Posts tagged ‘disney’

UV Doesn’t Smell Right

What a day for UltraViolet articles.  I understand that the group is planning a flurry of press releases based on some announcements that it is ready to launch, and the media is beginning to smell something isn’t quite right.  Being I’m still the skeptical Fool, I wanted to do a brief roundup of recent dubious UltraViolet coverage.

We all know what’s going on in the declining entertainment business, and today’s Financial Times does a nice job in telling it straight.  In no uncertain terms, if Hollywood can’t figure out digital and address the decline in home entertainment, Hollywood will stop making movies.  With big film concepts being shelved because they’re too expensive, we’re beginning to see the slowdown in new releases. It terms of digital dreams like UltraViolet saving the day, the FT had this to say:

Yet for all of the enthusiasm, Ultraviolet increasingly looks like a last throw of the dice for an industry desperate to preserve its retail business model. It is clear why Hollywood wants to keep selling movies: the profit margin on a DVD sale is more than 65 per cent – close to double the margin on a rental. Selling an electronic format is even more profitable because there are no manufacturing costs and minimal distribution costs.

But consumer behaviour has changed radically in the five years since DVD sales reached their peak, making it difficult to predict demand for a cloud-based rights locker. After all, consumers hardly lack choice when it comes to streaming movies or online TV programming.

The FT correctly sniffs out that UltraViolet’s positioning of selling $14 digital movies to consumers isn’t quite right.  With more and more options to rent and acquire content, UltraViolet runs the risk of being vDOA – Very Dull on Arrival.

The Hollywood Reporter talks about how retailers are bracing for a holiday season that doesn’t look so bright.  Retailers may afterall turn to digital to help ease their pain.  Hollywood Reporter, however, points out a glaring pimple on the face of the industry’s transition to digital: like it or not, there may be TWO major digital offerings this Holiday.  Disney’s All-Access with its Keychest digital locker competing with UltraViolet will supposedly be available soon (which is a bold statement to say that either will be ready).  By the way, All-Access content won’t work in the UltraViolet digital locker and vice versa.

Execs deny they want to start a format war, but let’s get serious for a moment.  There are two ecosystems that don’t play the other’s content.  No format war? That doesn’t quite smell right to me.

Keep your eyes, ears and nose peeled for more critical news of UltraViolet.  You’ll catch a whiff of something not right as well.

Advertisements

UltraViolet: Who’s Really Getting Burned?

UltraViolet: Who's Really Getting Burned?

In light of UltraViolet’s recent flurry of announcements about it being “ready,” let’s take a moment to revisit the truthiness of it coming to life…

As entertainment continues to gasp for air and content owners watch their revenues plummet, the industry continues to achieve nothing. Think of the Coppertone Girl if she didn’t do anything about the sun’s harmful ultraviolet rays. She’d end up burnt.

Call me a Fool, but I’d like to expose why UltraViolet is hazardous to the health of both the entertainment industry and the consumer. If it continues on its current course then, in the future, I won’t get to watch my movies the way I want to.

The industry appears to be trying to move to a “watch wherever” model. That’s a good thing because that would allow me to get my content on any of my devices like my TV, PS3, i-Pad, mobile phone, etc.

It’s a great theory, but the way things are going this initiative seems destined to fail.

Are the studios waffling?

The studio-centric UltraViolet was started three years ago when the market was different and they felt that a digital standard was required to continue selling content in a world where disc sales were crumbling.

Time has marched on and I now understand the studios are waffling, beginning to disown the very usage model that allows you to “include up to six people you define as your household” and “access all of your shows and movies from any of up to 12 registered UltraViolet devices.”  (Don’t shoot the messenger.  This is straight from uvvu.com).  They are getting cold feet with this fundamental premise because they feel the model is overly generous and too big of a departure from the current model.  They also are concerned that the members of an account would misuse their rights by sharing content too liberally among members and devices in their account.  You tell me what that really means…

To this day, the business costs of how UltraViolet works is ambiguous.  Commitment to the business model is a long way off.  Who pays for marketing? The studios spent millions promoting Blu-ray; why aren’t they ponying up to market UltraViolet?

