TV américaine N°14: to cut or not to cut... the cord?

.
That is the question. And it is not an easy one to answer.

Why "cut the cord"? 

• Economic reason: to save money (The "official poverty rate" is 15.1 % of Americans in 2010. Source: Census Bureau, September 2011). Monthly pay-TV bills average 73 $ (source: LRG, 2011) and 91.44 $ for cable + broadband (without add-ons or premium channels, of course. Source: SNL Kagan, Feb. 2012).
• To regain some degrees of economic liberty: with free terrestrial TV (broadcast), you receive all the commercial networks available in your area (DMA) and their local stations; you get PBS as well as a few other stations (indies, etc.). Plus you can rent DVDs from kiosks (Redbox, etc.). No cord anymore (but how about the Web connection?)
• Also, cord-cutting and unbundling have a transaction cost (paperwork, changing email address, phone number, etc.) which act as as barrier to exit.

Then come the numbers

How many TV households (TVHH) unsubscribe (churn rate), but also how many new subscribers? Among cord-cutters, how many moved for personal or professional reasons? How many moved into a nursing home? How many passed away?

According to the Convergence Consulting Group (April 2012), 1.05 million TVHH cut their subscription last year: in other words, 1% of subscribing TVHH. New subscribers were 0.11 million. All in all, since 2008, cable and satellite lost 2.65 million subscribers. Some of them now subscribe to telcos: U-verse (AT&T) or FIOS (Verizon). Some might subscribe to Netflix or Hulu+, etc. Anyway, these households did not cut the cord; they just switched cords (cf. Satellite, cable and connected TV). Nielsen call them "cord swappers".

Among the households that did unsubscribe, how many were "poor" customers who subscribed only to the cheapest services? MSO and satellite companies prefer usually to focus on "good" customers and they might want to lose "poor" customers in order to increase their margin with good ones - those who buy many services (DVR, multiroom equipment, triple play, etc.). Subscription management is more complex  than gaining or losing subscribers.

Among households without TV sets (3 to 4% of American households), how many subscribe to broadband and only watch on tablet, computers? According to Nielsen, their number is growing. Remains to be seen.

To make a long story short: there does not seem to be such a thing as cord-cutting. There is some cord swapping. Some people watch TV only on the Net. 
.

Satellite, cable and connected TV in Europe and USA

.
What are the major trends in television distribution? How could they influence and somehow predict the development of connected TV?

• Terrestrial reception which brings free TV to homes (i.e. paid by taxes and or advertising) is declining. Its level in the USA is now at an all time low: less than 10% of US TVHH (TV households) among which there are probably also many Netflix, iTunes or Hulu customers.

• Satellite and cable
• In Europe, television comes to homes mainly through direct satellite (DTH: 33,7%). (Source: SES, Satellite Monitor, 2012).
• In the USA, satellite increases its market share. Alternative Delivery Systems (ADS, i.e. telco + direct satellite) reaches 31.1 % of American TVHH). According to TVB, paid TV is already delivered mostly by ADS in 34 DMA.
• Cable is king in the USA, despite all talk about cord-cutting (60.4 % in 2011, 10% less than ten years ago).

Marketshares in %, 2011, TVHH.
ADS = telcos + satellite

• Digitalization takes over, in both Europe and the USA, making room for broadband, HD, DVR and some interactivity.
• Already 75% of European HH are digital. More than 90% of TVHH in Spain, UK, France and Italy, but only 76% in the Netherlands, 71% in Germany, 58% in Switzerland, 54% in Portugal. (Source: SES, Satellite Monitor, 2012).
• In the USA, digital TV is almost everywhere. Digital penetration in basic cable reaches 79.4%. (Source : NCTA, 2011).

Gatekeepers ?

On the one hand, digitalization makes connected TV possible. On the other hand, cable and satellite operators and now phone operators (Orange, Verizon, AT&T, etc.) may want to keep companies like Yahoo, Google or Apple from accessing the television set and its set-top box. Interactivity is becoming the USP of cable/telco/satellite multi-system operators (cf. tablets, multiscreentasking, social TV,VOD, TV EveryWhere, XFINITY, UltraViolet, etc.). Smart TV is their business. And, of course, smart advertising.

• N.B. This opposition concerning connected TV is exactly in line with what we have seen when the SOPA was debated in January 2012.

Major operators are powerful in the USA where they can act as gatekeepers: Comcast, Time Warner Cable, DirecTV, Dish Network hold more than half of the paid TV market; some of them are closely related to studios and national networks (Comcast / Universal), Time Warner Cable). They work with DVR (TiVo, etc.). These operators not only bring TV but also broadband to households.
Connected TV will not happen without them.

Europe, where terrestrial TV is digital and still strong (32%), is the market most vulnerable to newcomers like Google, Apple or Yahoo! That's where HbbTV (industry standard for Hybrid Broadcact Broadband TV) will be so decisive. The list of its members is impressive and counts, among others:

• satellite companies : Eutelsat, SES ASTRA
• major TV companies : Canal+, TF1, RTL, BBC, france televisions, SRG SSR, EBU, Mediaset, etc.)
• software companies or STB manufacturers like Opera, Cisco / NDS, Ocean Blue, etc.

Will HbbTV consortium be strong and determined enough to resist Web companies such as Apple, Google, etc.?
.