The Cable Industry Is Absolutely Terrified Of Set Top Box Competition
from the hey-we're-innovatin'-over-here dept
Last week, we noted that the FCC has proposed new guidelines that would bring some much-needed competition to the cable TV set top box market. Data shows that 99% of consumers pay something on average to $230 a year in set top box rental fees, despite much of this dated hardware being worth little to nothing. Collectively, the cable industry pulls in around $20 billion annually in set top box rental fees, which are fairly consistently increased once or twice a year. Unsurprisingly, whenever the FCC has tried to do something about this proprietary, captive market, the industry becomes downright hysterical.That was exemplified last week when the FCC simply proposed requiring cable operators deliver programming data to third-party hardware using any accepted standard they choose. Cable operators can still provide the traditional set top box (and consumers can still rent them), the industry would simply suddenly face competition for what's been captive income. But with $20 billion in annual revenues at risk, the industry quickly got to work trying to argue that the FCC's plan would demolish the very fabric or time/space and result in no limit of untold harm to consumers.
Despite the reality that most cable boxes (and many executives) are outdated relics of a dying era, the cable industry stuck to one central theme last week: the FCC's plan is "big tech's" attempt to thwart all of the amazing innovation occurring in the cable industry. A "diverse" group of cable companies and broadcasters calling itself the "Future of TV" coalition quickly launched to deride the FCC's "attack on innovation," with one press release circulated by the group going so far as to suggest that Google has been holding secret meetings at the FCC that undermine the cable industry's relentless thirst for...diversity:
"...Secrecy and subterfuge shouldn’t be tolerated and professional staffers who know the ropes and are unlikely to be swayed by a flashy demo and a Golden Ticket. The AllVid scheme being flogged by Google and the FCC is unfair and destructive to values held far too dearly on Capitol Hill – undermining free market competition and putting a government thumb on the scale for powerful incumbents like Google, and making it harder for those serving communities of color and providing diverse and independent programming to make the video ecosystem work.There's no secret cabal in the fact that Google, Apple, Roku, TiVo and countless other companies have lobbied for years for an open cable set top box market. But the cable industry has lobbied ferociously to dismantle any attempt to bring this goal to fruition (including CableCARD). So to mock Google for "secretly" lobbying for broader competition is both strange and hilarious. The argument that more robust set top box competition will somehow hurt diversity is equally absurd (more choice and lower product cost is good for diversity), yet it seems to pop up all over the Internet in mysteriously placed editorials.
But credit the cable industry for one thing, it knows how to rally around a central message, even if that message is absolute bullshit. The central theme of this blog post by the industry's biggest lobbying organization (the NCTA) was cable's amazing knack for innovation:
"We see these innovations almost daily, which is why it’s so strange that government feels compelled to insert itself in the mix in order to do Big Tech’s bidding. By forcing new government mandates on network providers and content creators, the FCC may intend to reward Google handsomely, but in the process it will ignore contractual freedoms, weaken content diversity and security, undermine important consumer protections like privacy, and stall the creative and technical innovation that is driving positive changes in today’s TV marketplace.Likewise, a blog post by Comcast largely involves the company patting itself on the back for being incredibly, awesomely innovative:
"Comcast is responding with our innovative X1 platform, and enabling access on a growing array of devices. Like other traditional TV distributors, online video distributors, networks, and sports leagues, Comcast is using apps to deliver its Xfinity service to popular customer-owned retail devices. These apps are wildly popular with consumers. Comcast customers alone have downloaded our apps more than 20 million times. This apps revolution is rapidly proliferating, and we are working with others in the industry and standards-setting bodies to expand apps to reach even more devices.Oooh, step back FCC, Comcast is developing apps! The problem is, and the insular cable industry forgets this constantly, that absolutely nobody likes or believes the cable industry outside of the cable industry. Cable providers continue to have the worst customer satisfaction and support ratings of any U.S. industry or government agency (no small feat). So when "big cable" breathlessly insists it's just trying to protect its monopoly over cable set top hardware to the benefit of minorities and puppies, it's unclear who the hell would be daft enough to actually take them seriously.
Given these exciting, pro-consumer marketplace developments, it is perplexing that the FCC is now considering a proposal that would impose new government technology mandates on satellite and cable TV providers with the purported goal of promoting device options for consumers.
