TV Everywhere means Billions!

In a January 20^th article for the Hollywood Reporter, Georg Szalai writes of the opinion from one analyst who feels TV Everywhere could be a literal gold mine for the industry.

Szalai pens that the initiative to get content from pay TV available on multiple platforms has been quite slow.  However, according to the analyst with Needham & Co., Laura Martin, the wait may indeed be well worth it, as she predicts the total revenue for this venture could top $12 billion annually. 

Martin is quoted as saying, “These dollars dwarf any near-term revenue streams from digital platforms (Hulu, YouTube, etc.),” and that “these are low risk dollars as adding services to the TV bundle suggests additional revenue rather than economic cannibalization.”

Szalai further writes that Martin believes the big time content owners, such as Disney and Time Warner could see the biggest gains to their advertising revenue, as much as 12% or $10 billion annually, because they are the farthest along in rolling out their products to TV Everywhere.

As for the operators of pay TV, this initiative has the potential of adding an estimated $1.7 billion to their revenue stream from the addition of these new services.  Martin feels the big boys of cable, like Time Warner Cable and Comcast, are most likely to see these increases first as they are among the early adopters of the TV Everywhere initiative.

Szalai concludes the article with one more drool-worthy notion from Martin: if these predictions are accurate, then this initiative could very well bring in anywhere from $24 billion to $48 billion – apart from the above mentioned revenue – to the TV economy from additional market value, over the next five years.  The industry is currently valued at about $330 billion of revenue annually.

While these figures are quite extraordinary and sound exactly like the type of figures the industry needs to make this initiative happen even faster, I wonder what these projections are based on.  Szalai doesn’t give any references other than the fact that this is simply one analyst’s opinion; so what I’d really like to see, then, is what data Martin is basing these figures on.

This kind of money should be enough to get this initiative moving into a higher gear.   One might even expect to see the government take measures to back it even more to stimulate the economy!  But, perhaps that is a bit too far fetched.  This is really quite the rosy picture – and it will be interesting to see how accurate Martin’s projections are; but I guess we’ll just have to wait and see – it will take time for the true value of this initiative to be known, but it certainly seems like a win-win situation for all interested parties: content providers, distributors, and viewers.  Let's hope this equation doesn't change and we can finally enjoy TV Everywhere!

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/analyst-tv-everywhere-could-create-283561

Monetizing Yourself

In an article on adweek.com, author Ki Mae Heussner writes of the notion that consumers’ data is a form of currency, and –of course- there are companies out there willing to help us “cash in.”

Heussner shares some background data that is astounding!  For instance, there are companies in the United States that are spending more than $2 billion annually on third-party data about consumers.  Heussner further notes that, when you include what is spent on credit data, research of the market and other information, this data business is actually a multi-billion dollar business.  The comment is made that some futurists are calling this personal data of ours the “new oil.”

While this is staggering data, the fact is simply this: companies are willing to spend money to get to know you and your personal habits, wants, and activities – and also your whereabouts.  Yes, location tracking is included in this industry.  But Heussner points out that consumers are not real hip to all of this collecting of information about themselves.  The results of a study in the first half of 2011 reveal that 46% of us “definitely would not consent” to letting their current location be made known to advertisers. 

There is an increase in the number of companies coming to us with an offer of control over our information.  They apparently want to help us keep our data safe and protected.  But, in reality, they want to help us make money (either earned or saved) by allowing our data to be given to advertisers - which allows them to make money.  Did you really think these companies would emerge to help us if there wasn’t something in it for themselves?  Of course not.  If you are willing to watch a video from a targeted advertiser, you can earn some form of money – and the company helping you keep your data safe and connecting you with only those advertisers you want to have your info, well – they will get 10% of whatever you earn. 

This business of personal data protection and tracking is considered “data lockers” with various offerings to consumers, like making it easier to fill out those order forms online, or keeping track of your personal preferences so the advertisers you choose to convey your data to can make it easier for you to complete your online shopping, with the right sizes and styles, etc.  Interesting that Heussner points out that in 1999, Microsoft already tested this type of business – remember “Passport”?  Ultimately, it failed due to several reasons, but two biggees were the fact that consumers simply didn’t trust it, and there were some security problems.  I guess 10+ years should have those concerns pretty much resolved now, right?  Aren’t you feeling more comfortable already?

There are experts that feel this trend is on the way, but admit it isn’t there yet.  Of course, getting consumers to understand that they can turn their information into some type of value can take time, especially when the words “personal” and “data” are continually used together with reference to consumers and business.  It is made clear in this story that we already do this to some extent with our airline frequent flier programs – earning money for certain buying habits.  But I think that is a little bit of a stretch in the comparison.  But, maybe we’ll all be OK with the big advertisers knowing that we really have a soft spot for those little ice cream bon-bons.  I don’t mind - much. 

http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/whose-life-it-anyway-137537