With recent announcements on the major US broadcasters set to launch their own video streaming services, the category is hotting up and so has the commentary on the potentially negative ramifications for Netflix.
Business Insider (here) highlighted three reasons why analysts remain bullish on Netflix’s ability to weather risks and forthcoming competition:
1. Netflix subscriptions are proving increasingly impervious to price hikes
2. Netflix are increasing in confidence in their product, and
3. It is solidifying itself as a 'must-have'
However, there is more to Netflix’s price rise than these elements. In addition, Netflix is capitalising in three places:
1. Customer Retention: As a ‘must-have’, Netflix will also be placed as the incumbent or current/embedded sub and habit. Psychologically users will find that harder to let go and harder to reconcile too many subs with a smaller wallet capacity
2. Competitive Catalogue Development: Netflix retains contracts for a good deal of the content owned by the producers of the new services for more than 12mths allowing them to better monetise it and increase its coffers for original content and beef out an even healthier, more competitor catalogue
3. Marketing/PR: The run time to launch and scale subscriptions of new services allows not only more content releases but more success stories and PR for Netflix, thereby cementing its status as premium and as a 'must-have'.
It's neither arrogant nor desperate; it's strategic.
Did you know that women are starting businesses at 1.5 times the pace of men but only 4% of venture capital goes to women-led Ventures? And the number is even lower if you are a woman of colour. For generations, over 50% of the population has been under-funded, under-resourced, and under-supported. It’s time to change that.
SheEO is a global community of radically generous women transforming how we fund, support, and celebrate female entrepreneurs. In our first three years, 3000 women across three countries have collectively loaned out $3M to support 32 women-led Ventures including The Alinker, 21 Toys, LOLIWARE, Callisto and In This Together Media. Our collective story can be read about in Forbes, Inc, FastCo and more. And we’re just getting started.
Our goal is to reach 1M women Activators and a $1B perpetual fund which will support 10,000 women-led Ventures each year for generations to come. Are you IN?
Here’s how it works:
SheEO 2018: Are you IN?
The model brings together 500 women (called Activators) in each cohort, who contribute $1100 each as an act of Radical Generosity. The money is pooled together and loaned out at 0%-interest to 5 women-led Ventures selected by the Activators. All Ventures are revenue-generating with export potential and creating a better world through their business model or their product and service. The loans are paid back over 5 years and then loaned out again, creating a perpetual fund which we will pass on to our daughters and granddaughters.
I’ve personally signed up as an Activator and hope you will join me in helping grow this global initiative. Over 150 regions have already expressed interest to bring SheEO to their area. Isn’t that exciting?
Ways you can get involved:
Are you IN?
P.S. If you have any questions, feel free to ask the SheEO team at email@example.com.
The aggregation of content is becoming less useful with regard to the content access problem we should be solving. Increasingly, access to content is being aggregated through partnerships and contract arrangements not of the consumer's choosing leaving users to opt for multiple subscriptions.
Under this environment, universal and agnostic search and discovery is thwarted and further frustration for users is experienced in the requirements to register through multiple providers and/or aggregators and through the many subscription payments.
Users will have a payment threshold and begin to demand easier search-ability and payment options across all content they choose to consume.
What's needed is a system which not only enables content discovery but doesn't require multiple sign-ins and subscriptions. A peer-to-peer payment system is the better angle to be addressing rather than merely aggregation of providers.
Facebook's new Blockchain division could make a proprietary alt coin within 2 years and enable such a system.
It would make sense for Facebook to make a play for P2P payments under-pinned by Blockchain while it has scale, not dissimilar to the approach by WeChat Global Team by Tencent.
Good analysis of the Facebook play here at Cheddar.
Further, some thoughts on what marketers should know at Campaign Live UK.
Can broadcasters/content producers get the jump on Facebook with their own Blockchain plays?
Live today is my recent meander through media with Adam Fraser for the EchoJunction podcast.
We covered a fair bit of territory on all things digital and as always it sparked more questions/curiosity and presented more intersections to ponder.
Adam is a natural podcaster; great industry knowledge and a tremendous host and conversationalist. A worthwhile podcast for media and marketing industry members.
Lots of fun. Love this space and could have talked for more than the 45 mins - which should surprise no-one who knows me!
Link to the podcast can be found via EchoJunction or iTunes.
Happy listening! All feedback/discussion welcomed.
A couple of post podcast thoughts:
EchoJunction's promotion is as follows...
Gabbi Stubbs talks marketing technologyMarketing strategist and consultant, Gabbi Stubbs, joins the podcast this week to talk marketing technology. We discuss:
To listen visit EchoJunction or iTunes.
Google is expanding its tool for publishers to combat ad blocking.
