The deal allows Cox and Verizon Wireless to sell each others’ services in their stores and other sales channels. The joint marketing arrangement is similar to the one agreed to in the groundbreaking deal disclosed earlier this month between Verizon and Comcast Corp., Time Warner Cable Inc. and Bright House Networks, in which Verizon said it would pay the cable consortium $3.6 billion for wireless spectrum licenses covering 259 million people in the U.S.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

The cable company said that it will stop selling cellular service as of today and will discontinue service to current customers as of March, though it promised to help them transition to other providers. Cox has been reselling 3G service from Sprint to customers in about half of its service areas.

Existing customers will get a $150 credit on their bill for each line of wireless service and keep their phone as well as any deals they had for bundling their phone and cable services.

“Cox is working to make this transition as seamless and easy as possible for our customers,” Executive VP Len Barlik said in a statement.

In making the decision, Cox cited several reasons, including the rapid shift to 4G and its inability to land “iconic devices.”

The move, Cox said, will allow the cable company to reach its goal of offering wireless service to half its customer base this year.

“We believe this approach is good for our customers, allowing us to take the necessary steps to fulfill our promise to deliver a Cox experience that customers expect from us,” Cox said in a statement. “In continuing with our successful wholesale model for 3G wireless services, we will accomplish speed to market while achieving greater operational efficiencies from a wholesale model that continues to improve. We are proud of our initial success with wireless, already nearly doubling our projected subscriber forecast.”

A representative declined to say how many millions Cox had spent on spectrum and network gear or to comment on its future plans for the spectrum it owns. Cox sells its service using the pitch of “unbelievably fair wireless,” offering terms such as cash back for unused minutes.

Cox’s plan was reported earlier on Tuesday by Fierce Wireless.

But then again, it’s not the most aggressive move Reed Hastings could make. Note that the chart Netflix provides makes it quite difficult to really evaluate broadband provider against broadband provider, without doing a whole lot of squinting.

And even then, I can’t tell which light-blue line represents CableOne and which one represents CenturyTel.

We do know, because Netflix already told us, that Charter gets the best marks. And it appears that Clearwire, the wireless service co-owned by Sprint and some of the big cable companies, ranks dead last.

The news that most of you care about: Time Warner Cable and Comcast, the nation’s two biggest cable companies, appear to be in the top part of Netflix’s rankings. I’m asking the company for clarification for those of us with decaying vision.

And here it is, via CNET–a top-to-bottom ranking:

1. Charter
2. Comcast
3. Time Warner
4. Cox
5. Suddenlink
6. Cablevision
7. Cable One
8. Verizon
9. AT&T
10. BellSouth
11. Embarq
12. Windstream
13. Qwest
14. Century Tel
15. Frontier
16. Clearwire

You can click on the chart below to see a larger version, and you can read a technical explanation of what it measures over at the official Netflix tech blog.

ThePlatform, a subsidiary of the cable giant, plans this week to launch a program that will allow workers whose job it is to post video content to use their iPhone to manage certain functions.

Workers will still have to use a PC or Mac to do the main work, but the iPhone app will allow basic tasks such as publishing a previously hidden piece of content (or taking down a piece that got published inadvertently).

“With the iPhone being a fairly ubiquitous device for media consumption, we felt it was also the perfect platform for media management,” said Ian Blaine, the CEO of thePlatform, which Comcast acquired in 2006. “It’s usually along with people wherever they are.”

Though clearly a niche product, it is the kind of application that many expect to see more of as businesses find ways of incorporating mobile devices into their office worfklow.

“I think what we are doing is a harbinger for others if they are not doing it already,” Blaine said.

Mpx, the main program developed by thePlatform, is used by Comcast itself and also sold to other cable providers such as Time Warner Cable, Cablevision and Cox, as well as by individual content producers such as NBC, PBS and Canada’s CBC. Mpx is used to edit and prepare video for sending to various devices, including phones, computers and set-top boxes.

“We’ve always been in the game of publishing to mobile devices, but being able to take advantage of the platform for actually publishing is pretty great and we are excited about it,” Blaine said.

