I’ve been wading through a set of tedious discussions about Time Warner Cable and Cablevision and both companies’ respective iPad Apps. Over at Silicon (V)Alley Insider, there is a pro-consumer bent where the editors, such as Dan Frommer, who approaches cable television as if it’s just another smartphone. And at Paid Content, there is a re-hash of Cablevision’s press release.
I’m willing to discount SAI’s coverage after they recently referred to an airplane as having a “roof.” Okay, that was The Business Insider, but these sister publications love the hyped-up headlines followed by little substance and lots of opinion, and it’s all RSS to me. In all fairness, SAI/TBI is running into the same editorial issue that exists in the analyst community — “mobile” analysts and journalists are the bedbugs of our respective industries. Once they “cover” a topic, that’s it. It’s suddenly their domain, and there’s no way to get their commentary out of the discussion. Take cable television, put it onto a mobile device, and suddenly, you have a “mobile” expert talking about something they just don’t understand.
Cablevision's New Optimum App
And the subtlety of this issue is what’s important. Namely, what is DOCSIS? and what does it have to do with the difference between TWC’s iPad App and Cablevision’s New Optimum App?
Here’s the deal. TWC is streaming Internet video to iPads with minimal conditional access and DRM safeguards. Meanwhile, Cablevision is delivering cable TV to iPads, using their cable network and employing cable network DRM and CA safeguards. And so, while TWC is just pushing an app out there, Cablevision has done the heavy lifting to extend their Pay TV platform to the tablet. Both approaches use IP, but they are very, very different ways of doing the same thing.
Time Warner Cable’s application is a barely-controlled form of OTT. Cablevision is just another set in the cable TV household. These “minor differences” are pretty major when you start talking about content licensing.
As in. Is a media company willing to give up Internet streaming rights in (part of) the largest media market in the United States? For free? Better yet, are they willing to give up those rights in a market where people can easily “borrow” Wi-Fi connections from someone else?
The list goes on. But I know that the media companies aren’t interested in losing 5-8% of their subscriber fees in New York City just because TWC introduced an iPad App. I don’t know what the actual numbers would be in a place like New York, but there’s definitely cause for concern.
And before we get dragged down into the consumers-know-best diatribe. Let’s remember that this is about producing content (television programming) and distributing it. Cutting revenues means cutting production costs which means more reality TV, less writing, less drama, and less comedy.
To recap. The difference between TWC and Cablevision and their iPad Apps is as follows:
Pay TV + Multiscreen = OK.
OTT + Multiscreen = Check Your License and call your attorney.
{ 1 trackback }