Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Internet-Connect TV Soars, Clicks With Mainstream Audience (Dinosaur Media DeathWatch™)
http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=153465&nid=128464 ^ | July 1, 2011 | Wayne Friedman

Posted on 07/01/2011 11:17:50 AM PDT by abb

Internet-connected television sets have been growing fast, and by the end of the year -- for the first time -- there will be more connected TVs than videogame consoles.

By the end of 2011, some 52 million connected TV sets will be sold globally -- from Samsung, LG and Sony versus 37 game consoles in the market from Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony --Xbox, PlayStation and Wii respectively. This is according to U.K.-base Informa Telecoms & Media.

"Until now, many online video services were launched primarily with the game console in mind, mainly because console users innately understand how to connect these devices and demand interactive video services from them," stated Andrew Ladbrook, analyst at Informa Telecoms & Media.

He said this trend is changing as "connected TVs bring these services to a mainstream audience."

Informa projects that in five years -- 2016 -- there will be 1.8 billion in-home video devices -- including tablets -- that will be sold, an 800% increase. That means 70% of all in-home video devices sold will be able to connect to the Internet. But connected TVs might have to undergo a change by then. Informa says new TV set makers will need to build and support platforms that works across both the latest and legacy video devices.

Which company could lose out here? Informa says Apple could lose ground in the connected TV space if it does not launch a dedicated Internet-enabled TV instead of relying upon a standalone box to stream video.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: advertising; dbm; networks; television
A la carte TV programming is now here. It will never go back to the way it used to be.
1 posted on 07/01/2011 11:17:59 AM PDT by abb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 04-Bravo; aimhigh; andyandval; Arizona Carolyn; Bahbah; bert; bilhosty; Caipirabob; carmenbmw; ...

ping


2 posted on 07/01/2011 11:18:48 AM PDT by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb

This is why Glen Beck started GBTV!


3 posted on 07/01/2011 11:25:01 AM PDT by SubMareener (Save us from Quarterly Freepathons! Become a MONTHLY DONOR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb

I have a PC hooked to my HDTV. It gives you a lot more flexibility. You are locked into the TV manufacturer’s software if you get a Internet connected TV. There is LOTS of free TV on the web that they lock you out of. You can only purchase Netflix, etc.


4 posted on 07/01/2011 11:25:30 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum ("A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves." - Bertrand de Jouvenel des Ursins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb
Informa says Apple could lose ground in the connected TV space if it does not launch a dedicated Internet-enabled TV instead of relying upon a standalone box to stream video.

Sanity check - an Internet enabled flat screen has a $200-1,000 premium over a similar TV without the internet capability.

AppleTV costs $99, and takes a single HDMI connection on your TV, is wireless, small and completely silent (no fan).

5 posted on 07/01/2011 11:28:33 AM PDT by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat; Halfmanhalfamazing

http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=153481
MSNBC’s Liberal Stance: Decision Based on Profit, Not Politics

http://gannettblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/nashville-heres-forum-just-for.html
Nashville | A forum just for Tennessean layoffs

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/58161.html
White House press pool losing scoops to Twitter

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/58161.html#ixzz1QsXTFJSW

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/Features/Article/11-Employees-Take-Buyout-Offer-to-Leave-Lee-s-Lincoln-Journal-Star
11 Employees Take Buyout Offer to Leave Lee’s Lincoln Journal Star

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-0629-cable-trends-20110629,0,5960290.story
Cable TV looks to go social to keep audiences tethered

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504943_162-20075189-10391715.html
Dawning of a new media age: Journalism in the time of social media

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/470485-McDowell_Better_Than_Average_Chance_Net_Neutrality_Rules_Will_Be_Stayed.php
McDowell: Better Than Average Chance Net Neutrality Rules Will Be Stayed

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/470473-FCC_Finishes_Net_Neutrality_Rule_Review.php
FCC Finishes Net Neutrality Rule Review


6 posted on 07/01/2011 11:32:36 AM PDT by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

But a roku box ($59 to $99) is far cheaper. I got one about a month ago and I love it. Combine that with a digital antenna and I am seriously considering dropping cable.


7 posted on 07/01/2011 11:42:18 AM PDT by Drill Thrawl (No one is more against progress than a progressive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Drill Thrawl
But a roku box ($59 to $99) is far cheaper. Point conceded.

Honestly, I expected Apple to utilize the A4 processor in the AppleTV and the memory space available far more than it has (or hasn't, as the case may be).

