Featured Post

Side-Giggers And The Future

In the advertising world, moonlighting while holding down a full time job has been around for decades. Millennials have taken it to a new he...

Saturday, March 21, 2020

Update on the Global 1%

As markets are in turmoil with the spread of the coronavirus, many of us have a bit a time to put things in perspective.

The World Inequality Database recently released data on what it takes to be in the top 1% of annual income in many countries around the world. The results were a bit surprising and here is how things fall in a number of countries:


NATION INCOME NEEDED TO BE IN TOP 1%*


India $77k
Italy                                 169
Canada                             201
France                              221
United Kingdom              248
Bahrain                            485
UAE                                 922
China.                               107
Brazil.                               176
South Africa.                    188
Australia.                          246
Germany.                          277
United States.                   488
Singapore.                        722

Source: World Inequality Database, 2020

*all figures in US dollars

In the U.S., the top .1 (one tenth of one percent) earned approximately $2 million while the .001 earned an eye-popping figure close to $10 million

Surprised by these numbers? I thought that Canada and Germany would be somewhat higher but was not surprised by low population countries in the Middle East nor Singapore, long a high growth country in Asia.

As we have often written, there will always be some measure of inequality in free market nations but it seems to be cresting right now. When I can get clear data on median income for these nations plus wait for the fallout to settle from the pandemic, I will update this information and provide more detailed comments.

Meanwhile, stay safe my friends.

If you would like to contact Don Cole directly, you may reach him at doncolemedia@gmail.com

Sunday, January 19, 2020

The Streaming Wars--Conclusions

This post will conclude (at last!) our series on The Streaming Wars


When you look at the media landscape, most of us who analyze the streaming arena come to pretty much the same forecast—Netflix and Disney will likely be the big winners when the smoke clears in five years or so. Here is how I have come to that conclusion:


1) Netflix is without question the global leader in both usage and content in January, 2020. RBC Capital (Royal Bank of Canada) projections are that 95% of their subscriber growth will come from OUTSIDE the U.S. going forward. They still may add two to three million per year in the U.S. but the explosive growth will come from overseas. Also, they are developing original content (programming) in many languages and with interest to people in far flung places around the globe. For the foreseeable future, Netflix has won the streaming war if you look at the company from a global perspective. They do have one big problem and that is that producing the tremendous amount of quality content they air each year costs a great deal of money. Last year, they were said to have spent $12 billion and some of that was borrowed. At some point, their new competitors with deep pockets such as Apple and Amazon might be a white knight and form an alliance with them. Apple would be a great partner as would Alphabet. They could provide endless financial resources and let Netflix produce world class content. If we ever go in to a global economic downturn, this might happen faster than you think. Netflix is a wonderful service but they may have to blink if competition gets fierce and money gets tight. Remember, as more financial powerhouses enter the streaming space, it will be very expensive for Netflix to bid for old TV series and films and even to produce new content. Also, and very importantly, when Netflix had streaming largely to themselves, they had pricing power. This is no longer the case so they need to grow even faster to cover their production commitments and still make money.

2) Disney is the global leader in entertainment. Their streaming service is off to a fine start but, on a worldwide basis, they have a long way to go to catch Netflix. They should get significant traction in the U.S. with their inexpensive trifecta package consisting of Disney +, ESPN + and Hulu in the U.S. Their movie studio continues to grind out blockbuster films and the merchandising profits from their franchisees are significant. Remember that they have been realistic about Disney + growth projecting that they may not see a profit until 2025. Disney is in the game for the long term but they will not kill off Netflix even though they have a lot going for them. Also, don’t forget Hulu.

3) Amazon is now the world’s leading retailer. They have positioned  Amazon Prime Video as “free” with an Amazon Prime subscription. Content is improving each year and they can buy up the rights to a great deal of high quality content if they wish. A relative handful of people get Amazon Prime Video on a subscription basis but are not Amazon Prime members. As Amazon Prime expands overseas in the next few years, their now small video division may get a real lift.

4) Apple’s foray into streaming does not make huge sense to me. They have some big names and billions to sink into content although, to date, not much is there. As written in earlier posts they have HUGE cash balances that they can deploy in to developing or buying content. So, they can do what they want. When I think of them re streaming, I wonder about Warren Buffett’s famous comment about sticking to your “circle of competence.” Why are they doing this? However, when the inevitable shakeout occurs in the space with 24-36 months, Apple could buy their way in by purchasing struggling smaller services or even an elephant such as Netflix.

