Blog Post

CES 2013: The TV Manifesto

P.J. McNealy • May 24, 2016

CES 2013: The TV Manifesto

The Battle for the Living Room is OVER—the War for the Consumer is ON!

The reality has begun to sink in: The home is part of a larger war involving engagement of the consumer -- and companies battling just to dominate consumer engagement in the living room are going to lose the bigger war. The end-game is clear: Companies must engage the consumer both in the home and mobile and have devices that are not location-locked.

This shift in targeting consumers while mobile or in the home was the most significant takeaway from CES 2013. Before the show, the expectation was for thinner, greener TVs with better user interfaces to be the show highlights. Coming out of the show -- while the TVs are bigger, thinner and greener – numerous TV companies highlighted their improvements in their TV set user interfaces (UI). However, this focus means that they are still targeting the battle for the living room, and are not well positioned in the larger consumer war.

This is a significant shift that has taken place in the past 20 years, when TV manufacturers and consumer electronics (CE) companies ruled the home and the consumer.

Just 20 years ago, when analog devices such as VHS players were dominant in living rooms, and devices were not connected to the Internet or to each other, the CE companies were household brands – Sanyo, RCA, Sony, Panasonic, Magnavox, Philips, Zenith.

Starting a decade ago, PCs started appearing in the living room and the race to put connected devices in the hands of consumers began. With clunky connected solutions (remember the rack-mounted Media Center Edition PCs from Microsoft?) creeping into the living room, the concept of“tele-webbing” was born.

The race to connect the consumer in the living room was on, and the device with the pole position? The TV.

So what did the TV industry do to respond? They began putting Ethernet jacks in their premium TV sets five years ago, and just three years ago, major retailers such as Best Buy were proudly promoting that every 40” or larger TV would come with an Internet connection.

To go with the Internet connectivity, the TV manufacturers needed a compelling, easy-to-use UI. However, UI was not a core competency for any global consumer electronics company. Most of the UIs were simple and limited to some form of electronic programming guide (EPG) licensed from Rovi (who bought the patent portfolio to most TV EPGs). Adding a new, interactive UI was not a strength of any CE company. Most of the UIs shown at CES over the past three years were clunky, and the big upgrades were more focused around adding a web camera for Skype, service partners such as Netflix or Hulu, or being able to see YouTube videos or check a Facebook page. The upgrades were largely iterative.

At this past CES show, much of this remains unchanged with respect to iterative additions. However, in the meantime, while the TV industry slowly moved toward capturing additional consumer eyeball time with non-TV content, the PC and mobile industries have moved significantly faster.

As expected, software and UI companies in the United States are familiar with software upgrade cycles, which are typically faster than hardware upgrade cycles. Those cycles, coupled with the computing power increases, pricing curve decreases, and the emergence of feature phones into smart phones, have driven consumer behavior become more mobile, and not just in front of a PC. The emergence of tablets, with 8” to 14” screens, have also enabled more mobile computing.

Because consumers today are now familiar with being able to communicate, socialize, consume, purchase or entertain with devices such as phones or tablets, the pole position of the TV as the center of a consumers’ entertainment world has diminished.

While the TV and consumer electronics industry has tried to move into the digital world, the mobile world has taken advantage of the transition of analog to digital to move entertainment out of the living room and onto alternate devices.

As a result, consumers have become familiar with watching TV on a TV while “second screens” in their hands are typically phones, tablets or notebooks. This means that the opportunity that the TV industry had just a decade ago has been lost to the phone, tablet and laptop industries.

The silver lining for the TV and consumer electronics industry? The opportunity to partner and avoid the risk of being further marginalized as the “dumb” screen.

Table 1: Current and Future Consumer Leaders (traditional CE manufacturers in blue, PC/software/mobile companies in yellow, other companies in green)

Table 1 above shows the companies in the new pole position for consumer engagement. The mobile, tablet, and laptop companies are in the top right, and the majority of consumer electronics companies are in the bottom left. There is much more company-level discussion and a breakdown of this table later in this document.

The growing install base of non-TV devices already have comfortable, familiar UIs, such as devices from Apple, Microsoft and Google (and its Android partners), and to a lesser degree, Amazon. Consumers are used to these platforms/devices not only within the house, but also in their mobile lives. The TV then becomes a connected, but somewhat “dumb” device to which consumers can direct content to that screen, using a smart, connected other device.

Within DWR’s survey panels in the past, two trends are consistent:

1.Consumers have more and more devices (screens) in their hands from companies such as Apple, Google, Microsoft and Amazon, such as phones and tablets.

2.Consumers have not been demanding (at least in the U.S.) for “Where is my tablet from Panasonic?” or “Where is my Sharp smart phone?”

