[94217] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marshall Eubanks)
Sat Jan 13 07:53:07 2007
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701131332511.29447@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@multicasttech.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2007 07:50:08 -0500
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Jan 13, 2007, at 7:36 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
> On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
>
>> A technical issue that I have to deal with is that you get a 30
>> minute show (actually 24 minutes of content) as 30 minutes, _with
>> the ads slots included_. To show it without ads, you actually have
>> to take the show into a video editor and remove the ad slots,
>> which costs video editor time, which is expensive.
>
> Well, in this case you'd hopefully get the show directly from
> whoever is producing it without ads in the first place, basically
> the same content you might see if you buy the show on DVD.
>
I do get it from the producer; that is what they produce. (And the
video editor time referred to is people time, not machine time, which
is trivial.)
>> In the USA at least, the cable companies make you pay for
>> "bundles" to get channels you want. I have to pay for 3 bundles to
>> get 2 channels we actually want to watch. (One of these bundle is
>> apparently only sold if you are already getting another, which we
>> don't actually care about.) So, it actually costs us $ 40 + /
>> month to get the two channels we want (plus a bunch we don't.) So,
>> it occurs to me that there is a business selling solo channels on
>> the Internet, as is, with the ads, for order $ 5 - $ 10 per
>> subscriber per month, which should leave a substantial profit
>> after the payments to the networks and bandwidth costs.
>
> There is zero problem for the cable companies to immediately
> compete with you by offering the same thing, as soon as there is
> competition. Since their channel is the most established, my guess
> is that you would have a hard time succeeding where they already
> have a footprint and established customers.
>
Yes, and that has the potential of immediately reducing their income
by a factor of 2 or more.
I suspect that they would compete at first by putting pressure on the
channel aggregators not to sell to such businesses. (note : this is
NOT a business I am pursuing at present.)
What I do conclude from this is that the oncoming wave of IPTV and
Internet Television is going to be very disruptive.
> Where you could do well with your proposal, is where there is no
> cable TV available at all.
Regards
>
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
