<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>CableTechTalk &#187; iTunes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cabletechtalk.com/tag/itunes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com</link>
	<description>Technology &#38; Telecommunications Policy Discussion</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2011 19:44:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Does A La Carte Always Make Sense?</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/a-la-carte/2008/08/04/does-a-la-carte-always-make-sense/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/a-la-carte/2008/08/04/does-a-la-carte-always-make-sense/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:38:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Paul Rodriguez</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[a la carte]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Apple TV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[broadband video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cable prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iTunes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pricing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/a-la-carte/2008/08/04/does-a-la-carte-always-make-sense/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the last few months, a number of blogs have written about &#8220;a la carte&#8221; consumption of content as a cost-savings measure. In these tough economic times, managing your entertainment and information budget is certainly a good idea. But much of the discussion I&#8217;ve seen fails to note that this approach isn&#8217;t going to work [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the last few months, a number of blogs have written  about &#8220;a la carte&#8221; consumption of content <a href="http://b-ruunermediajunkie.blogspot.com/2008/08/tv-la-carte.html">as a cost-savings measure</a>.  In these tough economic times, managing your entertainment and information  budget is certainly a good idea. But much of the discussion I&#8217;ve seen fails to  note that this approach isn&#8217;t going to work for everyone.</p>
<p>For example, in early June the <a href="http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/blog/the-a-la-carte-method-use-psychology-against-yourself-to-save-money">I  Will Teach You To Be Rich blog</a> argued in favor of cutting down on unneeded  subscriptions: &#8220;Instead of paying for a ton of channels you never watch on  cable, buy only the episodes you watch for $1.99 each off iTunes.&#8221; (Also  see the <a href="http://lifehacker.com/395086/do-subscriptions-really-save-you-money">discussion  of this tactic on Lifehacker</a>.) You also often see people talking about how little  cable television they watch.</p>
<ul type="disc">
<li><a href="http://theshortbus-james.blogspot.com/2008/07/what-is-wrong.html">The       Short Bus</a>: &#8220;After all, I only watch about 5 or 6 channels &#8211; none       of them are a major network.&#8221;</li>
<li><a href="http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67807">jetdawgg       at Leatherneck.com forum</a>: &#8220;Frankly, the only Time-Warner channel       I REALLY want is Turner Classic Movies. Maybe a couple others.&#8221;</li>
</ul>
<p>I&#8217;ve also seen people argue that they only watch a  couple of cable series. And if you&#8217;re a low-level consumer of such content,  perhaps this makes sense. More and more television programming is available  online, either as <a href="http://www.hulu.com/">free streaming video</a> or  available for purchase on an a la carte basis via services such as <a href="http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/">iTunes</a> or <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Unbox-Video-Downloads/b?ie=UTF8&amp;node=16261631">Unbox</a>.  <a href="http://500yearsfromnow.blogspot.com/2008/08/mission-statement.html">Some have asked</a> <a href="http://seekingalpha.com/article/82735-is-apple-tv-a-viable-replacement">if  Apple TV could be a replacement</a>. As the supply of broadband video grows, the theory  goes, consumers can turn to an online supply of a la carte video to satisfy  their needs, saving money at the same time.</p>
<p>So, let&#8217;s run some numbers. According to estimates from <a href="http://www.snl.com/media_comm/">SNL Kagan</a>, the Average Monthly  Price for Expanded Basic Programming Packages (<a href="http://www.ncta.com/Statistic/Statistic/AverageMonthlyPrice.aspx">2007  estimate</a>) was $42.76. You can buy some television programs on iTunes for  $1.99. Once you&#8217;ve purchased 21 or so shows at two bucks a pop, you&#8217;ve now  matched the price of expanded basic cable service. At that rate, you could  watch one show each weekday night, but you&#8217;ll have to take the weekends off.  But if you want to watch more than that, then subscribing to cable makes more  sense.</p>