5) Cable has to be in a bad spot looking ahead. Every month, thousands of American households “cut the cord.” As people analyze the new offerings, you can receive Amazon Prime Video, Netflix and Disney + for around $21 per month. Add Apple and maybe HBO and you are still under $40. Cable defenders tell me it will be hard for Disney. They are not used to service. What if they do not get billing right? What if there is a service issue with transmission? Are they equipped to respond? That is truly the pot calling the kettle black? How many of you have been tickled with the service you received from Time Warner and Comcast over the years? Disney is a mega-company. They can handle billing and will learn quickly how to best deal with service issues.

I have also been told of a straw in the wind as streaming services are gaining ground. Reputedly, some 500,000 Americans have over the last few years purchased a TV with rabbit years and a basic antenna. So, if they cancel cable and put together their customized package of streaming venues, they can get over the air TV as well. Apparently this has some appeal and there is no monthly bill. It this turns in to a trend, it may gallop modestly at some point. Cable would really get hurt. People have learned that they do not need or use 250+ channels. Streaming services give them content and that is what they want. Why spent $150 per month for cable when you can get the streaming services that you want for $20-40 per month and you still would not have time to digest all the good content? Also, whenever the next recession occurs  a number of people who will be struggling may cancel cable but still have significant entertainment options by subscribing to a few streaming services for a fraction of their then cable bill. They may never go back.

6) ROKU—their long term hope to me is to be a server for competing services. One stop shopping has lots of appeal.

7) Over the Air TV—the slow death will continue. The reversion back to rabbit ears will not be done by everyone and young adults are addicted to streaming and are deep in to commercial avoidance.

8) Minor players—consolidation will take place in a few years and programming will shift over to the majors. Some sports channels may move from cable to a successful streaming king.

So, Netflix and Disney look like good bets although Netflix may be short on cash at some point. Amazon, Apple and Alphabet (Google) have the money to do what they want for a long time and AT&T’s new HBO entry may survive as well.
The consumer will have a field day sorting through the options and financial people will do some sharp figuring sorting through the rubble of failed streamers and seeing what can be salvaged.

It is going to be very interesting and fun to watch. As Yogi Berra allegedly said, “The future ain’t what it used to be.”

If you would like to contact Don Cole directly, you may reach him at doncolemedia@gmail.com

Thursday, January 9, 2020

The Streaming Wars--Part V

Special Situations

If you take a look at the whole cavalry charge of players that is unfolding in streaming it is clear that several large players have the best chance of surviving and ultimately winning. Yet, there are a host of other players out there who are worth a look or may go the distance when consolidation occurs in the space in a few years. Today, we talk about a few of these players:

Roku

This is a both a hardware company and content platform. They provide some free content from the internet and also take some advertising and have subscriptions. They serve the majors such as Netflix and Amazon Prime plus have a modest service called Roku TV and well as sell actual TV boxes. The service could thrive if they can maintain relationships with the major providers—their low cost may have appeal to the likely wave of cable“cord-cutters” to come.

Quibi TV—this was profiled quite a while back in MR (see update on Quibi TV--MR, 5/30/19). Available only on mobile phones this spring, they will provide some original video content in “bite size” offerings of 12 minutes or less. The assumption is that it will be a go-to place for millennials and those on the move in the course of a day. Have strong management team led by Meg Whitman and Jeff Katzenberg. Here is the link to a 1/8/20 interview on Bloomberg TV—https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B0Of5XV7no

My bet is that Apple TV Plus, Disney, or Amazon Prime will gobble this service up if it clicks.

IMDB TV—somewhat quietly owned by Amazon, this contains some original programming and it’s FREE!

You Tube TV—You can view live TV here and over 70 channels from parent Google. This is not cheap—$49.99 per month at present

Acorn TV—a personal favorite with a nice mix of British and international shows, some of very old vintage. Has narrow appeal but only $5.99 per month.

There are dozens of others that are free, sports oriented, or with very narrow breadth of content. Candidly, the average consumer will have a hard time sorting them all out which may help a non-controversial carrier such as Roku that can offer several for one stop shopping.

