Cable Companies Despise PVRs

sbombay writes "I just came back from Broadband Plus (formerly the Western Cable Show) and was disappointed to find that cable companies despise PVRs. In his keynote speech, Comcast CEO Brian Roberts said that the PVR amounts to 'the Napster of the future.' Cable World has a story about the speech and quotes from other cable execs bashing the PVR. The cable industry's opposition to the PVR boils down to two things -- PVRs help satellite companies (Dish and DirecTV) provide services like Video On Demand (VOD) and a PVR in a cable home cuts into VOD revenue. Any of the sessions at the show that touched the topic of PVRs were an opportunity for the cable industry to slam the PVR. The strongest attack came from Gary Lauder, a venture capitalist who has funded many cable related companies. During his 15-minute presentation, Lauder slammed his Replay box, 'it's too hot,' 'my wife doesn't know how to use it,' and he even tried to fry an egg on his PVR. He also openly called on the cable companies and Hollywood to sue the PVR companies for copyright infringement. If you love your PVR, the cable industry is not your friend." Update: 12/09 18:33 GMT by T : Gary Lauder wrote to say that this account misquotes and misinterprets his speech on certain points. Read below for his reaction.

Gary Lauder writes: "I have 3 PVR's and love the functionality. My wife knows how to use it. The misquotation is that she did not know how to reboot it when it locked up. This was a piece of data in support of the following position:

My position that I expressed in my speech and that was inaccurately portrayed: PVR functionality should be provisioned from the headend for the following reasons (which ultimately will benefit consumers):

1. VOD servers cost much less
   • If video servers @ $350/stream (Soon Component cost declining 40%/year
   • @ 10% simultaneous use, costs $35/sub.
   • PVRs cost >10X more
   • When simultaneous use = 50%, server costs will have declined >5X
2. Disk noise wakes my wife
3. Replay box hot enough to fry an egg -- Is that a feature?
4. Disk size limitations mean obsolescence, esp. with HDTV
5. Available on every set-top in house Average of 1.7 PVRs/PVR household
6. No pro-activity/anticipation required
7. Records multiple concurrent shows
8. NW storage could always have max. res.
9. Uses existing deployed base
10. Moving parts break more often
11. Box complexity means more crashes & customer support costs

My basic thesis is that PVRs + Satellite will eat cable's lunch, and since it's unambiguous that cable needs to get the copyright clearances to offer programming from the head-end, they should start now. It is the case that I suggested that if a Supreme Court case was brought on the legality of each feature of PVRs were brought, some would lose. I also suggested an alternative business model to make everybody happy to avoid the all-or-nothing result that has been occurring in the RIAA vs. Napster wars.

I suggested that consumers pay 1 cent per commercial skipped (which is about the same as what advertisers pay). That would be equivalent to $10/thousand commercials skipped. I think that's reasonable. I also suggested that targeted advertising could be a win-win for all involved by delivering ads in areas that are of greater interest to the viewer so that there would be less incentive to skip and fewer ads would have to be delivered due to the higher prices paid for the targeted group. I also predicted that this dynamic combined with competition between satellite and cable would ultimately make both services free."

Works both ways...

[slipgun]

If you love your PVR, the cable industry is not your friend.

And if you hate the cable industry, then the PVR is your friend.

Re:VCR v. PVR

[Oliver Wendell Jones]

If you're VCR has an almost instantaneous 30-second skip button, then it's hated as well.

Re:AT&T Selling TiVo

[mgs1000]

This is especially interesting now that ATT Broadband is owned by Comcast, and the president of Comcast is the one bitching about PVRs.

Gary Lauder

[FreeLinux]

Lauder slammed his Replay box, 'it's too hot,' 'my wife doesn't know how to use it,' and he even tried to fry an egg on his PVR.

So, he doesn't like them. He thinks they are for copyright violation. He thinks cable companies should sue the PVR manufacturers. So, why does he own one and why is he pissed that his wife can't operate it.

Hey Gary, can she set the clock on your old VCR?

It is so different...

[sterno]

But you see, PVR's are digital, and that means it's completely different. Right? I mean because people can.... uhhhh... oh yeah, they can send copies of the Buffy Episodes that they recorded last week to all their friends. That deprives the cable company of... ummm... well wait, who owns a Tivo and DOESN'T own cable? Hmmmm... OH! I remember, because you can't skip ads on a VCR by fast forw... hmmmm...

IT'S JUST DIFFERENT! :)

Re:No, just means actors will be paid less.

[cioxx]

You should be modded up to (+10, The Truth)

Truer words haven't been spoken. The industry pay is the mimic of the dot com frenzy back in late 90's. $300,000/yr for a Java Developer. Give me a break. (Read: -1, Overvalued).

His wife can't work it - solution

[Anonymous Coward]

"During his 15-minute presentation, Lauder slammed his Replay box, 'it's too hot,' 'my wife doesn't know how to use it,' and he even tried to fry an egg on his PVR. He also openly called on the cable companies and Hollywood to sue the PVR companies for copyright infringement. If you love your PVR, the cable industry is not your friend."

- Maybe he should find a new wife.

Re:At least it's not

[Overt Coward]

Without ads, there is no reason for broadcasters to come up with quality programming.

Since they do run ads now, what's their excuse for not producing quality programming currently?

In Soviet USA

[Anonymous Coward]

the cable companies watch the PVR watching YOU!

Pay Per Dreck

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't get it. $60++ a month to watch TV. We have an incredible heritage of broadcasting and commerce in this nation which few seem to really appreciate. Unless you live in the desert or are plagued buy uncontrollable multipath interference (the kind that kills 8VSB digital reception), CUT THE CABLE NOW! Put up a good antenna, or perhaps an array of antenna if you don't want a rotor. READ A BOOK! Write letters of protest to your elected federal representatives about group ownership broad cast laws.

Never before has an industry made so much money delivering so little, and often at some one else's expense.

If you actually think that paying $60 a month for TV is a good thing, then your watch too dammed much of it.

ITS ALL DRECK!

Re:Help! Cable companies are STEALING from me!

[cancrman]

Or you could switch to DirecTV. Or just go without cable. It's not like you're gonna die without SportsCenter. Okay that was the worst example ever for this group. You're not gonna die without Farscape.

Re:AT&T, Comcast

[Ralph Wiggam]

Adelphia's bid of 1700 cartons of cigarettes, 690 Snickers bars, and the promise of desserts for the next 15-20 years was not accepted for some reason.

-B

-1 Redundant

[po8]

If you love your PVR, the cable industry is not your friend.

If you have cable, the cable industry is not your friend. Duh.

Re:bullshit

[EatHam]

"I suggested that consumers pay 1 cent per commercial skipped"

In all fairness, I'm sure that they left out the last part of the quote...

"I further suggest that we put X10 cameras in every home so that we can monitor when people wait for the commercial breaks to go take a leak or get something to eat. This is equivalent to theft, and consumers should be charged for it. I suggest 2 cents for every bathroom break, and 3 cents for every snack preparation, based on our aggregate time-sampling for each of these activities."