Warner Brother’s seems to be confirming this waffling.  Its President announced a “Digital Everywhere App” that allows consumers to manage their video content the way they can with music and photos.  Warner expects the App to connect consumers with and enable other retailers like Amazon, Netflix and Apple.

Wait a minute: we know for a fact that Apple will continue on its own course and never join UltraViolet, and Amazon will refuse to sign up because it is busy with its own cloud services plan. Netflix doesn’t even sell or rent movies so to them a digital locker is irrelevant.  Warner’s ruse of playing nice with retailers that will never launch UltraViolet services is just more waffle.

Could I please have some extra syrup, as this is all a little hard to swallow?

The Sun rises in the West?

Device makers will have to create new devices in order to support UltraViolet.  Since this engineering takes people, time and money, they only add functionality if they think it will help to sell more devices.    It’s too risky to start production with changing and ill-defined specifications. It’s not surprising they are standing on the sidelines and waiting before they invest R&D resources until it is a safe bet.

They are tiring of studio waffling.  With each waffle, device makers push back their ability to deliver UltraViolet-ready devices by a minimum of nine months due to production lead times. For devices to hit stores for the 2011 holiday season, they would have needed to start production in February.  That didn’t happen.

Device makers are unclear on the benefits.  They know it will cost more to build the devices, and they know that no one appears to be stepping up to pay for marketing. The upside was selling more devices supporting an open standard, but now they are not so sure.

They were excited at the prospect of a beautiful sunrise with UltraViolet, but it turns out that they are tired of waiting in the dark only to find the forecast is mostly cloudy (with a chance of meatballs).

Are retailers’ heads in the cloud?

Contrary to what others think, I believe that people learn about new stuff by going to stores.  At the moment, these retailers SELL the vast majority of disc-based content.  As I look at UltraViolet, there doesn’t seem to be many disc retailers involved.  Think of the number of visits that Amazon, Wal-Mart and Target have coming through to learn about and buy products.  Where are the other retailers?  Where will consumers go to learn about UltraViolet without retailers?

The concept of interoperability requires multiple retailers in each territory to launch simultaneously.  Recent estimates would see a top DVD retailer paying $10M in fees alone in the first year to operate an UltraViolet service.  The costs seem high, but retailers will get involved if they understand the benefits.  So far, these benefits are obscured and preventing retailers from committing.

I might be wrong, but maybe consumers don’t need stores or online sites to learn about new products.  Some device makers like Samsung with their TV apps, Microsoft with Xbox and Nokia with their handsets, are positioning to go direct to consumers.  Even Warner Brothers is demonstrating that maybe selling their wares directly to consumers is the future.  I have a foolish idea: maybe they can pick up the nearly 1,000 Blockbuster stores that Dish is dumping in order to reach consumers…

The disincentives are clear.  UltraViolet is expecting retailers to expose themselves and use their resources for the marketing and promotion of the UltraViolet brand.  UltraViolet will provide marketing materials (they will throw some bones like messaging and logos) that retailers will have to license. Other than that, they are on their own to market and promote the UltraViolet experience.  Retailers should not, will not, and do not reach into their own pockets to market other company’s brands.

So who’s getting burned?

UltraViolet burns the consumer.

With studios, device makers and retailers in a game of chicken, UltraViolet will rush to get something to market and water down any meaningful consumer offering to the point of being insignificant.

Think about it – should Sony be the last studio standing in UltraViolet, what good does a service do for a consumer that only has their content? It’s likely that, due to the number of companies involved, the offer will end up costing more than stuff that’s available today.  Would you pay more?  With manufacturer lead times, what if there are no devices that support UltraViolet services? If you can’t buy from retailers that you are used to, then what did 70+ companies over the past three years achieve?

My dream of watching content on all my devices seems further off than ever. With UltraViolet burning consumers, entertainment junkies like me will stop buying and keep in the shade.  I’m afraid that the sunset for entertainment is coming all too soon.

UltraViolet: Who’s Really Getting Burned?

UltraViolet: Who's Really Getting Burned?

