Getting Back to Basics in Business

Over the last few months much has been made of relatively new tech companies, less then, 2-5 years old coming out and announcing that they want to do a IPO, which is a Initial Public Offering. There are several questions that have been risen, such as do they have a solid business plan, and are they actually making money. While I don’t pretend to completely understand all the ins and outs, of big time money management and all of the ramifications of events to both the economy or the business itself.

There are several basic ideas that I do understand, The primary object of any business is to both make money, and give the consumer the most value for their money as possible. If you give the customer value above and beyond what they expect , and follow it it up with support and service, whatever, that might entail everything from basic hand holding, to either going and fixing or replacing the product with no hassle, and a BIG smile on your face. You’ll do far more more good for your business then any amount of advertisement can ever do. Happy customers come back, and Happy customers talk,, a lot. Word of mouth can go a long way to either building your business, or destroying it slowly. Just remember that the next time a customer is driving you crazy over something YOU think is stupid, to them its important, how you handle what they think is important, is important to them. So much for business 101.

Netflix has become the 800 pound guerrilla in the room when content and tv companies get together. No matter what else they talk about, what deals they may want to do, Netflix is in their shadow waiting to take their market share way form them. Content providers need to go back and reevaluate their core objectives.
As I mentioned in the opening segment, the object of any business, be it a small family business that sells fruit out on the side of the road, to a multi-million dollar conglomerate is to give the customer value above and beyond what they expect.
Quite simply the TV/media industry at least on the broadcast and consumer provider side, not the theatre side so much, has dropped the ball a LONG time ago.
Way back in the 1950’s at the beginning of TV, advertisers knew they had a captive audience and played it up to the max. Having corporate sponsors,and having host of talk and game shows actually plugging the product as part of the routine show, is was annoying, but far less annoying then today's commercial breaks which can last from 3-10 minutes long, and often repeat the same ad several times in a roll.

That just covers what broadcast show “live” on a daily basis to the masses.
That includes those who don’t have the technology to bend their TV to their will.
Those of us with DVRs can record,pause and rewind and generally bring the TV to its knees. And advertisers hate this. they can’t count on you seeing their ads every time you want to see your favorite show. and Appointment Viewing is long dead. That is to say if you wanted to watch a certain show you had to be in front of your TV at that exact time, or you missed it until next week. Worse yet, if there were two shows on at the same time, on different channels you had to choose which one you liked better. Advertisers loved that, it helped with getting numbers, they could tell much better what was being watched, and who commercials were being seen. Today, consumers demand to watch what they want when and where they want. The devices and platforms that media is available is constantly expanding. Content owners and providers need to embrace the new directions and come up with models that allow them to get access to the content they want, when they want.
They need allow consumers to watch their content on a variety of platforms.
The basic concept is to spread your content around as much as possible; instead of trying to do a deal to limit ones content to one venue and asking a exuberant sum for a very short year deal, try spreading it out out over several venues with less for money each deal, and make more money in the long run.
Better yet they make their content readily available to whole new audiences which might not have discovered content they didn't know about. Making content easier to access or rent, either via Netflix Amazon, any number of other places to rent or view content, doing such deals to let ` the consumers find the content and play it where they want, or need to, with out having to resort to to other means to get the content they want.
A YouTube search will yield many movies and TV shows put up in short 10-14 minute segments watching a series of 8-10 segments in a row will allow you to essentially watch the whole program. Whether this is legal is another question for another time. However, the bigger point, is the is people want to see the content, and will put it out one way or another. So content providers do yourself a favor and make you stuff easy to rent, buy or otherwise enjoy the content, and moving content from one platform to another should be seamless with a DRM issue and no issues with software formats not being capable. Everything should just work.
The notion of cord cutting that the industry pundits are taking about is probably right to a degree, However, As people get the new TVs that can connect to the web, either directly or through a computer, easiest being hooking a laptop and piping everything from the laptop to the TV, the uses for a fast connection are increased, suddenly you can fire up Netflix, on the laptop and send it to the TV and enjoy the same content from the laptop on the big TV, same for YouTube, any other web content, be it podcast, or videos etc. Suddenly the pipe from the cable provider is’nt as important as it was, However, there’s still a lot of content that only available on broadcast TV. While a large percentage will cut down on the size of the package that keep, both for budget reason, and because content is available on line and they can get it there and pipe it to the platform of choice to watch it. I don’t think its cord cutting, so much as its cord switching, and sharing, one supplementing the other.
Some content providers are making strides to make their content available on mobile platforms with limitations, while its a good start. But there’s a long way to go.
Netflix has pretty much set the standard for streaming video, and a business model that works. They have been able to get themselves placed in a wide variety pf platforms from DVD players, TVs themselves, I even read at one point, there was talk of them actually having a physical button on a remote, on some TVs, weather anything has come of it, is not important. What is important is their dominance and saturation in the video industry . They do have some big hurtles to jump, the biggest is the deals they have to make with content owners. Every time they try to do a deal the price goes up or the owners want to renegotiate a deal halfway though a contract. The point is if content owners would quit being so worried about their content and how its being used, and work to get it into as many venues as possible and not make is prohibitively expensive that small providers to get into. They would in the long run probably make more then they trying to do with the high price deals they’re doing now, only it’s be spread out over more companies, and longer terms, so if there was a loss somewhere it won't be as much as it it was in one big deal the lost.

