This article comes from Broadcasting & Cable and focuses on a new ad insertion technology for networked DVRs:
Cable technology vendor Tandberg Television plans to demonstrate at the NCTA show in Washington, D.C. this week how cable operators can dynamically deliver targeted commercials within linear network programming that has been time-shifted on a server at a cable headend.
The Atlanta-based company, which makes video-on-demand servers and management software in addition to a range of compression and transcoding gear, will create a simulated headend in its NCTA booth and show a working system that marries its AdPoint campaign management software with its Xport time-shifted TV solution, which consists of servers that can capture live TV programming and then provide full digital video recorder (DVR) capability to cable viewers. Tandberg executives believe this is the first time such dynamic, targeted insertion capability has been demonstrated in combination with time-shifted TV.
The concept of time-shifting linear TV at a headend server instead of using a hard-disk drive in a customers’ living-room set-top, commonly referred to as “network-DVR” but labeled “network-PVR” by Tandberg, has been championed by cable operators such as Cablevision but has met with legal challenges from programmers, who have maintained that such technology might infringe their copyrights.
One of the biggest challenges for TV networks due to DVRs is that people skip over the advertising. But these network DVRs could be set to block out the fast-forwarding. From a technology perspective networked DVRs are just exapanded video on demand.
However, a network-DVR-type experience has been rolled out in a limited fashion by Time Warner Cable in the past few years with its “Start Over” and “Look Back” services. While it doesn’t yet have any commercial deployments planned for its combined AdPoint/Xport system, Tandberg aims to show operators at NCTA how they could easily deliver targeted ads within network-DVR programming in the near term.
Why would anyone want a DVR service where they couldn't skip commercials? I don't think they would, if they had to pay for it. But, if it is free, and especially if it offers the convenience of not having to really worry about specifiying that you want to record anything, I can see a lot of people suffering through the commercials just for the sake of convenience at no extra cost.
I think we'll probably see networked DVR services offered with disabled fast-forward at no extra cost. You'd be able to watch programs that are available to you in your cable package for a limited amount of time. Traditional DVRs with local hard drives and fast-forwarding (and outright commercial skipping, if you program your remote) would still be available for a fee. But the next likely step would be the networks wanting a cut of that fee since they'd theorize, and probably mostly correctly, is that the only reason people are paying for that service is to skip advertisements. At the same time, cable companies will want a cut of the advertising for the ads served from the network-DVRs.
It will be pretty interesting to watch this develop, though it will likely be something that develops over years, not months.
Use On-Demand for the networks as a free service when accompanied with commercials, and disable the fast forward feature, but allow pausing and rewinding. Charger per episodes that have no commercials. It is so simple and obvious that it makes no sense why they are not using it yet.
I agree that initially some customers will accept the inability to skip commercials in return for the ease of use of networked DVR (IF in fact, the companies DO make it easier to use than the current DVR technology).
But again, that’s just a stop gap measure. Sooner or later the networks and the studios – and the advertisers – are going to find that advertising just doesn’t work any more.
One thing I can guarantee. The more control they now try to take AWAY from people who have experienced their control over their own media, the more they are going to drive away customers to an alternative, whatever it may be, whether that alternative exists now or must be invented.
I just don’t see a non-fast forward network DVR ever taking off. Time Warner tried Start Over a few years ago and that hasn’t caught fire with the other cable operators. I think part of the problem is that it will be hard to create an ad supported service because the cable companies are the ones who are implementing it. Considering that Comcast is charging $15 a month for their DVR in the bay area, I just can’t see them giving away that hardware or service without adding more monthly charges on the TV bill.
Furthermore, the cable companies have been screaming at the top of their lungs that they don’t have bandwidth because people have started downloading films. Why/How are they going to create a mass market solution internet solution when their network is already overtaxed.
At the end of the day, this may be wishful thinking by the content owners, but the marketplace is too complex to allow it to happen. When you consider that Cablevision still is in limbo with their own plans, I think it’s clear that the obstacles are greater then any perceived benefit by the cable companies.