The company has been testing the product with a few of its customers. Among those excited about the new mobile version of mpx are the folks at Time Warner Cable who use thePlatform to publish their content.

“We have been working with thePlatform to create a solution that supports our producers or editors responsible for ensuring that shows or clips are ready for publication, 24 hours a day,” said Eric Manchester, a member of Time Warner Cable’s technical staff. “Having a solution we can carry on us at all times allows us to solve many time sensitive issues without being tied to our desks.”

For now, those using the iPhone app will see only thumbnails of the videos in question, but Blaine said adding full-video previews is tops on the company’s list of features to add. It will also see if there is a way to achieve similar capabilities on the BlackBerry, given that many companies also use those devices.

With Android, Blaine said the company may not even need to do a separate app because the desktop version of mpx runs using Flash, which Android supports.

The deal will be structured as a joint venture, and Scripps (SNI) will kick $181 million into the new partnership; it will then issue another $878 million in debt.

Scripps itself frequently pops up as an acquisition candidate, and that chatter has only gotten louder as a new wave of consolidation appears to be in motion, prompted by Comcast’s (CMCSA) pursuit of GE’s (GE) NBC Universal.

Scripps, which had planned on announcing quarterly results this morning, is pushing back its earnings call till tomorrow morning.

Here’s the full press release:

CINCINNATI–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Scripps Networks Interactive Inc, owner and operator of the Food Network and HGTV lifestyle television networks, will enter into a joint venture with Cox Communications Inc. by which it will acquire a controlling interest in the Travel Channel.

The two companies today signed a definitive agreement that, upon completion, will result in Scripps Networks Interactive owning 65 percent of the Travel Channel and Cox Communications retaining a 35 percent minority stake in the network.

The Travel Channel transaction is expected to be completed by or before January 2010.

“Combining the Travel Channel with Food Network and HGTV will make our fast-growing, young company the undisputed global leader in lifestyle programming,” said Kenneth W. Lowe, chairman, president and chief executive officer of Scripps Networks Interactive. “This collection of popular lifestyle networks will be in great demand worldwide and promises to create substantial long-term value for all of our stakeholders.”

Launched in 1987, Travel Channel has grown to become one of America’s best known cable television networks and today reaches about 95 million U.S. television households. The television network–the cornerstone of Travel Channel Media–supports a growing range of cross-platform initiatives including Internet, mobile and social media applications.

“Adding the Travel Channel, and its related enterprises, provides us with a unique opportunity to meaningfully expand our portfolio into a lifestyle category that’s highly desirable to media consumers, advertisers and programming distributors,” Lowe said. “Our vision for Travel follows the same script that’s made Food Network and HGTV two ofthe most powerful brands in all of television. By lending our unparalleled expertise in developing successful lifestyle media businesses, we have every confidence that we can build on Travel’s strong brand identity and leverage the successes achieved to date by the top-notch team at Travel Channel and our new partners at Cox Communications.”

As proposed, the transaction is structured as a leveraged joint venture between Scripps Networks Interactive and Cox Communications.

Cox will contribute the Travel Channel, valued at $975 million, and Scripps Networks Interactive will contribute $181 million in cash to a newly created partnership. The partnership, in turn, will take on $878 million in third-party debt that will be guaranteed by Scripps and indemnified by Cox, with the proceeds to be distributed to Cox.

The transaction will result in the partnership having about $696 million in net debt.

“This solid partnership that we’re establishing today allows us to maintain an interest in Travel Channel while at the same time giving the network an opportunity to leverage the resources and expertise of a successful programmer like Scripps Networks Interactive,” said Cox Communications President Patrick Esser. “Scripps has an outstanding reputation as a company, an employer and a programmer. Over the past 15 years, Scripps Networks Interactive has built a portfolio of leading lifestyle programming brands, and we think this complementary expertise will be a boon to Travel Channel’s future growth.”

Scripps Networks Interactive will control the joint venture and the network will be run as part of the company’s growing portfolio of popular lifestyle media brands.