These trends strongly suggest that, while a company such as Sharp or Sony may improve its own UI for its TV sets, it’s simply not enough. The end-around for the living room has passed them by on the relevance scale to mass markets.

Another filter on Table 1 provides the alternative perspective shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Current and Future Consumer Leaders by country or state of origin

The talent base for mobile, tablets and laptops, as well as leaders in software and UI, are all located in either the states of California or Washington. As the media industry has gone digital, the traditional TV and CE companies (based predominantly in Japan) have struggled.

This is not to suggest that there is not hope for the Japanese companies – but, a big BUT – corporate culture must change with respect to the role of engineers and partnering with non-Japanese companies.

Traditionally, Japanese companies do not move quickly, while many in the U.S. move quickly – as in daily. This means that not only do Japanese corporate cultures (such as at Sony, Panasonic, Sharp and Nintendo) have to acknowledge that they need help, but they also need to figure out how to partner with companies who specialize in UI and software, as well as services such as cloud computing.

The Korean companies remain the wild card in this consumer equation. Both Samsung and LG have significant currency tailwinds, and they have been putting it toward increasing research and development budgets. By virtue of blunt force, a company such as Samsung may figure out the magic of UI and become the first non-U.S. company to do so, but it lacks a key component. To understand how to truly distribute digital content, such as video games or movies, there is a highly vested interest to have some skin the game. If Samsung were to launch a significant effort to fund and create movies or video games, it would better understand the needs of content owners and be able to tailor its vast resources to creating products aligned with those interests.

This is a criticism often leveled at companies such as Google as well, but at least with both Apple and Google, both have courted and supported reams and reams of third-party content. This isn’t true of Samsung to date.

Company-Specific Implications

As the war for the consumer evolves, there are companies who will thrive or struggle based on hardware, software, content and services. Those below are a snapshot of those entries, and implications for a tablet or mobile device-driven consumer scenario. The companies have been broken up based on which quadrant they are positioned in Table 1, followed by other future potential players not in the quadrant.

Keep in mind that companies will move throughout the quadrants as the year progresses. This will be driven by a series of filters, including:

1.New hardware announcements

2.New distribution deals

3.New content aggregation or creation news, in TV, news, music, movies, other video, photos, video gaming, real-money gaming, or other consumer-generated content

4.New social communications networks or tools

5.New software product offerings, including utility-driven consumer offerings.

6.Improvements in transactional capabilities

7.Longer term initiatives in remote medical diagnostics and collaboration with health care infrastructure partners.

TOP RIGHT QUADRANT—Huge potential to dominate consumer time, both in home and mobile

Facebook

Facebook is the social layer woven throughout devices, and is not location specific. While there is criticism that “Facebook is for my parents but not for me,”it is not well-founded. The numbers for Facebook remain massive, and consumer behavior means updating Facebook statuses, checking others updates, etc., no matter where a consumer is – at home or mobile.

As a result, Facebook is clearly lodged in the living room on phones, tablets and laptops. To a lesser degree, Facebook is on TVs as part of a connected UI through a TV manufacturer. Where Facebook is more interesting on TV is logging into Facebook for your Xbox Live account, playing an Xbox Live game and being able update your status after playing a game, or being able to share a recently watched YouTube video on Facebook. It is arguable that you can do that on YouTube with Facebook on any device, but for the sake of this discussion, it reiterates that Facebook is already in the living room.

The potential for Facebook looms as large as any company out there today since it already dominates in social. While it has a significant presence in gaming, if the movement to HTML 5 gaming in the next two years happens, it opens up an even deeper relationship for Facebook with consumers on multiple screens.

Can Facebook do more? Sure, it could partner with Rovi to become part of the Electronic Programming Guide (EPG), or become an interactive ad for what TV content your friends are interested in and might be watching. Recommendations from friends for content -- any content -- have proven to be wildly powerful, and Facebook user data combined with a TV guide is a pretty compelling combination.

Facebook should look to partner more with the TV guide food chain – from Rovi, to Dish and DirecTv, to Comcast and other cable companies. Even if Facebook cannot become part of the EPG, it could still become part of a separate app that shows friend recommendations and become involved in interactive discussions such as polls and voting on TV content.

Amazon

Amazon should likely be split a couple ways, including:

· Amazon the hardware company . The Kindle Fire and its future iterations will likely include either a phone and/or a TV panel. As a hardware company, Amazon likely has moderate aspirations – seed the market, own the e-book vertical, and inch into other adjacent verticals such as music services or TV/movie content. Amazon has a main goal: keep the consumer in the Amazon universe of buying or consuming, so that means being a multi-media services and content company.

