Switching service providers is a hassle. First you have to commit a weekend to watching the backlog of dreadful DVR content that you could not yet bring yourself to watch in six months but cannot forego watching now that your DVR must be returned. Then there is the phone call to your current SP breaking their heart while ignoring their pleas to stay. This is followed by the truck roll and hours long deployment that make you wonder why you did this, and finally the inevitable need to return your old equipment. Good times.

Recently I bit the bullet and switched to FiOS. I was interested in the service ever since seeing their approach to the program guide (dubbed the electronic media guide), their increase of HD offerings (on par with competitors), and the IP connection enabling advanced uses today and others I hope for down the road. And the service has only been out a few years.

Since signing up I have been hard at work to determine what I like best about the service thus far (as well as some of the disappointments which will follow in another blog post next week). Yes, I have finally found how to make watching TV part of my job.

1. Global Search. This is an excellent tool. No longer do I have to search through my DVR, VOD, or guide to find when Law and Order will be on (it turns out it is on every hour of every day on TNT). I simply conduct a search and the results are from all sources. Think how powerful this will be in the future when I sign up for Home Media Manager and have content on PCs which will also appear in the search. Or web video as they are now testing. Global search is much more fascinating than I initially expected it would be.

2. VOD. While the VOD presentation isn’t perfect (I haven’t yet been able to figure out if I can just sort by channel instead of History and World or Pop Culture) it is better than what I have experienced in the past. The side by side navigation in lieu of drilling into menus makes navigating smoother and I find it a bit more intuitive.

3. Home Media Manager. I don’t have this service yet - mostly because you cannot stream HD from the initial STB to another HD-DVR but when they day comes I can shutter my second HD-DVR and my Apple TV I will be a happy man. I think this will be my favorite feature one year from now. As I (and others in my household) amass more content both personally created and profesionally purchased accessing all my content through one interface and via one device will provide tremendous value. Plus being able to watch content recorded one place in another place is a fascinating use case - especially if/when you can move that second location to somewhere beyond the home.

Ultimately, Verizon (and AT&T) has positioned itself for success because FiOS does not exist independent of the home network. Instead the devices and service are a part of the network and as such can bring together otherwise disparate elements. This is evident from Verizon’s decision to support MoCa and its Media Manager product. While we are still at the beginning of this transition of pay TV as a channel to only proprietary content into a channel for all content (including propreiatry broadcast content) companies that understand the need to interface with other devices will be well positioned. As I have written and continue to write in my research - it’s all about the network now. The device is becoming secondary.

Today, these advanced services appeal to techie folks like myself but eventually when it becomes even more simple (and perhaps social networking is factored in - such as automatically providing access to photos of your grandkids that your child who also subscribes to FiOS uploaded via home media manager to your STB) the desire for such services will spread. Those that can enable these services quickly will be well positioned while others will be more challenged to change course. Enough writing - back to my research… watching TV.

Today was a big day for personal navigation devices. Navigon, Garmin, and Sony all announced additions to their PND product portfolios. While the expected enhancements are all there - 3D, touchscreen, Bluetooth, thinner form factors one underlying theme underpins all the devices - Real Time Traffic Updates. For free (for the most part).

The days of helicopters hovering high above or sensors being put in the road to determine traffic conditions are becoming a thing of the past. While each manufacturer opts for different solutions (i.e. RDS/TMC versus Navteq Traffic) for their traffic data the evidence is clear - the wireless network will be what empowers the next generation of traffic reporting. The primary sources of data will be mobile phones and PNDs themselves providing flow data based on their movement (immediately indicating traffic slow downs) which can quickly be aggregated and then distributed to the masses.

In a world where location based services are the future - knowing where people are, how to get them where they need to go next, and reach them on their travels will be necessary. Traffic is merely the beginning of these services - as the technology penetrates deeper (and is distributed via 3G and 4G networks) the opportunity for location based advertising, couponing, and specific recommendations based on route will only increase further.

Will the PND be the device that delivers all these services or will they be usurped by the mobile phone? There are argumens both ways - but what is clear is that the device will require pervasive connectivity on the Anywhere network to enable these new features. This is just the beginning.