"Funding Choices comes at a cost; publishers have to meet the Coalition for Better Ads’ Better Ads standards, which Google’s Chrome ad filter enforces and which some consider another way Google is dictating the rules of the web. Publishers also have to share the revenue with Google if they get readers to pay. Finally, few publishers are able to get people to pay for online access in the first place."
It should be noted that Google has (at least previously) paid two of the most popular ad blockers to have Google's ads whitelisted; effectively Google's revenue helps fund the development of ad blockers. Google then develops a tool for publishers to deal with adblocking...taking 10% (of monetised viewing) to do so.
While Google may be virtue signalling an intent to solve the ad blocking issue, it fully intends on capitalising on the revenue opportunity it represents.
This move (combined with their News Initiative to monetise new subs and GDPR requests to be 'controller') is aimed at making Google the gatekeeper to the content consumption experience for a large portion of the population.
Any other takes/perspectives?
The internet is predicated on the notion of it being free. But what if this predilection was found to be the root cause of most of our media and societal ails; filter bubbles, 'fake news', misinformation and the spread of conspiracy theories, privacy breaches et al.
Our technological and in some ways societal future depends on what happens next.
Jaron Lanier, a scientist, musician and writer is known for his work in virtual reality and his advocacy of humanism and sustainable economics in a digital context, and contends that when free digital systems and great tech entrepreneurs exploded there was a 'globally tragic, astoundingly ridiculous mistake, rather than a wave of evil where behaviour modification empires (we know them as social networks) sprouted and effectively 'broke' the internet'. He believes 'we simply just need to remake the decision'.
Lanier suggests, that born of this period (in the late 1990s) was a 'mythical power which produced two different passions; for making everything free and for the almost supernatural power of the tech entrepreneur. (But) How do you celebrate entrepreneurship when everything's free?' These two things are at odds with each other and this decision for predominantly 'free' has resulted in systems which modifies users' behaviour in the process of allowing them to seek information and communicate with others via the internet.
The only solution back then was the advertising model and just like users, the likes of Google and Facebook are hooked; unable to diversify from the proposition of cost centres to profit centres.
His most notable thought; "I don't think our species can survive unless we fix this. We cannot have a society in which if two people wish to communicate the only way that can happen is if it’s financed by a third person who wishes to manipulate them.”
Would/will users ever be able to be weaned from the 'free' model. Would we make a different decision if we knew back then? Would we being willing to remake the decision now?
A comprehensive and contextualised account can be read via New York Mag
Worth watching the TEDTalk in full.
Seven West Media will be the next FTA broadcaster for cricket ending Nine Entertainment Co. four-decade stranglehold on the sport. News Corp-controlled Foxtel will pay for the majority of the rights in a $1 billion deal which could see a large number of matches held back for pay-TV, including some Twenty-20.
Big Bash League’s media equity and brand accessibility is arguably only what it is thanks to Network Ten so a hard act for Seven to follow and a risk with many games exclusive to PayTV.
The numbers are right now for Cricket Australia but the impact will be in 3-5 years. A definite change in the landscape and an all-in on sport for Murdoch.
The Australia reports the deal as is understood to include Seven committing to estimated annual payments of $75 million or $450m over 6 years, with Foxtel stumping up $105m a season or $630m.
Read more detail here:
The Australian - Seven Network seizes cricket media rights from Nine, Ten in a partnership with Foxtel
SMH - Seven and Foxtel nab cricket broadcasting rights in $1 billion deal
There’s only one broadcaster winning the (long term) strategic game here.
For Nine this now isn’t a ‘must have’. Even the revised Nine Entertainment Co. & Network Ten offer $900m ($150m pa over 6 years) to keep cricket on FTA, would see Ten retain the Big Bash League while Nine would keep the Test matches...but importantly international Twenty20 & 50 over matches would switch from Nine to Ten.
Nine has already won the Australian Open Tennis Tournament & entering the Cricket negotiations with Ten means it shifts a significant portion of its cost base, freeing it up for more diversification & greater margins & still receive summer sport revenue.
Foxtel's aggressive bid estimated between $160 to $170 million per year for every game (or $800-850 million) may be viewed by Cricket Australia as a financial lifeline as SMH points out, but unless Foxtel & Seven West Media can deliver something (questionable & arguably detrimental to CA brand) like a knock out news lock out (Comm Games style), I’d question the long term strategy. Even if the bid wins, they ‘win’ the rights but inherit the largest cost base for a summer sport with no additional benefit for users and no significant audience gains for Cricket Australia. Right now, CA need an outcome which delivers improvement/stability for the brand. Taking cricket from FTA is a risk.
As News Corp play hard ball, Nine’s patience, holistic view of rights & willingness to collaborate should pay off here.
Blockchain will affect the practice of marketing and the media industry in ways not yet entirely obvious but is it over-hyped?
No. It will be both inevitable and transformative.
