TV Producers Need a Business Model to Go Online

This week, two events caught my attention which are not that significant on their own, yet in combination made me think.  First there was CBS Corp's Chief Exec who complained that his viewers were not 'helping the networks' when it comes to pretending they actually watch the advertisements.

Then, the Lonelygirl crowd launched its new show "Kate Modern".  This time the action is in London and we're looking at multiple characters, outside locations and plot twists and hints which promise to be in line with any British light drama series.  Only as it's backed by bebo.com, there is no TV station in sight.

But in spite of the millions of video-watching consumers online, there are few Lonelygirls who truly stand out.  And when they do, they work on a very tight budget, often linked to the limit on their credit card.

The reason for this is obvious.  Even though online projects attract audiences which can rival mid-range TV shows, they are dispersed across various geographies and demographics while the marketing budgets to support them are still organized by country and segment.  In short, they may get the numbers as a whole, yet these don't square with the way media-buyers make most of their money.

The end result is a world where TV stations are running out of audiences to pay for big productions, while the long tail online makes audiences too fragmented to go beyond bedroom production value.

So I wonder when new business models will emerge that fundamentally change this equation.  When will global brands simply finance high production quality online shows for international markets, series and movies (the last ones I really enjoyed date from 2001/2).   When will fan-financing generate sufficient cash to support real productions (I still dream of bringing back a sequel to Fawlty Towers in which Basil gets to run a Canadian airline)?  When will portals and ISPs start with some "real" production projects?

Especially if you consider that international production costs are considerably lower than those in the US, this should be feasible.  After all, for the price of one sitcom in the US, you can almost produce a series in Europe and half a station's worth of content in India or China.  Also, if you give production teams like the one behind LonelyGirl a million they'd probably give you the moon in return.

The tools, creativity and audiences are there.  All that's needed is a business model that turns the next YouTube into a high production value machine.

I wonder who plays first?

Sony Home ... Why Can't I Make My Own Stuff?

When looking at part 1 and part 2 of the unveiling of Sony Home for the PS3, I was dazzled by what I can only describe as a cool combo of an über-interface to the Sony media-world and a hi-res version of Second Life for my living room TV.  Even my wife started saying she wanted a PS3.

The message -even though not explicitly mentioned- is that Sony wants to:

• slay a few TV stations by embedding movies and TV-shows into Home
• disintermediate a few retailers by making games downloadable
• take on Second Life and There by offering a hi-res living room experience, featuring "premium" virtual clothing, furniture and what more.

And in the process of course make the guys in Seattle sweat on about how they will counter that move.

Whether Sony will pull all of this off, only the future can tell, yet the most interesting feature which I missed in Home was the ability to "make my own things".  But then I wondered, is that actually something which the majority of people actually want? 

If Sony are going to include "sponsored environments" anyway, wouldn't a virtual IKEA be more convenient for the average punter who just wants to hang out with his in-world friends.  But then the next question forms in my mind, who do I call to open my shop?

I don't know … what do you think?

Anyone for Inspiration Overload?

If you decide to start your weekend with a little bit of inspiration overload, have a look at A Blog List which Stefano Ricci put together.  Stefano runs Elmanco, an Italian consultancy in art direction and cool hunting. He's put together this list to provide inspiration to professionals in graphic and industrial design, fashion, technology, advertising and new trends.

I haven't gone through all the links, but at first sight it looks like one of the most comprehensive listings I've ever come across in this field, including many blogs and sites I had never heard of before.  He has been kind enough to include Futurelab :-)

One health warning though.  If you're already suffering from RSS overload, your family may not want you to click :-)

Thanks Stefano!

Philips: Setting the Record Straight

Sentiments have been running a bit high about Philips' alledged plan to "force" us all to watch advertisements whether we like it or not.  According to Catharine Taylor at Adweek we can all calm down as the consumer electronics firm is going around the blogosphere to set the record straight (we didn't get it, yet I guess we're not on their blogroll :-)

Inventors from Royal Philips Electronics (Philips) filed a patent application, as yet not granted, that enables watching a television movie without advertising. However, some people do want to see the ads. So, we developed a system where the viewer can choose, at the beginning of a movie, to either watch the movie without ads, or watch the movie with ads. It is up to the viewer to take this decision, and up to the broadcaster to offer the various services. Philips never had the intention to force viewers to watch ads against their will and does not use this technology in any current Philips products, nor do we have any plans to do so.

90% of PVR Viewers Adskip (yet they watch more TV)

The "big six" networks in the US (CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox, Warner and UPN) just published a study that people with PVR's actually watch more TV (5.7 hrs/day) than regular viewers (5.1 hrs/day).  This as they are not hampered by time constraints any more.

That is, however, where the silver lining stops as 90% of the respondents in the research claim to "skip" the commercials.  A shimmer of light is still there in the fact that 58% says to watch commercials in "fastforward" and 53% occasionally goes back to watch a commercial again.

I'm sure this is going to make some creative think of doing commercials at half speed so they actually come out all-right when fast forwarding ...

via: Broadband TV News