The long and short of it content owners, and providers need to go back and reevaluate their core business model, and why they are in business. Are they in business to serve the stockholders, or the customer, aka, public? If its the customer, they need to rethink how and what kind of deals they do, to get their content out, with a minimum of constraints both on the provider and especially the end user. If the customer is is happy and willing to pay the reasonable rental fee or subscription fee, and can get what they want when and where and on what platform they want, with no issues, the profit for the stockholders will come.

The future of TV and Media is Evolving

Lets see now,,, Where to Start,,,?

Interesting news crossed my desk this morning,;

Apple is now working with record labels to try to push the sale of complete albums. From what I grather they are working on putting together a more interactive, value added experience for the album buyer in hope of entising more complete album sales. and cut down on the single track sales. Unfortunately, too little too late. If they had done something like this several years ago, they might have influenced the buying patterns of consumers. However, now except for rare occosions or special issues of classic albums no one buys a whole ablum, They pick and choose what tracks they like.

I personally have very little interest in buying a whole album, except for replacing material that I already have. For example, I have the 2 disc lp of Elvis Hawaiian concert, Only been played a few tines to make cassette copies many years ago, in other words practically new. Buying a new remastered copy might interst me. However, I prefer to have a CD and not just a digital copy. So a digital copy would have to offer material that I can't get now, and and I doubt they very much they could ad to a 30+ year old concert of a guy whose been dead for almost all of those 30 years.

However, other models of marketing and packaging do interest me. I have seen lately where Disney was offering its movies on Blu-ray, and including a regular Dvd in the same package. THAT makes sense .. As may folks will have only one HD player while regular dvd players are dirt cheap and the kids probably have at least one device that plays dvd, be it a laptop, or a portable dvd player, Let the kids have the regular dvd, and save the HD version for the main HD set-up at home, if they loose or ruin the dvd it not the end of the world, so to speak. In order to combat piricay. Media producers are going to to have add value to get consumer to spend money on material, they could just as easy download form bit-torrents and the like. Adding the regular dvd to the HD set, just makes sense, and is only the beginning. The new crop of Blu-ray players is offering a host of networked interactive features. Of course how many people actually use them remains to be seen..

The television as we know it has evolved over the last 20 years, particularly over the last 5-10 years. The digital transition went off in June, and he world didn't stop turning. However, the broadcasting world did change. The tvs have become almost entirely flat panels, either LCD or Plasmas, or in some expensive models, OLEDS, and other new technologies. The old old 4x3 form factor is now entirely gone. Every unit form the little 7 inch monitor up to the massive 65 inch Plasma are in the wide format, 16x9 format. While the number of inputs that one can feed into a tv has jumped to a panel in the back and side that resembles the back of a high end surround sound receiver. There is usually a set of legacy ports, RCA, S-video, and of course the new HD connections, HDMI, and digital audio in and out, carrying all 5 channels of surround sound both in and out to receivers, and Blu-ray players. Next genration game consols, and even laptops with HDMI out on them, allowing one to connect the laptop to the Tv. This allows one to surf the web on the big tv, add a wireless keyboard, and mouse and you have a nice set-up. Ideal for streaming Hulu and the like. One concept that I've seen a lot lately is the idea of the connected tv. What they are touting as connected is the ability of the tv to natively download and play movies of the likes of Netflicks, Amazon,. While I'm sold on the idea of the connected tv,

I'm not sold on the idea of buying my media only in a pure downloaded format, trusting them to keep my media that I've bought on their servers and remembering is mine when I change tvs or even the next time I just want to watch it. My idea of a connected tv would be native wireless connectivity, ie , it sees the local network and ask me for permission to jump on the network, and then I go the to menu and find a built in web browser, Firefox, or Chrome. A included wireless keyboard would make running the whole tv much easier, Possibility include special buttons to access the tv menus and setting for tweaking and set-up. A trackball on the keyboard would eliminate the need for a wireless mouse.

A small fash memory built in would hold the browser programing along with bookmarks and flash and other web necessary programs and could be reset to factory default if needed. Thats a connected tv...