I fully expected Apple to release a' la cart programming several months ago. The AppleTV has the computing power to easily manage this feat. If I could pay $5/month for each channel I actually watch - I could drop my $88/month satellite bill to zero. Video-on-demand, streaming from Netflix and watching ONLY the channels that I like would save me a fortune. Why am I forced to supplment channels that I have no interest in watching .... ever?

8 posted on 07/01/2011 11:56:07 AM PDT by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: abb
What's fascinating about Zucker's commens as to MSNBC's liberal slant...is when he says that the "viewer can distiguish for himself"

How come all of FOX's critics don'tsay the same thing?

9 posted on 07/01/2011 12:04:54 PM PDT by ken5050 (Save the Earth..It's the only planet with chocolate!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: abb

The sat-cable industry is on the precipice, to the extent they are not ISPs.


10 posted on 07/01/2011 12:12:12 PM PDT by cicero2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Same here. The problem is that outside of the major vendors like Netflix, the chances of finding something that doesn’t look absolutely awful on a large flat panel is slim to none. Most internet sources still look like crap on my 26” monitor.


11 posted on 07/01/2011 12:55:21 PM PDT by Melas (Sent via Galaxy Tab)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Drill Thrawl

Better yet, a decent Blu-Ray player will run you around $150 and will have all the benefits of a Roku box plus it will play Blu-rays and DVD’s.


12 posted on 07/01/2011 12:59:10 PM PDT by Melas (Sent via Galaxy Tab)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: abb

Google is well positioned to take advantage of a switch to ip tv.

They bought up all that dark fiber several years ago...it was bargain priced after the dot com bust. High speed wireless could connect everyone in a large metro area to that dedicated fiber network at little cost.

Free Republic should draw on the pool of talented members here
and start a news network on the web. It would cost very little and could earn revenue from ad sales. It could be based on a peer to peer model...this model works and is robust.


13 posted on 07/01/2011 1:36:32 PM PDT by Bobalu ( "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother." ..Moshe Dayan:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Drill Thrawl

Digital antenna?


14 posted on 07/01/2011 1:44:23 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: D-fendr
"Digital antenna?"

A misnomer that retailers are trying to push on customers who want Broadcast HDTV.

An Old fashioned TV Antenna like Grandpa had on the side of his house will do the same job.

(Shhh, don't tell anyone else though...)

15 posted on 07/01/2011 1:47:36 PM PDT by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Drill Thrawl
a roku box

We love ours.

16 posted on 07/01/2011 2:52:35 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler (Just once I'd like someone to call me 'Sir' without adding 'You're making a scene.' - Homer Simpson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ken5050

http://www.boston.com/Boston/businessupdates/2011/07/new-york-times-sells-part-red-sox-stake/oZd9gFXIbHyk6pZvVuax4K/index.html

New York Times Co. sells part of Red Sox stake
July 1, 2011 5:58 PM
By Beth Healy, Globe Staff

The Red Sox have been struggling lately, but the team is paying off for The New York Times Co., which today sold a portion of its Sox holdings for a sizeable profit.

The Times Co. reported that it sold more than half its holdings in the Fenway Sports Group, which includes the Sox, for $117 million, recouping more than what the media company spent on its entire original investment.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304584004576420161145036094.html?mod=WSJ_hp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsThird

JULY 2, 2011

Times Co. Sells Part of Stake in Red Sox
By RUSSELL ADAMS

New York Times Co. sold more than half of its 17% stake in the holding company of the Boston Red Sox to three separate buyers for $117 million in cash.

The sale, disclosed in a regulatory filing on Friday, represents 390 of the 700 shares that Times Co. held in Fenway Sports Group, which owns the Red Sox and most of the cable network that airs its games.


17 posted on 07/01/2011 5:33:41 PM PDT by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SubMareener

GBTV is $99 per year, seems a bit steep multiplied over many channels.


18 posted on 07/01/2011 5:59:04 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

FreeRepublic.com is $100.00 a month for me. So $99 a year is a bargain!


19 posted on 07/01/2011 9:51:40 PM PDT by SubMareener (Save us from Quarterly Freepathons! Become a MONTHLY DONOR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: abb

_______MSNBC’s Liberal Stance: Decision Based on Profit, Not Politics________

Wow! That must be why they are kicking FOX’s tail in ratings and market share. /s/


20 posted on 07/02/2011 8:04:51 AM PDT by Clay Moore (The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of a fool to the left. Ecclesiastes 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson