The message for the television industry at this year’s National Cable Show was clear: It’s all about broadband now. Programmers agreed that they have to focus on consumers who want to watch video on their smartphones and tablet computers. Meanwhile, cable operators know that they can make a lot of cash by enticing new customers to buy broadband now that the TV service business is mature. The big question is whether the Big Media companies can move fast enough to head off competitors such as Apple, Google, and Netflix. But we’ll let the moguls have the last word:
Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman
- “For the content owners there’s never been a better time.”
- “Netflix is primarily a service that provides library programming. … Netflix got involved in one show (House Of Cards) that was a pay television kind of project, but that isn’t their fundamental business.”
- “If we are ad supported, (then) we need to have a measurement system in place so the mobile device in the home can sell ads. … (Nielsen) is not measuring it now. That’s one of the obstacles [for TV Everywhere].”
- “Consumers are changing. … People don’t want to watch the 17th repeat of the same show.”
- “In a world of a lot of choices, Snookie still rules.”
News Corp COO Chase Carey
- “We have to do a better job of exciting consumers.”
Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes
- “Let’s all cheer up. This isn’t the music industry. It’s the cable industry. … It’s morning in the cable industry.”
- “We’re all sitting here at this convention at the cusp of putting all of [our programming] on demand. … We need to get [shows] on every device.”
- “Put the TV on all the Internet devices and don’t charge people to do it and allow them to [access] they way they’re accustomed to.”
Comcast CEO Brian Roberts
- “We are demonsrating a whole new level of (Internet) speed. … It’s where the future of broadband is headed.”
- “We need to make the television feel as relevant as all of these other products [such as smartphones and iPad tablet computers].”
Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt
- “There’s no such thing as a TV anymore. There’s a video display device.”
- “I see Netflix as another programmer. But clearly if there is something that makes consumers not want to buy the big package (of programming) that we’re selling then that’s a threat to all of us.”
- “There clearly is a growing underclass of consumers that can’t afford [cable TV] and they want it. It would behoove all of us to have smaller packages… The economics make it difficult, but it would serve us well to worry about that group.”
Cox Communications President Pat Esser
- “You have to keep going back to the consumer and asking what they value. … Consumers wil reward you for doing that. And in some cases you won’t control all of it.”
FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski
- “Broadband is an absolute key to helping us recover from the terrible economic situation of the last few years…. Our broadband platform is what will make sure that the next generation of products that consumers are buying are developed here.”
- “One of the great accomplishments of the cable industry was the launch of C-SPAN.…Out of the 50 states in the country only four have (a state equivalent)…I encourage this industry to look at this challenge of creating more state C-SPANS.”
- “[67% of people who can subscribe to broadband actually do.] 67% is so far from good enough that we can’t be satisfied with slow, step by step incremental change…. We need to step this up a few notches. I’m calling on the cable industry and other industries in the broadband economy to help close the broadband gap.”
Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jonathan Liebowitz
- “I don’t understand why [broadband] metering hasn’t taken off… [In other businesses] people pay for what they use.”
Scripps Networks Interactice CEO Ken Lowe
- “For us, the content providers…we’re probably going to become a little more dependant on advertising.”
Time Warner Cable COO Rob Marcus
- “One of the attractions [of Netflix] is the cheapness of that service. And cheapness and breadth of service don’t go hand in hand.”
Oprah Winfrey
- (About the launch of OWN: Oprah Winfrey Network) I was all-in with one foot out the door.
- My audience came thinking it’s all there. (If she could launch OWN over again) I would clarify it to say, we’re taking Tuesday nights or Sunday nights or Monday nights. I would bring my audience and teach them how to watch cable.
- I have committed everything I have to this cable venture. It’s everything I have. Myself, my heart, the soul and spirit of me, my company – dedicated to the vision of OWN. I wouldn’t bet against me.

If the big guys really want to ensure people buy their program packages on cable, smaller channel packages will not be the winning answer. People do not want to pay $80 for 70 channels when they may only watch 20 of those channels. The biggest complaint consumers have about the current system is being forcer to pay for channels they never watch. Cable and satellite need to figure out a way to offer a-la-carte programming. You choose the channels you want to pay for! End of story. Until cable figures out a way to make this happen I will not be going back to a cable box anytime in the near future.
Yes but a-la-carte programming has a huge negative. What was it 70-90% of the channels exist today would be gone over night if a-la-carte was an option? I guarantee that one of your 20 channels would be one of them. While I think you should get more choice in the channel selection, I think a-la-carte would destroy the industry.
I agree that perhaps going a-la-carte could hurt some channels in the long run and that would be unfortunate because it would really limit the choices, but do we really need 10 food channels or 15 shopping channels?