· Amazon the TV/movie/video game content creator . This strategy is simple: every other content creator feels better making content for a piece of hardware and service (such as Amazon) when Amazon has some skin in the game. This means they understand the morphing needs of content creators without having to constantly ask for and be completely reliant on feedback from their developer community.

Microsoft

Similar to the discussion around Amazon, Microsoft needs to be sub-segmented:

· The Interactive Entertainment Business (IEB) unit, including the Xbox teams . This means a reset of potential power within the traditional Microsoft divisions as the next-gen console is prepared for launch likely later this year. Given that the underlying kernels for the console -- code-named Durango -- are the same as those running the Windows Phone and Windows 8 operating systems, cross-platform functionality should be as easy for Microsoft as it is for Apple. This also means that Microsoft has one big target in the living room with Durango: Apple (i.e., not Sony or Nintendo).
At a more complicated level, the internal challenges of “who is calling the shots?” will be significant as Microsoft tries to roll out cross-platform services such as Xbox Music. Who controls Xbox Music? An independent team, or the Windows 8 department, or Windows Mobile, or IEB? Let the power struggles continue in Redmond.

· Windows 8 tablet/PC/laptop OS teams . These groups have been laying the groundwork by rolling out Windows 8, and tablet penetration is a key objective (beyond obvious objectives such as an enterprise PC upgrade cycle). The capabilities for consumers to move content from a Windows phone to a Windows tablet to a TV, much of the capability of its “Smart Glass” marketing, has been in anticipation of adding a console/set-top box into the equation, likely in 2013.

· Windows Phone . This team has been pounding away trying to make inroads against both the Android-based phones and the iPhones, and it has been all uphill. However, from a second-screen perspective, this screen is still highly strategic as a secondary source of content and controlling the consumption function on a TV.


So will Microsoft then make its own TV set? It could likely extend its current operating system for basically a “lite” version where most of the brains and power of the TV would be handled by the cloud. Possible? Yes. Likely? No. Multiple versions of Durango by region (think some with TV tuner cards included, various sizes of storage) are highly likely.

Further, Microsoft has been experimenting with selling the Xbox similar to selling a phone: $99 with a two-year commitment to Xbox Live. Microsoft could package a version of Durango in this fashion, but would not be popular with Triple A game developers who need hardware profile assumptions for game development. If those profiles changed every two years or so, development would have to be heavily reconfigured.

Apple

Apple is split in a similar fashion to Microsoft:

· Apple iPhone . This product upgrade cycle of new iPhones every 18-to-24 months allows Apple to continue to innovate on second screen possibilities, including navigation for Apple TV. Apple has continued to tweak and try new things using its iPhones and Apple TV such as flicking or sending content (photos) from an iPhone for viewing on a TV. The growing install base of iPhones worldwide is a massive advantage for Apple when discussing control of the consumer not only while mobile, but also within the home.

· Apple iTunes and App Store . This is Apple’s content aggregation approach on the iTunes side for TV and movies, as well as games and apps for mobile and home utilization/consumption. There appears to be zero interest in Apple becoming a content creator, but given its install base of devices, it is an attractive partner as an aggregator.

· Apple iPad . Similar to iPhone upgrade cycles, the role of the iPad just hammers home utilization no matter where the location. The iPad mini extends that approach, filling out a product gap based on screen size.

This analysis of Apple products and services begs the question of whether Apple needs to make an Apple-branded TV set. The business model case can be made from many perspectives, including its dominance over the food chain, its turnkey content already prepped for large-screen formats in iTunes and the App Store, and its familiarity with monitors and TV through Apple TV. However, the contra-arguments remain: TVs are closer to 5-to-7-year replacement cycles and do not hold up well with typical Apple 40% hardware margins. Further, Siri does not yet work well at distance for voice commands in the living room (unless, of course, the use case is on handhelds or tablets).

The concept of Apple TV as a hobby remains, and Apple not only has not been able to secure numerous over-the-top content deals, but it also can still dominate the consumer in the home or mobile given the install base or hardware. One piece of news we believe critical to Apple’s future success with AppleTV is simple: It must sign more content deals for over-the-top delivery of content from multiple partners, such as HBO.

Google

Google is sub-segmented as its operating system efforts have spanned multiple devices. Google’s growth with Android-based devices has been impressive, but critics have remained, focusing on a consistent argument – why focus on an Android OS-based device when making an OS is not the primary business of Google? Criticism aside, the non-search segments include:

· Android OS for mobile , including Google Phone. Google clearly has had success in this arena to Apple’s and Microsoft’s chagrins, and has been hugely driven by support from Samsung as a partner. Growth in Android-based phones is surpassing Apple’s growth rate in smart phones.
The challenge for Android is inherently a significant challenge for content and services companies. Because the Android market is widely fragmented by OS version and phone features, it presents a programming challenge. Further, the price points on Android phones are very wide, meaning the likelihood or predilection for an Android owner to spend additional money for content or services over the phone is challenging. That said, Android will have a significant role with consumers, mobile or at home.