As entertainment continues to gasp for air and content owners watch their revenues plummet, the industry continues to achieve nothing. Think of the Coppertone Girl if she didn’t do anything about the sun’s harmful ultraviolet rays. She’d end up burnt.

Call me a Fool, but I’d like to expose why UltraViolet is hazardous to the health of both the entertainment industry and the consumer. If it continues on its current course then, in the future, I won’t get to watch my movies the way I want to.

The industry appears to be trying to move to a “watch wherever” model. That’s a good thing because that would allow me to get my content on any of my devices like my TV, PS3, i-Pad, mobile phone, etc.

It’s a great theory, but the way things are going this initiative seems destined to fail.

Are the studios waffling?

The studio-centric UltraViolet was started three years ago when the market was different and they felt that a digital standard was required to continue selling content in a world where disc sales were crumbling.

Time has marched on and I now understand the studios are waffling, beginning to disown the very usage model that allows you to “include up to six people you define as your household” and “access all of your shows and movies from any of up to 12 registered UltraViolet devices.”  (Don’t shoot the messenger.  This is straight from uvvu.com).  They are getting cold feet with this fundamental premise because they feel the model is overly generous and too big of a departure from the current model.  They also are concerned that the members of an account would misuse their rights by sharing content too liberally among members and devices in their account.  You tell me what that really means…

To this day, the business costs of how UltraViolet works is ambiguous.  Commitment to the business model is a long way off.  Who pays for marketing? The studios spent millions promoting Blu-ray; why aren’t they ponying up to market UltraViolet?

Warner Brother’s seems to be confirming this waffling.  Its President announced a “Digital Everywhere App” that allows consumers to manage their video content the way they can with music and photos.  Warner expects the App to connect consumers with and enable other retailers like Amazon, Netflix and Apple.

Wait a minute: we know for a fact that Apple will continue on its own course and never join UltraViolet, and Amazon will refuse to sign up because it is busy with its own cloud services plan. Netflix doesn’t even sell or rent movies so to them a digital locker is irrelevant.  Warner’s ruse of playing nice with retailers that will never launch UltraViolet services is just more waffle.

Could I please have some extra syrup, as this is all a little hard to swallow?

The Sun rises in the West?

Device makers will have to create new devices in order to support UltraViolet.  Since this engineering takes people, time and money, they only add functionality if they think it will help to sell more devices.    It’s too risky to start production with changing and ill-defined specifications. It’s not surprising they are standing on the sidelines and waiting before they invest R&D resources until it is a safe bet.

They are tiring of studio waffling.  With each waffle, device makers push back their ability to deliver UltraViolet-ready devices by a minimum of nine months due to production lead times. For devices to hit stores for the 2011 holiday season, they would have needed to start production in February.  That didn’t happen.

Device makers are unclear on the benefits.  They know it will cost more to build the devices, and they know that no one appears to be stepping up to pay for marketing. The upside was selling more devices supporting an open standard, but now they are not so sure.

They were excited at the prospect of a beautiful sunrise with UltraViolet, but it turns out that they are tired of waiting in the dark only to find the forecast is mostly cloudy (with a chance of meatballs).

Are retailers’ heads in the cloud?

Contrary to what others think, I believe that people learn about new stuff by going to stores.  At the moment, these retailers SELL the vast majority of disc-based content.  As I look at UltraViolet, there doesn’t seem to be many disc retailers involved.  Think of the number of visits that Amazon, Wal-Mart and Target have coming through to learn about and buy products.  Where are the other retailers?  Where will consumers go to learn about UltraViolet without retailers?

The concept of interoperability requires multiple retailers in each territory to launch simultaneously.  Recent estimates would see a top DVD retailer paying $10M in fees alone in the first year to operate an UltraViolet service.  The costs seem high, but retailers will get involved if they understand the benefits.  So far, these benefits are obscured and preventing retailers from committing.

