Tag: price

If The Price Is Right

Launching VidZapper as a ‘low cost’ video management system seems to have raised a whole debate out there on what ‘low cost’ means.

To me it’s a cost at which the costs do not prevent a viable business from growing.
The trouble is, this is an industry where the major players – Brightcove, Move, Maven, Narrowstep, the platform and KIT aim to make a minimum of $100k a year from their customers – smaller customers just aren’t worthwhile, although Brightcove has recently introduced a ‘basic’ package.
VC backed companies can afford to subsidise their customers, so there seem to be some low cost and free options out there.
However, there is one thing that is common to all VMS providers. To my knowledge, not a single one of them publishes their prices for any level of service.
So, let me start here by saying that an average deployment of VidZapper for a year, including storage, bandwidth, CDN costs, etc.. should be $10 – 15k.  I don’t think that’s a bad price considering all the investment that’s gone into the platform.
Now, any of you who know the pricing of other services, please post them here, so that we can start to establish a more open marketplace.
** Please use the comment field below to post any relevant pricing information anonymously **

Read more:
If The Price Is Right

Share/Save/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Livestation Adds Deutsche Welle TV Over broadband

Germany’s main TV and radio export is Deutsche Welle.
It broadcasts to 22 million people in its native German and in English, around the world via satellite and cable TV.
Deutsche Well was a pioneer of worldwide news stations, along with English language news stations such as BBC worldwide and CNN.
Now Livestation is going to [...]

See the rest here:
Livestation Adds Deutsche Welle TV Over broadband

Share/Save/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What Price To Pay ?

The backlash begins here. Long suffering sports fans in the UK, where almost all sports are now on pay per view channels (and, worse still, on different channels such as Sky Sports and Setanta) are finally rising up and complaining.

According to BBC News, only 290,000 people watched England’s impressive World Cup victory over Croatia – if the game had been free to view on a mainstream channel this figure would have been twenty times higher.

It’s also a shame that Setanta didn’t see the opportunity and make the game available PPV online.

But the real culprit is the BBC, who are happy to pay millions, possibly tens of millions, for Formula 1, which can more than adequately covered by commercial free to air TV, and will not buy the rights to what their viewers want to watch.

What Price To Pay ?

Share/Save/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Price Of Fame

So, should a ‘property’ in the real world become an internet TV ‘property’. Hmm… Well, I guess it depends on what kind of audience it draws. Channels launching an internet TV presence is a no brainer, but individual stars with their own channel ?

The key question is whether stars can extend their reach to become brands. Very few people become brands. Is Paris Hilton a brand ? Oprah Winfrey certainly is and plans to launch her own broadcast channel in 2009.

A related question is ‘can brands become an internet TV property’; for me the unequivocal response is ‘yes’. Indeed, despite the failure of channels such as Bud TV, the near future is going to be full of companies launching their own audience driving properties.

But the key is to be able to leverage an existing brand profile – a TV viewer has the choice of a few hundred channels, whereas on the internet there are millions of places to go; there is a real danger that the brand gets diluted.

The trick with building an internet TV presence seems to be to leverage what has gone before and exposure on other media.

Read the rest here:
The Price Of Fame

Share/Save/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Why do we need a gatekeeper when the content providers can sell direct to consumers without paying the carriers a fee?
Or, to be more precise, just paying for the bandwidth they consume?
What happens when the content providers figure this out or when new entrants realize they no longer need to pay for access to customers by paying equity to the carriers?

What happens if people realize that they don’t need to pay high fees for services they can create themselves or buy in a competitive marketplace?
Word Processing went through this long ago and we now accept email. VoIP is coming to the force. Video is just another format — not at all special.
The price of IPTV will be the price of producing a video or paying the copyrights for it and the bandwidth condumed to broadcast it.
That is the main difference with the classical TV, but it is not little.
I you do not have to pay a fequencty, all the expensive hardware to broadcast,
The governments are seeking money to pay for old expensive technologies, but it won’t be for long (I honestly DO NOT PITY THEM).

The DRM issue is no different whether you send the bits broadcasting them in the air or IP (as it is increasing the norm within the networks). The decoding is still done by a device at the edge be it a Set Top Box or another device.

It looks like a few understood the power of the new way of transmission.
And the few who understood are strangely quiet, as if they didn’t want the news spread…
So, broadcasters of the future, this is your present!

Read more here:
The end of Murdoch’s Era and the Dawn of the new IPTV producers’ time

Share/Save/Bookmark

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
« Previous posts Next posts » Back to top