· Android OS for tablets . Welcome to the low-cost alternative to buying an iPad. The environment for apps on Android phones and tablets has been described as “the Wild, Wild West” and wide open, meaning curation for quality apps does not exist. However, Android-based tablets (including Amazon’s Kindle line) will likely remain in second place in market share behind Apple unless Windows 8 tablets have a significant rise. Again, Google tablet penetration means a significant role with consumers both mobile and in the home.

· Android OS for TVs . The efforts behind Google TV have ebbed and flowed. While making a splash over the past few years at shows such as CES via partnerships, Google TV has remained muted. At CES 2012, partners such as Sony, LG and Samsung all introduced a few models of TVs featuring Google’s OS. However, at CES 2013, there were few new products announced, yet multiple Japanese and Korean TV companies made a point to call out and highlight what a great partner Google was, how they enjoyed working with them, etc. It bodes well for Google for continuing to grow its presence in consumer devices used while mobile or in the home.

During CES 2013, Google was the one company mentioned onstage in nearly all the major press conferences without holding one itself, while Apple was the company mentioned off-stage in the crowd in nearly all the major press conferences without holding one itself. Strange days, indeed.

Samsung

Samsung has potential to play in the consumer space simply due to market share. It is already the top handset maker worldwide, the top TV manufacturer worldwide, and is gaining ground with its Android-based tablets and laptops.

However, Samsung stumbles with UI, software, and content aggregation outside of Korea. There are vast sums of Won being spent trying to solve some of these issues outside of content aggregation.

The question of Samsung as a content aggregator or creator remains unanswered – aggregation seems to be the answer for now, but the content creation question remains. Samsung has cash, but seems reluctant to spend on outside of research and development, as well as marketing.

Samsung is already in consumer living rooms with its TVs, and in some hands at home and mobile with its phones. It is impressive that Samsung can compete for market share in so many different areas (all the way to home appliances), but as one commenter from CES said, “have you seen a good working UI from (Samsung) yet? Let me know when that happens.”

TOP LEFT QUADRANT—Huge potential to dominate consumer time, somewhat in home and not well-positioned in mobile

LG

LG in many ways mirrors Samsung with TV production, panels for tablets, and some phone and appliance production. However, again, it stumbles on UI, software and content.

LG is smaller than Samsung in all areas and has fewer products spread across fewer areas. And, while some of the UI presentations in Las Vegas looked good on stage, it remains an isolated strategy.

Longer term, LG could be one of the first to present a unified home system where your fridge, stove, washer, TV, air conditioning and electricity are all controlled by a single LG device, but may be felled by a bigger problem -- vertical integration where that home networked group works only with LG devices. Not many homes are built in such a fashion, and there is very little evidence to suggest any early actions to create cross-device software and integration solutions.

BOTTOM RIGHT QUADRANT—Limited potential to dominate consumer time, currently in home and with some presence in mobile

Sony

Sony has made some sound business decisions, such as looking to partner for TV panel production instead of manufacturing them, and some baffling business decisions, such as treating DeNA as an investment instead of a potential partner.

It has continued to muddle through phone production, and there is plenty of aging speculation that a PlayStation phone could finally be coming now that the Sony-Ericsson agreement has ended. However, Sony will require a massive marketing effort to gain market share outside of Japan in the smart phone market.

Sony has continued to produce Sony Vaio computers, and featured several tablets at CES, but, again, there seems to be little traction for theses devices outside of Japan.

Sony has taken a more network-centric approach, with connected devices meaning connected to the Sony network, not necessarily to each other. The only exception to this is integrated gaming with a Sony PS3 console and a PS Vita handheld — and this exception is limited at best, and more of a technological capability demonstration.

The challenge for its network-centric approach is that, plain and simple, Sony has struggled creating a network with content and services. It has finally moved away from offering Sony-centric content, but the privacy data breach was a significant hit, and trust remains an issue to consumers. Simply being able to access consumer content in the cloud is not enough to stay competitive with Microsoft, Google, Apple and Amazon today.

Sony finds itself at an absolutely crucial crossroads —what does the Sony brand mean in an Apple-centric world? And what technological edge can Sony exploit to drive a new generation of products and services? Things are mighty dark for Sony in Tokyo these days.

When might it get brighter? Sony recently announced a February 20th press conference in New York City, with expectation of a PlayStation 4 console. Expectations are that Sony will attempt to move, in essence, higher up in the quadrant to capture more consumer time with an improved social layer. Further, it could still announce a new PlayStation phone, too, moving Sony in a potentially more meaningful shift further right in the quadrant. However, Sony has a moniker that reads “Make.Believe.” We remain on the sidelines on Sony’s
future until we “See.Believe.”