As things stand now, cable providers frequently drop channels from the basic and premium packages without adjusting the price. To the consumer, does it really matter if it is the result of a carriage dispute or just low ratings? No.
Let a customer try a channel for a short period and then bill them to subscribe to it.
A-la-carte can work as long as there is a corresponding drop in the bill when a channel goes under, I am cool with letting the market decide what is profitable based on actual subscribers.
If it means the death of niche channels like CSPAN, CNN, Current TV, Fox News, G4, HSN, MSNBC, MTV, and QVC, etc. because the fees from subscribers doesn’t put enough money in the coffers, So be it!
“death of niche channels” what the fuck are you talking about? Fox News is the most watched news channel. HSN and QVC do remarkably good numbers. MTV has reached ratings highs the past two years, love or hate the content. 6mm+ for jersey shore.
go back to your cave, unibomber.
Watching the O’Reilly Factor until “niche” turns up as the Word of the Day might be of use here.
Niche does not refer to the number of viewers. It refers to a “specialized market” like music, shopping, news, etc.
Bloomberg, CNBC, and Fox Business serve the niche of business news. Fox News, CNN, & MSNBC serve the niche of general news.
Vitriol aside, the real question is:
If relatively equivalent content is available on the web, would the same number of people pay a subscription fee to watch it on cable?
If people see value in paying a fee to subscribe to QVC or HSN, great. Otherwise, they can do their shopping at Amazon.com, Overstocked.com, or eBay, etc.
Channels that are popular would attract subscribers, and the marketplace would determine sustainability.
An al-a-carte approach would allow the cable operators to be transparent about which channels charge the highest carriage fees. So, the next time they threaten to drop a channel due to a request for higher carriage fees, they can translate that directly into a tangible increased cost to consumers.
As it is now, people just think the cable operators ought to stop being greedy. Many consumer’s attitude is that the cable company makes enough money and should just suck it up and continue to give me my Food Network at the same price.
Niche channels like, “Fox News and MTV”? Really, if a la carte is the way of the future then Fox News and MTV will get even larger market shares. When you start trimming the fat away some of the secondary channels will end up growing in size.
It’s not possible to go a la carte, what is possible is for cable to realize that people are starting to use alternate avenues to get their entertainment fix. If any thing Netflix is proving what cable has been doing for years… people will watch whatever content is available as long as it’s affordable. There is a notion now that people won’t buy or rent anymore if they can just stream it on Netflix… the exact opposite of a la carte.
The networks and studios need to get their shot together and find a sensible/ affordable way to get they’re content to the masses. Cable is an outdated middleman and it costs and arm and a leg for what amounts to a low return in entertainment value.
Jeff Bewkes seems to get it.
No, Reed Hastings gets it. Netflix is fast becoming HBO, except they have a business model that bypasses the cable operators and deals directly with the consumers. Forget about the mailing of DVDs back and forth. That’s the old Netflix. The new Netflix is on-demand movies (and soon original programming) streamed directly to your TV via the internet through video game consoles, blu-ray players and set-top boxes, or your phone, laptop or ipad. When HBO sells a subscription, it is to a cable customer that already has to have the basic tiers, and the cable operators take their 30% (or more) cut. Netflix sells a la carte directly to the consumer, without having to pay a vig to cable. The networks of the future are going to be Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, etc. Cable operators are going to be strictly broadband internet providers. If I’m ESPN, CNN, The Food Network or even HBO, I get on the internet streaming bandwagon ASAP.
Talk about slumbering giants jolted awake after rolling off the bed! Some comments in particular — Dauman: “For the content owners there’s never been a better time” contrasted with “Consumers are changing… People don’t want to watch the 17th repeat of the same show.” See the dichotomy there, Phil? I’m just not too keen to watch “Petticoat Junction” on my 4G iPhone, understand? Stop going to the same creators or content owners, really try to offer something new! Britt: “There clearly is a growing underclass of consumers that can’t afford [cable TV] and they want it. It would behoove all of us to have smaller packages… The economics make it difficult, but it would serve us well to worry about that group.” Ya got that right, Glenn. Food on the table or yet another food channel? Easy choice. Yet my favorite is the Big O: “I would bring my audience and teach them how to watch cable.” How dare you?! Maybe you have your core audience of sheeple just begging for your crumbs of wisdom, but the rest of the viewing audience can’t wait to “teach” you a thing or two by blowing off your billion-dollar gamble.
If Oprah doesn’t teach me how to watch cable, who will? It has taken me decades to figure out that whole “It’s not TV… It’s HBO” ad campaign. It turns out they we right. You don’t need a TV to watch HBO.
Streaming sources will continue to replace cable channels until broadband providers begin to lower the threshold for monthly bandwidth usage. It is inevitable.
Cell providers have figured out their infrastructure doesn’t work and have eliminated unlimited plans.