Here's the thing: if the cable industry's existing set top box systems are as "innovative" as the industry claims, surely competition will bear that out? When faced with a myriad of new hardware options, customers will clearly want to continue paying Comcast a significant amount of money for a traditional cable box, right? If the cable industry is half as adaptive as it claimed last week, surely this sudden influx of competition will be like a gnat at the ear of a god of innovation. Unless of course this prattling on about innovation is just the insecure braying of an industry absolutely terrified by the foreign specter of real competition?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: allvid, cable, cable tv, competition, fcc, innovation, set top boxes
Companies: comcast, ncta
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
To be fair...
As such I don't think it's fair to say that they're not innovative, the issue is that they're only innovative in a very specialized way, that of 'How can we get more money from our customers without having to actually do anything to earn it?'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
nah, that's not the real innovation
I've been to slack/sloppy/lazy to change, but issues like this motivate me. Sadly, I have 8 months left on a lease where cable is part of it. When I sign again, I will not check the cable box (unintentional pun left in place). If these are the rules of their game, then I will refuse to play.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: nah, that's not the real innovation
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: nah, that's not the real innovation
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: nah, that's not the real innovation
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Real Innovation According To Them
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Another innovation. Spying with cameras and mics built into the boxes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ ] Idiot
[ ] Crook
[ ] Monopolistic Asshats
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I couldn't agree more, cable dudes. So why don't you set the example? In the field of hardware and software, there's another special word that means the same thing as "secret": proprietary. Give up your proprietary systems and switch to an open standard, and we'll believe you don't tolerate harmful secrets.
Until then, just go away and let the adults talk in peace.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We called Comcast and found out that they had scheduled a tech visit to our house, without our permission or knowledge and apparently were going to just show up and try to talk us into it.
Their Rep swore they were going to call back (Oh really! Suuuure....) and of course, never did.
Of course, we can keep our legacy boxes, at $30 a month, That alone is almost half the price of switching to the local Microwave internet carrier. Even if their system barely works, it's becoming temping just to cut Comcast off entirely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So what happens when
This is what I would expect from an industry that has had a cash cow taken from it,
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Incredibly, awesomely innovative"
How can you deny their incredible, awesome, daily innovations?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Doesn't even matter
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sony's Playstation Vue
The only thing that the cable companies have "innovated" is a sub par viewing experience with outdated, hard to control hardware and cumbersome remotes!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sony's Playstation Vue
The only thing that the cable companies have "innovated" is a sub par viewing experience with outdated, hard to control hardware and cumbersome remotes!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
How Congress Will Read This
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"contractual freedoms"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "contractual freedoms"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: "contractual freedoms"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Um. Every tv show in existence is uploaded as a commercial-free mkv/mp4/pickyourformat file within a day of being aired already. Their objections have nothing to do with piracy, and everything to do with losing their insanely profitable rental fee income.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The concerns about security, privacy, piracy and diversity are quite simply bullshit cover for captive revenue protection.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
IN fact if you open it up and make it easier and a software solution, no Cable card needed where any company can support it, More people would use their service as they can now use any box they want.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Security considerations
And they can stay in denial, because there's no competition. Open things up, and there will be -- and an increasingly security- and privacy-conscious public will vote with their wallets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Couldn't all the functionality of the STB be replicated in an app or apps on Android TV? I'm sure that my TV has more computing power than my current STB.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
1) A lot of people are either disinterested in "smart" TVs due to increased price, or are simply disinterested in their features. News reports of some of them spying on their owners for advertising purposes, and general difficulty in locking them down so they don't send things you don't want them to send provides further disincentive.
2) STBs often double as DVRs. A separate box for this is likely to be more capable in the role, more capable of supporting the entire household, and easier to repair or upgrade, than a smart TV filling the same role.
3) Current STBs being underpowered is a symptom of a lack of competition. You can't go down to the store, buy the latest and greatest, and swap it out. You have to jump through hoops, and likely incur additional fees with your cable company, to upgrade to the newest of whatever they're offering. Moving to an open standard where anyone could make a STB would encourage the development of far more powerful STBs.
4) An open standard could make it possible for modern videogame consoles to serve as STBs. I'm sure Microsoft and Sony would leap at the opportunity to add that capability to the Playstation and Xbox. Having one device capable of fulfilling the role of playing videogames, internet streaming, and watching TV would be much appreciated by a number of people. As would being able to switch between the three without needing to fool with TV inputs.
