[flv width=”512″ height=”298″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WSJ Studios disarming cable in battle with Netflix Media Report 6-20-11.flv[/flv]

Wall Street Journal: Top execs of some media behemoths are shifting their public stances toward Netflix Inc. of late. They’re now trying to persuade investors that the video streaming service will expand their business rather than destroy it. (4 minutes)

You are forgiven if you are confused about the love-hate relationship the cable industry has with online video streamers like Netflix — one that the Wall Street Journal likens to manic bipolar episodes.  Weeks after blaming Netflix for getting video programming too cheaply and threatening cable subscriptions, cable industry executives were hugs and kisses about online video at the recent Cable Show in Chicago.

“The reason why there’s interest in these Internet video providers that is that they’re deploying technology that’s making the experience better for consumers,” Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt said in an interview with MarketWatch during the National Cable & Telecommunications Association’s annual Cable Show last week.

“There’s nothing about [cable companies] that stops us from doing that. So I would say … we as an industry just need to pay attention and give consumers what they want. Then there’s no room for these other guys. I don’t mean to say that in a negative way, but it’s true.”

Britt

Of course, this is the same man that has earplugs firmly implanted to help resist another rejection of his Internet pricing schemes that Time Warner Cable customers loathed in 2009.  Britt’s desire to give “consumers what they want” just doesn’t play in this part of town while the cable company is installing software to measure and potentially meter broadband usage.

What is different in the online video spectrum is consumers have choices.  They can adopt Time Warner Cable’s glacially-slow rollout of its TV Everywhere concept, watch Hulu, use Netflix, or simply steal content providers don’t want them to watch.  For customers of Time Warner Cable facing competition from AT&T, there is potentially nowhere to run to avoid an Internet Overcharging scheme which could bring the online viewing party to a rapid conclusion when your viewing allowance is used up.

Britt says he is struggling with rights holders to provide more accessibility to online video streaming of popular shows.  He’s also thinking about how many restrictions to slap on subscribers.

MarketWatch talked with Britt and found him dealing with nagging questions about how many devices each user account should be authorized to use for viewing. “Should it be three, should it be 10? If I make [that number] too small, you’re not going to be happy as a customer,” Britt philosophized. “If I make it too big, you’re going to give the password to all of your friends, and they won’t have to buy a subscription to begin with.”

As Netflix traffic continues to grow, analysts are pondering whether Netflix is a primary driver behind consumers cord-cutting their pay television packages in favor of watching video content online.

A recent article in The New York Times claims that Netflix may be behind the recent decrease in cable television households, citing a report from the Diffusion Group, a media analyst.  The group’s study claims 32% of satellite, telephone, or cable-delivered pay television customers were planning to downgrade or cancel their packages in 2011, a giant increase from the 16% measured in 2010.

[trefis_forecast ticker=”NFLX” driver=”0532″]

Trefis, another research firm, is challenging those assertions, noting an in-depth review of the study finds only around 7% of those planning to pull the plug cited Netflix as the chief reason.

What is causing a rush to downgrade or cancel service?  Rate increases, particularly for add-on services like premium channels or extra tiers including sports and movies.  Time Warner Cable recently boosted prices for HBO to as high as $15 a month for many subscribers.  Netflix may have an impact on these consumers, deciding to drop premium services like HBO, Showtime, and Starz!  For several dollars less than what these premium channels charge, Netflix customers have unlimited access to the company’s streaming video library.

Relentless annual rate hikes have often triggered subscribers to review their packages and delete services to keep the bill stable.  Economic distress is also a widely cited factor among those completely canceling pay television.  The report does not measure how many consumers, especially younger ones, don’t ever start a pay television subscription.  These subscribers never had a cord to cut.

Hulu has received an unsolicited, and still private offer to buy the company lock, stock, and barrel — disengaging some of America’s largest television networks from the online streaming business Hulu represents.

With an offer in hand, Hulu’s owners News Corp., Walt Disney, and Comcast/NBC have decided to hire investment bankers to solicit any competing offers for the service.  Yahoo! may be one of the companies interested.

Hulu has always represented an irritation for program buyers — notably cable networks and television stations — that purchase programming to rerun on cable networks and television stations.  Because Hulu gives away most of its content for free, these buyers argue it devalues the programming they are buying.

In short, if everyone has already been able to watch 30 Rock several times online, for free, why pay top dollar to buy the series to show on a local television station?

The problem is even worse from the perspective of cable, phone, and satellite companies in the business of selling video packages to customers.  As soon as viewers discover they can watch all of their favorite shows online, again for free, why buy the cable TV or satellite package?

The Los Angeles Times reports Hulu may have some bad news in store for cord cutters: it may implement its own “authentication” system that would only allow instant access to those with a verified subscription to a pay television package.  All others would need to wait just over a week before they can watch popular shows during a limited viewing window.

For many analysts, that will slash the service’s net worth to a would-be buyer.  So would the inability of the new owners to win long-term contracts for the rights to keep popular series and shows on Hulu for the indefinite future.  In the case of Comcast/NBC, it’s a classic case of being torn between bringing your programming to more viewers and eroding away your company’s own cable subscriber base.