I might be wrong, but maybe consumers don’t need stores or online sites to learn about new products.  Some device makers like Samsung with their TV apps, Microsoft with Xbox and Nokia with their handsets, are positioning to go direct to consumers.  Even Warner Brothers is demonstrating that maybe selling their wares directly to consumers is the future.  I have a foolish idea: maybe they can pick up the nearly 1,000 Blockbuster stores that Dish is dumping in order to reach consumers…

The disincentives are clear.  UltraViolet is expecting retailers to expose themselves and use their resources for the marketing and promotion of the UltraViolet brand.  UltraViolet will provide marketing materials (they will throw some bones like messaging and logos) that retailers will have to license. Other than that, they are on their own to market and promote the UltraViolet experience.  Retailers should not, will not, and do not reach into their own pockets to market other company’s brands.

So who’s getting burned?

UltraViolet burns the consumer.

With studios, device makers and retailers in a game of chicken, UltraViolet will rush to get something to market and water down any meaningful consumer offering to the point of being insignificant.

Think about it – should Sony be the last studio standing in UltraViolet, what good does a service do for a consumer that only has their content? It’s likely that, due to the number of companies involved, the offer will end up costing more than stuff that’s available today.  Would you pay more?  With manufacturer lead times, what if there are no devices that support UltraViolet services? If you can’t buy from retailers that you are used to, then what did 70+ companies over the past three years achieve?

My dream of watching content on all my devices seems further off than ever. With UltraViolet burning consumers, entertainment junkies like me will stop buying and keep in the shade.  I’m afraid that the sunset for entertainment is coming all too soon.

UltraViolet: Who’s Really Getting Burned?

UltraViolet: Who's Really Getting Burned?

As entertainment continues to gasp for air and content owners watch their revenues plummet, the industry continues to achieve nothing. Think of the Coppertone Girl if she didn’t do anything about the sun’s harmful ultraviolet rays. She’d end up burnt.

Call me a Fool, but I’d like to expose why UltraViolet is hazardous to the health of both the entertainment industry and the consumer. If it continues on its current course then, in the future, I won’t get to watch my movies the way I want to.

The industry appears to be trying to move to a “watch wherever” model. That’s a good thing because that would allow me to get my content on any of my devices like my TV, PS3, i-Pad, mobile phone, etc.

It’s a great theory, but the way things are going this initiative seems destined to fail.

Are the studios waffling?

The studio-centric UltraViolet was started three years ago when the market was different and they felt that a digital standard was required to continue selling content in a world where disc sales were crumbling.

Time has marched on and I now understand the studios are waffling, beginning to disown the very usage model that allows you to “include up to six people you define as your household” and “access all of your shows and movies from any of up to 12 registered UltraViolet devices.”  (Don’t shoot the messenger.  This is straight from uvvu.com).  They are getting cold feet with this fundamental premise because they feel the model is overly generous and too big of a departure from the current model.  They also are concerned that the members of an account would misuse their rights by sharing content too liberally among members and devices in their account.  You tell me what that really means…

To this day, the business costs of how UltraViolet works is ambiguous.  Commitment to the business model is a long way off.  Who pays for marketing? The studios spent millions promoting Blu-ray; why aren’t they ponying up to market UltraViolet?

Warner Brother’s seems to be confirming this waffling.  Its President announced a “Digital Everywhere App” that allows consumers to manage their video content the way they can with music and photos.  Warner expects the App to connect consumers with and enable other retailers like Amazon, Netflix and Apple.

Wait a minute: we know for a fact that Apple will continue on its own course and never join UltraViolet, and Amazon will refuse to sign up because it is busy with its own cloud services plan. Netflix doesn’t even sell or rent movies so to them a digital locker is irrelevant.  Warner’s ruse of playing nice with retailers that will never launch UltraViolet services is just more waffle.

Could I please have some extra syrup, as this is all a little hard to swallow?

The Sun rises in the West?

Device makers will have to create new devices in order to support UltraViolet.  Since this engineering takes people, time and money, they only add functionality if they think it will help to sell more devices.    It’s too risky to start production with changing and ill-defined specifications. It’s not surprising they are standing on the sidelines and waiting before they invest R&D resources until it is a safe bet.

