Dear Cable TV Executives,
by Steve McKee
I don't want 300 channels. I only want 18 channels. OK, the average person wants 18 channels. I really only want six. Why can't I have just six?
I know, I know, it's the economics of the industry. But industries change, don't they? I mean, look what has happened to the music industry. I used to have to purchase an entire CD just to get the one or two songs I want, but now I can buy and build my own playlists song by song. It's funny, but I'm sure I spend more on music now than I used to.
You should know I just bought an Apple TV box. That's not your fault - since the Blockbuster Video stores near me closed (and RedBox, while cool, doesn't exactly offer a huge selection) I didn't really have a good option for renting movies. So I thought it was worth a try. Now I can select from a huge selection of movies and TV shows, and when I'm not in a buying mood I can use it to watch YouTube on my HDTV. I'm beginning to think of YouTube as the ultimate TV network - there's so much on-demand entertainment there. (Hmm. You might want to make a note of that.)
Speaking of entertainment, I've held off on getting a Kindle because I knew Apple was coming out with a similar device. I'm excited to get my iPad, not only to check my email and surf the web but to download books. I guess Apple is shaking up the book publishing industry just like it did the music industry. "Saving it" is probably a more accurate description; I'm sure my book purchasing behavior will mirror my new music buying habits. I wonder if they're thinking along the same lines when it comes to TV. I guess time will tell.
So if you don't mind, I'd like to subscribe to individual cable channels. For that matter, I wouldn't mind subscribing to individual programs. I know you won't get as hefty of a monthly fee from me, but I'd be willing to pay more per network than you're getting now. And I suspect other people would be too.
Anyway, it's something to think about. But no pressure. If you don't do it, I'm sure I can find other things to do with my time and money.
Editors Note: I'm with you Steve. I've got limited cable because I don't have much time to watch television. When I really want to watch something specific I can get it online. Cable TV is going to face much the same problem that fixed line phone service faces now (declining subscriber #'s). And, if more and more networks develop their own 'apps' for a variety of mobile or IP platforms (Apple TV, iPhone, Blackberry, iPad FloTV, etc.), it's only going to accelerate.
Enjoy this post? Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=220cd8f5-4cee-4361-b2a5-ab5c94bb3ddd)
Steve McKee is a BusinessWeek.com columnist, marketing consultant, and author of "When Growth Stalls: How it Happens, Why You're Stuck, and What To Do About It." Learn more about him at www.WhenGrowthStalls.com and at http://twitter.com/whengrowthstall.
I don't want 300 channels. I only want 18 channels. OK, the average person wants 18 channels. I really only want six. Why can't I have just six? I know, I know, it's the economics of the industry. But industries change, don't they? I mean, look what has happened to the music industry. I used to have to purchase an entire CD just to get the one or two songs I want, but now I can buy and build my own playlists song by song. It's funny, but I'm sure I spend more on music now than I used to.
You should know I just bought an Apple TV box. That's not your fault - since the Blockbuster Video stores near me closed (and RedBox, while cool, doesn't exactly offer a huge selection) I didn't really have a good option for renting movies. So I thought it was worth a try. Now I can select from a huge selection of movies and TV shows, and when I'm not in a buying mood I can use it to watch YouTube on my HDTV. I'm beginning to think of YouTube as the ultimate TV network - there's so much on-demand entertainment there. (Hmm. You might want to make a note of that.)
Speaking of entertainment, I've held off on getting a Kindle because I knew Apple was coming out with a similar device. I'm excited to get my iPad, not only to check my email and surf the web but to download books. I guess Apple is shaking up the book publishing industry just like it did the music industry. "Saving it" is probably a more accurate description; I'm sure my book purchasing behavior will mirror my new music buying habits. I wonder if they're thinking along the same lines when it comes to TV. I guess time will tell.
So if you don't mind, I'd like to subscribe to individual cable channels. For that matter, I wouldn't mind subscribing to individual programs. I know you won't get as hefty of a monthly fee from me, but I'd be willing to pay more per network than you're getting now. And I suspect other people would be too.
Anyway, it's something to think about. But no pressure. If you don't do it, I'm sure I can find other things to do with my time and money.
Editors Note: I'm with you Steve. I've got limited cable because I don't have much time to watch television. When I really want to watch something specific I can get it online. Cable TV is going to face much the same problem that fixed line phone service faces now (declining subscriber #'s). And, if more and more networks develop their own 'apps' for a variety of mobile or IP platforms (Apple TV, iPhone, Blackberry, iPad FloTV, etc.), it's only going to accelerate.
Enjoy this post? Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Continuous Innovation group!
Steve McKee is a BusinessWeek.com columnist, marketing consultant, and author of "When Growth Stalls: How it Happens, Why You're Stuck, and What To Do About It." Learn more about him at www.WhenGrowthStalls.com and at http://twitter.com/whengrowthstall.Labels: Apple, Innovation, Steve McKee
posted by Blogging Innovation at 12:05 AM
5 Comments:
I wouldn't mind all the excess channels nearly as much if there was a simple, easy way to surf only the 10 or so channels I ever watch. Unfortunately, it feels as if part of the strategy is to make me scroll through an endless menu in addition to paying for unwanted channels. I agree, this is the next model that breaks.
Not only that, but some of the channels I want, I'd have to upgrade my package to get the two or three channels I do want plus another 20 or 30 that I will never watch. But some how, I think if we went to pay per view, they'd come up with some way to screw us for even more money and make the "contract" even more unreadable and unbreakable so you know what cable executives, just go screw yourselves.
MUSIC
its true, I used to hate spending £10 on a CD just to get the one or two tracks, but now I spend £15 on loads of the great songs that I want.
MOVIES
I don't want to pay SKY £22 per month to watch the movies that they chose to show, but in the year since I got my Apple TV I often spend over £30 a month on renting the movies I want to watch (in HD!)
TV SHOWS
I didn't buy any TV shows at all, but now I have the Apple TV I have a season pass for LOST and 10 episodes of The Office (US). If they make the episodes 99 cents or 99p I'll spend even more. Its great watching LOST in HD with no ad breaks.
...the Apple TV is just a bit too good.
Excellent post! This doesn't just apply to the Cable industry but every business existing to delivery value to their customers. If a business isn't ready or willing to adapt to changes in the market customer will take their money where competition will be glad to meet their needs. This was worth reblogging to my readers.
everyone wants their channels they watch and nothing else but guess what if that happens how many networks do you think will survive. if everyone pays just for the channels they want alot of the small networks will go under because there won"t be enough subscribers to it. are you willing to lost 3 or more of your favorite channels to save a few bucks a month.
Post a Comment
<< Home