<p>Another measurement is to take the average basic cable  rates from SNL Kagan and divide it by average basic cable network viewing time  from the <a href="http://www.thecab.tv/">Cabletelevision Advertising Bureau</a> to obtain the Average Price Per Viewing Hour, which was 24<strong>.</strong>5 cents in 2006 (<a href="http://www.cabletechtalk.com/ncta-actions/2008/01/25/the-price-of-cable/">see  an explanation of PPVH here</a>). Since a typical hour drama can be purchased  on iTunes for $1.99 &#8211; which makes their Price Per Viewing Hour about 8 times  more. Keep in mind that a half-hour show <em>also</em> costs $1.99, making the  PPVH for fare like <em>Family Guy</em> and <em>South</em><em> Park</em> even higher.</p>
<p>Naturally, there are a couple of built-in assumptions  to the a la carte argument: how <em>little</em> TV you will watch and how <em>much</em> cable programming you can get online. A <a href="http://www.nielsen.com/media/2008/pr_080708.html">recent Nielsen report  on TV, Internet and Mobile usage</a> found that the average American <a href="http://www.nielsen.com/media/2008/pr_080708_download.pdf">is watching 127  hours, 15 minutes per month</a>. To watch that amount of video at $1.99 per  hour would cost more than $250 per month. And if half of those shows were  half-hour sitcoms (also at $1.99) the monthly bill would come in at $380. The  people above who are quoted as watching so little television fall well below  the average.</p>
<p>What&#8217;s interesting about the discussion of this topic  is that there&#8217;s an assumption of how much video is watched online by consumers.  Sure, there are certain groups who watch a ton of video online and watch  little, if any, cable TV. But that Nielsen study found that Americans are not  only using the Internet more, but are watching even more television. You might  think this doesn&#8217;t apply to young people, but the Nielsen study says that 18-24  year olds are watching over 103 hours a month, and <a href="http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/6/study-38-of-college-students-not-watching-online-video">a  recent study from Alloy Media + Marketing</a> found that 38% of college  students aren&#8217;t watching online video at all.</p>
<p>This is not to say that there&#8217;s not growth in  broadband video. For example, <a href="http://dailymarauder.com/2008/07/15/online-servicesinteractive-media-266/">37  million episodes were watched on ABC.com&#8217;s video player during the month of  May, or a total of 815 million minutes of full-length content.</a>. There&#8217;s a  good deal of broadcast programming online. But your local news isn&#8217;t available  online. And while some cable programming is available, much of it is not. <a href="http://www.videonuze.com/blogs/?2008-06-11/Cable-s-Sub-Fees-Matter-A-Lot/&amp;id=1874">Will  Richmond explored this issue</a> and explained the importance of cable  programmer&#8217;s dual revenue model.</p>
<p>Finally, <a href="http://www.tnr.com/booksarts/story.html?id=3bc0e959-3b4e-440d-9b99-69078429b82c">the  study of economics</a> demonstrates that people&#8217;s mental states can affect  their perception of this equation. You may think a subscription makes more  sense because you pay once and get a lot. If you consume less than you think, a  subscription approach might not be right for you. But when it comes to  consuming television, consider your cell phone.</p>
<p>Remember a few years ago when cell phones were new?  You got one and selected a simple plan, because you were only going to use the  phone for emergencies. And then you got in the habit of using the device,  because it&#8217;s so convenient, and then your bill went through the roof. Today,  it&#8217;s smart to get a plan with a lot of hours or unlimited texting or some other  pricing system that&#8217;s economical. Similarly, if you truly only watch a very  small amount of cable TV, and if your favorite program is available in some  other form, then it might make sense to purchase your video programming by  episode. But if you watch an average amount of television, which is more than 4  hours a day according to Nielsen, then one of cable&#8217;s various packages (basic,  expanded basic, digital, etc.) definitely makes more sense.</p>
<p><strong>UPDATE:</strong>  I just noticed that <a href="http://www.cabletechtalk.com/tech-discussions/2008/01/08/next-big-thing-the-future-of-television/">this January post during CES</a> touches on many of these same issues.</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/a-la-carte/2008/08/04/does-a-la-carte-always-make-sense/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