Next up—Conclusions

If you would like to contact Don Cole directly, you may reach him at doncolemedia@gmail.com



Tuesday, December 31, 2019

The Streaming Wars--Part IV

The Financial Giants

As the streaming wars heat up, the obvious question is what will some of the greatest companies in history do? Perhaps not as obvious, but still important, is why are they are getting involved?

Let us take a look at several of the emerging players in streaming who are not pure entertainment companies:

1) Amazon—The success of the massive on-line retailer made founder Jeff Bezos the wealthiest man in the world recently. Why would a retailer get in to streaming video? Not easy to say from my perspective. Sometimes Amazon Prime Video is positioned as a free service that you receive with your Amazon Prime subscription. That certainly would have some real appeal especially with younger audiences who depend on Amazon for some much of their shopping needs. Also, if you have been following it at all closely, the service is improving quite rapidly. Some videophiles that I know gave it low marks a couple of years ago but now say it has improved. The made for Amazon films and original programming are also getting stronger and more interesting. By positioning Amazon Prime Video as a “perk” for Amazon Prime members, the retail giant has reinforced their reputation for one stop shopping. And, they can afford to get some of the best content out there if they want it. The service is “free” with Amazon Prime membership but a few prefer to get it freestanding for $8.99 per month to see award winning content such as “The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel” or “Fleabag.”

2) Apple—As alluded to in early posts, I was more than a bit surprised when Disney honcho Bob Iger resigned from the Apple board and then Apple announced Apple TV Plus at $4.99 per month. The tech/hardware giant is reportedly spending more money than Disney right now on new programming although admittedly they are starting from zero. They signed big stars, Jennifer Aniston, Reese Witherspoon, and Steve Carrell for “The Morning Show” which received lukewarm critical reviews and Oprah is returning with her book club now and then. Steven Spielberg will be a creative consultant. They have the cash to play the long game if they choose. Right now, the content available is thin. That can change fast if they get out their checkbook.

3) HBO MAX—now owned by debt laden AT&T, HBO is not going away but getting deeper and maybe stronger. They are keeping HBO but adding new series. A sequel to “Gossip Girl” will be featured and “Sesame Street” and “Friends” will be on board as well. HBO got it right for decades. They produced several good, some outstanding series per year. The programming developed a big following (people still talk about The Sopranos and Sex in The City). It will be interesting to see what happens as they branch out. Set for a May launch, HBO MAX will be $14.99 but their will be a free year for some AT&T users. Do not play them short.

4) Alphabet (Google)—the kings and queens of search have owned YouTube for nearly a dozen years. They have not done much with it except for a few tepid tests. You Tube gives them a powerful platform to launch a streaming service (Google Tube + ?). Also, as we write, they have surpassed Apple in net free cash at over $105 billion (Apple has been buying back shares with both hands in recent years). With You Tube in place, they have a global and much loved platform plus record cash to enter the streaming game in a big way.

5) Peacock—set for a Spring, 2020 launch, this NBC Universal service (a division of Comcast) will be advertiser supported. It will have new versions of “Battlestar Galactica”, “Saved by the Bell” and “Punky Brewster”. Remember “Punky Brewster”? I used to watch it with my kids in the 1980’s. What I remember the most is that it was opposite “60 Minutes” at Sunday nights at 7 pm EST. “The Office” is shifting back from Netflix. Pricing has not been announced yet.

Okay, people say to me that Sports will save legacy properties for a number of years. Really? Does the NFL care who pays their rights fees as long as they are huge? As a viewer, would you watch the Super Bowl with commercials on You Tube? I think that I know the answer. Someone listed above with deep pockets can easily jump in to sports. Disney, of course, has experience with ABC and ESPN.

All of these players have the financial wherewithal to play the streaming games for either several years or forever.

More to come. Stay tuned in early 2020!

If you would like to contact Don Cole directly, you may reach him at doncolemedia@gmail.com

Saturday, December 28, 2019

The Streaming Wars--Part III

Disney +

On November 12, 2019 Disney +, a new streaming service from the Walt Disney Company, launched with a lot of fanfare. On day one, media reports were that they had 10 million subscribers on day one. For a while, they were adding a million new subscribers per day and showing great early strength in far flung places such as Australia. Netflix, long the winner in the streaming wars now had competition from Disney, the king of content, and Amazon and Apple with the deepest pockets in business history. Alphabet (Google) with their popular sleeping media giant, YouTube, was considering entering the fray along with Facebook. Other players are also lining up including AT&T with HBO Max, and Comcast with their new Peacock service starting in spring, 2020. There are others that we will discuss in upcoming posts.

