As is the normal way on the Internet, people love to read headlines.
Of course, they rarely read the substance of the article behind the
headline. They take the headline and run with it as gospel. This is
particularly true of internet video and the presumption by many that
the internet will be so vast and powerful that its a foregone
conclusion that video on the internet will replace traditional
television delivery.

 Ain’t gonna happen.  I can go into depth about it, but my buddy Dan
Rayburn does a far better job of it.  He asks the simple question of
“How is it the Youtube, with all of Google’s resources, can’t solve
their buffering problem?” Then he answers much of it.

Now maybe Youtube will fix their buffering problem someday, along
with the other issues that Dan addresses, but it wont be easy and it
wont be quick.

You can find Dan’s work here. Make sure to also read the comments. He does a good job there as well.

Let me add a couple other thoughts. There are many that think that
video over the Internet will “set them free” from having to deal with a
small number of big companies (think cable, telco).

If that is what
you think, you better think again. There are maybe three companies that
can stream to 1mm or more simultaneous users. Google, Limelight and
Akamai. And that 1mm simultaneous users isn’t just for your content.
That is for EVERYONE’s content and they can’t get much beyond 2mm
without big problems.

More importantly, if you want to stream your
content to millions of users at once, its going to cost you an
incredible amount of money.

Which leads me to a lesson for all you netizens who are jazzed up
about over the top video.  If you really believe the demand is there
and your content will command 1mm simultaneous users, it’s probably
cheaper to pay Directv, Dish Network and Comcast to create a channel
for you and let your viewers watch it on TV.

Let that sink in. It’s going to be cheaper to have the big
traditional cable distributors offer your content to viewers than it
will be to reach a large audience on the net. That’s for a one-time
offering. If you plan on doing it more than once or on a regularly
scheduled basic, there is no question it’s cheaper to do it this way.
And the picture quality will be dramatically better.

In fact, that is probably a great business opportunity for
satellite, telco and cable companies. Open up times to bid to offer
content over their networks. You want channel 1020 on Directv, it’s X
dollars per hour minimum or the best price bid. Here is how you provide
your content to us. You can buy marketing from us as well. Directv,
Dish, Comcast could make a boatload of extra money offering this
service.

And I can give you one more option.  It may be cheaper to go to a
movie theater chain and pay them to broadcast the content you want
people to see via digital to their theaters. As long as its a slow
night and they can sell popcorn, I can assure you it will cost you less
than a content distribution network would charge to deliver to
thousands of viewers.

Maybe someday over the top video will be a realistic alternative to
traditional distribution of content, but it’s not now and its not this
year or next or the next and probably not the year after that.

(Image source: electronicallyobsessed.com)

Support VatorNews by Donating

Read more from related categories

Related News