Nintendo

Nintendo continues to try to innovate and differentiate with offerings such as WiiU TV, but the uptake rate from consumers is too early to measure. Nintendo has a storied legacy of remaining focused on what it does extremely well --- making great games. While there is plenty of public criticism of what Nintendo is not , Nintendo has not wasted time and money on a large scale trying to become something it is not.

However, Nintendo continues to explore new possibilities at its own pace, and partnerships with content providers or aggregators such as Netflix have been announced. It is a WiiU box specific strategy – not tied to any smart phone or tablet hardware providers.

This likely means Nintendo will continue to be, well, Nintendo, and likely out of the second screen discussion beyond using a WiiU tablet as a content controller.

BOTTOM LEFT QUADRANT—Low potential to dominate consumer time, currently in home and not well-positioned in mobile

Panasonic

Panasonic continues to shift its business models away from competing for the living room. To its credit, it has focused on its battery business, and reapplied some of its plasma-panel production capabilities to serve the solar panel market. It is unlikely to make the jump to create a presence in the mobile phone or tablet markets at any scale.

Sharp

Sharp demonstrated an improved UI experience at CES, and it will work well for households that do not have other connect devices. However, that market size is small.

Its opportunity being pushed at CES was 60”, 70”, 80”and 90” TVs. They looked phenomenal. However, how big is the market opportunity for very expensive, very big TVs? Limited again.

Sharp has a future in TVs and tablets, but as a panel provider for companies such as Apple. Its IZGO technology demonstration at CES was impressive, and Sharp deserves kudos for partnering with Corning on panel technology. Sharp is arguably the best panel producer in the world today, and will continue to drive the company.

COMPANIES NOT YET IN THE QUADRANT

Aereo

Aereo is included in this conversation because they are, as DISH has said, “trying to give consumers what they want.” In this case, it is giving consumers access to content and making it easy. Aereo is offering consumers a chance to rent an individual TV antenna to be able to access its local content over the air and through the Internet to any location.

It is an interesting workaround to the traditional conditional access approach to paid TV content. It also enables TV to be consumed on something other than, say, a TV. It sounds funny, but it aligns with changing consumer behavior for the 18-to-30-year old crowd. They are used to consuming content on a 15” or 20” screen, or even a 4” smartphone screen, so providing them access reiterates that TV does not have to be on TV, thereby lessening the importance of the traditional TV manufacturers who are not involved in the tablet/laptop/smart phone discussion.

Aereo not only works around some of the constraints of the current consumer delivery infrastructure, but could also be considered a form of unbundling. While more classic examples would be enabling consumers to buy ESPN directly through the web instead of having to have a subscription to a current cable or satellite provider, technology is enabling other workarounds such as Aereo.

DISH

DISH is in a tooth-and-nails fight with DirecTV and has been aggressive in promoting not only its new (last year) Hopper series but also its ad-skipping capabilities.

DISH has been aggressive in positioning itself as meeting consumer needs for simplicity, access, storage, and convenience. It wants consumers to access content stored on a set-top box anywhere, any time, and with or without ads. It is a powerful marketing push, but is also differentiated from DirecTV, which pushes content and numbers of high-definition channels. In other words, if you can not win the current battle, change the terms and pick a fight you perceive you can win.

To that point, DISH realizes that while it is a satellite company, it needs to deliver content to not only TVs, but also to phones, tablets and notebooks. It has been able to see beyond a connection to the back of a TV set, which positions itself in a decent spot as more consumers watch “TV” on tablets and phones. It is not landlocked to a legacy idea of the battle for the living room.

Netflix

Netflix is arguably already in an enviable position having successfully moved from a focus on physical disc rental to its online streaming service. As a result, Netflix simply wants to keep consumers happy, and subscribing. Netflix does not care if a consumer wants to stream content from Netflix on an Xbox 360, a Sony PlayStation 3, an iPad, a Macbook, a Windows 8 device, through a TV UI, or even on a phone.

As a result, Netflix is insulated from the consumer mobile-vs.-home locations. Netflix is already wherever the consumer is.

The main threat to Netflix is likely Amazon, not iTunes, at this point. Amazon Prime subscribers have access to a wealth of content to stream included with the subscription, and while it may not be early “window” release content, it often may be considered to have “good enough” content to keep consumers happy and consider canceling a Netflix subscription.

Twitter

Twitter by-and-large has become a huge second-screen phenomenon by virtue of consumer empowerment. For example, a consumer could arguably skip watching the Grammy Awards show live on TV, but instead follow some key influencers on Twitter and learn in near-real time which artist won which award.

