This CNN.com feature is optimized for Adobe Flash Player version 8 or higher.
You are currently using Flash Player 10
Hmm, 10 is higher than 8, isn't it?
The Feldman File covers eBooks, publishing, new media, Internet services, consumer electronics and salsa dancing. (Okay, not salsa dancing, but it'll be interesting to see how many people looking for information on salsa dancing end up here.)
This CNN.com feature is optimized for Adobe Flash Player version 8 or higher.
You are currently using Flash Player 10
Hmm, 10 is higher than 8, isn't it?
Yesterday, Netflix and Roku announced the Netflix Player. This device, priced at $99.99 and about the size of a paperback novel, can stream the portion of the Netflix catalog that's available for immediate download (approximately 10,000 out of 100,000 movies and television shows) to any television. The player has composite, component, S-Video and HDMI connections. It supports both SD and HD, although Netflix only offers SD streams at this time. It has both wired and wireless (802.11g) Ethernet connections.
The least expensive Netflix plan that provides unlimited downloads is $8.99/month, going to $15.99/month (the only difference between the plans is the number of physical DVDs that can be out at any one time--one for the $8.99 plan, three for the $15.99 plan.)
The reviews of the Roku Netflix Player so far have been positive; the biggest drawback is the relatively limited selection of movies available for instant streaming. However, this is an issue that I think will be resolved over time, as more studios see Netflix's service as a variation of VOD, at least for catalog material.
In the past, I've believed that the chances for third-party set-top boxes have been slim, but this Netflix/Roku box could be a game-changer. The price is so low that the player is almost a throwaway item; as one reviewer pointed out, if you watch 25 movies, the incremental cost of the box is only $4 per movie. The box already supports HD, when Netflix makes it available.
The Netflix/Roku player is a test case for whether or not a managed network is really needed for IPTV. The "standard definition" of IPTV includes a managed network with controlled Quality of Service and Quality of Experience. If Netflix and Roku can deliver acceptable performance "over the top", on the public Internet, it makes it hard to justify huge capital equipment expenditures in order to deliver IPTV over a closed network.
For example, in the U.K., BT is using VOD as its primary "value-add" for subscribers to its IPTV service, since the company relies on the over-the-air Freeview service for broadcast channels. Freeview, however, is launching its own over-the-top VOD service, similar to the Netflix/Roku service. If it works, where does that leave BT?
Red,NAB,Red One,Scarlet,Sony,Panasonic,Canon,Apple,Final Cut Studio
In some previous blog entries, I discussed the new products announced by Red at NAB. Scarlet, the "3K for under $3,000" camcorder announced for shipment next year, takes Red into an entirely new market segment, one in which the Japanese consumer electronic vendors (primarily Sony, Panasonic and Canon) have long played.
The current Red One lists for $17,500, but by the time lenses and accessories have been added, the cost can easily double (or more). At that price, there's enough margin for video system integrators to make money, and the systems are expensive enough for rental houses to have a steady market.
However, at $3,000 plus accessories, the Scarlet will clearly be a prosumer product that should sell in quantities many times that of the Red One. From interviews with Red executives at NAB, it seems clear that they see a market much bigger than that served by the mail-order video resellers such as B&H.
At the show, Red executives talked about the company's close relationship with Apple. It seems to me entirely possible that Scarlet, in a package closely integrated with Final Cut Studio, could be sold in Apple's stores, possibly even exclusively. This would give Red street-level access to consumers and media creation professionals around the world, without having to vet a sales channel store by store.
There have been rumors about Apple purchasing Red, but as I've written about previously, I think that Apple's hardware-agnostic approach to professional audio and video (as opposed to its hardware-centric approach to everything else) has worked in its favor vs. Avid. By buying Red, it could alienate its largest hardware partners, but by simply reselling a Red-branded Scarlet in its stores, it would remain agnostic, yet share the spotlight with the company that is fast becoming the Apple of video cameras.
Please keep in mind that this is speculation on my part; I have no inside information. However, I've felt for a long time that the design of camcorders needs a major overhaul in order to make them more usable, and that Apple is ideally suited to design and build such a next-generation product. A reselling partnership with Red could be the first step to such a product.