Candidly, I was surprised when Apple announced that they were launching Apple TV+. Bob Iger, the long time CEO of Disney had sat on the Apple board for years. My presumption was that Apple might get involved with some form of co-production with Disney or take a significant equity position in Disney itself (15-20%). Bob Iger wrote in his recent autobiography that he had a great relationship with the late Steve Jobs, and had Jobs lived, Apple might have bought The Walt Disney Company outright. So, Apple’s entry, with a skinny lineup at $4.99 per month, was low cost but did not appear to have significant appeal to prospects. Apple does have over $100 billion in cash as I write so they may buy up properties pretty easily.

The Disney lineup is familiar to all of you. They have a film archive going back to the 1930’s, the Fox film library, ABC TV and 4,000 titles for viewers plus amazing franchises such as Star Wars, Marvel and  many others. What fascinates me is the powerful bundle that they can put together of Disney +, ESPN+, and Hulu ( of which now Disney has a controlling interest). The bundles vary but the trifecta of Disney +, ESPN+ and Hulu can be had for several dollars less than what many of us are paying for Netflix. It has lots of appeal and is not simply for families with young kids as many seem to be saying. Netflix, as mentioned in our last post, has been borrowing heavily to produce original programming (much of it high quality) so it is unlikely that they can cut subscription rates in the U.S. and remain viable in the credit markets.

Disney and the other media/financial giants can play “the long game”. In fact, Disney says that they do not expect Disney + to be profitable until 2025. An article in BARRON’S  in mid-November said that, for a few years, Disney + will “look like a little Netflix inside Disney.” So, while it will be a drag on earnings, they will bounce back with strength from theme parks, blockbuster films and do not forget merchandise. That is a huge profit center for Disney. The company also has a hedged position if somehow direct to consumer (streaming) fails as they will remain a powerful player in cable. Also, where do they spread their content? Will the Disney Channel survive? Do they put a new show with promise on ABC, Hulu, FX or Disney +? They have a real challenge in optimizing their content for maximum profit. Most companies dream of such a problem!

I asked a group of millennials if they had subscribed to Disney +. About 40% said yes and also that they liked it very much. One fellow in the corner said nothing but was beaming. He approached as I was leaving and said, “I love Disney +. For the rest of my life, I will watch a Star Wars film at least once a week.” That, my friends, is a franchise, with a Warren Buffett deep and wide moat!

So, Disney looks to be a survivor when the smoke clears a few years from now. Will they be the dominant player? Time will tell. More to come in a few days.

If you would like to contact Don Cole directly, you may reach him at doncolemedia@gmail.com

Friday, December 20, 2019

The Streaming Wars--Part II

The topic for this post is Netflix. It is always a bit difficult  for those of us who analyze media to write or talk about Netflix. The reason to me is that so many people really like or even love the service. Those of us who are considered old or stodgy or both do not get much traction when we discuss the debt that Netflix has piled up or the huge money they spend each year to develop new programming (reported to be $12 billion + in 2019). People push back with the truly magnificent stock market performance of recent years and the burgeoning global subscription base which sits somewhere north of 160 million as we write. And, Netflix shares trade at a lusty 100 times earnings.

Candidly, as is true of many of you reading this post, I really like Netflix as a consumer. Many of their made for Netflix series have significant appeal fto me and I have been an avid user of the service for several years. Things are changing a bit and a dogged look at the facts surrounding the company raise some medium and long term issues.

Over the last five years or so, Netflix has done, as best as I can count, a total of eight debt issuances. That would be fine if growth and earnings were very large and competition was muted. Yet, the situation is changing and fast. Disney launched their new Disney + service last month (November). They reportedly signed up 10 million subscribers on day one. Many other days one million more climbed aboard with particular strength in Australia. They also have upwards of 4,000 hours of content and are offering package deals with ESPN, a property which has great appeal to many males. The Disney franchises such as Star Wars and Marvel have great fan bases plus their film library goes back to the 1930’s. Their balance sheet is strong (though not as strong as Apple’s which we will discuss in a future post) and they now control HULU which many considered a meaningful threat to Netflix recently along with Amazon Prime Video.

