Giant relative to Rev3's.
If you're a newcomer who wants to compete with Conan O'Brien, the web can be a good starting point. If you are Conan O'Brien, the web is suicide.
The only way it makes sense for Conan to move his show to the Internet is by starting his own business and making a real go of it. Figure out a real business model, and yes, salaries would have to take a hit, but he could conceivably create something amazing and future-proof rather than riding the (slowly) sinking ship that is traditional network television. Signing on to try to help someone else's startup would be insane; nothing more than an act of charity. However there is an opportunity, however slim, for Conan to go big on the Internet and prove that he is still innovative and do something that's never been done before.
Some years ago I recall reading a list of top entertainment money makers. The top two women that year were Madonna and Oprah. The interesting thing was that while Madonna grossed more revenue overall, Oprah made more money because Oprah owns all of her own businesses and almost everyone is an employee. Madonna, by contrast, did business with people who took a portion of the proceeds.
This is not to say that Madonna was doing the wrong thing. It allowed her to focus on her 'core competence.' Perhaps business is Oprah's core competence, so each might have been doing the right thing for themselves.
I would say that Conan could make a lot more "running his own show" on TV or the Internet, but only if he has a talent for it.
Madonna was popularized using a very well established formula that had been honed by record companies over the previous half-century.
My point is, that at this stage in the game, Conan could innovate, but only if he can take a controlling interest. If he wants or needs someone else to be the strategic party then it's too soon. He'll need to wait 5 or 10 years for Internet programming to come into its own as an industry at which point he can be just one more chunk of content (sort of like he was for NBC).
It seems possible it could be more innovative and funny if it was internet based, but I am highly skeptical of this translating to more profit for Conan. How much is Conan worth to the big networks for a year of shows? 15 million? Where's Revision3 going to get that kind of money?