Content vs. Distribution
What happens when Content squares off against Distribution in a battle over the audience?
ContentDeveloper.com has been focusing recently on the variety of strategies brands and content owners are deploying to transform themselves into their own distribution platforms. An interesting twist on this emerging trend is currently playing out here in San Antonio and in other markets across the country between the NFL Network and Time Warner Cable.
The contest pits arguably one of the most attractive content brands in the US against one of the most powerful content distribution companies, all happening with both parties caught in the crosswinds of our quickly changing distribution landscape. If there’s a matchup that can tell us whether Content or Distribution has hand today, this may be the one.
But could this high profile negotiation also have larger implications for the industry as a whole due to one of the party’s somewhat peculiar pivot in their position regarding a la carte programming. More about that in a moment.
First, the distribution issue.
If you haven’t been following the story, the game breaks down basically like this – the NFL wants to be on the expanded basic cable programming tier where the majority of cable subscribers can access it. Time Warner Cable wants the NFL Network to be on a premium sports tier where cable subscribers will have to pay extra to get it.
Being a Time Warner Cable customer I’m among those unable to enjoy the new Thursday Night and Saturday Night Football. Watching those games and the 24-7 football related content the NFL Network offers would be nice, but so far it looks like it’s not quite a big enough deal to most people (myself included) to go through the hassle of dropping cable and setting up a dish.
A good measure of this audience complacency though will be the Cowboys game scheduled for Saturday night on the NFL Network. San Antonio is often among the highest rated Cowboys’ television markets right behind DFW, so if this can’t provide any Romomentum for a breakthrough then perhaps nothing will.
Time Warner San Antonio President John Owen Jr.‘s recent characterization of the situation as reported here would suggest that they remain comfortable enough with the stalemate:
We’re not even negotiating at this point in time.
I wonder if that position might’ve softened some if U-verse was currently available in more than just a few neighborhoods?
Now, about the a la carte…
Did one of the plays run during this matchup produce a lingering injury that could impact one of the teams in other big games down the road? My clumsy sports metaphor is referring to this rationale offered by TWC on why the NFL Network should be on a higher priced premium tier:
Not all of our customers are interested in the NFL. Why should they pay for that high-priced programming?
That’s from Time Warner Cable San Antonio spokesman Jon Gary Herrera as reported here. It’s a position worthy of some support, but then you have to wonder about this:
The channels you don’t watch subsidize the channels you do watch.
That’s from the National Cable Television Association regarding their position against a la carte pricing.
The NFL Network has picked up on this vulnerability as well, offering a response on their I Want NFL Network site:
Your cable company says it thinks only the people who want the channel should have to pay for it. This is not how they package their programming to you, is it? You get a whole bunch of channels you don
|
Not being a big Cowboy fan, I went out Saturday night looking for the Spurs game. What I found was that the establishments that had the Cowboy game were ridiculously packed, standing room only. The last time I saw crowds like that was last years Rose Bowl. The establishments that did not have the Cowboy game were airing the Spurs game and were completely empty. Not having the NFL network on TWC might not be so great for all NFL fans but certain establishments were racking up cash because of it.