“The incredibly complementary nature of our lifestyle media businesses presents an abundance of opportunity to provide services for Travel Channel that will result in increased advertising and affiliate revenues and substantial cost synergies,” Lowe said. “We have extensive experience working with partners to build value over the long term. Among cable companies, Cox has an outstanding reputation for its vision and investment for the long-term success of its businesses. We look forward to partnering with them in this venture.”

Scripps Networks Interactive was advised on the transaction by Barclays Capital Inc. and Skadden, Arps, Slate Meagher & Flom LLP.

“iDon’t have a real keyboard
iDon’t run simultaneous apps
iDon’t take night shots
iDon’t allow open development
iDon’t customize
iDon’t run widgets
iDon’t have interchangeable batteries
Everything iDon’t
DROID DOES”

Shown on Fox and CBS (CBS) during a pair of NFL football games Sunday afternoon, the ad clearly positions Droid as the mythical iPhone killer. And while that might seem foolhardy, perhaps even hubristic, those who’ve seen the Motorola (MOT)-designed device say it’s at the very least a worthy iPhone rival.

Says Boy Genius: “[This is] the Android device to beat, and easily the most impressive. From what we’ve been told, Google had a direct hand in the Motorola Droid. Something to the point of almost dictating every move Motorola made when designing and making the phone….the Droid, even in its non-final form, is the most impressive phone we’ve used since the iPhone. It’s positively amazing.”

A gushing endorsement of an unreleased device and as such, to be taken with a grain of salt. That said, it’s hard to believe Verizon (VZ) would go all out here without good reason. And make no mistake, the company is going all out, even to the point of licensing the “Droid” trademark from Lucasfilm.

This past weekend’s TV commercial and a Droid teaser site are clearly the beginning of a major marketing push intended to position Droid as the Apple (AAPL) iPhone’s better, or at least its equal. Little wonder then that Google (GOOG) CEO Eric Schmidt was so upbeat about Android’s future during the search engine company’s earnings call last week.

“Android adoption is literally about to explode,” Schmidt said. “You have all the necessary conditions, you have the vendors, you have the distribution and so forth. This is a very critical period with all of everything being delivered.”

PREVIOUSLY:

• Verizon to iPhone Users: “Want Five Times More 3G Coverage? There’s a Map for That.”
• Perhaps by “Devices Like the Pre,” Verizon CEO Meant the iPhone?
• Analyst: AT&T Screwed Without iPhone Exclusivity
• Q: Should Apple Bring the iPhone to Verizon? A: Yes.
• Apple, Verizon and the iPhone LiTE

At a digital music panel in Nashville this week, executives from AT&T (T) and Comcast (CMCSA) created a furor by saying they were passing along warnings to customers that the RIAA says are illegally uploading music files onto the Internet.

Later, the companies tried to calm the outrage erupting in the blogosphere by harrumphing they weren’t cutting off Internet access to those people–or in the case of Cox (CXR), hardly ever cutting it off. AT&T said it wouldn’t cut off access without a court order.

So what is going on? For more than a year, the RIAA has been engaged in a major diplomatic effort to win over ISPs. “What we are trying to encourage ISPs to do is adopt some form of graduated response,” says Jonathan Lamy, an RIAA spokesman. “It is our position that people who are repeat offenders merit an account suspension or something like that.” He adds that any customer has a right to due process and should have the option to challenge the action if they think it is unjustified.

Read the rest of this post

That’s the thinking behind plans some of the big cable TV operators and cable networks are drawing up. But while it’s tempting to describe these offerings-to-be as Hulu 2.0, it’s not nearly that simple.

Both Comcast (CMCSA) and Timer Warner Cable (TWC) want to give their subscribers Web access to more shows than they can currently get–at least legally. But the two companies have competing plans, based on different technologies and philosophies. Here’s the latest info I have on the offerings-to-be, which The Wall Street Journal first wrote about last night:

