Media has drastically changed over the past few years. Decades ago, people bought albums. Then came CDs. Finally, it came down to singles and MP3s.

The same applies to video properties. Few years ago, people paid for what they wanted to watch. Blockbuster thrived on that model, but failed to innovate. Other video stores suffered due to their lack of scale.

However, with introduction of online media, individuality has gone out the door. Services like Pandora, Spotify and Rdio have started a trend towards unlimited access. Netflix has been leveraging the same model — unlimited access to a vast catalog. Not necessarily the choice you want. But the only choice you have.

Amazon has taken the same approach with their Prime offering. Unlimited access to a small library of content. Just like any media property, a catalog grows slowly. And you can bet that Amazon will leverage its bargaining power to make their MP3 service unlimited and fight aggressively to grow its video library as well. In the next few years, it won’t be surprising if Amazon’s media offering is larger than the entire Netflix catalog.

Overall, this trend towards unlimited media is only going to benefit distributors and not customers. There will be a point where consumers and passionate fans are no longer going to accept fragmented offerings. Knowing the media licensing model, there will never be content parity across platforms. And sadly, that is one thing that will continue to hold digital distribution back.

Last year, I wrote a fairly lengthy post about the state of the entertainment industry. Fortunately (for me), most of the predictions in the post held true. And, they will continue to hold true for the rest of 2011. Digital media has taken an interesting step over the past couple of months — for the worse. The volume of independently produced content is through the roof and the competition in this space is aggressive.

As someone who now works on the financial side of content — advertising — it’s hard to justify spending a considerable amount of money on online video. Why? It’s too expensive and not engaging. Here’s what’ll matter in 2011:

• Social: Facebook and Twitter are obvious first steps, but they’re also the only reliable platforms in the social media space.
• Mobile: It’s a challenge to find non-smart phones. With a phone coming out every few weeks, the market is now mobile heavy with an aggressive push on mobile content and services.
• Tablet: Unlike mobile, tablet is still very new. However, with very few reliable players in the market — it’s a good place to be involved from a content creation or syndication standpoint.

Here’s what won’t matter in 2011:

• Online video: It hurts for me to say this, but it’s true. Content discovery on the web is just way too difficult and there is a lot of content being produced. The chances of finding an audience and then monetizing it is nearly impossible.
• Loyalty: In this case, loyalty means something very different. It means not sticking to one mobile platform. Android is growing faster than ever and Apple is countering nearly every move. Sticking with one platform only is a recipe for disaster.
• Fluff: A lot of people are saying that the bubble is back. It may be, but there’s a reason why some initiatives get funded while others do not. Fluff. Investors and users are very restrictive when it comes to spending money. In this market, there is no room for fluff. Sadly, most companies created in the past few years do just that — create and sell fluff.

At one point, Blockbuster used to be the go to place for renting videos. Although their collection was fairly limited, it was the only big player in town. The transition from VHS to DVD was easy. Same content on a different physical medium. Recently, despite desperate attempts, the company has failed miserably to transform from the physical generation to the online generation.

Of all the physical media businesses (books, music CDs, etc.), Blockbuster should have seen it coming a long time ago.

iTunes became popular.

eBooks came onto the market.

People started renting DVDs online.

So why did a company the size and negotiating power of Blockbuster not do anything? They continued to rent DVDs at almost double the price of their nearest competitor, had ridiculous late fees and failed to form partnerships at a time where every medium was going digital.

They should have predicted it by looking at CD sales. They did not. They should have learned from Netflix’s model. They did not. They should have come up with a streaming model. They did not.

When Hulu, a startup has come so far in the past 3 years, it’s baffling why a multi-billion dollar organization failed to sign any deals with their long-term content partners.

Out of everyone remaining in the current playing field, Blockbuster had the best leverage — content. Comparatively, Netflix and Hulu are newcomers.

As someone who used to visit Blockbuster quite frequently a few years ago, it’s still shocking to see that the company hasn’t learned. Their retail stores are packed with junk and there’s no ability to request content that isn’t in store. Even free public libraries have that feature.

As one of the leading forces of content less than a decade ago, why didn’t Blockbuster partner up with hardware manufacturers to leverage a full-fledged streaming service?

Nearly every new device today has Netflix. Hulu is also striking deals at a rapid pace. So, why didn’t Blockbuster?

Over the past 3 years, there has been no improvement in how Blockbuster operates and what it offers. In the digital space, that’s an entire generation.

As much as Blockbuster enjoyed its past, it’s time to pack up. A company that can’t innovate or experiment is a company that consumers don’t want.

Earlier this year, Cablevision got into a heated and very public dispute with ABC regarding retransmission fees for WABC-7 in the New York area. While the dispute was short lived, it was an indicator of things to come.

This year we’ve seen more public retransmission disputes between content providers and distributors. However, the largest one thus far has to be the dispute between Cablevision and FOX (also in the New York metro area).

Since October 15th, Cablevision subscribers have not had access to certain FOX programming in the midst of the fall TV season as well as highly rated sporting events. While this is expected to continue for some time, the scary part of this dispute is that FOX turned off access to Hulu.com and Fox.com for a little while. It’s clear that content companies are treating web and TV properties as similar entities, since the content is transmitted via the same pipe. Although access to web properties was restored very rapidly, this is not the last time this issue is going to come up.

The way the cable business works today is very complex and the revenue numbers associated with content transmission are significant. While we’re still a little ways off before this becomes a significant issue, it will be interesting to see how cable companies deal with customers that have a data-only connection, but not a content connection (cable TV subscription).

[Image from Consumerist.com]

Last week, Roku announced the release of its new set-top boxes. Starting at just $59.95 and along with a few new partnerships, Roku has effectively made itself a very serious contender in the set-top box market.

Pricing:

The Roku HD box starts at just $59.95 — a price that is almost half of the latest generation Apple TV. This low price point is significant because it makes the device affordable in a market where traditional (cable, satellite, etc.) content consumption prices are increasing. With Roku, a user also does not pay any additional content access fees. The highest model Roku — the XDS is priced at $99.99 — the same price as the Apple TV.

Features:

By and large, this particular update doesn’t introduce any ground breaking features. However, the Roku XDS model has the ability to display content from USB drives. This makes the device an excellent choice for presentation and demo purposes on the road.

Content:

Today, Roku supports more premium content than the Apple TV and for that matter, most set-top boxes. With access to Amazon Video on Demand, Pandora, Netflix and now Hulu Plus, the device can access a significant amount of premium content at very minimal cost ($20 per month for Hulu and Netflix). And, with the XDS‘ upcoming ability to play content from an attached drive makes the device even more attractive.

Apps:

As of this moment, the Apple TV doesn’t offer the ability to install Apps. Roku does. Roku calls their apps “channels.” And, the ability to create apps and market them on a growing platform is win-win for any media organization — small or large. Broadcast networks could potentially create their own channels and introduce new revenue streams.

Conclusion:

The new release by Roku is a huge leap forward, not just for the company, but for the set-top box market. Highly recommended.

Yesterday at the BlackBerry DEVCON conference, RIM announced the BlackBerry PlayBook. While other sites have covered the technology aspects of this announcement in detail, this device marks a new era for RIM:

• User experience: Take a look at the embedded video above in this post. The user-experience is significantly better than current BlackBerry devices. A step away from corporate.
• No network: The initial PlayBook is available as a WiFi only device. BlackBerry phones, even today, are not sold without a service contract. This is a huge step for BlackBerry / RIM and their first direct-to-consumer product.
• BlackBerry Internet Service (BIS): BIS is the backbone of BlackBerry devices across the world — ranging from BlackBerry Messenger to email services. To a certain extent, BIS is also carrier dependant and without a carrier, it will be interesting to see how the device works.
• Privacy: BlackBerry has also been battling with privacy issues in the Middle East and Asia. It will be interesting to see how this device will impact data-sharing agreements between authorities.

As an end user, I’ll definitely be reviewing the device and comparing it to the Apple iPad. Thus far in the demos, the BlackBerry PlayBook looks like a good concept.

For the past few weeks, I’ve been hard at work creating something that not many people across the world will see, but something that will still get coverage on primetime broadcasts in the United States. What is it? Multi-screen content for NBC News’ Education Nation. Through my employer, we were hired to do multi-screen video content for the event in 3 weeks worth of time. Calling that time-frame aggressive was being polite. We had to produce 2 significant pieces of content — one for a 14-screen installation and one for a 4-screen installation. Teams worked round-the-clock to gather high-quality images from across the country and we had to use robots to get our most crucial shots. Impressive? Yes. Hard-work? Yes. Worth it? Absolutely. If you’re in NYC and would like to see the exhibit, send me an email — aanarav [at] sareen [dot] tv and I’ll be your personal tour guide this week.

Production & Technology:

I’ve been creating content for 9 years professionally. During that time, I’ve worked for local public-access stations, advised broadcast networks strategically and played a crucial consulting role for companies that enable media to progress. However, the art of creation is still one of the most challenges components in entertainment. Digital media thus far has primarily been a technological advance, not a creative one. Working on the above project over 3 weeks round-the-clock makes the best digital media advocates realize that although we should be focusing on technological advances, we shouldn’t forget what most people are still interested in — big, beautiful and inspirational. Web doesn’t do that. Yet.

Content creators need to keep pushing the boundaries of what’s possible. Real-time instantaneous web broadcasts are fine. But, what’s the production quality? Digital-only content creators have littered the web with poor-quality content. There have never been financial incentives for poor quality work. Nor will there ever be. Despite technological advances, people still come back to watch content that inspires them. Content that looks good. As content creators, producers and marketers, we should be aiming for better.

Retail businesses have been around in varying forms for centuries. The premise behind a retail presence is simple — setup a (preferably convenient) location, allow people to visit, browse and purchase. Get more people to come in by using coupons, discounts or other incentives. However, the basic sales technique behind a retail location has been the same despite the changes and advancement in technology and media. Today, apart from using paper coupons, stores are simply using digital coupons. That is a good step forward, but very few retail stores are truly making use of technology to create a better environment for their customers.

For those in the retail business, here are some ideas:

1. Digital Displays: Retail locations have limited space and therefore clothing stores only use a handful of mannequins to display their best (and often times, most expensive) products. Furthermore, every person is different physically. So, why should a potential customer purchase an item just by looking at a mannequin that doesn’t resemble their physical characteristics and/or taste. A solution for this to have tablet-like interactive displays that allow users to visually select and modify their body type as well as different types of apparel. Combining these together would result in a display that is far more personal and appealing to the end user.
2. Email Receipts: Few companies have started doing over the past couple of years. However, why can’t more companies simply email you receipts from your store purchases? With the amount of paper and junk mail, it’s easier to categorize and archive emails than it is to locate a flimsy receipt.
3. Convenience: Ever walk into a store only to find out that the product is out-of-stock? Retail stores could avoid (a lot of) frustrated customers by having them order a product from a store’s digital display and having it delivered for free. A few bookstores have implemented this practice, but a wider adoption would be beneficial.

The possibilities for engaging customers via digital media in a retail location are significant. However, very few companies try these techniques because of the investment required. While that’s understandable, these investments are going to get larger in size as time progresses.

I sold my Kindle 2 a while ago to purchase the iPad. I immediately regretted that decision as the Kindle 2 was most certainly the best e-reading device I had come across. While the iPad is a great product, it cannot be used for long term reading. The reflections and the weight of the product make it difficult to use for extended periods of time.

A few months ago, Amazon announced that they’d be releasing the Kindle 3 in two flavors — a WiFi version and a WiFi + 3G version. Starting at $139, I ordered the WiFi version as soon as it was available. Having used it intensively over the past 2 weeks (including an international trip to Australia), here are a few comments regarding the device:

• Size: I’m not sure how Amazon managed to pull this off, but the Kindle 3 has the exact same screen as its predecessor, but the overall device is much smaller.
• Speed: The page turns are much faster than prior versions. Often times, you aren’t even aware of the time delay between the pages.
• Battery: I’ve only charged my Kindle once and after reading one book and using it almost daily for 2 weeks, there’s still more than 70% of the battery left.
• Case: The Kindle 3 does not come with a case. I highly suggest picking up the case with a built in light. The light borrows power from the charged Kindle, but has very little overall impact.
• Contrast: This is one of the biggest improvements with the Kindle 3 and the difference is apparent. The screen savers and the text is a lot sharper and crisper, delivering a better reading experience.

Compared to the iPad:

The Kindle 3 and the Apple iPad are in completely different categories. One is a book reader. The other is a computer. However, for reading books, the Kindle 3 is far superior. Furthermore, Amazon makes it easy to access the Kindle content across multiple devices via their iOS, BlackBerry and Android applications.