[flv width=”360″ height=”290″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Bloomberg Olson Says Yahoo Google Amazon Potential Hulu Buyers 6-22-11.mp4[/flv]

Bloomberg News reports on rumors Yahoo!, Google, and Amazon may be interested in acquiring Hulu.  (5 minutes)

Cerf

Vint Cerf understands the Internet.  Widely recognized as one of the two “fathers” of what eventually grew into today’s Internet, Cerf has watched a network launched by the United States Department of Defense grow into an economic powerhouse driving a knowledge-based economy.

Today, Cerf works as an Internet evangelist for Google, promoting the company’s innovation in the next generation of the broadband experience.  He brings decades of advice to Internet Service Providers the world over: upgrade your networks.  But more importantly, he told attendees of Juniper Network’s Nextwork conference, upgrade exponentially, not incrementally.

Cerf’s remarks Wednesday targeted the conundrum of coping with increasing video traffic on the Internet.  Cerf pointed to his employer’s construction of a gigabit fiber to the home network in Kansas City as the best antidote to traffic congestion.

Simply put, Cerf believes bandwidth must be increased exponentially and not through incremental upgrades that try and stay one step ahead of demand.  Google intends to prove gigabit fiber broadband is cost-effective and within reach of providers.  A side benefit of building next generation networks is the opportunity for innovating new online applications.  Many of tomorrow’s online innovations are simply impossible on a constrained, incrementally upgraded network that often requires accompanying traffic limiting schemes.

“When you are watching video today, streaming is a very common practice. At gigabit speeds, a video file [can be transferred] faster than you can watch it,” Cerf said. “So rather than [receiving] the bits out in a synchronous way, instead you could download the hour’s worth of video in 15 seconds and watch it at your leisure. It actually puts less stress on the network to have the higher speed of operation,” he said. 

Wu

So far, many providers are considering Netflix and other video traffic a threat to their networks, and are attempting to collect tolls to allow Netflix content to reach subscribers (Comcast), or are considering Internet Overcharging schemes that combine usage caps with overlimit fees to discourage customers from watching too much (AT&T, Time Warner Cable).

At another session held Tuesday, Tim Wu, Columbia University law professor noted efforts by several U.S. providers to do away with all-you-can-use broadband.

Wu said phone companies like AT&T are ideally looking towards replicating the cell phone model on broadband — leaving users to guess how much usage they will rack up over a month, knowing most will be wrong.  As the consumer, he noted, you end up buying too much or you face steep overlimit fees for underestimating usage — either way “you are screwed.”  Wu called consumption-oriented pricing “abusive.”

Wu also said wireless carriers in particular are uneasy with the open, “ownerless” concept of the Internet.  Their instinct is to own, control, and manage networks.  Their only success so far is trying to advocate for fast, premium-priced traffic lanes, and slow “free lanes” for everything else — a key reason why many consumers advocate to preserve the open model of the Internet through enforced Net Neutrality.

Wu called these efforts by phone companies to control traffic “dangerous.”

Krone

When David Krone decided to quit his job as senior vice president of corporate affairs at Comcast to go to work as Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid’s top aide, he got quite the parting gift from Comcast — $1.2 million to cover the cost of the condo he bought just a year earlier.

Comcast’s agreement to make Krone whole, even during one of the worst real estate markets in recent history, was quite a relief for the man who had to make do with a severance package worth $2.9 million.  Now Krone is slumming it on a Senate aide’s salary — $165,000 a year.  That is less than the $270,000 Krone contributed to various candidates, mostly Democrats, since 1989 according to the Center for Responsive Politics.  The Center for Public Integrity says he is Reid’s biggest donor over the past two decades.  Now Reid is his boss.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Krone spent years as a cable industry lobbyist, living in a penthouse unit above Reid’s own condo at Washington’s Ritz-Carlton.  Reid even sought to help Krone win a commissioner position at the Federal Communications Commission — an agency that oversees the cable industry Krone lobbies for, a position Krone declined.

In January 2008, Mr. Krone became a top executive at Comcast, working on public affairs, government relations and public-policy issues. He moved to Philadelphia, paying $1.95 million for a condo, real-estate records show.

After less than 10 months, however, Mr. Krone decided to bail out of the job. Friends say he was unhappy because he had expected to be more involved in top-level decision making than he ended up being.

By then, the real-estate market had declined. When he told Comcast he was quitting, the company agreed to pay him $2.07 million—allowing him to recoup his original purchase price, plus closing costs, according to Mr. Reid’s office.

Companies often cover real-estate losses when trying to woo prospective employees. It is extremely rare for them to do so when an employee quits, say executive-compensation experts. “Severance benefits and even golden parachutes generally don’t protect executives against personal real-estate losses,” says Chuck Yen, an executive-compensation consultant with Grant Thornton LLP.

“Comcast did not know that David Krone was going to Harry Reid’s office or to any other government or regulatory agency” when his separation agreement was negotiated, according to company spokesman John Demming.

Some people familiar with the matter say the company wanted to make sure that he didn’t harbor any ill will after leaving, given his connections. As a heavily regulated cable and media company, Comcast has a lot at stake in Washington.

When Mr. Reid invited him to Capitol Hill several weeks after he left Comcast, Mr. Krone thought it was to discuss another FCC post, Mr. Krone told friends. Instead, Mr. Reid offered him a job, and Mr. Krone accepted.

In April 2009, four months after Mr. Krone started in the Senate, the property sold for $1.09 million, $980,000 less than Mr. Reid’s office said he received from Comcast.

“Whether or not they lost money when they sold it is irrelevant,” said Jon Summers, Mr. Reid’s spokesman.