• Comcast, which is referring internally to its plan as “Authentication” (ugh), wants to beef up its Fancast Web site, which is currently an also-ran behind Hulu in the video portal competition. But Time Warner Cable, in conjunction with Cox, is offering a different take, powered by the same technology it used when it offered HBO to some broadband customers in a Wisconsin test last year. The cable provider’s plan, which it has dubbed “Entitlement” (double ugh), doesn’t call for a single portal. Instead, each cable programmer that signs on would distribute its programming via its own site.
• Comcast would eventually like to syndicate its Fancast-on-steroids site to other cable providers. But don’t expect to use the souped-up Fancast if you’re a Time Warner Cable customer–the company has no interest in letting someone else control its subscribers’ Web video experience.
• Most of the major cable networks have been talking to cable providers about both plans, and most have offered up some degree of enthusiasm, including GE’s (GE) NBC, Viacom (VIA), Time Warner (TWX) Discovery Communications (DISCA) and Scripps Networks Interactive (SNI).
• Notable player not involved in discussions, at least so far: Disney (DIS). Which means you shouldn’t expect to get full access to Disney channel or ESPN programming on your laptop for some time to come.
• Comcast plans on a trial run of its service this summer; Time Warner Cable had originally planned to launch its trial in the first quarter of 2009, but has pushed back its launch to the much-vaguer “sometime this year.”

But while the strategies and specifics of the plans are different, the underlying philosophies are the same. Both plans are meant to keep customers from defecting to TV services offered by the satellite companies and telcos. (And Time Warner Cable has been specifically warning its programmers of the danger of “cable cutters” by touting a test in Texas where up to three percent of its cable subs have dropped the service in favor of free TV from the Web.) And both plans are meant to impress upon customers that someone, somewhere has to pay for the TV they watch.

Will any of this work? It’s easy to assume that it won’t, since it involves slow-moving cable providers linking up with protective cable programmers to produce compelling Web services. But that’s the sort of thing that all of us geniuses said about Hulu, and that JV between NBC and News Corp.’s (NWS) Fox has worked out great, at least from a technology and user perspective. (News Corp. is the owner of Dow Jones, which owns this Web site.)

And regardless, the tension between broadband providers, content providers, and consumers who don’t care who pays for their programming as long as they can watch “Heroes” whenever they want wherever they want, is going to make for interesting stories for a long time to come. We’ll be revisiting this one frequently.

Meanwhile here’s a clip reel from HBO’s excellent new “Eastbound & Down” series, which literally kept me from canceling the pay service this week. But as soon as it’s done, so is my subscription. There’s just too much good stuff out there on the Web for me to justify the extra cost. NOTE: This clip has a lot of swearing. If you want even more swearing and a little bit of nudity, there’s a much better clip here.

I’m not so sure that the whole issue really is one of commercial avoidance. It really is a matter of convenience–so you don’t miss your favorite show. And quite frankly, we’re just training a new generation of viewers to skip commercials because they can. I’m not sure that the driving reason to get a DVR in the first place is just to skip commercials. I don’t fundamentally believe that. People can understand in order to have convenience and on-demand [options], that you can’t skip commercials.”

–ABC President of Advertising Sales Mike Shaw, July 2006

Leave it to ABC to devise a service that offers all the convenience of video-on-demand with all the annoyance and vapidity of broadcast TV in one joyless package. This morning the network and its affiliates announced fast-forward-disabled video on demand, which prevents viewers from bypassing commercials.

Designed to combat the now nearly ubiquitous DVR, the service offers viewers the chance to watch ABC shows like “Lost” and “Desperate Housewives” for free, at any time they choose, as long as they’re willing to suffer through the advertisements that accompany them. And just to make sure that they do, participating affiliates will disable their video-on-demand services’ fast-forwarding capability. “This does counter the DVR,” Anne Sweeney, the president of the Disney-ABC television group (DIS), told the New York Times. “You don’t need TiVo if you have fast-forward-disabled video on demand. It gives you the same opportunity to catch up to your favorite shows.”

And your not-so-favorite commercials. Which would seem to make it about as uncompelling a proposition as … well, as over-the-air broadcast TV. But ABC, which has been testing the service with Cox Communications in Orange County, Calif., insists it’s got an audience. The company says 93% of users it surveyed said they would be willing to give up the fast-forwarding option and watch the commercials if they were given VOD programming for free.