Blockchain has been made possible with the convergence of scaled audiences, connectivity and computation power and provides a new data structure enabling what is known as crypto economic protocols. Blockchain is technology which decentralises the way we do business. Blockchain can create new network designs and supply chains and reduce the friction from many processes.
What this means for media and marketing is the way in which content is distributed and indeed the ownership, management and use of personal information and therefore the ability for marketers to reach consumers as they have done previously will be up-ended. Existing distribution models for both editorial and advertising content will be impacted by disintermediation and many AdTech and MarTech businesses will be under threat.
Plain and simple; if you're a media middle-man and you've read anything about Blockchain, you're likely to be a little nervous or amidst a period of heavy innovation.
We have reached a time right now where we're questioning how the tech giants ended up with too much power. Blockchain will be their likely usurper and from this, peer-to-peer for everything will become (the most likely) reality. How we never thought of this rather than allowing the rise of large networked empires will amuse future generations.
Blockchain is less about how the technology works itself and more about how it will be utilised and what the implications or impacts are.
As Jeremy Epstein from Never Stop Marketing discusses on the EchoJunction* podcast, with Blockchain we 'now have technology which allows for the transfer of items of value as opposed to simply information (like the internet delivered) without the need for third party intermediaries which add time and risk'. That is, we are seeing the distinction between the internet of 'Information' and the Internet of 'Value'.
Most significantly, it allows consensus about the state and ownership of assets at particular times and has strong security guarantees to ensure that 'history' cannot be altered by bad actors. This means this innovation enables or liberates all types of value (including content) as the owners and recipients are protected through verification.
According to Singtel's APAC Associate Director for Financial Services Industry Innovation, Cindy Nicholson, 2018 will be the breakthrough year for Blockchain and the technology will mature by 2025^.
This is what we will start to see:
The most significant change will be in the space where consumers themselves make money from their own data...but more on that later.
Waiting to see how it plays out is likely to see players 'left out' or 'left behind'. Education, preparedness and early experimentation (or partnerships) is key.
Update (April 10, 2018): Found this explainer on Blockchain which might be useful - A Beginner's Guide to Blockchain - Steve Sammartino
* The EchoJunction Podcast with Adam Fraser; Jeremy Epstein talks Blockchain
^ AdNews; In Depth - Can blockchain revolutionise how media is traded? and Blockchain Summit 2017
It has become increasingly clear that workplaces of today will hardly be recognisable within the next decade or two. According to the Foundation for Young Australians, by 2030, automation, globalisation and flexibility will change what we do in every job. This will require preparation for the future and urgently shift our understanding of what the new work order will mean.
Experts agree the increasing casualisation of jobs and the rise of freelance or contingency workers is not a fad, but a long term trend which will become centrepieces of future workplaces.
Further, the impact of technology will have widespread implications for the type of roles which exist. A survey of 200 CEOs and Chief HR Officers conducted by Gartner owned, CEB found these groups believe 14 per cent of jobs will be automated over the next three years.
While many jobs will disappear with the advent of automation, artificial intelligence and robotics, many will be enhanced and more will appear...many of which we cannot currently imagine.
Every trend, as described in MediaPost's Death of the Company Man points to economies where "more people will work for themselves than for corporations (by 2027)...because they want to. This group is preparing for the future more swiftly than traditional employees (including) putting time aside to learn new skills" at a greater rate than traditional corporate employees.
In order to be both agile and 'valuable' in this new work order, workers will be required to not only learn 'future skills' including critical analysis and both computation and creative thinking, problem solving, communication and collaboration, they will need to understand and develop skills in operating an enterprise because that 'enterprise' will be them.
Citizens will look not just for 'jobs' but for revenue streams (via projects, short-term contracts and/or fixed employment with short tenures). The likelihood is that teenagers today will have 17 different jobs across 5 careers^. How they manage themselves as a business (from marketing, financials, operations and resourcing) will determine their success in winning and succeeding in 'business' and being able to seamlessly switch between work 'gigs' and industries.
As emphasised in the Foundation for Young Australians' report, The New Work Smarts, 'enterprise' and communication skills, which are portable across jobs and industries, will be most important for future workers who need to be adaptable as career paths change.
Forthcoming disruptive forces mean embracing technology and developing strong digital literacy skills will be imperative for every worker, across every discipline. If we ignore the need, were in for a world of pain. If we embrace, there will be myriads of opportunities.
Almost anyone can learn the skills they need for a job...learning skills for jobs that are yet to exist, is quite something else. It will require preparedness with the development of soft skills and the capacity to continue to learn.
It's in everyone's best interests to develop future-skills, especially rich enterprise skills to ensure future-readiness.
Tip: See some of Australia's best future-skills providers and learn why these skills are important and more about future-readiness head to Full Circle Project.
Image: StartupStock Photos
Source: ^ Foundation for Young Australians, Work Smarts
Your comments are welcome and you are encouraged to express your views in a positive and productive manner in line with our Code of Conduct.