Between the twin poles of family vacation and intensive business planning, late summer isn’t the best season for me to keep up with writing a blog. But one of my favorite Sunday activities–reading The New York Times–is getting me back into the swing today. Today’s issue features two stories that, when taken together, predict something unfortunate about the Anywhere revolution.

Randall Stross’s Digital Domain column today worries over the introduction of Mobile Wi-Fi into cars, based on a demo he was given by Chrysler. Even though their technology is intended for passengers only, Stross reasons that drivers will also be tempted to use it, dramatically increasing the risk of accidents from what one source in the article terms “distracted driving.” From the looks of it, he appeared to become so preoccupied with the risks that he hardly was able to review the technology demo he got. Talk about not being able to pay attention.

I went out for a run ruminating over two contradictory reactions I had to his story. First, that Stross is right to be concerned. I can hardly remember how, before I quit smoking, I managed to drive a stick-shift and light a cigarette at the same time, to say nothing of talking on the phone. But my second reaction was that the eventual use of wireless data in the car by all its occupants, driver included, is inevitable. And if both those are right, the future sadly holds news stories about auto accidents caused by on-line drivers, and catch-up legislation to try to get the automotive wireless genie back into the bottle.

My mind wandered to another NYT article today–Amy Harmon’s engrossing long-form piece highlighting one science teacher’s struggles to teach evolution to evangelical Christian students at a Florida high school.

From there I recalled a tour I’d taken more than 20 years ago of one of the aerospace industry’s first flight simulators. The guide had shown me all the heads-up displays in the cockpit, which even then were pervasive, and happened to explain how they first tested would-be fighter pilots to find those candidates best at managing the onslaught of information coming at them from the cockpit, their radio headsets, and the world outside the aircraft itself, all the while staying calm and focused.

In evolutionary terms, those pilots would be more likely to survive, and then procreate, than the ones who couldn’t handle data coming at them from many sources all at once.

What’s happening to us–or more precisely, our kids–is the natural selection of those who can do just that. Watch TV, check the stats online, and tweet on our cellphones at once… we already know we’re raising a generation of multi-taskers. It’s the evolution of the human who can and will do anything, anywhere. Car crashes, sadly, will be part of the selection process.

As the Olympics Games soldier through their second week, we’ve already heard the complaints about NBC tape-delaying the coverage, ESPN’s aspirations to get the rights for future games and to do the coverage properly, and NBC ad revenues surpassing $1 billion for the 2008 games.

But we continue to miss the point about these modern, digital Olympics — which is how the games play out for the vast majority of viewers. I’m probably not the best example, but I’m willing to bet that I’m not alone in my disappointment in how inaccessible the coverage really is.

No TV

I’ll set the stage by saying that I own a television set, but it isn’t connected to anything such as a pay TV service or even rabbit ears. As a matter of fact, it’s sitting in a closet, unplugged and gathering dust.

Read the rest of this entry »

One of our colleagues and a frequent contributor on this weblog, Andrew Jaquith, has a signature file for his e-mail with a quote that reads “the plural of anecdote isn’t ‘data.’” It’s appropriate when considering the nature of a digital universe in which readily-accessible information can be easily assembled in such a way as to identify an economic groundswell or a cultural zeitgeist.

Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve been spending much of my time the last few weeks working on a new research piece called the Anywhere Economy (look for it on our Web site next month) which tries to quantify our progress toward Anywhere in various parts of the world. In the process, my co-authors and I have been trying to crisp up our definitions of what an Anywhere Network is. In the process, we’ve discovered some interesting pre-conceptions about it.

I think a lot of people tend to think of the Anywhere Network as a big telecom-operator owned entity. Certainly a recent New York Times article by Columbia Law School professor Tim Wu offered this idea as a subtext, even wondering if our needs for bandwidth in today’s world will create an OPEC 2.0 similar to today’s oil cartels.

Read the rest of this entry »

Earlier this week I was lamenting the challenges of becoming truly Anywhere. Thus when a simple solution is released which would ease some of my woe I feel compelled to highlight it.  The device to which I refer is the Logitech Nano Wireless Mouse. Simply, the mouse comes bundled with a clip that attaches to your laptop lid thus providing a “docking station” for your mouse when on the go. No extra pockets needed. No cords to avoid getting tangled. Just a quick way to have the functionality of a mouse with minimal additional inconveniences.