They are tiring of studio waffling.  With each waffle, device makers push back their ability to deliver UltraViolet-ready devices by a minimum of nine months due to production lead times. For devices to hit stores for the 2011 holiday season, they would have needed to start production in February.  That didn’t happen.

Device makers are unclear on the benefits.  They know it will cost more to build the devices, and they know that no one appears to be stepping up to pay for marketing. The upside was selling more devices supporting an open standard, but now they are not so sure.

They were excited at the prospect of a beautiful sunrise with UltraViolet, but it turns out that they are tired of waiting in the dark only to find the forecast is mostly cloudy (with a chance of meatballs).

Are retailers’ heads in the cloud?

Contrary to what others think, I believe that people learn about new stuff by going to stores.  At the moment, these retailers SELL the vast majority of disc-based content.  As I look at UltraViolet, there doesn’t seem to be many disc retailers involved.  Think of the number of visits that Amazon, Wal-Mart and Target have coming through to learn about and buy products.  Where are the other retailers?  Where will consumers go to learn about UltraViolet without retailers?

The concept of interoperability requires multiple retailers in each territory to launch simultaneously.  Recent estimates would see a top DVD retailer paying $10M in fees alone in the first year to operate an UltraViolet service.  The costs seem high, but retailers will get involved if they understand the benefits.  So far, these benefits are obscured and preventing retailers from committing.

I might be wrong, but maybe consumers don’t need stores or online sites to learn about new products.  Some device makers like Samsung with their TV apps, Microsoft with Xbox and Nokia with their handsets, are positioning to go direct to consumers.  Even Warner Brothers is demonstrating that maybe selling their wares directly to consumers is the future.  I have a foolish idea: maybe they can pick up the nearly 1,000 Blockbuster stores that Dish is dumping in order to reach consumers…

The disincentives are clear.  UltraViolet is expecting retailers to expose themselves and use their resources for the marketing and promotion of the UltraViolet brand.  UltraViolet will provide marketing materials (they will throw some bones like messaging and logos) that retailers will have to license. Other than that, they are on their own to market and promote the UltraViolet experience.  Retailers should not, will not, and do not reach into their own pockets to market other company’s brands.

So who’s getting burned?

UltraViolet burns the consumer.

With studios, device makers and retailers in a game of chicken, UltraViolet will rush to get something to market and water down any meaningful consumer offering to the point of being insignificant.

Think about it – should Sony be the last studio standing in UltraViolet, what good does a service do for a consumer that only has their content? It’s likely that, due to the number of companies involved, the offer will end up costing more than stuff that’s available today.  Would you pay more?  With manufacturer lead times, what if there are no devices that support UltraViolet services? If you can’t buy from retailers that you are used to, then what did 70+ companies over the past three years achieve?

My dream of watching content on all my devices seems further off than ever. With UltraViolet burning consumers, entertainment junkies like me will stop buying and keep in the shade.  I’m afraid that the sunset for entertainment is coming all too soon.

Entertainment Retail is Dying: Follow Up

Friday’s post laid out some grim evidence about the state of entertainment retail.  It seems that Nipper, the loyal old dog that got so famous for listening to His Late Master’s Voice through the gramophone, has gotten fat.  If it’s not the economy or other lame excuses, then what’s going on?

Sales of discs are NOT being replaced by digital

As physical sales began declining, many in the business began to assume (and hope) that the declines would be offset by digital sales.  However, the transition to digital from physical is nothing short of a catastrophe.  Total revenue from the sales and rental of content (physical and digital) has been declining over the last several years, and nothing seems to be working to reverse this trend.   The industry is in free fall.

We got here because content owners chose to hang on to the old model and get fat and lazy rather than nurture the development of an inevitable new digital model.  That attentive and amazed terrier somehow turned into a territorial pit bull that didn’t want to switch to a more lean and nutritious bowl of food in the name of health.   Here’s what happened.

Content protection

Content owners began emphasizing how to protect their content as it changed from digital on a disc to digital in the computer.  The music business stood by in paralyzed disbelief as fans turned to crime and stole entire music collections.  In the movie world, studio execs focused on preventing illegal file sharing and created complicated content protection that had the unintended consequence of making it nearly impossible for customers to enjoy content across a variety of devices.

