Apple TV could be very good for the ACC,Pitt and consumers.

[mdpitt]

With the news this morning that Apple is going "over the top" to provide basically 25 channels including all the broadcast channels but without NBC is pretty interesting. The Bundle includes ESPN but what I find interesting is that it will not include Big 10, Fox Sports 1.

If anyone has Apple TV, you will agree that the layout and interface is how TV should be. There are a total of 3 buttons on the most simplistic remote crafted out of airplane grade aluminum. The box hardly uses any power and can be hidden anywhere because of the RF frequency.

By all accounts, the service will cost about $40 per month for 25 channels.

What will be great for the ACC is this just gives a nudge to Notre Dame who suddenly will not be seen in many homes if NBC doesn't cave. This is great for ESPN by the way because right now they get about $6 per subscriber but now they get North of $10 per subscriber. To which much is given, much will be expected so expect the ACC to fill a lot of programming.

The future of ESPN will be an App on your TV, one opens it and all their programming cascades on one screen with the score below. The subscriber then picks what to watch from there. It will basically look like a Casino Sports Book if you have ever walked in that section. It is sports quicksand.

This thread is not intended to be an "Android is better, Chromecast, ROKU. Amazon Fire TV is great. Apple just has a lot more command of the market to create a Sea Change. The Sling system is essentially already doing it but Apple will perfect it. A $69 Apple TV Box is pretty impressive if you are not familiar.

The ACC, ESPN and the SEC are going to be big winners. Being the last Power 5 Conference to start a channel could be a very good thing.

I have a sneaky suspicion that Directv and AT&T are going to benefit from this as just using apple boxes instead of their own and the cable companies become more like Utilities.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Originally posted by mdpitt:
With the news this morning that Apple is going "over the top" to provide basically 25 channels including all the broadcast channels but without NBC is pretty interesting. The Bundle includes ESPN but what I find interesting is that it will not include Big 10, Fox Sports 1.

If anyone has Apple TV, you will agree that the layout and interface is how TV should be. There are a total of 3 buttons on the most simplistic remote crafted out of airplane grade aluminum. The box hardly uses any power and can be hidden anywhere because of the RF frequency.

By all accounts, the service will cost about $40 per month for 25 channels.

What will be great for the ACC is this just gives a nudge to Notre Dame who suddenly will not be seen in many homes if NBC doesn't cave. This is great for ESPN by the way because right now they get about $6 per subscriber but now they get North of $10 per subscriber. To which much is given, much will be expected so expect the ACC to fill a lot of programming.

The future of ESPN will be an App on your TV, one opens it and all their programming cascades on one screen with the score below. The subscriber then picks what to watch from there. It will basically look like a Casino Sports Book if you have ever walked in that section. It is sports quicksand.

This thread is not intended to be an "Android is better, Chromecast, ROKU. Amazon Fire TV is great. Apple just has a lot more command of the market to create a Sea Change. The Sling system is essentially already doing it but Apple will perfect it. A $69 Apple TV Box is pretty impressive if you are not familiar.

The ACC, ESPN and the SEC are going to be big winners. Being the last Power 5 Conference to start a channel could be a very good thing.

I have a sneaky suspicion that Directv and AT&T are going to benefit from this as just using apple boxes instead of their own and the cable companies become more like Utilities.

Yawn.

It'll take a generation or 2 before sports fans are going to turn their TV on and click on an app to watch a game. Sure, there will be some fans that will do this, mostly young people, but it wont be until their parents and grandparents die off and the ENTIRE market is filled with people that have grown up watching TV like this, that there will be any real change. We're talking 30-50 years. Cable is going to be here in its current format for that long at least. If anything, maybe this makes cable companies go to smaller cable packages. For example, there's a cable company out there that offers a "no sports" package. The thought was that only 30% of cable customers really care about live sports (the other 70% can do without it) but the sports channels make up a higher percentage of the bill. I could see stuff like that happening.

While Apple TV and other devices are a threat to cable in the long-run, its going to be a LOOOOOONG time till cable changes in any meaningful way. All this is doing is telling cable to revisit its business model. Heck, what's to stop them from introducing an app-based platform themselves?

 

[OaklandPanther139]

30-50 years? I think your time frame is way off as far as Cable in its current form.

"Cable" companies will be around though because they have the internet access people need to cut the cord. As of right now they practically give away cable to new customers if you get internet, as Comcast and Fios know most people need / want internet now.

 

[mdpitt]

I'm going to bet Apple gets more new customers than all Cable Companies

combined for the fourth quarter of 2015. That being said, you have some valid points about cable will be forced to change. Many people might not realize the most common age for an American is 22 and the average age is 37.6 There are more Millennials than Boomers and this really starts widen quickly.

I am a Gen X person and have not used a remote control to just go up and down the channels for a long time. I have a DVR that records shows and even that technology looks like Betamax or VHS compared to using a Netflix type system.

This will change viewing habits rapidly. I agree elderly will not adopt.

The answer is likely somewhere in the middle of my view and yours.

 

[NTOP]

Will "THIS-TV" be on that app?? WQED?? PCN??

We'll still need a full-service cable or satellite provider. Perhaps ESPN won't be involved with the ACC?? Apple's products are overpriced X 2.

 

[raleighpanther]

SMF, you're a real futurist, aren't you? You probably thought Blockbuster would be around for 30-50 years too.

This is going to happen way faster than you think. Technology adoption sometimes takes longer than people think it will, and sometimes it happens faster. The wheels are greased for this TV transition to happen for a number of reasons, not the least of which, is that most people hate their cable company, just as many people hated Blockbuster.

 

[mdpitt]

$69 is overpriced for a box you don't rent and service is $30-40 per month?

You must have a very inexpensive cable plan that includes ESPN. Please let us know how to get this kind of a discount in High Definition.

 

[drunkinoakland]

what about areas with crappy internet? I live in a populated area and have a ton of tech toys but streaming crap for me is a pain due to Internet speed.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Darth_VadEER]

I got rid of cable. I've had SlingTV for about a month and love it. I get 14 cable channels including ESPN/ESPN2/Disney for $20/month.

I stream through roku. Super simple.

 

[Darth_VadEER]

This morning I turned on my tv, clicked the sling app and watched ESPN. I'd say 3-4 of my friends did the same. Your estimation is way off, the market has already turned.

 

[Pitt-fan-in-Charlotte]

Been watching Pitt games on Apple TV for couple years - great feature for fans who live out of market and watch on ESPN3 - basically has every ACC football & basketball game.

LOL SMF - 30-50 years before people watch games through apps??? - it's here already - bet you got a killer 8 Track collection though

 

[Darth_VadEER]

Miller's posting live from his Palm Pilot. Yo Mill, hit me up on Myspace.

 

[NTOP]

A whopping 24 channels!!! How exciting. So I can pay $30-40

for the Apple service, and another $75-90 for basic cable, with lots of duplication?? I don't just watch ESPN.
Apple's products are pretty, but no better for most users than competitors at half the cost. Samsung's tablet, e.g. Bought one at $200, vs. an I-pad at $500??
There's no question that we're headed to all content delivered via the 'Net. So we need to pay extra for faster broadband, when the current delivery is perfectly adequate for thinks like posting on here, paying bills, general research, etc. Nothing gets cheaper once the base is established.

 

[pittdan77]

I think as soon as somebody gets one of these services to "stick", cable and satellite will be gone. I think people would pay a premium to only get what they want. Netflix has proven that model can work.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Originally posted by Pitt-fan-in-Charlotte:

Been watching Pitt games on Apple TV for couple years - great feature for fans who live out of market and watch on ESPN3 - basically has every ACC football & basketball game.

LOL SMF - 30-50 years before people watch games through apps??? - it's here already - bet you got a killer 8 Track collection though

Yea, and what are the stats? People are cutting the cord more and more and these devices are gaining popularity but all its going to do is force cable to change their business model. Do you think cable is just going to go belly up? Newsflash: They are the #1 internet providers. You're using them to stream your shows on whatever device you use. When more people start dumping them and using their internet service, all of a sudden you're going to see data caps and slower speeds........or higher priced internet service as demand for it goes up.

Cable will change a bit in the coming years but you're not going to defeat cable until you can also control the internet, which cable currently controls.

And I dont know how any of this applies to Pitt or college football. ESPN is the #1 cable channel in the world. People are always going to find a way to watch it and advertisers are going to continue to spend big money on it.

 

[JimPL]

Apple TV is slick. I have it and use it for any game I want to watch on ESPN3 (also for some movies etc).

You still need a high speed internet connection. For many people this means Comcast/Time Warner.

Yesterday I was listening to satellite radio in my car. They had a reporter on who specializes in the business aspect of sports. He lived in Charlotte, NC.

He indicated within two years the ACC will have made a move on their own network. Curiously he said he was not sure if it would be a conventional cable network like the SEC Network or a digital network (Apple TV).