MRG,Multimedia Research Group,NAB
Late last week, I gave notice to my employer, Multimedia Research Group (MRG), that I'll be leaving as soon as the Spring five-year Forecast is done, which will probably be before the end of April. It's never easy to leave a job, especially one that enabled me to return to Silicon Valley, and one in which the company's owner is a good friend with whom I've worked off and on for almost 20 years, but it's time to make a move.
There are three key reasons for me to move on. The first, and most important, is that MRG is a small company, and I need to increase my income. I recently got engaged, and the money that was sufficient for myself and two cats won't cut it for a family. The second reason is that the travelling that I've been doing has been exhausting. In the last fifteen months, I've visited London twice, Shanghai and Shenzhen, China on two separate trips, Singapore, Chicago, Boston, Amsterdam, Paris, Rio de Janeiro, and undoubtedly places that I've forgotten. It's harder for me to rebound than it was when I was travelling back and forth between California and Tokyo when I worked for Toshiba in the late 1980s.
My final reason is that I'd really like to get my hands dirty again with products or services, rather than just write and speak about what other people are doing. Analysts are observers--we sometimes consult one-on-one with clients, but we rarely have an integral role in defining or launching products.
I'll be representing MRG on a panel at the National Association of Broadcasters' convention in Las Vegas later this month, and I'll be continuing this blog. I'm "pursuing other opportunities," as the saying goes, so if you know of an opening, please let me know at lfeldman(at)feldmanfile.com.
ZTE,UTStarcom,Huawei,Ericsson,Nokia Siemens Networks,Cisco,IPTV
As I mentioned in some previous posts, I spent most of last week at an analysts' conference in Shenzhen, China, sponsored by ZTE Corporation. To folks like myself in the U.S., ZTE has been a fairly "invisible" company; this conference was an attempt to make the company, and its products, more visible.
ZTE is one of the largest telecommunications equipment manufacturers in China. Its largest local competitors are Huawei and UTStarcom. The Western companies that I'd compare ZTE to most closely are Ericsson, Alcatel-Lucent, Nokia Siemens Networks, and to a lesser extent, Cisco. ZTE is a wireless powerhouse; it has product lines covering GSM, CDMA, WiMAX, and the Chinese standard TD-SCDMA (where it's the market leader). It's also a large supplier of wireline access equipment (IP DSLAMs and xPONs) and routers.
In IPTV, ZTE supplies all the key system components except live encoders. Everything else--Video-on-Demand systems, Set-Top Boxes, Middleware and Content Protection--ZTE can provide itself, or integrate other companies' products into a turnkey system. ZTE's approach is closest to that of UTStarcom, a U.S.-based company with a huge presence in China, but the companies have two different strategies: UTStarcom prefers to sell complete, turnkey systems using its components, while ZTE will sell complete systems or individual components. This enables ZTE to sell to service providers that want "best-of-breed" products, as well as those who want everything from one company.
What both ZTE and UTStarcom have in common is that they're both focusing on China, India, and developing markets. In my opinion, this is a very smart approach for ZTE. While the company has some advanced technology, such as software-defined base station radios for mobile applications, it can best be thought of as a "fast follower." ZTE is unlikely to be the company to bring technology to market first, but when its products do come to market, they tend to be less expensive than their Western counterparts. This is very important for service providers in developing countries with very low ARPUs (Average Monthly Revenues Per User).
Even though ZTE isn't much of a market factor in Western Europe or North America, it doesn't mean that the Western equipment vendors can breath easy. I see ZTE, Huawei and UTStarcom much as Toyota, Honda and Nissan were when they entered the U.S. automobile market in the early 1960s. The first Japanese cars to reach U.S. shores were tiny, underpowered and not terribly reliable, which made it easy for both American and European manufacturers to ignore them. However, the Japanese manufacturers learned what American consumers wanted, and gave it to them with high quality and low prices, eventually driving American manufacturers out of the small car market. Even after Japanese manufacturers went upmarket and raised their prices, U.S. consumers still preferred their products.
I think that ZTE is going to be one of the world leaders in mobile, and possibly wireline, communications by the middle of the next decade. In fact, it may not take that long.