Dan Rayburn

Breakdown Of U.S. Sales Numbers for Broadband Enabled Devices

Minutes is what matters, not number of videos. Lets say I said 1 million videos were downloaded. That does not tell you anything since you have no idea how long each video is and they all range in length. Minutes is the best way to do it, which is why Xbox gives it out that way. You're comparing songs on iTunes, which are nearly all the same length, to videos on Xbox which are all different in length. One has nothing to do with the other.

Apple Dropped the Ball on an NFL Deal

This post makes no sense.

For starters, the Apple TV has a very low sales rate. Even if this deal was made, how many Apple TV units would they really sell? Who's going to spend a few hundred dollars for a device that only gives them NFL games?

Also, people who have DirecTV use it for all their cable channels, not just NFL content. There would be no "exodus" from DirecTV if NFL games were on Apple TV because Apple TV does not give you any cable programming.

Also, you say that "For many consumers looking to quit cable or the dish there was a problem: live sporting events. The MLB deal changes that, making live baseball games easily accessible and affordable."

But you neglect to mention that if you want to watch your local MLB team, live, you can't do that via Roku or the PC with MLB's offering. All local games are blacked out. So how does "the MLB deal change that"? It doesn't.

Blockbuster Still Lacks a Digital Media Strategy, Ten Years Later

I'll simply repeat myself again, I don't own any stock in Blockbuster, no shares or bonds. I don't have anything to gain financially from Blockbuster, Netflix or any other entertainment company. I know it's hard to believe, but someone can actually write about a company as a neutral person without having some sort of vested interest in the company.

Blockbuster Still Lacks a Digital Media Strategy, Ten Years Later

@sl62: This not about Blockbuster "conforming to my standards" or not being "digital enough for my taste" or even the "pace I want them to change" at. This is not about me, it's about the market.

The change in the market is not my "opinion", it's fact. Apple has now sold over 200 Million TV episodes via iTunes. Sold over 2M feature-length films via iTunes. Netflix got over 1 million subscribers to use the streaming service via the Xbox 360 in the first 3 months of it launching.

You say that "In my humble opinion, BBI is still a viable player in the space and will continue to be so for many years to come as they change with the industry." Yes, they are a viable player, but even you don't say "in the digital media arena".

No doubt I will be re-visiting this issue a year from now and I'll make you any bet that you want that Blockbuster won't be able to show us any viable, tangible, measurable result, of what you say their digital media strategy is.

Blockbuster Still Lacks a Digital Media Strategy, Ten Years Later

Since I am not a shareholder of Blockbuster, or any other company for that matter, and have no vested interest in them at all financially, I have nothing to "get over".

Anyone can ramble on with a response that includes no real data to back up their arguments, but the fact remains that Blockbuster has absolutely zero traction today for any kind of digital media strategy.

Is YouTube a Threat to Netflix?

Netflix is trying to solve the problem of how to get content to the TV and most of their streams are via devices, Xbox, Roku, TiVo etc.

Nearly all of YouTube and Hulu's streams aren't going to the TV, only the PC. I don't see how anyone can compare the two.

The analyst implies that Netflix's position “will be meaningfully eroded in coming months”. Why? What is happening in the next few months that is going to make us see any kind of relevant shift? YouTube's licensing of the Adam's Family? How is that a threat to Netflix? Where is Hulu's strategy to get content to the TV?

Detailing Netflix's Streaming Costs

Hi Steve, you say that "The true throughput will be a combination of many factors .." but that's not the case. The true throughput is the encoding bitrate. For example, if the movie is encoded at 2200Kbps, then that is what the user is getting as that is exactly what the movie was encoded for. The throughput may be lower or higher, but only if the movie was encoded for multiple bitrates.

Also you say that "Just when you think Netflix is making a killing they will have to put retained earnings back into data center buildup to support this." This is not the case. Netflix streams 100% of their movies via the CDNs of Limelight Networks and Level 3. They have additional costs to those companies as the service grows, but nothing to do with data center costs.

As for the ISP issue you bring up, that is not relevant. If a user only has a 256Kbps connection, then that is not a person that Netflix is targeting with their streaming service. The average broadband speed in the U.S. is just over 3MB, so even if they are not getting the full 3MB and only get 50% of that, it's still plenty of bandwidth to get a good quality stream.

And most of the cable connections in the U.S. get around 6MB and more and more folks like me on FiOS have 20MB. The ISP won't be the issue and while another user said that capping will be a problem, for all the talk of capping, we have yet to see consumers complain that the cap is too small. And many of the examples we get, like the one above, comes from folks in Canada or other regions of the world where the Netflix streaming service is not offered.

Review: Hands On with Amazon on the Roku

The only reason I have so many boxes is that I do reviews of many of these devices and hence need to have them on hand to see their latest video offerings. I don't expect an average user to have as many boxes as I have and if I was not in the industry, I would only have a TiVo (used as my cable box with cable cards) and an XBOX 360.

Netflix's New Digital Distribution Will Improve the Bottom Line

The cost to Netflix to license and encode all of this content and pay Limelight Networks to store and stream all of these video is not cheap, let alone the development costs for the player and interface. Today, it is not improving their bottom line, far from it. They are spending a lot of money to make this happen and will have to continue to sink a great deal of money into this for some time to come. Not a bad thing, as they are planning for the future, but it is not improving their bottom line anytime soon.

This is the main reason why to date, Netflix will not break out any of their costs around their digital distribution offering.

Netflix May Dominate The Online Video World, But With What Business Model?

Again, Apple and iPods have nothing to do with Netflix. iPods don't stream content, it plays content that has been downloaded. And all Netflix has said is that their streaming service for the PC will support Mac's at some point. Nothing Netflix offers has to do with downloads to an iPod.

Netflix May Dominate The Online Video World, But With What Business Model?

What does "video downloads" have to do with Netflix? Netflix's watch now service, XBOX 360 service and Roku service are all streaming based services, with no downloads. It's a completely different service offering than Apple's.

Netflix Player by Roku Has Potential to Really Impact the Market

If I could have said who told me the number, then I would have put it in the post. I would not have published it if it did not come from someone who would know.

Telcos Compete Too for the Online Video Market

The title of this says "Telcos enter the online video market" yet the article says nothing about any telcos entering the market. Comcast has been in the market for years with an online video offering since they bought thePlatform in 2006.