Could be both.

This will be interesting to watch. Apple is big enough with a market capitalization of about $740 billion to pull this off.



This post was edited on 3/18 12:45 PM by JimPL

 

[tgbst88]

Completely disagree many people like myself are keeping with cable because there are no real alternative for sports. Now with Netflix, Hulu, Amazon and AppleTV I can cut the cord. This will drive down cable costs and force cable industry down a path they didn't want to go down. Cable knows this is happening this is why they were fighting Net Neutrality they want to make money on both ends (provider and end user). FCC took care of that. If you have Google Fiber as well you have hit the Jack Pot.

Also, Influencing factors

HBO GO - No longer needs a cable subscription
Dish Offers a Online cable package
Netflix
Hulu

Integration points,

Blu Ray Players
XBox
PlayStation
Media Players (Google, Apple, WD TV.. many others)

 

[Darth_VadEER]

Copper cable is antiquated. TWC's mid-tier broadband package gives 15 mbps. Google fiber is 1,000 mbps.

A local nwpa company is positioned to start delivering residential fiber connection - and they aren't a TV bundler.

The technology is really getting away from the cable companies quickly.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

Google fiber is coming to my neck of the woods, and I"m psyched.

Literally, if my neighborhood isn't in the planned area..we'll likely move to one that is.

 

[mdpitt]

If you have DirecTV,they are going to do some creative things for Apple.

That Dish paired with AT&T and Apple TV are going to go over and around Cable with a whole lot more Data added to people's plans.

There are many reason's AT&T was the biggest bidder in the last Spectrum auction and buying DirecTV will allow customers to be completely wireless.

My LTE Service is faster than most people's broadband and it's only getting more robust.

 

[tgbst88]

No only is it getting away from Cable but from TV in general. TV as content source is losing to internet video providers and social media, ratings are dropping across the board. The baby boomers are dragging it out.

FCC declaring the Internet a Title II carrier is now going to expedite Google fiber as well.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Originally posted by tgbst88:

The baby boomers are dragging it out.

And their money is still good. They aint changing. Its going to be a LOOOOOOOOOOONG time folks, like it or not.

I saw a statistic a few weeks ago that floored me. Since I got a DVR in 2004, I haven't watched a live TV show. Its literally been 11 years since I watched a live TV show (not including sports which I watch mostly live). So, my thought has always been, "who in the world would sit down at 8:00 on a Wednesday night to watch their favorite show?" Why not timeshift it and cut out the commercials? Why would anybody be a prisoner of the network TV lineup?

So, what percentage of people timeshift their shows? 50-60% right? Nope. Its about 10%. That means 90% of American still watch those primetime shows live. That's unbelievable to me and THAT has the networks scared as heck. So in 10-15 years since DVRs came out, Americans have gone from watching 100% live TV to 90%. For sports, its probably like 98-99% live.

I'm telling you this is a generational thing. Yes, more and more people will get the streaming devices but it'll be 30-50 years before that's the industry. Cable will change up a bit and it'll be here at least that long, trust me.

Something as simple as DVR'ing your shows is a complete lifestyle change for the better and people won't even do that. Its going to be much longer until they begin to watch TV through internet apps.

 

[PittPanthers90]

Apple?

ACK!

Roku for the win

 

[drunkinoakland]

I have verizon and the package I pay for promises 1-15 mbps. I get 3 and they tell me that is the faster net avaliable in my area. Can't do anything with it.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Harve74]

I have Windstream internet but the same results, Drunk. Nothing faster available here. I can stream on my Roku but not fast enough for more than 480 HD. Mostly just pay way too much for DirecTV.

Hoping for faster internet via DirecTV but don't know how long it will take for that technology. HughesNet promised it "within a few years almost 20 years ago but they're no faster and cost a lot more. My 4G LTE is pretty shaky too.

Country living can be a b*tch.

I pay way more for media than my mortgage was. Internet, cell and DirecTV, plus Amazon Prime to stream with the Roku.

 

[drunkinoakland]

Harve, the worst part is that I don't live in the country. It isn't the mecca of civilization but it isn't small and rural either.

I feel like when I had cable Internet 15 years ago it was faster. If it is 3am and I turn off the work computer, home computer, tablet, and switch my phone to 4g, I can maybe stream some HBO Go or one of my other services that I'm currently wasting subscriptions on.

I'm hoping things will improve soon.
Posted from Rivals Mobile