[SBE] The future of Broadcasting.

[Dan Rapak]

"So it would be something like Sezmi http://sezmi.com/ sold at Best Buy here in Los Angeles ?"

First I've heard of that one. Interesting product. Indeed, that is the general idea. However, once the Internet streaming quality improves, why do it through broadcasters? If I'm a program provider, I can send it from my server to the broadcasters and then have the broadcasters send it to you or, I can simply send it directly from my server to you without the middleman. Seems like it would be more efficient (I.E. more profitable) for me to send it directly to you, plus you wouldn't have to buy the box or pay a monthly fee. I suspect the later scenario would win out in the marketplace.

Dan
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Francis Martin 
  To: sbe member discussion mail list 
  Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 1:16 AM
  Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.


  So it would be something like Sezmi http://sezmi.com/
  sold at Best Buy here in Los Angeles ?
  Curiously, content for your Sezmi box - $300. for the hardware and $5. a month for service - is delivered largely via OVER THE AIR ATSC stations.
  To deliver the service, Sezmi is using OTA spectrum from four 
  L.A.-area TV stations: 
  KOCE (a PBS member station in Huntington Beach, Calif.), 
  KRCA (a Spanish-language station owned by Liberman Broadcasting), 
  KAZA (owned by Pappas Telecasting and affiliated with Azteca America) and 
  KDOC (an unaffiliated station owned by Ellis Communications). 
  What they can't deliver via those OTA BROADCAST frequencies to the Sezmi DVR comes in over your broadband.

  This is sort of a more refined and well done version of the failed USDTV service out of Salt Lake City of a few years ago,
  which also used MPEG4 portions of OTA broadcast stations for delivery.

  -fm-
  http://mphbroadcastservices.com






------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  From: Dan Rapak <DanRapak at verizon.net>
  To: sbe member discussion mail list <sbe at sbe.org>
  Sent: Mon, March 15, 2010 10:01:37 PM
  Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.


  Jer,

  I'm not suggesting it would be pay TV. Rather, this is simply the new way that advertiser supported TV will be viewed, just as it is now on Hulu. The difference is, if you want to watch "CSI: Miami" you will no longer be locked in to a specific time period on a Monday night selected by the broadcaster. Instead, you will choose the episode you want to watch and choose when you want to watch it. It would still be advertiser supported.

  Indeed, for advertisers, this could be a big plus. Instead of relying on the bogus rating system that is currently in place, the advertiser would pay by the "hit" on the server. There would be no guess work as to how many homes tune in to a given program. The hit count would yield an exact number of households.

  Dan Rapak

    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: jer hill 
    To: 'sbe member discussion mail list' 
    Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 12:35 AM
    Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.


    Why would I want to pay for TV over a fast switch. It's still pay TV?

    -jer



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: sbe-bounces at sbe.org [mailto:sbe-bounces at sbe.org] On Behalf Of Lee Howder
    Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 10:02 AM
    To: sbe at sbe.org
    Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.


    With Cisco making routers that operate at 322Tbps it's only a matter of time that we have the ability to stream and download every video ever made quickly. TV is a thing of the past and with digital music and IPOD'S I don't know anybody under 30 that listens to the radio either.    