Some financial analysts agree that Netflix is burning cash (some borrowed) and will not really turn cash flow positive until 2022. That does not sound bad but keep in mind that studios are pulling content from Netflix. So, they will be borrowing money to produce their own series and films (much of it first rate) for the next few years for sure. Others see caution on Netflix to be alarmist. To many, streaming has a clear runway ahead as Korea, China and India are underdeveloped and can help Netflix which likely will be getting hurt in Western nations. Maybe so, but keep in mind that in India many of the new subs that Netflix is picking up are only paying $3 per month for mobile service only. Revenue growth is the key not necessarily subscriber count going forward.

What might happen? Netflix is still the global leader in streaming. They are not going to dry up and blow away soon. Yet, they will face formidable competition with VERY deep pockets. The best case might be if they sold 15-20% of the company to Apple/Amazon or Alphabet(Google)/Facebook. One of those financial behemoths could backstop them financially and they could do what they do best. Remember, their database of customer preferences is unparalleled ( see Media Realism—“Disney’s Big Challenge, April 29, 2019).

Netflix has been a resourceful player for a few decades. Now, they face the fiercest competition imaginable. Who will win? No forecast yet except to say that the consumer, particularly American, will be in the best spot possible. As the price war continues of Netflix vs. HBO vs. Amazon vs. Apple vs. Disney  plus others, the millions of American couch potatoes will get extraordinary value for their subscriptions for whatever mix of streaming services that they choose.

Next up—Disney +

If you would like to contact Don Cole directly, you may reach him at doncolemedia@gmail.com

Friday, November 15, 2019

The Streaming Wars--Part I

In recent weeks, the press has been giving significant coverage to the launch of Apple TV+ and Disney +. I have waited to put up a post in order to sift through the news reports and chatter. This  brief post will be the first of several to come between now and the end of the year regarding the new world of streaming video.

On November 6th, Reed Hastings, co-founder and CEO of Netflix, gave a 30 minute interview at the New York Times Deal Book Conference (you can catch the whole thing on YouTube by simply plugging in NYTimes Deal Book Conference or pasting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oVl3gyIaeI). He was interviewed by Andrew Ross Sorkin of both CNBC and The New York Times. Mr. Hastings also took a few questions from prominent players in media and tech world who were in the audience.

In brief, some highlights were:

1) He described Disney as a “wonderful competitor” and said that he would subscribe to Disney +.

2) Hastings said that Netflix had the most to learn from Disney compared to other competitors. Enjoyed watching “Fleabag” on Amazon Prime Video.

3) He said that his focus will be on “pleasing our members” and not going in to news, sports, or anything associated with gaming.

4) Also, he confirmed that Netflix is now in 190 countries.

5) From the floor, a lady asked whether he would consider adding paid advertising to Netflix as Hulu has done. He said absolutely not and mentioned how Disney+ will not have advertising even though they now have a controlling interest in Hulu. I could not help but smile at that. Back around 1984, I gave my first major address at a conference and discussed how, inevitably, HBO would one day have to take advertising before and after their feature films or specials. Here we are 35 years later and I am still wiping the egg off my face. Colleagues reminded me about it from time to time and many others never seemed to forget my worst all time forecast. At an airport last year, someone approached me and said, “Are you Don Cole?”. When I said yes and tried to place him, he flashed a dirty smile and responded, “Nice call on the HBO advertising forecast, Mr. Guru.” Since then, I have arranged to be cremated so my gaffe will not be on my tombstone.

 One thing was clear listening to Hastings. He is not trying to be all things to all people. Netflix has won the streaming war globally. It will take many years for content king Disney to roll out Disney + that far and wide. Apple TV + and Amazon Prime Video have deep pockets for sure but lack the experience in programming at present although they can certainly buy it.

A substantial issue really never came up in the interview. Netflix is still not a real moneymaker despite its global reach. That would seem to be a problem over the next few years as the cost of producing new shows will be in the annual range of $12-15 billion dollars.

This is the tip of the iceberg. There will be much more to come soon.

If you would like to contact Don Cole directly, you may reach him at doncolemedia@gmail.com