2 posts tagged “dvd”
As technology provides new platforms for video distribution, advertisers should start to ask the same question - why does sending my data over these (broadcast) pipes cost so much more than these other (internet, DVD, etc) pipes? In a way, channels 7,9, and 10 are a lot like the mobile phone operators, in that their market position allows them to charge premiums (in this case for advertising) because up until now they have been the only game in town. New platforms will allow advertisers to think strategically about where they put their money:
$XXXXX = the Australian broadcasting rights to a season of a prime time show.
$XXXXXXX = how much the show brings in from advertising per season.
$XXXXXXX = Unilever advertising spend (per year).
New strategies may involve buying the rights to a show and distributing it yourself. Myer could buy the Australian rights to Desperate Housewives and distribute the show over the internet with just a Myer watermark and maybe a quick 'top and tail'. (See "Piracy is Good?" video) Johnson and Johnson (Clearasil) could buy Home and Away, chop it into segments and distribute it over mobile phones.
Alternately, advertisers may want to build their own show instead of an ad. Ferrari could build their own informational car show to appeal to enthusiasts.
These may be terrible ideas, but they illustrate the point that the market for content will go from being a simple linear chain in which channels buy shows and sell advertising space to a multi polar world in which different companies may invest in content for a multitude of different reasons and at varying price points.
There are now lots of online services that are attempting to replace the video store. The services are reportedly plagued by problems in quality, high bandwidth requirements and a lack of the special features now found on most DVDs. To me the biggest drawbacks are in convenience - long form feature films call for a living room and a big screen - locking the content to a certain computer is a recipe for obscurity.
Apple now has AppleTV (take2) which aims to allow users to download directly from the living room with a remote. The downloads are progressive which should help with quality and cut down on any latency issues. The film can be taken along and viewed on an iPod or iPhone.
These all seem like steps in the right direction in terms of convenience. The problem is in the DRM. The user has 30 days to start the film, but once started, only 24 hours to finish watching. After this time, the film is locked. This is applying a 90s mentality to a 00s service. Netflix has pioneered a new way of renting films in which you retain (say) 3 films for as long as you want. When you want a new film, you have to send one of the old ones back.
It seems to me that this would be the best way to rent movies online. It would enable users to set their own viewing habits. The beauty of the Fairplay model of DRM for iTunes music purchases was that it provided enough freedom that most users did not even know the system was locked. Movie rentals should be the same.
