Too often, what appears to be a demo is just a simulated run through the program.  It is like saying ‘here's what we built, but we daren't show it actually live on the ‘net, because there may be glitches.'

In the streaming video business, for a number of reasons, I have almost never seen live demos.  Many companies seem to prefer showing their video from their hard drive!   When they have no connection, they have no choice.  But if they are in the online streaming movie or TV business, and not a production company whose contribution is the production values themselves, then there is a responsibility to demonstrate their transmission live before the audience.  Even if someone is in the downloaded video business, I would expect some demo of download speeds.

It is a badge of corporate pride that I always make the point to use someone else's laptop when showing a streaming video demo.  This sends a clear signal throughout the room (to anyone paying attention) that I am not ‘streaming a KlikVU video' from a hard drive.  The room sees me navigating to the site, clicking on ‘demos' and choosing one to view.  And as a TV-like video appears and I go through the paces of interactivity, there should be no doubt whatsoever that these are actual functionalities.

If there is a glitch, the presenter should be honest about it.  And that's the whole point:  disarm them with your honesty and clarity of vision. 

Is a demo from the hard drive hype or deception?  You choose.

When a business broker or intermediary finds its relevance questioned, the implication is existential.  If someone can go around him/her, and thereby save money, it won't be long before a trickle becomes a torrent.  However, technology until now has been accommodating of new developments.  Radio supplemented newspapers; TV did not kill radio, etc.  Yet in a world where newspapers are broken and the industry is consolidating and shrinking rapidly, where the music business is adrift, what are the implications for TV?  Never before have ‘old media'  been considered a broker or intermediary, until now.  That's what scares the wits out of folks.

Asia (ICCTV, China NetComm CHA, China Telecom CN) in China, in Korea (KBS, MBC, C3TV) in India (Doordarshan,  Indiavision,  NetGuruIndia) seems to be leading the trend which we see developing sooner rather than later in the US.  Europe is following close behind, and is rich in broadcast and technology providers.

As the US is transitioning to Digital TV (Globecomm {KlikVU's Partner}, Cisco, Broadstream Communications) media distribution questions are timely. How fast will CPM rates come down in TV, and go up online?  What will be the likely transition in rural America between traditional broadcasters and new telephone company services? How likely is the competition between new telco services, traditional cable, satellite and new outlets and OTT, and what are the probabilities? What role will wireless play in this transition?

Already, online video ads are fetching more than traditional TV ($35 CPM vs. $45 for online video ads), primarily due to the increased audience metrics and the ability of OTT video providers to precisely target viewers.  But upfront sales of TV advertizing are higher this year than last; the fear is that returns on the $billions spent by NBC for Olympic broadcast rights will be diluted by infringing Internet distribution from China.  This is a dynamic, confused market, in which signals are crossed and contradictory.  Consumer behavior is more unpredictable than ever, and technology advances have profound and quick effects on that behavior (viz. the iPhone.)

Telephone companies are in the TV business in a big way now.  Cable is already responding with ‘triple play' telephone offerings in response.  Satellite and wireless have both entered the fray.  The net result?  The pricing of telephone calling is being compressed, and the competitive local exchange carriers will have to enter the IPTV business to hold onto their profits.  And the need for a good mix of specialized content will be critical for IPTV and others to gain subscribers and retain them.

Wireless companies can compete by enhanced value-added services as well as even entering the traditional land-line business, for example. 

Old-school observers say something like: 

"The major barrier to entry is getting a set-top box installed in a significant number of households.  (The reality is that U.S. households are not going to watch movies on their computers.)  The companies that already have a set top box installed with a HD, have an enormous advantage: The cable companies (DVRs) Microsoft - Xbox 360 Sony - PS3, TiVo?

The other companies that stand a chance in this arena are companies that have big early adopter customer bases:  Apple, Netflix, Amazon..."  - John Campbell

Industries are colliding in a remake of TV and other digital content providers.  Cable, Satellite, TV, Hollywood and other media subsets are feeling the relentless pressure to rapidly evolve into new delivery models without traditional broadcast:  Over the Top (Internet) delivery.  See recent announcements by Amazon is launching their OTT streaming and downloading service soon, after they sunk over $100 million into Unbox and abandoned their distro deal with Netflix, who in turn recently announced their own OTT solution. 

The promise of upside for viewers in this massive economic disruption is multi-faceted:  lower pricing, more choice, better advertising models and community interaction and personalized services.   

TV may not go away, but its place in our society is morphing fast. 

There are many intertwined issues with complex relationships.  We invite comment.  This ongoing dialogue will be with us for quite some time.