Instead of trying to figure out ways to force people to watch 30 sec ads, the industry should be focusing on solutions that consumer actually like. Create a way for consumers to buy a product directly from their couch or give them commercial free programming with no need for fast forwarding for a small fee each month. Utilize electronic product placements in order to sell more relevant and timely ads. Back in 2002, I remember DirectTV and TiVo created a service that used a computer algorithm to put Lexus cars into old Knight Rider shows. It never made it passed the beta stage, but I thought that it could be a promising solutions if the content owners would focus on addressing consumer’s needs and wants instead of trying to force them to consumer television via a dying business model.
I agree with Jack and have always wondered what is taking the cable MSOs so long. Forced to guess, I’d say the bureaucratic sloth of a monopoly service provider, but it could be many other reasons.
This will be the Edsel of television hardware. Cable companies are not going to sacrifice their DVR fees by giving people the option of having a free DVR-type box just so the networks can make more money. And if cable companies charge for this box, no one will take it when a fast-forwarding DVR is also available from the same company.
Everyone is working on a way to hold back the tide, hoping that somehow it will make commercial television dominant again. I believe that horse and buggy manufactures tried this same thing. Wonder how that worked out for them?
I have five DVRS now both Tivo and the Directv provided. I still could probably identify most of the commercials on TV today, because fast forwarding still lets some commercials get through to be viewed. The up side of DVRS for advertisers is DVR users’ watch more Tv more frequently than random views. I think advertisers can target the folks they want to see their ads with more control because a DVR user always gets the programs they desire to watch thus exposing themselves to ads targeted to them. If I was an advertiser I would want my ad to come on at the end of the break because I almost always see most of these ad whin trying to get the DVR back on my program at the correct time. If the fast forwarding was removed from my DVRS, I would likely just stop watching shows from any live source and just download the program even if it cost a reasonable fee and just avoid the now rather high cost of getting all the HD channels on Directv. I could download allot of shows for what I pay now. It might be better if I download only the shows I really want to watch and just avoided the junk that the vast majority that I watch to some how justify paying out what I do for TV now. If Directv took away my fast forwarding, my contract for service would no longer be binding on me and that would be fine with me.
Actually I think this idea will work, because there are a lot of people out there who do not have DVR’s because they just don’t want to pay, or can’t pay. Its not just the monthly fee, its the taxes the cities and state throw on top too. So a DVR add-on to the digital cable box can get expensive every month. A free DVR is an attractive option. They’re already watching commercials anyway, what’s it matter? Now they get to go out instead of having to stay home and watch tv, or record a show they wouldn’t otherwise watch.
People who already have DVR’s of course would probably pass on this. They would still pay a premium to the cable companies to have all the features. But I think for people on a tight budget, this would definitely work.
The TV commercial break is the problem. It is an outdated concept, but the TV industry cannot seem to let it go. It wasn’t always that way. Before commercial breaks, advertisers sponsored entire shows, such as Firestone Theater. I believe that’s the future. The future is a return to the past. That and more extensive product placements.
Bah, the solution is allowing full frontal nudity in commercials.
And am I the last person on earth with a DVR that doesn’t come from a cable company?
Joseph, you are not the last person on earth, there are probably fewer than 4 million DVR owners in the US that don’t have them via cable or satco’s.
Thank you for that information. I may still be one of the handful of people who has a DVR that isn’t provided by a cable or satellite company or from TiVo though. I was helping someone else shop for a DVR when we both came to the conclusion that they don’t seem to make high-quality standalone non-subscription DVRs anymore. We found a total of one that qualified. It might be analog, but I better take good care of my Toshiba. Pretty soon the only option may be to build one yourself.
Time Warner on Staten Island has all of the new cable services & I find them to be good. But their DVR has some major problems [Scientific Altanta 8300HDC] if was not able to skip the commericals I’d dump it. For me the extra fee is worth it, I just hate commercials I can see an hour show in 42 minutes & I love that.
But that’s me for other people getting a DVR service for free but having to look at commercials is also a great deal I think the DVR hard drive will always be an option.