
Amazon Is Hungry and Coming for Cable Channels - Mz
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/amazon-hungry-it-s-coming-your-cable-channels-n801781
======
majormajor
Could be a solid strategy compared to the competition.

Their current biggest problem is that they have anything you can search for,
so if you want to stream something for free, their search isn't that useful
since it throws off false positives for a ton of stuff that you'd have to rent
or buy.

Netflix wants to be mega-sized HBO, but having that much original content
under one umbrella seems to be straining them - the signal-to-noise ratio is
low, and I can't be bothered to sift through the number of originals they put
out these days to find the interesting ones. Sub-channels that operate more
independently to build individual reputations for genres or themes seems like
a much better model.

Vue, Sling, DirecTV Now are hobbled by the fact that they're tied to the same
original source restrictions as traditional cable, so you get commercials,
"edited for content" versions of movies, and all that nonsense. Too many
layers of indirection between them and the content makers.

Hulu has a good thing going with their own originals + HBO/Showtime add-ons,
but their live TV offering seems like a confused step backward, since if you
add that it introduces all of the above problems to part of the library. Soon
you end up in the same place as Amazon's current problem of search being too
cluttered with the wrong stuff.

~~~
bhuga
> Could be a solid strategy compared to the competition.

I thought the same, but from a different angle. Traditional channels with
commercials can be monetized by Amazon in a way the rest of the big 5 can't.
Watching a commercial on an Amazon channel for a new brand of chips? "Alexa,
get me some of those chips". Amazon knows what you're watching, what the
commercial is, where you live, has your payment information, and has the
fulfillment infrastructure. Boom. Buy the commercial, get your new chips in 2
days.

By turning commercials into trackable purchase events, Amazon might be able to
better monetize traditional, commercial-ridden television than any other
player. That includes existing cable providers (!).

~~~
nolok
On one hand, this is a big step in the future of technology that I've been
waiting on since the 80's.

On the other hand, this is a big step in the end of privacy and separation of
data that I've been dreading since the early 00's (when I started to care
about that).

Can't quite figure out if I'm more on the for or against side, but one thing
is for sure: the mis-fires that are sure to happen at times will be full of
giggles ... "Honey I _swear_ I didn't buy that".

~~~
SomeStupidPoint
What would alleviate some of your privacy concerns regarding that?

------
empath75
Amazon's recent moves seem to be taking it far from core competencies and are
moving it more into a GE style conglomerate, which can work, but you're not
going to get the kind of growth that they've been getting for the past few
years that way.

I really wish they'd spin off AWS so I could invest in just that without also
buying a piece of an overpriced grocery store and a mediocre television
production company.

~~~
godzillabrennus
They need the returns from the good business units to cover the losses from
these big gambles.

Google does the same using ad revenue.

~~~
brianwawok
A supermarket or an existing TV channel is not a big gamble. Big gamble is
things like pouring a few billion into self driving cars or building a space
station...

~~~
tryingagainbro
_A supermarket or an existing TV channel is not a big gamble. Big gamble is
things like pouring a few billion into self driving cars or building a space
station..._

A few billion to Google is nothing. Amazon probably would be smart to buy a
lot of stuff using their stock right now...$470 BILLION. Those hard assets can
always be sold later

~~~
brianwawok
Exactly even if the wholefoods partnership went nowhere, they can get the
money back. A risk to Amazon would be to spend a decent portion of their cash
on an unproven or unprofitable venture. Whole foods was profitable. Not
wildly, but they made money...

------
moomin
I have a PS3. I had Amazon Prime Video for a year. Didn't renew it. The
interface is utterly dreadful in comparison to Netflix's. Not only is it
constantly spamming you with stuff that costs extra, not only is it impossible
to find what you're looking for, the player itself is pretty ropey.

Provide me with a service that lets me add HBO or Showtime to a Netflix-level
interface, then we'll talk.

~~~
r00fus
This.

Prime video along with Amazon's free music and books offerings are just loss
leaders for selling you the non free products in the relevant categories.

Amazon is still at its heart a store.

~~~
ballenf
[http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/amazon-studios-jeff-bezos-
ro...](http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/amazon-studios-jeff-bezos-roy-price-
zelda-1202552532/)

I think Amazon is trying to shift away from that approach with the push to get
a "Game of Thrones" type show on Prime Video.

Here's Stratechery's take on it:

> ... focusing Amazon Prime Video on massive hits that break through into the
> popular consciousness rationalizes the service considerably. If the ultimate
> goal is signups, then by definition producing shows that everyone is talking
> about is more important than building out a fleshed-out content library.
> Netflix has to worry about having plenty of content to keep people coming
> back; Amazon has the rest of Prime to accomplish that.

From: [https://stratechery.com/2017/amazon-studios-shifts-
strategy-...](https://stratechery.com/2017/amazon-studios-shifts-strategy-
spotify-and-hulu-facebook-to-spend-1-billion-on-video/)

(that site is subscription-only, but I think there are quite a few subscribers
here. If I'd seen non-paywalled analysis on this I'd link to it. Sorry if it's
not kosher to post paywalled sites! Some of his other writing on Amazon is
free to read.)

~~~
r00fus
This is what I absolutely don't understand about Amazon Prime Video
positioning against Netflix.

Even a lower middle class person can afford and justify both.

What these services compete against are the cable industry HBO and broadcast
TV for your entertainment time (and budget but many folks I know have all/most
of the services concurrently).

They should worry about YouTube more than each other.

~~~
tehwebguy
No one needs to worry about YouTube, they will destroy themselves on their
own!

------
0x4f3759df
The market doesn't want dividends from Amazon, they want growth, and to get
growth at Amazon's scale, you need to devour industries.

------
quink
I smell a rat. If they're planning a pricing model like Anime Strike's on top
of Prime Video, they can forget about it. Anime fans are pissed:
[https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=anime+strike](https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=anime+strike)
and if they think they can one-up Netflix by doing anything like this they're
going to be in for a very rude awakening.

~~~
wavefunction
Until Amazon is offering simulcasts they're not really competing.

~~~
ballenf
What's a 'simulcast'? Multi-streams or live broadcast of events? Or something
else?

~~~
wavefunction
I guess it's kind of an archaic term but it means broadcasting media via
multiple channels at the same time. In this case it means that when the next
episode of a show is broadcast via cable or over-the-air in Japan (probably
cable in 2017) it's also simultaneously available on websites for folks who
don't have Japanese cable.

A simple modern example is being able to listen to the announcers of a sports
match on radio or watch the same announcers via the television transmission.

Google defines a "simulcast" as a simultaneous transmission of the same
program on radio and television, or on two or more channels.

~~~
quink
It means showing an episode before the fansubbers (which means the above
definition of simulcasting doesn't apply) and pirates get an opportunity to
put it online. It means putting it online within as little as an hour or two
of airing in Japan. Instead of like what Netflix did with Little Witch
Academia for instance. Which took months. For a Studio Trigger show, mind you.

------
dannylandau
It would be great if Amazon offered a line up of cable channels for $20 flat
fee, and extra channels ala carte for like $5 extra. That would be very
disruptive to the current monopolies like Comcast and Dish.

~~~
jvolkman
A bit more than $20, but YouTube TV does this today.

------
mikhuang
If only they went after cable internet connections...

