NBC will make 1,000 hours of live and recorded Olympic coverage available online... but only for those who pay for cable, satellite, or mobile TV. They are working in partnership with all the major MSO's: Comcast, TWC, DirecTV, Dish, AT&T, Verizon, etc....

This is a new flavor of TV Everywhere, one pushed by a content programmer (NBC) rather than an MSO (such as Comcast or Time Warner Cable).

Story:

http://www.mediabuyerplanner.com/entry/47676/nbcu-offers-1000-hours-of-streaming-olympics-coverage-to-those-who-pay-for-/

This is good analysis:

With Comcast's acquisition of NBCU finally official this morning (technically, it's not an acquisition, but rather the creation of a JV in which Comcast holds 51% and GE 49%, until GE inevitably begins unwinding its position), it's time to assess the winners, losers and unknowns from the deal, the biggest the media industry has seen in a long while. I listened to the Comcast investor call this morning with Brian Roberts, Steve Burke and Michael Angelakis and reviewed their presentation.

Read story here.

CNBC broke the news today: http://www.cnbc.com/id/34225581

We will have a solid year to wait for this deal to pass through all the regulatory hoops and hurdles.

That will give us time to consider so many really interesting questions:

• What will this mean for Hulu? What will happen to NBC's 30%stake in Hulu, the sworn enemy of Comcast?
• Will DirecTV and other MSOs respond in-kind by buying up content as well?
• Will this start a content land-grab among the MSO's who fear their bread-and-butter distribution business will evaporate over the next decade?
• How will owning NBC impact Comcast's On Demand Online (TV Everywhere) initiative to bring TV online?
• Will this deal keep Steve Jobs up at night? Will Comcast pull NBC shows from iTunes (again)?

http://us.mobile.reuters.com/m/FullArticle/p.rdt/CMERGER/nmergersNews_uUSWEN683820091120

Sent via BlackBerry

The Wall Street Journal ran a story today discussing the potential regulatory challenges to a Comcast acquisition of NBC Universal.

What these stories seem to miss is that this a DEFENSIVE move by Comcast, not an aggressive move against its rivals.

Comcast is NOT buying NBC to seek an "unfair" advantage in its cable markets.

The real motivation behind this deal (I believe) is survival. Comcast understands that the price point for distributing TV into homes is going to fall dramatically in the coming years. Comcast's 3 distribution products, Voice - TV - Internet, are collapsing into just one, single product: Internet. This poses a huge threat to Comcast's top line.

As such, Comcast is hedging through diversification into content, moving up the media value chain. Comcast will be looking to replace lost revenue in distribution with revenue from content (advertising, subscriptions, etc). At it's core, it's that simple.

Therefore, I believe Comcast will be willing to live with any reasonable regulatory restrictions the government slaps on this deal.

..Still waiting on whether Vivendi, which owns 20% of NBC, will agree to this price point. From there, it may take a full year for this deal to clear the regulatory hurdles.

From the WSJ:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703808904574523971545652140.html

Rumors are flying high today about an iTune's $30 / month "TV Subscription" service. It would give users "all you can eat" downloads of current (and some past?) episodes of TV shows - playable your computer, iPhone, iPod, or even up on your TV. No need to pay Comcast anymore, right?

Sounds great for users, but it does force the TV networks and cable channels into an uncomfortable and unwanted political mess. The content providers remain quite reliant on fees paid to them by the cable / satellite companies; it represents a large percentage of their overall revenue, in fact. Further, iTunes downloads would potentially erode their primary revenue stream: broadcast advertising. Why would NBC, Fox, CBS, etc risk any of that?

While Apple would love to disrupt the TV industry as thoroughly as it did the music industry, by disintermediating the MSO's (cable co's), I just don't think it will be that easy. In the case of TV, unlike music, the content providers hold the cards and they have little interest in pissing off their existing distribution partners. That's ESPECIALLY true if the MSO's go on an expected content binge (a la Comcast gobbling up NBC). Story:

http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20091102/apples-itunes-pitch-tv-for-30-a-month/#content-main

Even prior to sealing an acquisition deal with Comcast, NBC has agreed to require all online Olympics viewers to prove they are cable or satellite subscribers in order to watch live streaming of the 2010 Winter Olympics. This will be the first real, widespread test of the TV Everywhere concept.

Story:
http://newteevee.com/2009/11/03/watch-the-olympics-live-online-if-you-paid-your-cable-bill/

Let's all say a collective "Duh!"

If Comcast buys NBC, Comcast won't be allowed to remove NBC channels from TimeWarner or DirecTV offerings. "Duh!"

If Comcast buys NBC, Comcast won't be allowed to delay airings of NBC shows on rival MSO offerings. "Duh!"

If Comcast buys NBC, Comcast won't be allowed to limit online viewing of NBC content to only Comcast subscribers. Again, a no-brainer "duh!".

Comcast's interest in NBC is not to gain unfair distribution advantage. It is to move up the media value chain, closer to content, diversify its assets, and acquire a "safer" revenue stream as cable TV increasingly becomes a "dumb pipe".

Comcast won't screw up those objectives by pursuing clearly short-sighted and probably illegal content hording (which also severely limits the value of the content!).

Here's the WSJ blog post:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/posttech/2009/11/a_comcast_buy_of_nbc_raises_sl.html

Sent via BlackBerry

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-comcast-so-very-close-to-nbcu-deal-vivendi-talks-still-continuing/

Sent via BlackBerry