So perhaps the 30-second TV ad has a few more years left in it still. But only a few. According to a study by the Association of National Advertisers and Forrester Research, 62% of marketers believe TV advertising has become less effective in the past few years. And 87% said they plan to increase their online ad spending this year, while many said they will cut their TV ad buys substantially when DVR penetration tops 50%.

I’m not so sure that the whole issue really is one of commercial avoidance. It really is a matter of convenience–so you don’t miss your favorite show. And quite frankly, we’re just training a new generation of viewers to skip commercials because they can. I’m not sure that the driving reason to get a DVR in the first place is just to skip commercials. I don’t fundamentally believe that. People can understand in order to have convenience and on-demand [options], that you can’t skip commercials.”

–ABC President of Advertising Sales Mike Shaw, July 2006

Leave it to ABC to devise a service that offers all the convenience of video-on-demand with all the annoyance and vapidity of broadcast TV in one joyless package. This morning the network and its affiliates announced fast-forward-disabled video on demand, which prevents viewers from bypassing commercials.

Designed to combat the now nearly ubiquitous DVR, the service offers viewers the chance to watch ABC shows like “Lost” and “Desperate Housewives” for free, at any time they choose, as long as they’re willing to suffer through the advertisements that accompany them. And just to make sure that they do, participating affiliates will disable their video-on-demand services’ fast-forwarding capability. “This does counter the DVR,” Anne Sweeney, the president of the Disney-ABC television group (DIS), told the New York Times. “You don’t need TiVo if you have fast-forward-disabled video on demand. It gives you the same opportunity to catch up to your favorite shows.”

And your not-so-favorite commercials. Which would seem to make it about as uncompelling a proposition as … well, as over-the-air broadcast TV. But ABC, which has been testing the service with Cox Communications in Orange County, Calif., insists it’s got an audience. The company says 93% of users it surveyed said they would be willing to give up the fast-forwarding option and watch the commercials if they were given VOD programming for free.

So perhaps the 30-second TV ad has a few more years left in it still. But only a few. According to a study by the Association of National Advertisers and Forrester Research, 62% of marketers believe TV advertising has become less effective in the past few years. And 87% said they plan to increase their online ad spending this year, while many said they will cut their TV ad buys substantially when DVR penetration tops 50%.

Among the more than 260 applicants included on the bidder list released last night by the FCC (accepted applications; incomplete applications) are AT&T, Verizon Wireless, Cox Communications, Google (bidding as Google Airwaves Inc.), MetroPCS, Qualcomm, National Datacast (the for-profit subsidiary of the Public Broadcasting Service), Alltel, Towerstream, Chevron and Frontier Wireless (EchoStar).

And then there’s zillionaire investor Paul Allen–Microsoft’s other founder (pictured above). Applications from Vulcan Spectrum LLC and Bend Cable Communications LLC, both Allen-backed ventures, have been accepted by the FCC. Seems Allen fancies himself the Pied Piper of the Wired World, and the Wireless World as well. Perhaps someday we’ll have the Paul Allen Brain Atlas, the Paul Allen Telescope Array and the Paul Allen Advanced Wireless Services Spectrum.

In the past few weeks, TiVo has signed deals with online photo-sharing services Photobucket and Picasa and the music-and-video network Music Choice. It’s begun fulfilling its contracts with cable outfits Comcast and Cox. It’s entered the media-services market, partnering with NBC Universal to provide second-by-second ratings of programs and commercials, based on the TV-watching habits of subscribers to the company’s digital video recorders.

“We are very much a technology company,” TiVo CEO Tom Rogers told the New York Times. “At the same time, in the last year and a half, we’ve substantially moved in the direction of becoming a media company.” And that’s proven a prudent move for TiVo, where things are beginning to look up. Shares of the company hit a 52-week high of $8.53 Friday. Today they were trading at around $8.35.

Too bad for TiVo that days of the standalone digital video recorder are reportedly numbered. According to Yankee Group, the standalone DVR product category will cease to exist by 2010, “and its dissolution will result in the end of TiVo as we know it.”

I’m not sure that the driving reason to get a DVR in the first place is just to skip commercials. I don’t fundamentally believe that. People can understand in order to have convenience and on-demand (options), that you can’t skip commercials.”