Granted, Twitter is not limited to being just a second screen for TV, but it has certainly become a required “tool” or service to have handy during other TV viewing events such as professional sports.

Most consumers today do no use Twitter on a TV screen via a remote keyboard, but instead use a phone, tablet or laptop. This again diminishes the prospects for a TV-driven user interface dominating a consumer experience without having some additional interactive software layer tied to a handheld screen of some size.

Zeebox

Zeebox is one of the early services that take advantage of the second screen concept in the living room. While it is not directly integrated with the content being consumed on the TV (can not play, pause, record, etc.), it is positioned as an enhancement to the content with a social, data, communications and transactional layer.

At one level, Zeebox will work on virtually any handheld, tablet or notebook device, but is more of an overlay rather than a consumption driver. Over time, as companies move from providing one to two or three screens that consumers will use, a company such as Zeebox will be an attractive layer to add in.

>> Download the Printable PDF Here

By P.J. McNealy 10 Jun, 2021
Microsoft takes a step closer to offering games anywhere, anytime, anyplace and over any connection with Xbox and its offerings. Here are our key takeaways.
By P.J. McNealy 15 Jan, 2021
#CES2021 will go down as a relative virtual success -- no lines, wide access online, sessions timed well -- and gave the chance to dig in on how companies have adjusted to 2020 heading into 2021. These adjustments are opportunities for other companies to learn from others, because we are in the thick of #AdaptOrPerish. The one overriding theme was clear: 2020 has hyper-started consumer adoption rates to digital, changing consumer consumption behavior by a factor of years. As history has shown, consumer don't typically revert back, either. In no particular order, some observations from this week: The term "franchise is so 2020. "Universe" is so 2021 . (And you can add "Content is Still King" too.) As streaming TV/film content services have spent the last three years or so driving subscriber growth numbers, one of the underlying business model tactics has been #BuildVsBuy when it came to adding content to the service to build out the library while attracting new subs. The balance of creating original programming versus acquiring licensed content is regularly being tested and where the bulk of investment dollars for the next 12-to-24 months go. Take it one step further and more mature services such as Netflix have been focused on which international markets to spend money on for local content in those markets while still offering enough to the U.S. subscriber market and holding off any rising churn rates. Part of the licensed content land grab has been for franchised content, whether it is, for example, Friends or Seinfeld or His Dark Materials . This year will see the expansion of the more important term: universe. The universe of Star Wars (Disney/LucasArts), the universe of The Avengers (Disney/Marvel), the universe of DC Comics (Warner Brothers). Comic book stories were sometimes islands of characters, and occasionally they overlapped. As those books moved to film, collaboration and overlap and off-shoots of story lines have grown in multiple prongs. There are TV series, mini-series, film adaptations--in other words, short-form and long-form content to be consumed on multiple-sized platforms, from phones to the Box Office. Do consumers really know what they want to watch? @HBO had an interesting point on consumers viewing patterns: 66% of time, consumers know what they want, while 33% of time they’re looking for new. This is classic push/pull content balance for subscription providers. The 66% of time means that the service has to have a strong library of content that has few friction points to discovery and consumption. That 33% of looking for new? This is an evolution of what we saw 20 years ago in the early days of streaming audio, where streaming radio "channels" were either being curated by panels of "groovers and musicologists" (one music service did actually promote that phrase) versus early algorithms setting programming options. The net-net is that consumers win. They enjoy a better experience, leading to a sticky subscription service. Potential benefits for the service provider include lower churn rates, lower marketing costs, better margin expansion potential, and better consumer data to build strong profiles for potential targeted advertising. Voice hits its stride in 2021 . The evolution of consumer behavior with user interfaces continues to mature, from keyboards to digital pens to touch screens to voice commands. The use of voice is going to quickly become a default interface for many (mostly younger) consumers, from search to commands to dictation. This leads to a deeper learning set and the concept of a relationship of sorts with Alexa/Siri/Cortana will grow. A consumer could ask “Hey Siri, what should I watch tonight?” The question suggests inherent trust that Siri (or others) know enough of the consumer to give a relevant answer. The result could be a combination of known viewing habits, time of day, location, companions, how busy a day one had, consideration if dinner has been made/ordered/eaten, tone of voice, filter of live events...the combined data sets are endless. We have consistently seen in consumer survey data that the 18-to-30 year old market is comfortable with tradeoffs of giving up data in order to get a more personalized recommendation. Also underlying is the trust in a reasonable result. Services