Bet 3
A profitable video-on-demand service aimed at consumers will offer 10,000 titles to 5 million subscribers by 2010.
Bet 3
Duration 8 years (02002-02010)
Predictor
Jim Griffin
Challenger
Gordon Bell
Stakes $2,000
will go to Electronic Frontier Foundation (www.eff.org) if Griffin wins,
or The Computer History Museum (www.computerhistory.org) if Bell wins.
Add your voice to a conversation with the bettors:
Bookmark this bet, and share it with friends:
Audio's been the canary-in-the-coal-mine of digital interactivity, with digital video riding its coattails, and it's no wonder because, done right, video requires lots more digits than audio.
The winding course of the broadband river to the home is straightening bionomically, as Michael Rothschild might put it (http://www.bionomics.orgwww.bionomics.org). What the entertainment ecosystem demands, the network flaura and fauna will supply. We are the beneficiaries of a rising tide of digitization, a bionomic flood, and the global competition for our attention (and wallets).
The transition from acoustic to electric was far more savage than that from electric to digital. Rights holders eventually figure out the customer is always right (whether or not we agree with the customer, no copyright law can force open a wallet), and here too money will find a more efficient path between artist and fan regardless of the rightholder reluctance.
Ultimately, interactivity will be direct to centralized servers. In the meantime, buffers and caches will cover for network inefficiency, whether controlled by the network or the end-user, as with smart buffers like Tivo (now sporting USB ports) or Replay (now shipping with Ethernet built-in).
Several factors need to come into play before VOD can find its market. You need sufficient bandwidth and universality - at least 1Mbps, which that is well beyond what's available today at the consumer level. But then again, consumers may trade quality for convenience.
You need a codec that can deliver a television-like picture at that data rate, but progress has been made.
You need a connection between the servers and televisions - I don't think five million people will want to watch movies on their PC screens while they're checking their email. You need services that offer attractive selection and terms. Finally, the content suppliers have to decide to sell their stuff in bit form. All of these things need to happen.
You should be able to get something like video-on-demand today, using a relatively unobtrusive caching arrangement, on cable, DSL, or even satellite. The fact that you can't - after so many years of imagining it, developing the core technologies, and experimenting with business models - leads me to expect that VOD isn't likely to happen within a decade. Progress has been nil.
I wish I were more optimistic. I watch TV while I exercise, and it annoys the hell out of me. I sit there with my clicker - going between MSNBC, Headline News, NBC, ABC, CBS - and they all show their commercials at the same time! With VOD or even today's PVRs, I wouldn't have to put up with that. But I don't expect to give up my clicker any time soon.
A profitable video-on-demand service aimed at consumers will offer 10,000 titles to 5 million subscribers by 2010.
Intel and some of it's partners are currently putting together a bussiness model that will do just this. If it gets off the ground, then this bet will be all but won.
Personally, I'd like to see that kind of thing more, and less of traditional TV. But thats cause I can't stand ADDs.
Profitability is the killer definition here. Is the company that eventually offers this service to be profitable? (Sony, Viacom,etc...) or is the specific VOD division to be profitable. I think the latter is a stretch even by 2020.
"Personally, I'd like to see that kind of thing more, and less of traditional TV. But thats cause I can't stand ADDs"
Probably be cheaper to get a TiVo. ^_^
When making this bet I saw the key to be Option Value. As my statement makes clear, it is clear that customers want to pull that which is otherwise pushed, and customers ruling markets means that interactivity will grow and dominate, whether provided by centralized network efficiency or smart buffering devices like Tivos.
I live in clearwater fl, I work for Time warner we have a service called VOD Video On Demand people can order movies straight through there digital cable box. Also we have something called HOD HBO On Demand where you can order HBO shows right from your digital box. and im not sure on how many titles we have on it maybe 100,
I came here after reading this silly bet in Wired magazine. It's a rediculous bet because I have had Icontrol (as Timewarner calls it) for over a year here in Austin, TX. I believe it is being tested in 4 major cities right now, perhaps more now. It is pausable, stoppable, fast forward and rewindable, and you have 8 hours to watch it as many times as you want. It costs $3.99 for new movies and older movies cost $1.99. I have HBO on demand also, as the previous poster had mentioned, which is $6.95 a month. There is probably 150 movies or so, and all new big movies are added as they come out, so it's growing daily.
Someone forgot to do some research, hah.
Rob Nance
Austin, TX
I don't think there are 10,000 DVDs, VHS, whatever available. So the bet is silly because of wording, and premise. 5 million is no problem, add a couple more cities to what they have now and you can "claim" that.
As regards Nance's comments, the questions of scalability and market acceptance are key to broader deployment, but I can't disagree with the assessment that this will happen: That's my bet. And Gordon, whom I respect immensely, thinks scalability and especially the market may prove its downfall. Regardless, it's not a silly bet -- I consider it a good bet for me (I agree it's likely to happen) but with sufficient variables to make it interesting.
I believe that this bet is nearer to being completed than Mr. Griffin may have realized. Currently I am installing VOD systems for a company in Pennsylvania, and Cablevision has had their system up for a number of months now. The only real question in my mind is how the profitablity is expected to be proven. For the company overall, or for the VOD system alone?
Respectfully, and mindful that I DO believe I will win this bet, I must dissent from those who write that this is such a foregone conclusion that it isn't worthy of the bet.