Cable companys are desperate to try to bing in customers and keep the ones they have are trying several new models, the the so called "TV anywhere", which essentially allows subscriber to log in and watch their regular programing on a computer and they are verified as a subscriber. Their is allready a soluation for this, called slingbox, which onced connected to your cable box lets you watch whatever you have connected to it on any computer in the world. Dish network, which is a investor and part owner of Slingmedia, already has a new reciver coming out later this year which has the sling capabilities built right in. That is the technology that the cable companies are fighting. As soon as the new Dish receiver is made publicly available, they will have lost the battle. And they know it.

The cable company's "Tv Everywhere" is doomed to fail, no one will pay extra to get the same content, they can get much of for free, via, Hulu and other streaming sites. There is going to have to be a real valued-aded component to this and a very compelling one at that.

As for music cd's; How about including a set of MP3 on the disc themselves that can be legaly downloaded to a computer for use in mp3 playes and the like, or even a code to get a set of very high quality audio files off a certain site. Or better yet, behind the scenes content an the making of the music and the artist, and possibility even the ability to download enhanced tracks or stream material not yet released, but not able to save new material locally until its released. In general, offering maore ways to interact with the artist other then just his regular fan site.

In order to continue to sell hardware and media in a ecomay where people are becoming more careful about where they put their money, and what they invest in, be it a HDTV or a media player or even the media they actually play producers are going to have to be more creative in their marketing more importantly they need to give consumer more value for their money. be it adding a regular dvd version to a HD copy of a movie, or adding extras to music cds .If consumers don't feel they're getting what they paid for they will either stop buying, or in the case of media go to "Alternative Resources" to acquire what they want. By giving consumer extra content they can't get by downloading a copy off Bit-Torrents, they help give the consumer a reason to spend the money for the product.

And the Winner is....Not US....

The time as come to wax poetically, or just rant... on and on,,,,,,,,,,

I have several pet issues, which I've covered in some detail. I don't want to bore you by going over ground you can just as easily read by clicking on my archives.
As you may know the Oscars are coming up very soon, I haven't watched a Oscar show in many years, I've also not watched any awards show for music in at least as many years.
I haven't let myself get pulled into the pettiness and shallowness and gaudiness of of toady's commercialism . While its hard to completely ignore the advertisements and the push to get you to buy into a system where you want it before you even know what it dose. It can be done. The thing to do is realize that 99% of the "stuff" that is pushed into the market is either useless or just plain junk that should never have ever been brought to market in the first place . I have been heard many a times, when a commercial come on, saying to whoever was around, usually myself,"If you believe that, I've got some Farmland in the Middle of the Ocean to Sell YOU" meaning they're full of" whatever adjective you want to insert.". and I don't believe one word of their BS.

This morning my seven year old daughter wrote up a list of item she wanted for her birthday this spring,there were only three, but the point is, She saw them all advertised on tv this morning and decided based on one 30 second spot that she wanted them. Of course I know by the time her birthday comes around she'll probably forgotten about them, but it bring home the point about people particularly young kids thinking they have to have every new thing that they see, whether they need it or not. Kids are not he only who fall into this trap. Many adults of the last couple of generations have grown up with advertising blasting at them from the time they wake up in the morning, till they go to bed at night. They think they have to have every new do-dad that is shown them. weather they need it or not..

The basic of the new economy is consumerism and a throw away mentality, that is use something once and throw it away. It all started after WWII during the prosperity of the 1950's when the US economy was a giant in the world, exporting more then we were importing and selling goods all over the world. Science was making new discoveries every day and they were trickling down to the consumers at unbelievable rate. Consumers were bombarded with a whole new world of goods and experiences that had never dreamed of, soon they had more stuff then they knew what to do with.All that new stuff has to go somewhere when is being replaced, It used to take 10 plus years before something needed replacing, now almost anything needs replacing in two -three years; either because it stops working entirely or because its so outdated its useless it has to go.

Technology was moved so faster that its impossible to keep up with it. Computers that cost $3,000.00 10 tears ago, are now relics sitting in the back of a closet collecting dust, while some of the faster of the older machine can be used as servers and linux boxes, the vast majority are consigned to the giant tech pile of trash we as a world are building everyday.

All of this is not even counting the push for alternative means of generating energy. windmills, solar, ect, and some really off the wall stuff that if implemented with the proper backing and funding and management could actually work, People have a knee-jerk reaction to new ideas, if we don't as a world and as a country step back and reexamine every idea to help save our world or we'll be digging our way out of a massive pile of Tech junk the suffocating us so we can't breathe what air there is.

I realize that this is a pretty broad indictment of the economic system which we've come to know and love. I think that one to take a step back and reevaluate what they're spending their time and money on in the way of contributing to the national economy.
Well, I guess thats my rant for this week, I hope it give folks some ideas of things they should think about...

And if we're not very careful the winner will not be us...