such as Alexa are logging reams of data while answering a wider array of questions beyond "Alexa, what is the weather forecast for today?" Added functionality such as traffic information, intra-home device calling, streaming music, answering questions, telling jokes...all build up trust in getting a targeted response. (Bonus: pick a voice with an accent you find familiar or comforting for Siri!) Voice will become much more prevalent in homes in 2021. #GenerationMe #ItIsComing #CanBeCreepy #ChangingConsumerBehavior What is "entertainment?" Who is a "gamer?" The concept of a "gamer" is simple these days: everyone. It is no longer just a teenager in a basement on a console, and one panel said the gaming market is 40% female. The concept of "entertainment" is now likely simple: it is everything. It is no longer just a TV show, going to the movie theatre, or to a live sporting event. "Entertainment” is now in people’s homes for cooking shows, fashion shows, DIY shows, podcasts, Zoom cocktail hours, etc. The services have redefined entertainment too as a major source of eyeballs and time on screens thanks to both TikTok and Twitch. Both have grown straight vertical users/user hours and 2021 should continue that acceleration. One service, however, that sank in 2020? Quibi. With dominating screen time of such importance, Quibi was really well positioned with very short-form, quality video content with A- and B-list talent. Unfortunately, when consumers stopped commuting in 2020, Quibi sank. It would have probably worked in 2021/22 and will be interesting to see how Roku continues to move away from being a hardware and service company to service company and integrate the Quibi content into its platform. #DigitalEmpireBuilding
By PJ McNealy 21 Feb, 2020
YES. The launch of the upcoming Sony PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X consoles could be delayed, have reduced launch inventory numbers, or be configured to regional launches which means no simultaneous global launches this Fall---all due to the COVID-19. Let us be clear, too – there are many unknowns at this point in February, especially understanding when manufacturing workers in China will be back to full-time production, enabling the supply chain, manufacturing and assembly for the upcoming consoles. While the consoles may still launch as scheduled in the Fall in North America, the global rollout, launch numbers and software support will be causing scenario planning discussions as the global outbreak of COVID-19 continues. There are likely two current scenarios for launching the PS5 and Xbox Series X consoles in North America. The optimistic scenario is for an October launch, which allows retailers to sell hardware for 10-11 weeks before Christmas. The second scenario is a pre-Black Friday launch in mid-November, allowing the new console(s) launch(es) to be on the shelves ahead of Black Friday and what is now an extended sales period leading up to and following the day after Thanksgiving. To build a schedule for key dates for making October/November possible is similar to getting an orchestra to play in sync at a future date—it requires layers of coordination. The console maker needs to hit critical dates around dev kits being built and distributed, retailer support being lined up, media buys locked in, operating systems being finalized, third-party software finalized for launch, and hardware debugged and manufactured for scale for shipment to North America. The last point? It is likely causing the most worry at this point because of the uncertainty of how off-schedule manufacturing is going to be disrupted this month, March, April, etc . It is virtually impossible to predict when the outbreak will subside and the supply chain and manufacturing are back to work in full force . What we can predict is a timeline for manufacturing given an October or mid-November 2020 North American console launch.
By P.J. McNealy 15 May, 2019
The emergence of F2P gaming and video game subscriptions beg the question: Which one wins, and why? What do consumers really want?
By P.J. McNealy 15 May, 2019
This report from CES 2018 previews the business model impacts of the upcoming 5G launch, and why video game publishers should be planning for new platforms, new game models, and new business models as consumer behaviors change.
By PJ McNealy 08 Nov, 2017
Is the Xbox One X Launch the Death Knell for Consoles?
By P.J. McNealy 12 Jan, 2017
While the market is currently focused on the Xbox One and PS4 consoles, there is a case to be made that a year from now, the upcoming Nintendo Switch could be the top-selling console in CY 2017. Three factors: 1. What is the case for the Switch? 2. What is happening with Sony and Microsoft? 3. What else could influence dollars to the segment? VR? Mobile? 1. What is the case for the Switch? Nintendo announced its upcoming new console, called the Switch and is scheduled to launch in the first quarter of CY2017. While there has been early criticism, as expected, of how the console looks, history shows that software drives hardware sales, and Nintendo has the most top-10 most popular IP in console history, with IP such as Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong and Super Smash Bros. These are multi-generational games, meaning that the big IP typically launch once per hardware console cycle, and are multi-family generational titles. There are many 40-to-60 year old parents who grew up playing Nintendo games, a tradition shared by many 15-to-39 year olds also understand. Nintendo IP is often family friendly, and again, has the easiest path for a family to just pick up controllers in the Living Room and just play. No family sits around the