[padobson]

The problem with the TV is not the user experience, it's the content.

Right now, content creators have created an environment that is 10 times more complex and legally difficult to penetrate than anything the music industry did - and they're successfully defending this position against everyone, including Apple.

Television should be an experience where I can watch exactly what I want to watch, exactly when I want to watch it. No commercial interruptions, no content I feel 'meh' about. When I know what I want to watch, I should be able to select it and watch it on my terms. This should apply to new content in the same way Netflix is currently doing reruns.

Furthermore, when I don't know exactly what I want to watch, there should be a Pandora like system that creates a channel for me that will give me something I am probably going to like.

I should be able to know what my friends and people I find interesting think about what I'm watching. This should not, in any way, intrude on the watching experience, but it should never be more than glance or a remote tap away.

Finally, this entire experience should cost less than a cable subscription.

The technology is there. I could build this experience for myself using BDs, iTunes, DVR, a media server, and by programming a bunch of TV apps for something like Vizio, Samsung, or GoogleTV.

However, without the backing of content providers, something like this will never make it mass market because they are holding all the cards until a giant, like Apple, decides to take them on - and it'll be far more bloody than the battle for music.

[MatthewPhillips]

Commercials are an essential part of the television experience and the main reason why the transition to online is taking so long. Getting advertisers on board is difficult for a variety of reasons (namely that's it's a completely different model).

An episode of a TV show can cost several million dollars to make. Reality shows cost much less, obviously. ER, for example, cost 13 million per episode [1]. Do you think they can recoup that at $0.99 per episode? I don't. Can they recoup that at $9.99 per month for some subscription? No way. The only way they can pay for that is by drilling into your brain brand recognition.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_does_a_cable_television_s...

[padobson]

I'm not so sure about that.

Firstly, making the service I am describing available to customers like me doesn't mean that everyone is going to abandon the traditional delivery methods. Such a service would likely require some level of technical sophistication (i.e. plugging in an ethernet cable) where most TV users just want to turn on the TV. Traditional delivery methods, and revenue streams, would not be immediately damaged by such a solution.

Secondly, using your example of ER, there is marginal revenue per viewer. For every viewer that the new service draws from the old service, it becomes necessary to make a certain amount of money per viewer. ER's lowest rating was about 9 million viewers. At 13 million an episode, the marginal revenue per viewer (again, on the low end) would need to be around $3/viewer/episode to earn $14 million in net income per episode (that's 9M viewers x $3.00 = $27mm - $13mm cost per ep = $14mm). At 22 episodes a season, that's $66/yr for each viewer. Compare that to a digital cable service that can cost you well over $1200 dollars a year. You could buy 18 shows on the magnitude of ER for that price, and who could possibly have the emotional fortitude for that? Let alone the free time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ER_%28TV_series%29#Ratings http://money.cnn.com/2010/01/06/news/companies/cable_bill_co...

The cable television business model is a value suck. Albeit, a value suck that's not going anywhere, but I sure as heck am not going to pay for it. I'll stick to free TV, Netflix, and my BD player.

The numbers work for the sort of service I want, and I would bet that Reed Hastings would love to give it to me for $30.00/mo if he could get around the content providers who are clinging to their 20th century business model.

[ctdonath]

FWIW, Steve Jobs owns 7.3% of Disney, which is a major content provider. While still a small fraction of all content sources, he has a lot of leverage.

[qq66]

You want to watch any show you choose, at any time, without commercials, for less than a cable TV subscription.

I'd also like a Boeing 747 for $5.