What was great about the DVD – the convenience of using it in any DVD player – was completely undone in the digital world.  What a pain it would be if you had to buy three different DVDs to play in your computer, on your phone, or on your TV!  With the difficulty of watching movies across devices, consumers have checked out and don’t really care about digital.  The irony of all this content protection is that it hasn’t done a thing to stop illegal file share.   Not to mention the content owners have allowed a near Apple-monopoly.

Backwards economics

The next big issue concerns the economics that motivate retailers to sell products to its consumers.   In the DVD world, studios pay to manufacture a DVD – the plastic disc, the case, the paper on which the artwork is printed – and then ship off the package to the retailer.  The retailer pays a wholesale price to the studio and then in turn sells the DVD to its customer with hopefully a bit of extra margin to make some money.  Easy, right?  In the digital world, something happened that I really don’t understand.

Digital files have manufacturing and distribution costs associated with them.  But for some reason, content owners began pushing these costs onto retailers.  As a result, retail margins to sell digital goods took a hit.  When retailer margins take a hit for no good reason, retailers lose interest in selling a product.  Consequently, retailers haven’t readily adopted digital.  There is simply no motivation to help a customer transition to digital.

So, here we are.  The industry suffers as DVDs and Blu-rays sales continue to decline and customers opt for a cheap and easy subscription or rental offer (think Netflix, Amazon, Vudu).  The last standing retailers don’t know what to do with the dying entertainment category.  As smaller retailers go out of business, the big ones are looking at other more profitable things to sell their customers and fill the space in their stores.

The prognosis for the now fat and lazy Nipper is not looking good.  He needs to get up, move around, and start thinking of doing something different.  Otherwise, he’ll become another obesity statistic.

Amazon’s Cloud

Cloud computing, cloud syncing, cloud services, cloud storage.  It seems like anything these days with that ambiguous (and overused) word is sexy.  And the Cloud got a huge jolt of tangibility from Amazon’s launch of Cloud Drive and Cloud Player this past week.  But, the content industry is not too thrilled; more on implications in a bit.

Suffice it to say that the Amazon Cloud Drive and Player are consumer-oriented services that allow users to back up their local music libraries and play them remotely from anywhere via the Web or an Android device.   For you and me, that means if our tablet, laptop or smart phone crashes, our music would be left untouched and ready to be accessed on another device.  We can expect that Apple and Google will follow shortly with their own cloud offerings, but Amazon wins the First to Market Contest. For a decent read, check out the New York Times for an overview.

In terms of the experience, user reviews are also beginning to land (here’s a good one, there’s a decent one).  The most consistent positive callout is about the interface and ease of use.  On the negative side is the fact that uploading your entire music collection takes a ton of time and is generally a pain in the derriere.  Costs seem reasonable enough (free 5GB and $1 per GB thereafter).

OK enough facts.  Let’s now riff on the impacts of Amazon Cloud services on the music and movies businesses.

The labels are annoyed

Record labels are pretty well pissed off at Amazon for going to market without really consulting them and seeking out the appropriate licenses to stream music from the cloud to your devices.  Labels are concerned because they feel that some music in your collection isn’t “legit:” some music is either stolen from file sharing sites or ripped from friends’ CDs.  Besides offering a service that cuts revenue from labels on inappropriately obtained music, labels are worried that Amazon Cloud services will encourage friends to rip – and share – their music collections.

As Copyright and Technology points out, Amazon’s likely attitude toward the labels is “So sue me.” Simultaneously Amazon will argue that the labels owe them a favor for offering a competitive service to iTunes.  All I can say is that lawyers are licking their chops on the ensuing litigation that will undoubtedly occur.

And how about the studios?

While Amazon Cloud services are limited to our music collections for use across our non-Apple devices, Amazon will likely allow you to put your movie and television shows in the Cloud in the not so distant future.  Studios will undoubtedly resist Amazon Cloud services without the appropriate protections in place to make sure we nasty customers don’t steal and share with our friends.  I think we should expect some interesting (and litigious) discussions to come.