Indeed, this bet is today a long, long way from resolution. The number of titles requires an shift in rights-holder acceptance and the number of users is nowhere near the bet's threshold. It will require a confluence of content and marketplace acceptance that is now purely hypothetical. Even VOD via PVR (ala Tivo, Replay) is under a million users.
Stay tuned. I will win this bet, but it won't be clear for years. Yes, systems are in the process of installation and so forth, but content and users are another story.
The technology breakthrough will be public by summer 2003.
It will come from an unknown company.
True VoD service will be commonplace, as traditional broadcast and telephone service is today. Not only will it exist, but it will be enhanced to provide consumers with the ability to create their own programming schedules for any stored video content to include television programs past and future.
By the way I want to qualify VoD as: a service that allows any of its subscribers the ability to watch any stored content at a time they schedule.
It is not:
being able to watch movies pre selected by cable or satalite service providers at preset times, that is Pay Per View.
10,000 titles is pushing the envelope. A recent article in Cable & Satellite Communications International ( http://www.cscinet.co.uk ) concerned Starz On Demand SVOD service.
Quote "Starz has a massive library of 4500 movies"
Whether there will be a profitable company with more than twice that number of movies in eight years time is not something I'd care to bet on either way.
I agree with you, however I think your 10,000 titles and 5 million subscribers is a little low. GOOD BET!
believe it or not, the x-box with it's built in hardrive and the playstation2 (hardrive to come early next year) should allow this to happen. a hardrive equipped game system connected to broadband would allow the download of a movie for 1-time or multiple viewing. the software to play the movie could be given on dvdrom or also be a download. a full-length feature film compressed with the divx codec weighs in at 600-1200mbs and takes a couple hours to download over cable/dsl. streaming after maybe a half-hour wait would probaby be allright. all video game systems are capable of playing compressed movies (every modern game has this). hey, does anybody want to go into business???
No single service to a single group of customers will hit those numbers even in that far distant time frame. The net works differently than that... and Content owners have missed (and will continue to miss) it for 3 reasons: 1) Technophobia coupled with crippling ego (too cool to look dumb they fear the pipe) 2) Misguided content protectionism (go back and watch 'The Power of Myth'... again! It's the 'story' damnit!) 3) We aren't flipping pages... we're flipping channels. The mod consumer of now content (wrapped up in the headspace of a new tech) needs new story telling styles.
And now to flip the relevance argument. I'm not a gamer (but i play one on the internet) perhaps the gamezones have already proven Jim (and myself) correct. Are there 10k immersive, multi-player games online? Are there 5 million players?
- Willi
pray for peace. it's life or death.
NetFlix claims to have more than 13,500 titles and more than one million members. You order the movie on the Internet, you just can't watch it until all of the bits of the movie arrive. They just happen to be delivered to your mailbox and you have to put the bits into your computer or dvd player.
Would that qualify if they hit 5 million subscribers?
-Dave
Let's move back to the days when all video signals came over the air. They had this crazy idea about stringing cable to everyone's house. "Ha! won't happen" they said. Fifteen or so years later, just about everyone "in town" was paying too much for cable. And we have about three cable companies in the whole country gouging us every chance they get. If a similar grab happens with VOD, we'll see this big video on demand company before the bet's time limit.
Summer of 2003 is upon us. Can you say more about this unknown company or any other details?
"The Computer History Museum" is so screwed. But, why wait till 2010? If technology has proved anything feasible is possible, then all we need is the money to do it. And there's plenty of money in VOD because of its obvious profit making capacity.
Couch potatoes, rejoice!
Comcast and other cable services already offer VOD all over the USA, and Apple's iTunes store sells millions of songs and videos (viewable via computer, iPod, and on your big screen with the AppleTV.
game over.
A torrent server company, such as mininova, or ISOhunt has over 10,000 titles. They are profitable already, and they have way more than 5 million users. Mininova had over 10million different people download files from them last month. If you count this then the bet is already over.
Companies like Cox and Comcast, are already doing this, not at the proper scale yet but soon.
Ironic Mr. Bells Employer Will most likely be the demise of his challange.
Businessweek:
Next for Netflix: Xbox 360?
http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/may2008/id20080530_391201.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index_innovation+%2Bamp%3B+design
"It strikes me that the right business model for Microsoft and Netflix is that they both participate for free, and I think the idea is that Netflix has 8 million subs in the U.S. and Microsoft has probably pretty close to that many Xbox Live members in the U.S
http://www.roku.com/netflixplayer/
Clearly, the mail-to-your-home DVD giant has a bigger goal. As of now they are claiming to have 10,000 Films and TV Series at the touch of a button with their $100 player (and a $9 a month fee).
5 million subscribers is not much of a jump (not only because they already have 8+ million DVD subscribers but) especially given that we're just half-done with 2008.
I would like to propose this bet will be filed as Successful w/ regards to M.A. Bell's comment above on June 11th.
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/community/events/e32008/articles/0714-netflixteamup.htm
Netflix, with over 100,000 titles and 10,000 downloadable/online titles, is partnering with Microsoft's Xbox Live service to offer those titles to the online gamer community.
According to this Jan. 6th 2008 article from Kotaku(http://kotaku.com/341399/xbox-live-10-million-gold-subscribers) Xbox Live has over 10 million "Gold" subscribers and an undisclosed number of Silver subscribers. As of the article's writing, Microsoft claimed 17.7mil consoles sold. This article (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/jul08/07-14instantstreampr.mspx) from Microsoft, July 14th 2008, claims 12 million subscribers - implying that their Netflix service is targeted to that user base.
Please sign in to comment.