With advanced technology on the market today from TiVo to Sling Box it is important to remember that feats beyond streaming video or recording television are necessary to bring the Anywhere world into focus (although those advanced devices are also integral). Bringing Anywhere to anyone can be simple and elegant. This opens the door to companies that otherwise may not have been able to benefit from the movement to Anywhere.

Now if a company can only create a device that prevents the person in front of you in a plane from putting their seat back…

I get this question frequently: what’s the average cost per thousand (CPM) for online advertising?

And each and every time, I find myself saying that it depends on whether we’re talking about search versus display, premium inventory versus ad networks, video versus rich media, and so on and so forth. Depending on the type of inventory and how it’s sold, the price can range from $1.00 to $50. Easily.

And that doesn’t even get into out of home, television, direct mail and e-mail marketing tools. Some B2B e-mail lists are well over $100 per thousand. And the nascent mobile marketing category has seen some wild numbers well over $1000.

But anecdotes don’t make for solid findings. And dividing total revenues by the total number of impressions and multiplying by 1,000 doesn’t result in a meaningful statistic. If we said that the average CPM for online advertising this month is $10.47, does that provide anyone with actionable information?

Bain & Company recently published a study with the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) that goes into greater depth on the impact of advertising networks on a series of benchmark online publishers. It’s an interesting read that does an excellent job of elucidating the complex reasons why it’s misleading to talk about an average online CPM.

With the announcement today that Best Buy will sell the iPhone starting in September, the movement towards positioning phones as CE devices has finally started en masse. Over the last year Best Buy has expanded their mobile offering but still less than 5% of respondents to Yankee Group’s 2008 US Device survey bought their phone from a large electronics store. The channel is still dominated by the carrier.

This is a challenge that must be overcome if the phone is going to be positioned as a more capable device which interacts with various other technology a consumer owns. Placing the device at retail where it can sit alongside PCs, streaming video services, etc. presents an opportunity to increase the perceived value of a phone and sell it for a higher ASP. While the iPhone will not benefit from such a scenario as its capabilities are well understood other phones that have struggled to demonstrate their value will win from this scenario.

Will the purchase behavior of buyers shift radically because the iPhone is being sold at electronics stores? Probably not. But just as the iPhone has changed expectations and consumer behavior around the device itself it will bring recognition to a new channel for buying phones. And that will be a win for the carriers, retailers, and consumers.

In any technology market, it’s easy to lose sight of the end customer. Digital media is no exception, and sometimes our industry falls into a discussion about advertising technologies, forgetting that marketers buy advertising to accomplish their own business objectives. As the marketer selects from a variety of traditional and digital media – and marketing as well as advertising choices – there are numerous factors and priorities at play.

Brand advertising is one such priority. The goal of brand advertising is to build a brand in the minds of consumers. To accomplish this, marketers seek outlets with broad reach and bombard consumers repeatedly with messages. Think about Mazda’s long-standing “Zoom zoom zoom” campaign — what does it convey about the brand? how many times have you seen or heard it?

Chances are that you’ve seen it dozens of times in many different formats. Zoom zoom zoom. To the point where you don’t think about it anymore. That’s the goal of brand advertising.

Television has been a long-standing brand advertising outlet. The audiences are big, and each 30-second spot yields millions of impressions. That’s the way we’ve thought about it for decades.

And so that’s been the way that we’ve thought about it as we make the shift to digital. Marketers have blindly followed their customers online, cutting the 30-second spot down to :15 …assuming that the 15-second pre-roll is just another brand advertising vehicle.

But that may not be the case. In a recent study of IAB video advertising formats, Break.com and Panache found something very interesting. It turns out that — in their study — an interactive :15 pre-roll is an effective response marketing tool and overlays are ideal for brand building.

These findings aren’t set in stone. But they do go against commonly-accepted wisdom. Going into the study, I would have guessed that interactive overlays would be effective performance advertising…and that the :15 video ads would be far better suited for brand building. If the opposite is true, then it might force a thorough re-think about television advertising.

Think about it this way. If we can directly measure the performance of video advertising, then we may value it in an altogether different manner. Programmers might realize that they’re using their most valuable inventory for network promotions and selling their least-valuable inventory for the highest price.

The impacts of which could be disruptive…to say the least.