    > From: DanRapak at verizon.net
    > To: sbe at sbe.org
    > Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 13:30:00 -0400
    > Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.
    > 
    > First of all, in having this discussion, I think we need to differentiate 
    > between radio and television. Maintaining radio is crucial in that the 
    > dissemination of information in times of emergencies cannot be left to the 
    > wired infrastructure. I was working the mobile unit covering the World 
    > Series at Candlestick Park when the earthquake hit. Cell phones were useless 
    > and land line phones were severely overloaded. I was in New York on 9/11. It 
    > wasn't possible to place a call on most cell phone systems. I had Verizon 
    > cell service. It worked but it took awhile to get through as it too was 
    > severely overloaded. Ditto the northeast blackout. In times of emergency, 
    > relying on the public landline network (including wireless Internet which 
    > connects to it) just won't do.
    > 
    > That's radio. When it comes to television no one on this list is going to 
    > want to hear what follows. With respect, I think we may be missing the 
    > point. The core issue is not so much what the FCC or the government will or 
    > will not do. The issue is the marketplace.
    > 
    > Internet speeds keep getting faster and faster. Codecs keep getting better 
    > and better. Services like Hulu may not be full HD-1080P yet, but they don't 
    > look bad at all and they're getting better all the time. They're certainly 
    > better than the way YouTube looked when it was becoming a market force (sold 
    > in '06 for $1,650,000,000) and they look MUCH better than the Skype video 
    > that many broadcasters have begun using for remote pickups.
    > 
    > I know that everyone says people won't want to watch programming on their 
    > computers. Perhaps so, but you know what? They won't have to. Television 
    > sets are already beginning to sport RJ-45 connectors. TiVo boxes have had 
    > them for some time. The day is rapidly approaching when you will turn on 
    > your TV set and call up a programming menu very similar to what you get on a 
    > digital cable box or a satellite receiver. The difference is, you won't look 
    > at a listing by time-of-day that tells you when you can watch. You'll look 
    > at a listing by PROGRAM. You'll pick the show you want to watch. Then you'll 
    > pick the exact episode you want to watch and you'll watch it precisely WHEN 
    > you want to watch it. That is what consumers will expect. That is what they 
    > will become used to. Unfortunately, there's simply no way a television 
    > broadcaster can compete with that.
    > 
    > That, my friends, is the way the free marketplace works. Why do you think GE 
    > is getting rid of NBC? Why do you think there is noise about Disney 
    > divesting itself of ABC? The days of the big stick on the mountaintop are 
    > drawing to a close. The handwriting isn't on the wall, its on your computer 
    > screen. Get used to it and plan your careers accordingly.
    > 
    > Respectfully,
    > Dan Rapak - CPBE, 8VSB, CBNT
    > ABC Television Network - Retired
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > ----- Original Message ----- 
    > From: "Bob Reite" <br at telcen.com>
    > To: "sbe member discussion mail list" <sbe at sbe.org>
    > Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 10:32 PM
    > Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.
    > 
    > 
    > >I think that you are being a little bit paranoid. The Internet lets 
    > >everyone be a "broadcaster" for a very low entry cost. If traditional 
    > >broadcasters want to keep their audience, they had better start offering 
    > >better programming. I quit watching broadcast TV over 5 years ago, because 
    > >the entertainment shows were no longer entertaining, and the news 
    > >programming seemed to all rally for the war in Iraq, with no critical 
    > >analysis against it, unlike the news commentary during the Vietnam war.
    > >
    > > Yes, with the DTV transition, we lost some more of the UHF spectrum and in 
    > > the major markets, low VHF, but since one can cram 4 channels of standard 
    > > def programming into a 6 MHz channel, I feel that we still come out ahead.
    > >
    > >
    > > Edwin Bukont wrote:
    > >> Right wing nut jobs?
    > >> Conspiracy theorists?
    > >> Where? So far every name mentioned, with their words and deeds now 
    > >> public record, is a card carrying member of either the Clinton 
    > >> liberal-elite or the Obama liberal-elite. I don't either of those can be 
    > >> called 'right wing". There is nothing here in theorey or conspiracy, 
    > >> nothing thought up by a right wing nut.
    > >> The face of the matter is that what was begun in 1994, the Clinton 
    > >> years, then stopped during the Bush years, has now been resurrected under 
    > >> Obama. That ressurection is the plan to kill the very business that 
    > >> holds liberal causes so dear. Face the facts. The conspiracy is on the 
    > >> part of the liberal elites to remove freedom of speech and freedom to 
    > >> assemble from the mass populace. An all broadband world is an all 
    > >> monitored and tracked world. 'They', the proponents of a national ID 
    > >> plan, (which is what your future IPv6 smart phone will be) intend and 
    > >> will know what you listen to, where you listen to it, who else is 
    > >> listening with you and what your thoughts as you discuss them in a chat.
    > >> The First Amendment is under attack. And this is a fact. That appears 
    > >> to be the intent of Reed Hundt's vision, an all wired world that leads 
    > >> government right into any room in your house. Brought to you by liberal 
    > >> visionaries. No right wings or conservatives involved.
    > >>
    > >> Edwin Bukont CSRE, DRB, CBNT V- 240.417.2475; F- 
    > >> 240.368.1265 ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > >> From: tomtraveller at hotmail.com
    > >> To: sbe at sbe.org
    > >> Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:41:39 -0800
    > >> Subject: Re: [SBE] The future of Broadcasting.
    > >>
    > >> Right-wing wing nuts and conspiracy theorists, anyone who thinks the 
    > >> government can plan this far ahead and implement grandiose plans deserves 
    > >> their paranoia. They are part of the problem(s).
    > >> Thomas Wojciechowski
    > >> CBRE, lifetime
    > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > >> Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now. 
    > >> <http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/210850553/direct/01/>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    > >>
    > >> _______________________________________________
    > >> The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org
    > >> To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe
    > >>
    > >> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe
    > > _______________________________________________
    > > The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org
    > > To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe
    > >
    > > http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe
    > > 
    > 
    > _______________________________________________
    > The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org
    > To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe
    > 
    > http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Get started. 


----------------------------------------------------------------------------


    _______________________________________________
    The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org
    To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org
  To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/sbe/attachments/20100316/8453fd50/attachment-0001.htm>