– ABC President of Advertising Sales Mike Shaw, July 2006

Looks like Walt Disney has finally come up with a theory to explain plummeting ratings at ABC and ESPN–as well as a plan to fix them. The company’s two big TV networks have struck a deal with Cox Communications to offer free on-demand broadcast of hit shows and sporting events, as long as Cox disables its fast-forward feature that lets viewers skip advertisements.

To Disney, the price of free entertainment is suffering through inescapable advertising, and its DVR-empowered viewership hasn’t been holding up its part of the deal. And so, beginning this fall, Cox will offer episodes of four ABC prime-time series, along with select ESPN on ABC college football games in the FreeZone section of its on-demand service. They will be available the day after their original broadcast, and Cox will disable its on-demand fast-forward option.

Will viewers accustomed to fast-forwarding through advertisements watch on-demand programming with unavoidable ads? And, more to the point, if they so clearly dislike watching advertisements, why would they watch programming like this at all? Why wouldn’t they use their DVRs to record the same shows as they air live and use that device’s fast-forward function to skip the ads? Cox President Pat Esser says viewers will understand the transaction it’s proposing. “People want their content, and they want it for free, but I think they realize that there is a business model to keep intact for them to get it that way,” he told The Wall Street Journal.

We’ll see, I guess. But I hope for Esser’s sake that Cox and other cable operators like it are investigating other ways of solving this problem. Like figuring out how to take advantage of the attention fast-forwarding requires. Because while DVR users often fast-forward through commercials, the very act of paying attention to what they’re forwarding through vastly increases ad recall. “There’s a pretty good basis for thinking that the active attention required to fast-forward could reinforce brand awareness,” said Kenneth Wilbur, associate professor of marketing at the University of Southern California’s Marshall School of Business. “There can be a real effect on purchasing behavior due to the attention required. … You could see extensive changes coming to creative formats and a great deal of research into how creative can best be adapted to fast-forwarding.”

I’m not sure that the driving reason to get a DVR in the first place is just to skip commercials. I don’t fundamentally believe that. People can understand in order to have convenience and on-demand (options), that you can’t skip commercials.”

– ABC President of Advertising Sales Mike Shaw, July 2006

Looks like Walt Disney has finally come up with a theory to explain plummeting ratings at ABC and ESPN–as well as a plan to fix them. The company’s two big TV networks have struck a deal with Cox Communications to offer free on-demand broadcast of hit shows and sporting events, as long as Cox disables its fast-forward feature that lets viewers skip advertisements.

To Disney, the price of free entertainment is suffering through inescapable advertising, and its DVR-empowered viewership hasn’t been holding up its part of the deal. And so, beginning this fall, Cox will offer episodes of four ABC prime-time series, along with select ESPN on ABC college football games in the FreeZone section of its on-demand service. They will be available the day after their original broadcast, and Cox will disable its on-demand fast-forward option.

Will viewers accustomed to fast-forwarding through advertisements watch on-demand programming with unavoidable ads? And, more to the point, if they so clearly dislike watching advertisements, why would they watch programming like this at all? Why wouldn’t they use their DVRs to record the same shows as they air live and use that device’s fast-forward function to skip the ads? Cox President Pat Esser says viewers will understand the transaction it’s proposing. “People want their content, and they want it for free, but I think they realize that there is a business model to keep intact for them to get it that way,” he told The Wall Street Journal.

We’ll see, I guess. But I hope for Esser’s sake that Cox and other cable operators like it are investigating other ways of solving this problem. Like figuring out how to take advantage of the attention fast-forwarding requires. Because while DVR users often fast-forward through commercials, the very act of paying attention to what they’re forwarding through vastly increases ad recall. “There’s a pretty good basis for thinking that the active attention required to fast-forward could reinforce brand awareness,” said Kenneth Wilbur, associate professor of marketing at the University of Southern California’s Marshall School of Business. “There can be a real effect on purchasing behavior due to the attention required. … You could see extensive changes coming to creative formats and a great deal of research into how creative can best be adapted to fast-forwarding.”