It is only a matter of time before cable broadband providers see a corresponding surge of bandwidth usage as more people figure out they can pay companies like ComCast $150+ a month for cable TV + broadband or just $50 a month for high speed broadband then use the rest for services like NetFlix or Hulu Plus and have plenty left over for beer and pizza.
“Let’s all cheer up. This isn’t the music industry. It’s the cable industry…It’s morning in the cable industry.”
Said the man who either is fucking clueless that his industry solely exists because of government sanctioned monopoly or who works tirelessly to ensure that the government sanctioned monopoly never ends.
Without the government created and protected monopoly, then the cable industry becomes the music industry.
The savior of the cable industry isn’t a smaller package model. It’s an individual subscription model where people can go to a network’s website via their internet enabled television and subscribe directly to their channel (and only their channel) for $9.99 a month. There’s really no use for a cable provider anymore other than to provide broadband service.
That’ is going to cost people more than cable… 20 channels will set you back 200 dollars. No one in their right mind wants to do that… other than the pay structure though you are right. Content owners need to bypass the cable industry altogether and have their own streaming services… of course then we are talking about total control of the content and that’s going to cause a backlash.
broadband offer unlimited capacity for programming but constrained
capacity for promotion and marketing because of the overwheming information.
The cable industry have never been showmen nor in fact have theatres.
To choose a service or buy a program you need to create value.
Its not easy or cheap to create the identity that Showtime, HBO
and Starz have done over many years and now they are being faced with dilution from basic cable.
A new model of promotion has to be created. Active not passive.
What the Fuck. Do you think I really want to watch the Sopranos on my phone. TV lived from the fifties to the 1990′s when they paid the Friends stars too much on demand. Then their was Seinfield that broke the bank.
Great TV= Great writers + average, funny actors.
If the TV excecs think some kids from NY/NJ are going to save broadcast or cable TV they need to stop smoking rocks.
This is fing hilarious. “”In a world of a lot of choices, Snookie still rules.”
I’m going to paste that above my toilet.
Fabulous post! I WILL NEVER watch TV on my phone. I can barely read my emails on the phone.
What I see from these CEO comments is frustration because they do not understand where their business is heading. Two words are responsible for cord cutting in younger populations: channel bundling. The new generation of subscribers hate it, and cannot afford it. Stop the practice and per channel fees will sky rocket. Testing it through digital mediums will prove my point.
With the younger generation so wired to the internet, this strategy is completely viable now compared to say twenty years ago when it would have been disastrous.
Wow! What a bunch of delusional morons — and I suspect that each one of them is getting paid more in one year than all the rest of us will make in our lifetime. Not sure what planet they are living on, but whoever “gets” it first will crush all the rest of them. 1) cable and satellite companies have more than enough data about viewing habits to bundle channels that people actually watch into a myriad of packages instead of the ‘traditional’ three based on price. They cynically spread channels they KNOW people want among the tiers. Why are they propping up marginal channels — by forcing us to take them in order to get what we actually want — when no one will watch? 2) Content providers had better ‘bundle’ themselves together and talk some sense into internet providers who want to impose data caps. Data caps and ‘content everywhere’ are mutually exclusive. 3) People will not pay a separate fee for every device that they own, and in any event, if data caps are imposed, there will be a shakeout of overlapping technology(and see #2). Not all devices.delivery systems will survive. 4) In the rush to ‘serve’ teens and 20 somethings who embrace All Things New, the vast audience of 40+ year olds who make up the majority of the population are being abandoned. This is really stupid. 5) There’s more, but these guys will NEVER get it — until it’s too late. Just ask your customers what WE want to buy instead of trying to force us to buy what YOU want to sell.
The only thing keeping premium cable channels afloat is original programming like Dexter and Game of Thrones. Without original programming, we’d drop Showtime and HBO in a flash. 90% of the movies they show are the same movies, month after month, year after year. How many years has Die Hard 2 been in rotation? Jesus, if we wanted to see it, we saw it years ago. Vastly increase the variety of movies you show, adding far more additional movies old and new each month, or you’re going on a well-deserved trip down the toilet.
In a word, STREAMING!
I have bought my antenna and am cutting the cable cord. Have ya heard that there’s an economic crisis, guys…and maybe the average consumer doesn’t have $70 and more to spend on TV every month? I’m perfectly content with the local networks.
And, BTW, how full of herself can Oprah possibly be? No wonder she’s so heavy.
I would rather pay $5 a month per channel for the 10 channels I watch than 100 for 10+400 I don’t. I agree that cable channel welfare needs to die. Let those channels that earn a viewers dollar thrive.
I think fringe channels would have to focus on advertising and be free or nearly free to viewers. Perhaps throw ins with other more popular channels. I would give up one of my favorite 20 to stop paying for the 500 I don’t watch