I’m traveling this week, and just caught up with the excellent report out yesterday from Barclays Equity Research’s Anthony DiClemente about the boom in TV syndication – and the implications for companies including Apple that want to bust the pay TV oligopoly. He observes that “monetization opportunities for TV programming have never been greater.” Studios collectively generate about $20B a year now — up from $10B in 2002 — selling shows to TV stations, cable networks, VOD, online subscription services such as Netflix, overseas outlets, and via home video including DVDs. What’s more, the business provides Big Media companies with a higher return on invested capital — the most crucial metric for shareholders — than most other lines: For example, CBS makes a 14% return from its TV studio vs 12% for the entire company while News Corp sees a return of 10% (vs 7% for the company overall) and Time Warner generates 9% (vs. 7%).
This is great news for the companies, but not so much for people hoping that Apple or some other technology provider will find a way to break up the pay TV bundle that requires subscribers to pay for channels that they don’t watch. Program producers have too much at stake, and will fight tooth and nail to defend the status quo “assuming their hand [isn't] forced through cord-cutting,” DiClemente says. Since so many different producers, networks, and distributors control so many different programming rights in pay TV, it “would be very difficult, not to mention expensive, for new entrants to secure the requisite digital and linear rights to provide consumers with a one-stop content offering,” he adds. “We therefore don’t expect Apple to attempt the costly and logistically-daunting task of standalone distribution.”


I can’t blame program producers for fighting this. There’s a lot of money at stake. But just as the record companies fought technology for all those years, eventually innovation will catch up. Whether it is Apple or another company, the future in an increasingly on-demand society will inevitably on-demand content provided not as network-filler, but as consumer-chosen product. It’s only a matter of time.
Yeah…as soon as there’s a technology where producers can produce programs and consumers can access them without a middle-man, the entire television industry will collapse…wait, youtube has been around for seven years!…I bet Disney, NewsCorp and NBCUniversal
are scared to death!…Hahahahahahahaha!!!
so your underlying argument is that a $20B per annum market that has double digit margins, isn’t going to be attacked by disruptive technologies? that logic seems pretty flawed.
I agree…the future is 2 minute webisodes on youtube…NOT!
‘This is great news for the companies, but not so much for people hoping that Apple or some other technology provider will find a way to break up the pay TV bundle that requires subscribers to pay for channels that they don’t watch. ”
Well, yes… this is the key isn’t it… forcing unwanted but profitable garbage on customers so no one can cherry pick their preferred viewing. Bundling should be criminal. Thanks to bundling by my cable provider, I have to pay for a package of 30+ channels I NEVER watch, in order to get the one I enjoy. One of the beauties of iTunes was that you could buy just what you wanted. An album of 12 songs and you care about one? No problem.. buy the one.
There is one group of producers and creatives who are not making as much revenue as they wish. The young ones. Does traditional Hollywood have enough slots to absorb all the talent? As technology drives down editorial, photography, and production tools, we see a lot of folks starting with documentary and documentary-like productions that are inexpensive, shot on digital SLRs and edited in Final Cut Pro. Distribution costs are decreasing. The ratio of home screen size to room size is better than what one finds in the smaller theaters of the multi-plex. Home viewing is interruptible. (Nothing beats a great movie in a theatre in my opinion, and, still, I have watched 30 films or series on Netflix via my iPad this year and only one feature film in movie house. I subscribe to a dozen programs per year from iTunes and do not watch conventional television.) Things are changing and it’s the new generation that builds the new business models. Clearly there are some pieces to the puzzle that are missing or which are not fitting correctly. The youngsters who are being told by Hollywood to wait a decade or two have nothing to lose in building their revolution now.
After all, movies once were a young person’s business and considered a inferior adjunct to the very profitable vaudeville business.
Don’t want to give up your bundled subscriptions? That’s fine. Totally your choice. But don’t be complaining when people are illegally downloading your content.
Does this feel a little bit like the 60′s, when the old studio moguls were making really expensive costumed epics that people no longer wanted to see? Then, along comes EASY RIDER and blows everyone’s mind… ushering in an era of incredible filmmaking. It’s going to be a fascinating few years.
Might want to check the recent Ratings of network TV to see a 30 percent decline of audiences before declaring Apple has no place in the market. Ad exec’s over at Uni Leaver see it VERY differently to you.
And yet TV viewership as an activity is still up or the same overall.
Really this is the fragmentation of the audience — not a big deal since the companies that own NBC or ABC also own most of the cable companies and the studios that produce the shows.
Plus, as an added bonus, they are double-dipping on the network stations since they can collect the retransmission fees that were previously going just to the affiliates to help subsidize broadcast.
And for the future: what TV networks are finding is that people are starting to use their product during previously unavailable time: eating, waiting in line (average 27 minutes per day), public transportation commutes, etc. That translates into additional direct or indirect revenue to the same media companies.
The producers can do any damn thing they want because I do not buy ANY of it.
After the station began running promos, “coming up next…”, I.D’s on every damn corner of the screen, I gave up cable altogether. Now everything I watch is on DVD, bought or borrowed from the local community college library-for free. No more crap I don’t want to see or pay for, and no more endless commercials. With Mad Men or Boardwalk Empire for $20 (-or less, borrowed from the library),it’s all sweet! Sure you may have to wait until it’s released to DVD, but I’m so damn busy and have somewhat limited viewing time, I can afford to wait.
Do what you want, TV, I can afford to wait until I get the terms I want. Not a bunch of useless drek
It’s funny when poor people try to convince rich people on how their poverty is so totally awesome.
Media always was and always will be content driven; CBS has used what many consider an antiquated platform to rake in huge profits without the start up risks, because they invest dollars in quality narrative driven content.
yes YouTube has been around you bone head but the technology for streaming high quality video on large devices is new. the future is inevitable. consumer shall choose. one thing network was dead wrong about.