Living Room with four Xbox One or PS4 controllers, or connects on four Amazon Fire Tablet, or on four Apple iPads. This family gaming is a Nintendo tradition, and neither the Xbox One nor PlayStation 4 have focused on this aspect of multi-player family gaming software with any significance. Remember—when the Xbox One launched, it was focused on being an entertainment platform, while the PS4 was focused on the hard-core gamer market. So Nintendo will focus elsewhere—the family demographic with familiar, fun, friendly software. Nintendo sets itself as being the likely choice the second-console-in-the-house position. The Xbox One and PS4 are just over three years old since the November 2013 launches. Assuming that the Switch is priced at $299 or less, Nintendo has the opportunity to launch a swath of big first-party games for the March and June quarters of 2017, and have the third-party publishers (Electronic Arts, Ubisoft, Activision, Take-Two, etc.) target September and December 2017 quarters to launch. The extra six-to-nine months are likely critical to third-party publishers for development time. This means the value proposition of buying a second console—with lots of first-, second- and third-party software available by Holiday 2017. It is worth noting, too, that the public support for the Switch is notably better than for either the Wii or WiiU launches. Why would the business model case for Nintendo fail? Likely one of two reasons: 1. Supply constrains inventory to the point of frustration for consumers and limits market share. 2. History repeats itself and Nintendo fails to roll out a continual flow of big IP after the launch of the Switch, leaving the channel short of marketing opportunities to push the new console. 2. What is happening with Sony and Microsoft? Both companies are in new ground for Holiday 2016. The fourth quarter is typically the strongest hardware sales period, and Sony is pushing the new, updated version of its console, with the PS4 Slim ($299) and the PS4 Pro ($399), while Microsoft is pushing its Xbox One S. They vary in power (both CPU and GPU), and 4K streaming vs. 4K gaming, and consumers already know about the next Xbox One (Project Scorpio), slated for launch in Q4 2017. Again, it is an upgraded box over the Xbox One S, with full 4K gaming and 4K streaming, as well as likely enablement of a host of Virtual Reality/Augmented or Mixed Reality offerings. The corporate goals for the companies, as a result of these hardware rollouts, show divergent paths: Sony has one goal and one goal only: to sell as many PS4 consoles as possible as the PlayStation business is the core of the company moving forward. This means that Sony has been very aggressive, with multiple bundles or discounts through partners such as GameStop, Best Buy, Target, Amazon and Wal-mart. Microsoft switched its goal to enable alignment between the underlying operating system to be Windows 10 for the Xbox as well as for tablets and PCs. This means Microsoft can enable cross-play among devices, opening up its ecosystem to more partners, including on the VR/AR/MR front. It also then appeals to developers who might want to code once, distribute anywhere in the Win10 ecosystem. Hence, this holiday, Microsoft has been happy to sell Xbox One S boxes, feature 4K streaming, and really focus on gaining share in Holiday 2017. Could both Sony and Microsoft generate problems for Nintendo in CY 2017? Sure. It could come from a break-through title in VR that speeds up consumer adoption (and spending) on VR equipment, or it could be in the form of a killer, brand-new IP that sparks console sales (such as the original Halo launch), or it could be from either Sony or Microsoft being aggressive for either an exclusive licensing deal (such as for the next Grand Theft Auto), or going the merger and acquisition route (such as Microsoft buying Valve). These are all scenarios that could dim Nintendo prospects in 2017. 3. What else could influence dollars to the segment? VR? Mobile? It has been a popular argument to say that Nintendo has lost market and wallet share due to mobile gaming, and it has been largely true of the declining cycle of the Nintendo 3DS handheld systems. However, the role of mobile gaming has largely been short-session engagements, or a car back-seat babysitter. It has not replaced the Living Room family experience, and that is why the Switch launch could be impactful to the overall gaming market. Will VR/AR/MR take dollars from a Switch launch? The answer is likely no, but with some assumptions, such as Sony not having a killer PSVR game launched in 2017 (see https://www.digitalworldresearch.com/Virtual-Reality-Forecasts for our recent VR piece). If it does, it could erode some potential dollars at the margins for Nintendo. If the Samsung Gear or Google Daydream View sell incredibly well in 2017, those are likely incremental, small dollars (most headsets are either bundled or cost under $100). And at the high-end of VR, there is likely not many households making a buying decision between an $800 VR solution (assuming they have a compatible PC) versus a $299-or-under Switch.
By P.J. McNealy 07 Oct, 2016
Early Days and Overhype: Putting Reality Back Into Virtual Reality Forecasts
By P.J. McNealy 06 Oct, 2016
So kudos to Vizio, who sold out to LeEco for $2B. This is a great example of #DigitalEmpireBuilding in action where a company chooses to buy instead of building to grow its empire in the digital landscape.
By P.J. McNealy 24 May, 2016
New version(s) of an Xbox One console is launched and runs the full Windows 10 Operating System, enabling new forms of entertainment on the console such as Virtual Reality (VR).
More Posts
Share by: