Matt Britton joins a panel discussing Aereo, the streaming service that launched in New York offering 28 channels and cloud DVR for $8 a month. Panelists compare the model to Napster and predict the Supreme Court will rule against it, though VC investors are betting on a win.
Questions this video answers
New York.
28 channels.
Cloud DVR storage for $8 per month.
Atlanta, Dallas, Boston, Detroit, Miami.
"10 more markets" (phrase used in transcript).
You watch this extremely closely. This has huge implications for the consumer. Whether or not we're going to be able to actually cut the court or will the Supreme Court allow that? Will we be able to walk around with our cell phones and live network streaming television?
Well, we can already do that, but the difference is that the networks now have control over their intellectual property. Well, with Aereo, they're essentially setting up these tiny transmitters all over the place. And without the consent of the content producers, the IP holders, redistributing this content to the consumers and monetizing it. So it almost dates back to the Napster era of, you know, completely losing copyright for music holders. And, and if the Supreme Court allows Aria to continue doing business the way it's doing right now, it really can change the game. Because all of a sudden TV companies need to question, should I be investing in content if I can't even control how it's going to be distributed and who's going to see it?
I mean, Scott, could potentially a game changer for the consumer, a game changer for network television. And it was just two years ago that this company, they started in New York offering 28 channels and also Cloud DVR storage for 8 bucks a month. I mean, we're talking about a game changer.
It's pretty awesome. I mean, if you looked at your cable bill lately, they're ridiculously high. And that's even before this Comcast and Time Warner merger goes through, which is going to totally hurt the consumer in my opinion. So yeah, I mean, to the point that was made earlier, you know, this is distribution. Right. And I think Jeff mentioned, you know, his 22 year old nephew. I mean, that dude is probably one of the perfect guys in the demographic that's going to be appealing or they're going to, that area is appealing to here. And that's exactly what they want. Right. Like this is the demographic, this is the group, you know, the 22 to 50 or so of the people that are going to walk around and watch this stuff on their device versus sit down on their couch and turn on their television.
But it's not about if consumers want it or not. I mean, consumers want free stuff and they want it anywhere and everywhere. It's about the companies that are spending the money on producing the content. How do they protect those consumers?
Jeff, your take on this?
Yeah, I mean, somebody's got paid for it. I think a Napster analogy is great, is exactly what I was thinking about as we're talking about it. Because ultimately it's Great, if they get it. But then who's going to continue to pay for its intellectual property all of a sudden if it's given to everybody for free? So it could be incredibly disruptive, but could also work counterintuitively.
The pace at which this company has been expanding, I mean, they quickly branched into 10 more markets. After New York, Atlanta, Dallas, Boston, Detroit, Miami, they've got more expansion planned. They really look like they're trying to take over here.
Well, VC companies are betting on it. They're betting on the Supreme Court case. They're big gamblers. They go for runs. If the Supreme Court allows are you to continue, then they're going to get a handsome payback, the VCs. If not, then there'll be another risk that didn't work. So ultimately, we'll see what happens. I think, I do think the Supreme Court will vote against this because I think intellectual property and copyright is a huge part of this country. And I think that, you know, they are essentially redistributing something without consent.
All right.
This is why so much money in the VC world in the high tech sector right now, because disruptive technologies that can come out the this way literally can change the way we think about any of the media, finance, etc. So I thought we're going to be seeking billions of dollars. Continue to go in the tech sector.
Sure.
All right, Scott, no more hedging. Last word to you. As we wait for the Supreme Court decision to come down, what do you think happens here?
I don't think they let it go through because, look, it's kind of like a David Goliath battle here. I mean, you've got a lot of broadcast companies that have a lot of power in Washington versus this area company, which is a very cool idea, but I don't think they win this fight.
All right, thank you. I want to thank Matt Britton and Jeff Taylor and Scott Martin. Feisty conversation.