5) Then there's the long lifespan, and slow upgrade time for TVs. People buy TVs, and unless they break, keep them for decades. Occasionally there will be cause to upgrade, such as the transition from bulky CRTs to flat panels, or the transition to HD, but people still usually retain their older TV either to serve as a secondary TV, or to give to younger relatives, or less fortunate acquaintances for whom even an obsolete TV would be an improvement. In short, you could stop selling anything except smart TVs which support the proposed standard today, and there would still be a need for STBs for the next 30 years.
In summary, yes a smart TV can theoretically replicate the functions of a STB. That's almost entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, as smart TVs are not universal, set top boxes, or other successor stand alone devices fulfilling the same role will be called for for decades yet, and there are additional benefits to having the roles currently performed by STBs be separate from the TV itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TL;DR
"Competition will destroy innovation. Also, Google is racist."
Seems legit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For improved customer service and/or reduced customer cost? Good luck with that!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not a lot to like
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cable cut in less than an hour.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
He'll go to the In-laws right down the street about a block away if there's a sports game on he wants to see that he can't get. His kids pretty much only watch Netflix for Kids! Hell they didn't know what a Commercial was for the longest time.
4 years ago I was paying $170 a month to Comcast for slower internet and a duel tuner HD DVR. That's $2,040 per year and it goes up and up and up every year. I them got my house and paid U-Verse $35 a month for Internet only. That's $420. I got that for a couple years. That's a $1,620 savings if prices stayed the same for 1 year!!!. U-Verse prices went up, they wouldn't make a good deal again so I went to Comcast for Internet only at $50 for 1 year which is cheaper then what U-Verse wanted to charge me for a fraction of the speed. That's $60 a year. That's still a $1440 a year savings. That's the start of things I did to save money. Why give all that money to Comcast.
People can have Comcast for 10,20,30+ years. A $1,440 savings for 10 years is $14,400. In 20 years, $28,800, and so on and so on. That looks like some retirement money or a nice trip out of the country money, etc.
You pay for your local library in taxes, why not use it? They have more then Books! Rent out ebooks without even leaving home. You can rent out DVD's and Audio books, etc. Sure they have normal books. It's a free resource. Cut the cord and free yourself. Just don't be a sucker and sign up for everything to where it costs you more money for less they what you had. You don't need SlingTV, Netflix, HULU+,. Amazon Prime, etc all at once.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why Do They Care?
If they are worried about losing control... I don't understand why. They own the pipes, so changing which box makes the connection ultimately doesn't alter anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You might also way to consider that part of the issue of set top boxes is security and control of accept to programming. Cable boxes are often the gateway / security / usage control device that keeps end users from being able to see certain types of programming.
The point is not about money, it's about control - which leads to money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Krusty
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Please tell me the irony here was deliberate...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The FCC's plan has been amazingly successful, seeing how the cable industry hasn't innovated in a very long time and shows no sign of doing so in the future either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Modern" STBs are worthless
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Modern" STBs are worthless
When we brought it to the store, they threw it into a dumpster with other trash, so at least some providers have figured out how to turn trash into a revenue stream.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sing a Little Jingle
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can see the future.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I can see the future.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I can see the future.
And everyone would have to pay the fee regardless of whether or not they rent their box
Exactly. Might not be a separate fee but a greater the usual increase in subscription fees to cover the lost revenue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trigger Warnings
Thanks a lot! I was eating while reading this and I literally had yoghurt come out of my nose. I think there's still a blueberry in there somewhere
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cable Modem Boxes Expensive
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
YAPC. Fur lined handcuffs are still handcuffs.
The idea that a a selection of two or three shiny boxes in the living room is going to create diversity is pretty myopic. What we're really talking about here is using end-node appliances to channelize Internet service. This is probably worse for the Internet than the current infrastructure.
Or more to the point, it is an indication that Comcast has finally come around to accepting Netflix, but thinks Netflix should have a box, and all other content will be even more throttled.
The difference will be now they will point and say "LOOK! SHINY! errr? Consumer Choice!" and the argument for free and open speech and trade will be even muddled.
It isn't about consumer choice. New shiny appliances will not result in the restoration of civil rights that are being usurped from the American people. The only thing that will change by adding a few new shiny boxes, is that there will be more pimps and hustlers arguing on the side of fascism.
Bits are speech. Always have been.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who'd beleve them?
Scope out the "Pay To:" line on the contribution checks the industry has been writing ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]