What about current industry efforts with the Cloud?

In an interesting twist, Ultraviolet, which has studio backing from all but Disney, is now faced with a few interesting scenarios to consider as the Cloud space materializes.  On the positive side, with Amazon’s launch into the Cloud, Amazon is educating consumers to what life looks like with “up there.”  So an optimist could argue that Ultraviolet will benefit from drafting Amazon’s efforts.  Another outcome for Ultraviolet is if Amazon joins the consortium and then potentially leverages Amazon’s considerable Cloud infrastructure. Good for Ultraviolet, but bad for the only member company that has skin in the game.  Neustar will need to figure out how to avoid being squeezed out by Amazon.

Another scenario includes Ultraviolet being a potential competitor to Amazon’s Cloud.  If the studios get a sudden change of heart to license content to Amazon, Ultraviolet may just evaporate.

Wrap up

The Cloud is heating up, for sure.  Google and Apple will launch something, and soon the Cloud will become a must have feature in any content service.  But the content industry will not go quietly into this Cloud-based world.  And like the legions of lawyers out there, I’m grateful for the job security and the articles to come.

What do you think?  What are scenarios with labels, studios, industry consortia?

A world without Woody?

Another re-run, but an altogether great look at the continuing saga of UV.

I recently got a comment on a blog which asked about Keychest and Ultraviolet, and I’m here to tell you I found out some not-so-good news regarding “the future of entertainment.”  In a nutshell, I think the industry may be going down the path of confusing us with choices we will have to make.  While the industry seems to be trying, it is still coming up short.  Here’s what I’ve found out:

Disney and Apple are on their own

Imagine a world without Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Pirates of the Caribbean, The Lion King, Up, Cars, or The Chronicles of Narnia.  The top 10 movies from Disney have grossed an impressive $3.3 billion in US box office.  Despite being in 4th place for box office take so far in 2010, Disney is world famous for its franchises that earn billions of dollars.  No one can argue the staggering impact that this studio has had on merchandising, plush toys and bedroom decorations for little boys and girls across the world.

Continue to imagine a world without a close friend and ally of Disney’s:  Apple.  They continue to capture the world’s Luddites with its stupid-simple devices.  A not-unnoticed factoid with this company is that if you add the market caps of massive brands – take Microsoft ($230 billion), throw in two retailers like Best Buy ($18 billion) and Target ($40 billion) – and you come up with a few billion short of Apple ($292 billion)!  No one can argue the impact that Apple has had on the industries it plays in.

At the moment, UltraViolet, the industry’s leading consortium to create device and content interoperability so that we can enjoy content anywhere, anytime, anyplace, is heading down a path without Disney or Apple.  Disney instead is creating its own ecosystem called Keychest. The principles are the exact same as UltraViolet, only they have created an island.  With Steve Jobs on the Disney board, both Disney and Apple will likely continue to live on their own island and extend invitations to only those that are willing to play by their rules.  As a result, the content that is so popular around the world may not be part of UV, and will therefore limit my choice.  The devices that are so prevalent from Apple, will not work.

But what about choice?!

A deep, complete selection of titles from ALL studios from which I can choose and enjoy on any of my devices – from my living room to my devices in the pocket – is critical for me to join to a service.  UltraViolet has done an admirable job in bringing 60+ companies to the table to discuss how to create an alternative in the marketplace, yet driving a truly revolutionary service offering that will inspire me to buy legitimate sources of content still comes down to a fundamental issue: I want unlimited choice.

So long as there are islands, consumers will learn that their freedom of choice is limited, and they will understand that the evolving promises of both Keychest and UV are deeply flawed.  As consumers lapse into apathy and not participate in either UV or Keychest, the industry will continue its gradual decline.  With home entertainment representing more than 50% of a studio’s revenues, studios will stop making movies.  I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to see that happen.

Savvy

Sleek, Smart, and About the PR/Media World Today

Gigaom

Technology news, trends and analysis covering mobile, big data, cloud, science, energy and media

%d bloggers like this: